Agenda packet — South Pasadena City Council, April 6, 2022 (part 1 of 2)

City of South Pasadena Page 1
275167.1

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA

CITY COUNCIL

A G E N D A

SPECIAL CLOSED SESSION
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 2022
5:00 P.M.

City Manager’s Conference Room, Second Floor, City Hall 1414 Mission Street, South Pasadena, CA 91030

NOTICE ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & ACCESSIBILITY
The South Pasadena Special City Council Meeting Closed Session for April 6, 2022 will be conducted inperson from the City Manager’s Conference Room, Second Floor, City Hall, 1414 Mission Street, South Pasadena. Pursuant to, Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e)(3), the City Council may also allow public participation to continue via live public comment conducted over ZOOM.

Please be advised that to ensure the health and safety of the public, staff, and City Council, as the meeting will be open to the public for the meeting and members of the public may attend and/or participate in the in-person meeting, all are kindly reminded to follow Los Angeles County Public Health and CDC regulations and guidelines that are in place and may be posted.

Public comment regarding items on the Closed Session agenda will be taken at the beginning of the meeting. The public will be released from the meeting so that the Council can convene closed session discussion of items allowed under the Government Code. Any reportable action taken in closed session will be reported by the City Attorney during the next open session meeting. A separate Zoom webinar link will be provided for the open session for the public to attend.

The Meeting will be available
• In Person Hybrid – City Hall, City Manager’s Conference Room, Second Floor, 1414 Mission St • Via Zoom:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/2264427248?pwd=aEFuSGszQ2I5WjJkemloTms0RTlVUT09 ID: 226 442 7248
Public Comments participation may be made as follows:
• Written Comment submitted by no later than meeting day, 12:00 PM, deadline via the website. • In Person Hybrid – City Manager’s Conference Room, Second Floor, 1414 Mission Street Via Zoom (see Public Comment Section below for instructions.) To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can observe the public portion of the meeting via Zoom in one of the three methods below.

1. Go to the Zoom website, https://zoom.us/join and enter the Zoom Meeting information; or

2. Click on the following unique Zoom meeting link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/2264427248?pwd=aEFuSGszQ2I5WjJkemloTms0RTlVUT09 or

3. You may listen to the meeting by calling: +1-669-900-6833 and entering the Zoom Meeting ID and Passcode when prompted.

For additional Zoom assistance with telephone audio, you may find your local number at:
https://zoom.us/u/aiXV0TAW2
Closed Session Agenda
5:00 PM South Pasadena City Council April 6, 2022

Page 2 ends

275167.1
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Michael Cacciotti
ROLL CALL: Mayor Michael Cacciotti
Mayor Pro Tem Jon Primuth
Councilmember Jack Donovan
Councilmember Diana Mahmud
Councilmember Evelyn G. Zneimer
Public comment regarding items on the Closed Session agenda will be taken at the beginning of the meeting. Public comment will be accepted in person, via Zoom, or written comment.

CLOSED SESSION AGENDA ITEMS
A. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: EXISTING LITIGATION
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))

1. City of South Pasadena v. California Department of Transportation (LASC Case No.21STCP01779)

2. Alison Smith v. City of South Pasadena (LASC Case No.19BBCV00118) B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: LIABILITY CLAIMS
(Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1))
Claimant: Sirin Ozen Hallberg
Agency Claimed Against: City of South Pasadena
C. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: POTENTIAL OF LITIGATION Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2)
Number of Potential Cases: 2

CERTIFICATION OF POSTING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I posted this notice of agenda for the meeting to be held on April 6, 2022, on the bulletin board in the courtyard of City Hall at 1414 Mission Street, South Pasadena, CA 91030, and on the City’s, website as required by law, on the date listed below. 3/31/2022 /S/
Date Christina A. Muñoz, Deputy City Clerk

PUBLIC COMMENT
City of South Pasadena Page 1
CALL TO ORDER:

ROLL CALL:

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

Mayor
Mayor
Mayor Pro Tem
Councilmember
Councilmember
Councilmember
Mayor Pro Tem
Michael Cacciotti
Michael Cacciotti
Jon Primuth
Jack Donovan
Diana Mahmud
Evelyn G. Zneimer
Jon Primuth

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA

CITY COUNCIL

A G E N D A

REGULAR MEETING
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 2022, AT 7:00 P.M.

CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1424 MISSION STREET, SOUTH PASADENA, CA 91030
South Pasadena City Council Statement of Civility
As your elected governing board, we will treat each other, members of the public, and city employees with patience, civility and courtesy as a model of the same behavior we wish to reflect in South Pasadena for the conduct of all city business and community participation. The decisions made tonight will be for the benefit of the South Pasadena community and not for personal gain.

NOTICE ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION & ACCESSIBILITY
Pursuant to AB 361 Government Code section 54953, subdivision (e)(3), the City Council may conduct its meetings remotely and may be held via video conference. Pursuant to such Executive Order, the City Council may participate remotely and not be physically present in the City Council Chambers. Until further notice and as such Executive Orders remain in effect, the City Council may also allow public participation to continue via live public comment conducted over ZOOM.

The South Pasadena City Council Meeting for April 6, 2022 will be conducted in-person from the Council Chambers, Amedee O. “Dick” Richards, Jr., located at 1424 Mission Street, South Pasadena.

Please be advised that pursuant to government code, and to ensure the health and safety of the public, staff, and City Council, as the Council Chambers will be open to the public for the meeting and members of the public may attend and/or participate in the in-person meeting, all are kindly reminded to follow Los Angeles County Public Health and CDC regulations and guidelines that are in place and may be posted. The In-person Hybrid meeting will be conducted live in the City Council Chambers.

The Meeting will be available
• In Person Hybrid – City Council Chambers, 1424 Mission Street • Live Broadcast via the website – http://www.spectrumstream.com/streaming/south_pasadena/live.cfm • Via Zoom – Webinar ID: 825 9999 2830
To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can observe the meeting via Zoom in one of the three methods below.

1. Go to the Zoom website, https://zoom.us/join and enter the Zoom Meeting information; or

2. Click on the following unique Zoom meeting link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/82599992830or

3. You may listen to the meeting by calling: +1-669-900-6833 and entering the Zoom Meeting ID.

Regular Meeting Agenda South Pasadena City Council April 6, 2022 City of South Pasadena Page 2

PUBLIC COMMENT GUIDELINES
The City Council welcomes public input. Members of the public can comment on a non-agenda subject under the jurisdiction of the City Council or on an agenda item, you may participate by one of the following options:

Option 1:

Participate in-person at the City Council Chambers.

Option 2:

Public Comment speakers have three minutes to address the Council, however, the Mayor and City Council can adjust time allotted as needed. Participants will be able to “raise their hand” using the Zoom icon during the meeting, and they will have their microphone un-muted during comment portions of the agenda to speak. for up to three minutes per item.

Option 3:

Email public comment(s) to [email protected].

Public Comments received in writing will not be read aloud at the meeting, but will be part of the meeting record.

Written public comments will be uploaded online for public viewing under Additional Documents. There is no word limit on emailed Public Comment(s). Please make sure to indicate:
1) Name (optional), and
2) Agenda item you are submitting public comment on.
3) Submit by no later than 12:00 p.m., on the day of the Council meeting.

PLEASE NOTE: The Mayor may exercise the Chair's discretion, subject to the approval of the majority of the City Council, to adjust public comment(s) to less than three minutes.

Pursuant to State law, the City Council may not discuss or take action on issues not on the meeting agenda, except that members of the City Council or staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising public testimony rights (Government Code Section 54954.2). Staff may be asked to follow up on such items.

CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS

1. CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENTS

PUBLIC COMMENT

2. PUBLIC COMMENT – GENERAL (NON-AGENDA ITEMS)
General Public Comment will be limited to 30 minutes at the beginning of the agenda. If there are speakers remaining in the queue, they will be heard at the end of the meeting. Only Speakers who sign up in the first 30 minutes of public comment will be queued up to speak.

3. PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 7, 2022, AS “LIBRARY VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION DAY” IN THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA

4. PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 2022, AS “AUTISM ADVOCACY MONTH” IN THE

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA

5. CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION TO REGION 214 GIRLS WESTERN STATE

CHAMPIONS

PRESENTATIONS
Regular Meeting Agenda South Pasadena City Council April 6, 2022 City of South Pasadena Page 3

COMMUNICATIONS

6. COUNCILMEMBER COMMUNICATIONS
Time allotted per Councilmember is 3 minutes. Additional time will be allotted at the end of the City Council meeting agenda, if necessary.

7. CITY MANAGER COMMUNICATIONS

8. REORDERING OF, ADDITIONS, OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA

CONSENT CALENDAR

OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON CONSENT CALENDAR
Items listed under the consent calendar are considered by the City Manager to be routine in nature and will be enacted by one motion unless a public comment has been received or Councilmember requests otherwise, in which case the item will be removed for separate consideration. Any motion relating to an ordinance or a resolution shall also waive the reading of the ordinance or resolution and include its introduction or adoption as appropriate.

9. APPROVAL OF PREPAID WARRANTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $376,931.24; GENERAL CITY WARRANTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $460,681.05; SUPPLEMENTAL AUTOMATED CLEARING HOUSE PAYMENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $61,161.44; VOIDS IN THE AMOUNT OF ($46,609.16): TRANSFERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $586,005.65; PAYROLL IN THE AMOUNT OF $707,690.13
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council approve the Warrants as presented.

10. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE 2022 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the 2022 Legislative Platform that will serve as the guiding policy document for the City when determining whether a position should be taken on proposed State and Federal legislation that may impact the City during the 2022 Legislative Session.

11. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE INITIATIVE TAXPAYER PROTECTION AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 21-0042A1

RESOLUTION

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH

PASADENA OPPOSING CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE BALLOT INITIATIVE 21-0042A1
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Adopt a resolution to oppose Initiative Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act 21-00421A; and

2. Approve a letter to the League of California Cities (CalCities) in formal opposition to the Initiative.

Regular Meeting Agenda South Pasadena City Council April 6, 2022 City of South Pasadena Page 4

12. APPROVAL OF REORGANIZATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Approve the implementation of changes recommended by the Public Works organizational assessment to include elimination of one Deputy Director position; updated classification for the Deputy Public Works Director position, and addition of two Management Analyst positions; and

2. Approve a modified organizational chart for the Public Works Department.

13. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING A CITY COUNCIL

ELECTION DISTRICT MAP AS REQUIRED BY THE ELECTIONS CODE

ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH

PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A CITY COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT MAP UNDER ELECTIONS CODE SECTIONS 21600–21609
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council read by title only for second reading, waving further reading, and adopt an ordinance designating a City Council Election District Map under Elections Code Sections 21600-21609.

14. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE ADDING CHAPTER 20F “SAFE STORAGE OF FIREARMS IN RESIDENCES” TO THE SOUTH PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE

ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 20F “SAFE STORAGE OF FIREARMS IN RESIDENCES” TO THE SOUTH PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council read by title only, waiving further reading, and adopt an ordinance to add Chapter 20F “Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences” to the South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC).

15. AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF MOBILE DATA COMPUTERS WITH CODE 3 TECHNOLOGIES FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $63,920.20 FROM THE URBAN

AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE GRANT
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Authorize the purchase of Mobile Data Computers (MDCs) with CODE 3 Technologies Inc., in the amount of $63,920.20; and

2. Authorize the City Manager or designee to execute all necessary documents.

Regular Meeting Agenda South Pasadena City Council April 6, 2022 City of South Pasadena Page 5

16. ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION INITIATING THE PROCEEDINGS AND ORDERING OF THE PREPARATION OF THE ENGINEER’S REPORT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 LIGHTING AND

LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT

RESOLUTION

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2022-23

LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LIGHTING AND

LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE IN AN EXISTING DISTRICT AND ORDERING

THE PREPARATION OF A REPORT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 15, PART 2, OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached resolution initiating the proceedings for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance District (LLMD); and

2. Authorize the preparation of the Engineer’s Report for the annual levy and collection of assessments.

17. APPROVE A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FOR THE 626 GOLDEN STREETS MISSION-TO-MISSION 2022 EVENT
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council to approve a Memorandum of Agreement between with the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG) and the Cities of Alhambra, San Gabriel, and South Pasadena for the 626 Golden Streets Mission-to-Mission 2022 Event.

18. FIRST READING AND INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 18,

ARTICLE VI OF THE SOUTH PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF

ALL TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND ELECTRONIC SMOKING DEVICES

ORDINANCE

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA AMENDING
CHAPTER 18, ARTICLE VI OF THE SOUTH PASADENA CITY CODE TO

PROHIBIT THE SALE OF ALL TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND

ELECTRONIC SMOKING DEVICES
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Select the version of the proposed ordinance for introduction; and

2. Read by title only for first reading, waiving further reading, and introduce an ordinance to amend Chapter 18, Article VI of the South Pasadena Municipal Code to Prohibit the Sale of All Tobacco Products and Electronic Smoking Devices.

PUBLIC HEARING
Regular Meeting Agenda South Pasadena City Council April 6, 2022 City of South Pasadena Page 6

19. DIRECTION ON CITYWIDE COMMISSIONS
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Dissolve the Animal Commission;

2. Consolidate the Youth, Senior Citizen and Park and Recreation Commissions’ scopes of work to create a seven-member Community Services Commission, and reserve at least one seat each for members of youth and senior citizen populations;

3. Direct the City Manager and staff to implement an annual Animal Events Advisory Committee to focus on “Doggy Days” and “Be Kind to Animals Day” and other programming;

4. Change frequency of meetings for the Public Arts Commission to quarterly, or on an asneeded basis;

5. Change frequency of meetings for the Public Safety Commission to quarterly, or on an asneeded basis;

6. Dissolve the Finance Ad Hoc Committee;

7. Dissolve the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee; and

8. Consider adding an engineering staff position to further support the Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission in the Public Works Department.

INFORMATION REPORTS – NONE
PUBLIC COMMENT – CONTINUED

20. CONTINUED PUBLIC COMMENT – GENERAL
This time is reserved for speakers in the public comment queue not heard during the first 30 minutes of Item 2. No new speakers will be accepted at this time.

ADJOURNMENT

FOR YOUR INFORMATION

FUTURE CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS

PUBLIC ACCESS TO AGENDA DOCUMENTS AND BROADCASTING OF MEETINGS City Council meeting agenda packets, any agenda related documents, and additional documents are available online for public inspection on the City’s website:
www.southpasadenaca.gov/CityCouncilMeetings2022
Regular meetings are live streamed via the internet at:
http://www.spectrumstream.com/streaming/south_pasadena/live.cfm

ACTION / DISCUSSION
April 20, 2022 Regular City Council Meeting 7:00 p.m.

April 27, 2022 Special City Council Meeting 6:00 p.m.

Regular Meeting Agenda South Pasadena City Council April 6, 2022 City of South Pasadena Page 7

AGENDA NOTIFICATION SUBSCRIPTION
If you wish to receive an agenda email notification please contact the City Clerk’s Division via email at [email protected] or call (626) 403-7230.

ACCOMMODATIONS
The City of South Pasadena wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible to the public. If special assistance is needed to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Division at (626) 403-7230 or [email protected]. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting will assist staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).

CERTIFICATION OF POSTING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I posted this notice of agenda for the meeting to be held on April 6 2022, on the bulletin board in the courtyard of City Hall at 1414 Mission Street, South Pasadena, CA 91030, and on the City’s, website as required by law, on the date listed below. 3/31/2022 /S/
Date Christina A. Muñoz, Deputy City Clerk

9 9 - 1
Approval of Warrants
April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

Commission Review and Recommendation
This matter was not reviewed by a Commission.

Attachments:

1. Warrant Summary

2. Prepaid Warrant List

3. General City Warrant List

4. Supplemental ACH Payments

5. Voids

6. Payroll
9 - 2
ATTACHMENT 1
Warrant Summary
9 - 3
City of South Pasadena
Demand/Warrant Register Date 4/6/2022
Recap by fund Fund No.

Prepaid Written
General Fund 101 41,099.90 325,231.78
Insurance Fund 103 66,442.26 -
Street Improvement Program 104 - 1,570.00
Facilities & Equip.Cap. Fund 105 - -
Programs and Projects 107 - -
Local Transit Return "A" 205 - -
Local Transit Return "C" 207 - 727.58
TEA/Metro 208 - -
Sewer Fund 210 - 795.86
CTC Traffic Improvement 211 - -
Street Lighting Fund 215 - 28,349.40
Public,Education & Govt Fund 217 - -
Clean Air Act Fund 218 - -
Business Improvement Tax 220 - -
Gold Line Mitigation Fund 223 - -
Mission Meridian Public Garage 226 - -
Housing Authority Fund 228 - -
State Gas Tax 230 - 670.56
County Park Bond Fund 232 - -
Measure R 233 - -
Measure M 236 - -
Road Maint & Rehab (SB1) 237 - -
MSRC Grant Fund 238 - -
Measure W 239 10,602.00 -
Measure H 241 - -
Prop C Exchange Fund 242 - 14,531.20
Bike & Pedestrian Paths 245 - -
BTA Grants 248 - -
Golden Street Grant 249 - -
Capital Growth Fund 255 - -
CDBG 260 - -
Asset Forfeiture 270 - 10,300.00
Police Grants - State 272 - -
Homeland Security Grant 274 - -
Park Impact Fees 275 - -
Historic Preservation Grant 276 - -
HSIP Grant 277 - 3,632.80
Arroyo Seco Golf Course 295 - -
Sewer Capital Projects Fund 310 - -
Water Fund 500 - 66,122.19
Water Efficinency Fund 503 - 8,749.68
2016 Water Revenue Bonds Fund 505 - -
SRF Loan - Water 506 - -
Water & Sewer Impact Fee 510 - -
Public Financing Authority 550 69,491.52 -
Payroll Clearing Fund 700 13,900.55 -
-
Column Totals: 201,536.23 460,681.05
Recap by fund Fund No.

Prepaid Written
RSA 227 175,395.01 -
RSA Report Totals: 175,395.01 -
City Report Totals: 837,612.29
Payroll Period Ending: 03/18/2022 706,257.38
Payroll Period Ending: 03/19/2022 1,432.75
Wire Transfer Out - To LAIF
Wire Transfer In - From LAIF
Wire Transfer - RSA
Wire Transfer Out - To Acct. # 2413 500,000.00
Wire Transfer Out - To Acct. # 1936 86,005.65
Supplemental ACH Payments 61,161.44
Voids - Prepaid
Voids - General Warrant (46,609.16)
Grand Report Total: 2,145,860.35
Amounts
Michael A. Cacciotti, Mayor
City Clerk
Amounts
Kenneth L. Louie, Interim Finance Director
9 - 4
ATTACHMENT 2
Prepaid Warrant List
9 - 5
Accounts Payable
Check Detail
User: ealvarez
Printed: 03/30/2022 - 8:28AM
Check Number Check Date Amount
CSD3014 - Ca. State Disbursement Unit
314142 03/17/2022
Inv PR 02.18.2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
02/16/2022 PR Batch 21822.02.2022 Garnishment - Case # FAMSS - 1406906 814.15 Inv PR 02.18.2022 Total 814.15
Inv PR 03.04.2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 Garnishment - Case # FAMSS - 1406906 814.15 Inv PR 03.04.2022 Total 814.15
314142 Total: 1,628.30
CSD3014 - Ca. State Disbursement Unit Total: 1,628.30
CHWP2010 - Colantuono,Highsmith & Whatley,PC
0 03/17/2022
Inv 50648
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 General Services - January 2022 Re-Issue 10,000.00 Inv 50648 Total 10,000.00
Inv 50649
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 Labor & Employment - January 2022 Re-Issue 2,597.00 Inv 50649 Total 2,597.00
Inv 50650
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 Litigation- January 2022 Re-Issue 196.00
Inv 50650 Total 196.00
Inv 50651
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 Water & Utilities- January 2022 Re-Issue 1,813.00 AP-Check Detail (3/30/2022 - 8:28 AM) Page 1
9 - 6
Check Number Check Date Amount
Inv 50651 Total 1,813.00
Inv 50652
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 Special Projects- January 2022 Re-Issue 5,440.50 Inv 50652 Total 5,440.50
Inv 50653
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 Litigation- January 2022 Re-Issue 1,642.40
Inv 50653 Total 1,642.40
Inv 50654
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 Litigation- January 2022 Re-Issue 13,975.76
Inv 50654 Total 13,975.76
Inv 50655
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/17/2022 Litigation- January 2022 Re-Issue 24.50
Inv 50655 Total 24.50
0 Total: 35,689.16
CHWP2010 - Colantuono,Highsmith & Whatley,PC Total: 35,689.16 WFGO6712 - Computershare Trust Company, N.A.
0 03/17/2022
Inv 2069844
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/01/2022 SoPasadena 2013 Water Rev. Bond Aministration: 03/26/22-03/25/23 2,000.00 Inv 2069844 Total 2,000.00
Inv SOPASAWTR2013
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/09/2022 South Pasadena Water Revenue Bond: Ref 03/13 FAST 67,493.76 03/09/2022 South Pasadena Water Revenue Bond: Ref 03/13 FAST -2.24 Inv SOPASAWTR2013 Total 67,491.52
0 Total: 69,491.52
WFBK1020 - Computershare Trust Company, N.A. Total: 69,491.52 AP-Check Detail (3/30/2022 - 8:28 AM) Page 2
9 - 7
Check Number Check Date Amount
DTV5012 - DIRECTV
314143 03/17/2022
Inv 068653046X22030
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/01/2022 EOC COMMUNICATION 02/28/2022-03/27/2022 96.98 Inv 068653046X22030 Total 96.98
314143 Total: 96.98
DTV5012 - DIRECTV Total: 96.98
VRMZ7000 - Munoz, Valerie
314144 03/17/2022
Inv PR 03.04.2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 - Garnishment 750.00
Inv PR 03.04.2022 Total 750.00
314144 Total: 750.00
VRMZ7000 - Munoz, Valerie Total: 750.00
NAT9221 - National Business Furniture, LLC
314145 03/17/2022
Inv MK570931
Line Item Date Line Item Description
12/03/2021 72" W x 78" H Panel Divider 1,214.76
Inv MK570931 Total 1,214.76
314145 Total: 1,214.76
NAT9221 - National Business Furniture, LLC Total: 1,214.76 PayPlus - PayPlus Solutions Insight E-Tools
314146 03/17/2022
Inv 27862
Line Item Date Line Item Description
02/01/2022 Monthly Conversion of ADP Report to xml format for CalPERS 217.00 Inv 27862 Total 217.00
314146 Total: 217.00
AP-Check Detail (3/30/2022 - 8:28 AM) Page 3
9 - 8
Check Number Check Date Amount
PayPlus - PayPlus Solutions Insight E-Tools Total: 217.00 RIN7777 - Rincon Consultants, Inc.
0 03/17/2022
Inv 30993
Line Item Date Line Item Description
06/15/2021 Additional Staff Assistance: May 2021 511.25 Inv 30993 Total 511.25
0 Total: 511.25
RIN7777 - Rincon Consultants, Inc. Total: 511.25
SOU5435 - S.P. Police Officers Association 700-0000-0000-2246-000 0 03/17/2022
Inv March 2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 SPPOA Insurance 2,128.58 03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 SPPOA - Union Dues 2,882.25 Inv March 2022 Total 5,010.83
0 Total: 5,010.83
SOU5435 - S.P. Police Officers Association Total: 5,010.83 SOU5451 - S.P. Public Service Employees Association 700-0000-0000-2248-000 0 03/17/2022
Inv March 2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 SPPSEA - Union Dues 1,470.00 Inv March 2022 Total 1,470.00
0 Total: 1,470.00
SOU5451 - S.P. Public Service Employees Association Total: 1,470.00 CEAP7000 - S.P. Public Service Employees Association-PT 700-0000-0000-2249-000 0 03/17/2022
Inv March 2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 PART TIME ASSN. DUES / FEE 280.00 Inv March 2022 Total 280.00
AP-Check Detail (3/30/2022 - 8:28 AM) Page 4
9 - 9
Check Number Check Date Amount
0 Total: 280.00
CEAP7000 - S.P. Public Service Employees Association-PT Total: 280.00 SOU5230 - S.P.Firefighters L-3657
0 03/17/2022
Inv March 2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 Fire Assn. Insurance 177.42 03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 FFA Fire Rec Fees 90.00 03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 Firefighters 3657 - Union 2,050.00 Inv March 2022 Total 2,317.42
0 Total: 2,317.42
SOU5230 - S.P.Firefighters L-3657 Total: 2,317.42
SSDV2018 - Sandoval, Sheila
0 03/17/2022
Inv PR 02.18.2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
02/16/2022 PR Batch 21822.02.2022 - Garnishment 737.00
02/16/2022 PR Batch 21822.02.2022 - Garnishment 485.00
Inv PR 02.18.2022 Total 1,222.00
Inv PR 03.04.2022
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 - Garnishment 485.00
03/02/2022 PR Batch 30422.03.2022 - Garnishment 737.00
Inv PR 03.04.2022 Total 1,222.00
0 Total: 2,444.00
SSDV2018 - Sandoval, Sheila Total: 2,444.00
SMWL2990 - Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP
314147 03/17/2022
Inv 274141
Line Item Date Line Item Description
09/23/2021 Legal Assistance Regarding Moffat Street 08/31/2021 11,395.83 Inv 274141 Total 11,395.83
Inv 274496
Line Item Date Line Item Description
AP-Check Detail (3/30/2022 - 8:28 AM) Page 5
9 - 10
Check Number Check Date Amount
10/20/2021 Legal Assistance Regarding Moffat Street 09/30/2021 11,557.75 Inv 274496 Total 11,557.75
Inv 274801
Line Item Date Line Item Description
11/23/2021 Legal Assistance Regarding Moffat Street 10/31/2021 919.00 Inv 274801 Total 919.00
Inv 275120
Line Item Date Line Item Description
12/21/2021 Legal Assistance Regarding Moffat Street 11/30/2021 2,089.17 Inv 275120 Total 2,089.17
Inv 275640
Line Item Date Line Item Description
01/28/2022 Legal Assistance Regarding Moffat Street 12/31/2021 40,480.51 Inv 275640 Total 40,480.51
314147 Total: 66,442.26
SMWL2990 - Shute, Mihaly & Weinberger LLP Total: 66,442.26 SPBK - Springbrook Holding Company LLC
0 03/17/2022
Inv TM INV-005102
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/11/2022 Re-Implementation of Payroll Services: 02/28/22-03/06/22 44.75 Inv TM INV-005102 Total 44.75
0 Total: 44.75
SPBK - Springbrook Holding Company LLC Total: 44.75
USBANK - U.S. Bank NA
0 03/17/2022
Inv 1956866
Line Item Date Line Item Description
03/11/2022 South Pasadena 2000-1 Bond Act # 6711646700 155,000.00 03/11/2022 South Pasadena 2000-1 Bond Act # 6711646700 -4.99 03/11/2022 South Pasadena 2000-1 Bond Act # 6711646700 20,400.00 Inv 1956866 Total 175,395.01
AP-Check Detail (3/30/2022 - 8:28 AM) Page 6
9 - 11
Check Number Check Date Amount
0 Total: 175,395.01
USBANK - U.S. Bank NA Total: 175,395.01
Total: 363,003.24
AP-Check Detail (3/30/2022 - 8:28 AM) Page 7
9 - 12
Accounts Payable
User:

Printed:
ealvarez
3/30/2022 8:21 AM
Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
ACH SWRCB900 SWRCB 03/23/2022
SW-0223026 NPDES Annual Fee: 10/01/2021-09/30/2022 10,602.00 WD-0191525 WDR Annual Fee: 07/01/2021-06/30/2022 3,326.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor SWRCB900: 13,928.00 Total for 3/23/2022: 13,928.00
Report Total (1 checks): 13,928.00
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 8:21 AM) Page 1 9 - 13
ATTACHMENT 3 General
City Warrant List
9 - 14
Accounts Payable
User:

Printed:
ealvarez
3/30/2022 1:26 PM
Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
ACH ATGC8530 Acorn Technology Services 04/06/2022
95612 February 2022 Monthly IT Services 22,546.73
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor ATGC8530: 22,546.73 ACH BAK0366 Baker & Taylor Entertainment 04/06/2022
H60092070 DVDs/ CDs 139.11
H60215160 DVDs/ CDs 24.78
H60220910 DVDs/ CDs 26.09
H60287540 DVDs/ CDs 28.93
H60310950 DVDs/ CDs 33.04
H60413760 DVDs/ CDs 33.07
H60420820 DVDs/ CDs 77.69
H60436520 DVDs/ CDs 16.49
H60445940 DVDs/ CDs 63.58
H60478190 DVDs/ CDs 76.04
H60482470 DVDs/ CDs 12.38
H60482520 DVDs/ CDs 4.94
H60488980 DVDs/ CDs 18.19
H60521000 DVDs/ CDs 9.08
H60546280 DVDs/ CDs 28.93
H60587630 DVDs/ CDs 19.00
H60587650 DVDs/ CDs 23.13
H60589010 DVDs/ CDs 19.00
T24093940 DVDs/ CDs 28.93
T24099820 DVDs/ CDs 12.39
T24101310 DVDs/ CDs 53.72
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor BAK0366: 748.51
ACH BAK0369 Baker & Taylor Books 04/06/2022
2036367944 Books for Library 333.43
2036392796 Books for Library 515.22
2036396359 Books for Library 368.00
2036401717 Books for Library 442.17
2036428036 Books for Library 856.08
2036431674 Books for Library 491.67
2036456720 Books for Library 401.63
2036458190 Books for Library 285.62
2036471609 Books for Library 233.57
2036471875 Books for Library 690.45
2036485256 Books for Library 318.37
2036499593 Books for Library 159.99
2036512115 Books for Library 267.29
2036526722 Books for Library 265.41
2036539218 Books for Library 33.35
2036563630 Books for Library 47.74
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor BAK0369: 5,709.99
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 1 9 - 15
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
ACH CHWP2010 Colantuono,Highsmith & Whatley,PC 04/06/2022 51273 General Services: February 2022 10,005.00
51275 Litigation: February 2022 5,341.00
51276 Water & Utilites: February 2022 2,401.00
51277 Special Projects: February 2022 12,702.00
51278 Litigation: February 2022 2,724.25
51279 Litigation: February 2022 18,443.00
51280 Litigation: February 2022 1,094.75
51293 Labor & Employment: February 2022 7,508.00
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor CHWP2010: 60,219.00 ACH CIV2123 CivicStone, LLC 04/06/2022
2018-166 Caltrans Housing Consultant: February 2022 555.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor CIV2123: 555.00
ACH CRDA1021 Corodata Records Management 04/06/2022
RS4777134 AN 042023 Service (02/01/22 - 02/28/22) 464.42 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor CRDA1021: 464.42
ACH CRSR2010 Corodata Shredding Inc. 04/06/2022
1351773 AN SD041103 Service ( 02/03/22 - 02-28-22) 105.69 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor CRSR2010: 105.69
ACH DAN0769 DANGELO CO. 04/06/2022
S1439619.002 Order of 7 Fire Hydrants and 8 Fire Hydrant Extensions for Water 11,642.92 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor DAN0769: 11,642.92
ACH DEL4000 Dell Marketing L.P. 04/06/2022
10565554483 Comprehensive Gateway Security Suite for SonicWall 1,479.54 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor DEL4000: 1,479.54
ACH HQAB8100 Hi Quality Auto Body Inc. 04/06/2022
18434 Paint 4 doors and roof of new SUV (no unit # Assigned) 1,827.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor HQAB8100: 1,827.00
ACH JHMS8020 JHM Supply 04/06/2022
282947/1 Public Works Parks Division Irrigations Controller Box repair 259.30 283036/1 Public Works Parks Division Irrigation and Garden Supplies 498.87 283039/1 Public Works Parks-Tree Posting Supplies 54.24 283728/1 Public Works Parks Division-Garden Tools for City Parks 70.86 283728/1 Public Works Parks Division-Garden Tools for City Parks 10.03 283734/1 Public Works Water Division-Parts to Repair Damaged backflows 143.56 285011/1 Public Works Parks Division-Tree Stake supplies 255.23 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor JHMS8020: 1,292.09
ACH MNBL8170 Crestline Software, LLC dba MuniBilling 04/06/2022 14920 Postage - Feb 2022 2,082.92
14942 Water Billing Services - March 2022 24,646.23
14942 Absorb Charges - Feb 2022 8,397.74
14942 Lock Box - Feb 2022 719.40
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor MNBL8170: 35,846.29 ACH OVDR8011 OverDrive Inc. 04/06/2022
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 2 9 - 16
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
01148CO22065743 eBooks / Audiobooks 548.42
01148CO22067801 eBooks / Audiobooks 1,720.90
01148CO22067803 eBooks / Audiobooks 374.41
01148CO22075797 eBooks / Audiobooks 262.30
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor OVDR8011: 2,906.03
ACH POS5265 Post Alarm Systems 04/06/2022
1461409 Alarmy System for WMB: April 2022 54.33
1461409 Alarm System for Orange Grove Rec. Building: April 2022 54.33 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor POS5265: 108.66
ACH RED8995 Red Wing Business Advantage Account 04/06/2022 989-1-59326 Public Works Footware Voucher Program-Kelvin Machado-Water 238.08 989-1-59450 Public Works Footware Voucher Program-Luis Bardales-Water 250.00 989-1-59479 Public Works Footware Voucher Program-Lorenzo Palmieri-Water 218.27 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor RED8995: 706.35
ACH SPBK Springbrook Holding Company LLC 04/06/2022
INV-008677 CivicPay Transaction Fee - Feb 2022 102.00
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor SPBK: 102.00
ACH STA5219 Staples Business Advantage 04/06/2022
3477088928 Office Supplies -20.39
3481998885 Office Supplies 258.07
3484373931 Office Supplies 220.93
3484373932 Office Supplies 198.41
3490942051 Office Supplies 192.84
3494788695 Office Supplies 443.19
3497678142 Water Division office supplies 507.14
3498255657 Public Works-Parks Division office supplies 44.82 3498255657 Public Works-Parks Division office supplies 44.82 3499373016 Public Works Break Room Supplies 10.10
3499373016 Public Works Break Room Supplies 10.10
3499373016 Public Works Break Room Supplies 10.10
3499373016 Public Works Break Room Supplies 10.10
3499373016 Public Works Break Room Supplies 10.10
3499902438 Small and medium picture hanging strips 76.18 3500591387 Returned items -60.95
3500752555 Margin Index tabs. 164.65
3500947779 Office supplies for Deputy Director and Recreation Division. 180.05 3500947783 Office Supplies for DAR 20.50
3500947783 Office Supplies for Senior Center 94.34
3500947784 Office Supplies for DAR 87.94
3501676927 Plastic envelopes 16.53
3501676928 Plastic envelopes 20.72
3501676929 Office Supples (Battery BackUp Qty # 7) 805.94 3501746932 Office Supplies 65.38
3501746934 Office Supples 41.24
3501746935 Office Supples 308.80
3501746936 Public Works Yard Break Room supplies 10.44
3501746936 Public Works Yard Break Room supplies 10.45
3501746936 Public Works Yard Break Room supplies 10.45
3501746936 Public Works Yard Break Room supplies 10.44
3501746936 Public Works Yard Break Room supplies 10.45
3501746937 PD Office Supplies 49.35
3501817606 TONER FOR DIVISION CHIEFS OFFICE 88.32
3501817607 Office Supples 46.26
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 3 9 - 17
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
3501817608 Office Supples 132.27
3501817609 PD Office Supplies 6.49
3502068365 webcam 44.09
3502068366 Printer drum unit, ID badges, packing tape 190.83 3502068368 PD Office Supplies 207.93
3502068369 PD Office Supplies 97.00
3502222763 Public Works Operations Division-Yard office supplies 15.52 3502222765 PD Office Supplies 510.40
3502222766 Office supplies for CSD Sr. Ctr,Camp Med, Recreation Division. 90.00 3502222766 Office supplies for CSD Sr. Ctr,Camp Med, Recreation Division. 52.44 3502222766 Office supplies for CSD Sr. Ctr,Camp Med, Recreation Division. 218.22 3502290158 Public Works Department-Yard Admin office supplies 34.36 3502360579 desk lamp 59.51
3502360580 WD-40, project jackes, folding table, napkins 124.45 3502360581 Public Works Department-Streets Division Supplies 72.50 3502360582 Public Works Department-Yard Admin office supplies 6.60 3502664285 keyboard 33.06
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor STA5219: 5,893.48
ACH STSM1020 Studio Spectrum 04/06/2022
192057 City Council Meeting Streaming and Production Services Feb'22 4,425.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor STSM1020: 4,425.00
ACH SWRCB900 SWRCB 04/06/2022
WD-0197352 NPDES Permit Fees FY 2021-22 763.00
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor SWRCB900: 763.00
ACH UQMS8010 Unique Management Svcs Inc. 04/06/2022
6098569 Recovery Agency Services 44.75
Total for this ACH Check for Vendor UQMS8010: 44.75
ACH WES4152 West Coast Arborists, Inc. 04/06/2022
183076 Citywide Urban Forestry Services 2/16/2022-2/28/2022 400.00 183076 Citywide Urban Forestry Services 2/16/2022-2/28/2022 600.00 183076 Citywide Urban Forestry Services 2/16/2022-2/28/2022 6,994.00 183076 Citywide Urban Forestry Services 2/16/2022-2/28/2022 14,600.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor WES4152: 22,594.00
ACH WLST8267 William Shuttic 04/06/2022
January 2022 Contract Class Instructor Functional Fitness January 2022 500.00 Total for this ACH Check for Vendor WLST8267: 500.00
314148 3DCHEM 3D Chemical & Equipment 04/06/2022
INV-2203 5 GL BUCKET PUMP, SPIGOT, FOAMER, 5 GL PROTECTANT 426.84 Total for Check Number 314148: 426.84
314149 ABCBEE ABC Bee Control 04/06/2022
6805 Humane Bee Removal-Parkway Tree on Garfield Ave. 350.00 6836 Humane Bee Removal- Mission St. Inspection Only 150.00 6845 Humane Bee Removal-Maund Ave. 550.00
Total for Check Number 314149: 1,050.00
314150 ALH0179 Alhambra Car Wash 04/06/2022
February 2022 Police Department Car Washes - February 2022 169.00 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 4 9 - 18
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
Total for Check Number 314150: 169.00
314151 ALH0181 Alhambra Hospital Med Ctr 04/06/2022
1/12/2022 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 66.52
1/31/2022 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 130.16
1/6/2022 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 121.22
10/18/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 23.80
10/28/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 357.69
10/5/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 46.25
11/22/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 148.42
11/26/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 235.39
12/28/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 132.59
2/15/2022 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 869.19
9/14/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 61.77
9/6/2021 Medical Supplies for Fire Department 307.15
Total for Check Number 314151: 2,500.15
314152 ACMT2920 All City Management Services, Inc. 04/06/2022 75614 Crossing Guard Services for February 6-February 19, 2022 8,536.50 76056 Crossing Guard Services for February 20-March 5, 2022 8,684.93 Total for Check Number 314152: 17,221.43
314153 ARCD6011 ARC Document Solutions, LLC 04/06/2022
10433028 SCAN Bushnell/Diamond Ave CIP AsBuilts for Water 35.86 10849263 St. Albans Water CIP AsBuilts 183.06
11059275 Sewer Drainage Layout Map Drawing 33.71
11130639 Water Reports-Risk & Resilience Assesment required by DDW 184.78 Total for Check Number 314153: 437.41
314154 AT&T5011 AT&T 04/06/2022
248 134-6100 21 AN 248 134-6100 210 5 (03-1-22)/(03-31-22) 39.01 331 841-0756 32 AN 331 841-0756 343 2 (03-7-22)/(04-06-22) 0.19 331 841-0802 34 AN 331 841-0802 343 6 (03-7-22)/(04-06-22) 33.97 Total for Check Number 314154: 73.17
314155 ATCN9011 AT&T 04/06/2022
000017820838 AN CLAPDSOPAS Service (01/27/22-02/26/22) 320.47 Total for Check Number 314155: 320.47
314156 CIN4011 AT&T Mobility 04/06/2022
287269956155X03 AN 287269956155 Service (02-07-22- 03-06-22) 298.07 287297984615X03 AN 287297984615 (02/03/22-03/02/22) 334.48 287312118886X03 AN 287312118886X03102022 (02/03/22-03/02/22) 1,665.54 Total for Check Number 314156: 2,298.09
314157 ATSS6010 Athens Services 04/06/2022
11831406 Hazardous Waste Removal-PW Yard on Stoney Dr. 8,992.00 Total for Check Number 314157: 8,992.00
314158 MCBKWRHT Michelle Baker-Wright 04/06/2022
494 Closed Water Account Refund 22.96
Total for Check Number 314158: 22.96
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 5 9 - 19
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
314159 ELBNGS Elizabeth R Bangs 04/06/2022
119572 Unable to attend Skateside class. $20 admin fee deducted. 105.00 Total for Check Number 314159: 105.00
314160 BT4U8180 Better 4 You Meals 04/06/2022
0222-3319 Meals for Onsite and Home Delivery: February 2022 3,542.00 Total for Check Number 314160: 3,542.00
314161 TYBL7000 Tyler Borrello 04/06/2022
03/14-03/16/22 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Borrello: 03/14/22-03/16/22 227.10 Total for Check Number 314161: 227.10
314162 CAL5236 CA Linen Services 04/06/2022
1961433 Fire Station Linen Rental and Cleaning Services 87.89 1963547 Fire Station Linen Rental and Cleaning Services 105.21 Total for Check Number 314162: 193.10
314163 DACA4011 David Calderon 04/06/2022
03/11/2022 Training Class Reimb. for Officer Calderon 03/11/2022 14.51 Total for Check Number 314163: 14.51
314164 CAL8012 Califa Group 04/06/2022
5414 CENIC Broadband - December 2021 2,667.30
Total for Check Number 314164: 2,667.30
314165 CAL6695 California American Water 04/06/2022
12/23-1/20/22 Acct # 1015-210021511021: Water Connection fee - Wislon Well # 2 13.30 Total for Check Number 314165: 13.30
314166 CPC4011 California Police Chiefs Association 04/06/2022 021822 Executive Leaderhip Course for Lt. Jacobs 06/04/22-06/18/22 10,300.00 Total for Check Number 314166: 10,300.00
314167 CAN0607 Cantu Graphics Inc. 04/06/2022
20737 Business Cards 33.02
20739 Mission Statement Poster 97.02
20742 Business cards for Sgt. Ronnie and Officer Godoy 66.04 20744 FIRE & SAFETY INSPECTION FORM 468.56
20754 30"x40"PVC Sign & 22"x28" mounted matte foam board 128.39 Total for Check Number 314167: 793.03
314168 CAPI2010 CAPIO 04/06/2022
15126 CAPIO Membership Thru 02/21/2023 275.00
Total for Check Number 314168: 275.00
314169 CBSE6010 Cell Business Equipment 04/06/2022
75666805 Cell Business AN 857406 Service (03/01/22-03/31/22) 291.50 Total for Check Number 314169: 291.50
314170 EUGCHNG Eugene Chang 04/06/2022
1608418757 Refund Applicant for Duplicate Payment : 1608418757 354.20 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 6 9 - 20
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
Total for Check Number 314170: 354.20
314171 JENCHONG Jennifer Chong 04/06/2022
119576 Class cancelled due to low enrollment per instructor's request. 280.00 Total for Check Number 314171: 280.00
314172 ALPD4010 City of Alhambra Police Department 04/06/2022 SP 02/2022 Inmate housing for the month of February 2022 2,064.00 Total for Check Number 314172: 2,064.00
314173 CRSSTWN9 Crosstown Electrical & Data Inc. 04/06/2022 4620-002 Fair Oaks Ave. Traffic Signal Improvements Project 14,531.20 4620-002 Fair Oaks Ave. Traffic Signal Improvements Project 3,632.80 Total for Check Number 314173: 18,164.00
314174 DSP0755 D & S Printing 04/06/2022
2012 Overnight parking permit applications 435.49
3003 Regular and window envelopes 700.09
Total for Check Number 314174: 1,135.58
314175 DAYWIREL Day Management Corporation 04/06/2022
INV714577 RA-781;REPAIR AND TROUBLESHOOT POWER SUPPLY TO MCT/COMMUNICATION 150.00 Total for Check Number 314175: 150.00
314176 DUB0187 Andrew DuBois 04/06/2022
02/10/2022 Reimb. Training Expense for Cpl. Dubois: 02/10/2022 27.00 02/10/2022 Reimb. Training Expense for Cpl. Dubois: 02/10/2022 43.45 02/23-02/24/22 Reimb. Training Expense for Cpl. Dubois: 02/23-02/24/22 44.61 02/23-02/24/22 Reimb. Training Expense for Cpl. Dubois: 02/23-02/24/22 111.94 Total for Check Number 314176: 227.00
314177 ELL1017 Ellen's Silkscreening 04/06/2022
EE77877 Caps for Police Recruit Lizeth Gonzalez-Sotelo 66.04 Total for Check Number 314177: 66.04
314178 LACD5011 Emergency Medical Services Agency 04/06/2022 P8289 O SNIDER O SNIDER; PARAMEDIC LICENSE RENEWAL-EXAM 1 150.00 Total for Check Number 314178: 150.00
314179 FHCM5011 Foothill Communications 04/06/2022
INV5684 2 hand mics, power cables, accessory connectors Unit # 218 & SUV 338.97 Total for Check Number 314179: 338.97
314180 GAR5011 Garvey Equipment Co 04/06/2022
140791 Public Works Parks Division-Chainsaw & Rake Supplies 204.41 140791 Public Works Parks Division-Chainsaw & Rake Supplies 65.95 141461 Public Works Parks Division-Chainsaw and Rake Supplies 137.53 142392 Public Works Parks Div. Chainsaw Chains for Street Tree Maint. 97.42 142533 Public Works Parks Divi.-Chainsaw Chains & Loppers 76.62 142533 Public Works Parks Divi.-Chainsaw Chains & Loppers 91.73 142613 Public Works Parks Div.-Spline Screw and Tapping Screw 22.42 142613 Public Works Parks Div.-Spline Screw and Tapping Screw 15.15 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 7 9 - 21
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
142613 Public Works Parks Div.-Spline Screw and Tapping Screw 3.83 142874 Public Works Parks Division--Pressure Washer Maintenance 69.59 143890 Public Works Parks Division Small Tool Supplies 1,739.99 143890 Public Works Parks: Battery Packs, Chargers and Chainsaw Chains 1,114.55 143896 Public Works Parks Division-Trimmer, Battery Pack & Charger 1,455.30 Total for Check Number 314180: 5,094.49
314181 EGGO4011 Elias Giron-Garrido 04/06/2022
02/16-2/17/22 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Giron-Garrido 02/16-02/17/22 24.57 Total for Check Number 314181: 24.57
314182 ISGU4011 Issac Gutierrez 04/06/2022
03/13/2022 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Gutierrez 03/13/2022 17.55 Total for Check Number 314182: 17.55
314183 HGSI6010 Harry's Glass Shop Inc. 04/06/2022
22-40651 Glass Window Supplies-War Memorial Glass replacement 395.35 Total for Check Number 314183: 395.35
314184 HDLC3010 Hinderliter deLlamas & Associates 04/06/2022 SIN015118 Sales Tax and Audit Services 1,229.48
Total for Check Number 314184: 1,229.48
314185 HRSCHPIP Hirsche Pipe & Supply 04/06/2022
8115742 Solar Generator for Garfield Reservoir 392.55
Total for Check Number 314185: 392.55
314186 HOMCOMMU Reagan Hom 04/06/2022
030922 Repair control panel key pad for gun release unit #1404 250.00 031022 Repair and replace Radio and relocate transreceiver unit #218 200.00 Total for Check Number 314186: 450.00
314187 HOM1515 Home Depot Credit Services 04/06/2022
4100936 PWD Street Div-Epoxy Products for sign installation 552.84 Total for Check Number 314187: 552.84
314188 THMJRGRP Patrick Ibarra 04/06/2022
15-2022 Facilitation of Executive Staff Retreat on March 21, 2022 5,294.16 Total for Check Number 314188: 5,294.16
314189 IMGN8032 iMagen 04/06/2022
35250-1 Embroidered Jackets for Recreation Division 186.97 35250-1 Embroidered Jackets for Recreation Division 100.00 35250-1 Embroidered Jackets for Recreation Division 200.00 35250-1 Embroidered Jackets for Recreation Division 100.00 Total for Check Number 314189: 586.97
314190 LARJOHNS Lauren B Johnson 04/06/2022
119615 Unable to attend Brit West Soccer class. 79.00
Total for Check Number 314190: 79.00
314191 JCRS5011 Jones Coffee Roasters 04/06/2022
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 8 9 - 22
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
51149 Fire Dept. Coffee Supplies 162.68
Total for Check Number 314191: 162.68
314192 MJRI2950 Magic Jump Rentals Inc. 04/06/2022
335742 Four Inflatables for Camp Med Spring Break 1,141.60 Total for Check Number 314192: 1,141.60
314193 MER2145 Merit Oil Company 04/06/2022
689125 Emergency Fuel at Public Works Service Yard - Ordererd 1/12/2022 5,017.61 697604 Fuel for City Departments: 3,117 Gallons of Unleaded Gas 13,003.23 Total for Check Number 314193: 18,020.84
314194 NBSFIN NBS 04/06/2022
1221001084 Library Parcel Tax Admin: 04/01/2022-06/30/2022 1,662.12 Total for Check Number 314194: 1,662.12
314195 NXPX2920 Nexusplex 04/06/2022
INV31299 2 year subscription to the SouthPasadenan 70.00 Total for Check Number 314195: 70.00
314196 OREI6711 O' Reilly Automotive Inc. 04/06/2022
3213-227755 Public Works Water Distribution Unit #19-Brake Lights 16.34 3213-248685 Public Works- Air Filters for Water Distribution Vehicle Fleet 194.25 3213-250312 Public Works Street Division-Products and Vehicle Supplies 310.48 Total for Check Number 314196: 521.07
314197 OLNP8010 Outlook Newspapers Group 04/06/2022
74717 Renewal subscription to the South Pasadena Review 60.00 Total for Check Number 314197: 60.00
314198 PMHE6116 Pape Material Handling Exchange 04/06/2022 63030832 Quarterly Maintenance for Service Yard Forklift 242.61 63030833 Quarterly Maintenance for John Deere Tractor 401.46 Total for Check Number 314198: 644.07
314199 PHS4011 Pasadena Humane Society 04/06/2022
Mar2022SoPas Animal Control Services - March 2022 14,035.83 Total for Check Number 314199: 14,035.83
314200 PWP4465 Pasadena Water & Power 04/06/2022
1/11/22-2/11/22 Acct# 80176-1-City Of Pasadena water purchase Jan 2022 3,368.29 10/12-11/12/21 Acct# 80176-1-City Of Pasadena water purchase Nov 2022 3,500.13 11/12-12/13/21 Acct# 80176-1-City Of Pasadena water purchase Dec 2021 3,192.51 11/9/21-1/12/22 Acct# 80233-0-City Of Pasadena water purchase Nov-Jan 2022 0.04 12/13-1/11/22 Acct# 80176-1-City Of Pasadena water purchase Jan 2022 2,818.98 Total for Check Number 314200: 12,879.95
314201 PHOE4610 Phoenix Group Information Systems 04/06/2022 022022184 Parking Citation Processing & Database Access: February 2022 4,091.27 Total for Check Number 314201: 4,091.27
314202 CHRISPON Christopher Pong 04/06/2022
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 9 9 - 23
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
119575 Refund Cancelled Class due to Low Enrollment 280.00 Total for Check Number 314202: 280.00
314203 ROWI2011 Right of Way Inc. 04/06/2022
59513 On-Call Services for Traffic Control for Al Fresc: Jan'22-Mar'22 4,146.00 Total for Check Number 314203: 4,146.00
314204 RIV4011 Riverside County Sheriff's Dept 04/06/2022 BCTC0045952 Field Training Event 03/14-03/16/22 for Officer Borrello 185.00 Total for Check Number 314204: 185.00
314205 RKAC6010 RKA Consulting Group 04/06/2022
31813 Engineering Design, and Construction Services: October 2021 1,570.00 Total for Check Number 314205: 1,570.00
314206 RPCH8210 Christina Roppo 04/06/2022
09/23/2021 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Roppo: 09/23/2021 19.26 Total for Check Number 314206: 19.26
314207 ANGSAENZ Angelina Saenz 04/06/2022
119573 Parent request a check refund for Super Soccer Stars class. 110.00 Total for Check Number 314207: 110.00
314208 SAN4961 San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments 04/06/2022 RFR-01-09 Participation in the SGV Regional Food Recovery Program 57,765.00 Total for Check Number 314208: 57,765.00
314209 SCAT6710 Scott's Automotive 04/06/2022
16722 Supplementary battery for #1802 187.19
16819 Maintenance to Water Div.Unit# 16-Safety Break & Window repair 250.00 16822 Maintenance to Water Division Unit; 16-Starter replacement 212.80 16845 Replace PCM Module unit #1501 118.65
16847 Remove & replace mail oil seal unit#0219 522.83
16872 replace blend door actuator, thermostat, and coolant Unit # 1501 249.42 16873 Replace Oil, Filters, Brake Pads on Unit # 1705 262.20 Total for Check Number 314209: 1,803.09
314210 SDSI0107 SDS Security Design Systems 04/06/2022
232767 Installation of Security Cameras at Public Works Yard 286.57 232767 Installation of Security Cameras at Public Works Yard 286.56 232767 Installation of Security Cameras at Public Works Yard 286.56 233921 Maintenance of Security Cameras at Public Works Yard 29.15 233921 Maintenance for Security Cameras at Public Works Yard 29.15 233921 Maintenance of Security Cameras at Public Works Yard 29.15 Total for Check Number 314210: 947.14
314211 SKYERENT Skye Rentals 04/06/2022
ID 1115657440 REFUND-NO TENT FEE FOR FILMING; ONLINE TRANS ID #1115657440 169.00 ID 1115665969 REFUND-NO TENT FEE FOR FILMING; ONLINE TRANS ID #1115665969 169.00 Total for Check Number 314211: 338.00
314212 MCST4010 Michael Smith 04/06/2022
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 10 9 - 24
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
03/07-03/11/22 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Smith 03/07-03/11/22 122.09 03/07-03/11/22 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Smith 03/07-03/11/22 76.56 10/25/2021 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Smith 10/25/2021 11.98 Total for Check Number 314212: 210.63
314213 SOGA6501 SoCalGAS 04/06/2022
2/1/22-3/1/22 CNG for City Vehicles (PW & Transit)-2/1/22-3/1/22 97.17 2/1/22-3/1/22 CNG for City Vehicles (PW & Transit)-2/1/22-3/1/22 97.17 2/1/22-3/1/22 CNG for City Vehicles (PW & Transit)-2/1/22-3/1/22 97.17 2/1/22-3/1/22 CNG for City Vehicles (PW & Transit)-2/1/22-3/1/22 97.18 2/1/22-3/1/22 CNG for City Vehicles (PW & Transit)-2/1/22-3/1/22 97.17 2/1/22-3/1/22 CNG for City Vehicles (PW & Transit)-2/1/22-3/1/22 97.17 Total for Check Number 314213: 583.03
314214 SEBASTEI Sebastian Steinberger 04/06/2022
Film 257 Refund Police Film Deposit 630.00
Total for Check Number 314214: 630.00
314215 SRYC5011 Stericycle Inc. 04/06/2022
3005943963 HAZARDOUS MEDICAL WASTE 04/2022-06/2022 156.07 Total for Check Number 314215: 156.07
314216 SUVA8022 Sunset Vans Inc. 04/06/2022
21325 Wheelchair Maint. Repair for Units 75 & 80 Dial-a-Ride 271.96 21326 Wheelchair Maint. Repair for Units 75 & 80 Dial-a-Ride 150.00 Total for Check Number 314216: 421.96
314217 SSSS8267 Super Soccer Stars 04/06/2022
7709 Contract Class Instructor Payment (2-3 W) 10 AM - 02/23-03/23/22 715.00 7731 Contract Class Instructor Payment (Parent & Me) 02/23-03/23/22 143.00 7733 Contract Class Instructor (3-4 W) 10:45 AM 02/23-03/23/22 214.50 7734 Contract Class Instructor Payment (3-4 W) 2:10PM 02/23-03/23/22 357.50 7762 Contract Class Instructor Payment (5-6 W) 3PM 02/23-03/23/22 286.00 7781 Contract Class Instructor Payment (7-10 W) 4:05PM 02/23-03/23/22 214.50 Total for Check Number 314217: 1,930.50
314218 SCRR4010 Superior Court of California, County of LA 04/06/2022 February 2022 Citations processed for February 2022 3,962.00 Total for Check Number 314218: 3,962.00
314219 CHEKSHO Cheuk Sze Ho 04/06/2022
119617 Unable to attend Brit West Soccer class. Admin fee deducted. 79.00 Total for Check Number 314219: 79.00
314220 TMON4011 Team One Network 04/06/2022
16800T Training Class for Officer Giron-Garrido: 06/16-06/17/22 650.00 16802T Training Class for Cpl Dubois: 06/16/2022 350.00 Total for Check Number 314220: 1,000.00
314221 TERZHYK Hayak Terzyan 04/06/2022
000271 Notary Services for Police Applicant Fierro 90.00 Total for Check Number 314221: 90.00
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 11 9 - 25
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
314222 TLSI8011 The Library Store Inc. 04/06/2022
559478 CD/DVD HUB Labels 398.49
Total for Check Number 314222: 398.49
314223 TIM4011 Time Warner Cable 04/06/2022
0029763022722 AN 8448 20 899 0029763 Service (02-16-22 / 03-15-22) 409.61 0052005022622 AN 8448 20 899 0052005 Service (02-11-22 / 03-10-22) 3,477.78 0070193030122 AN 8448 30 008 0070193 Service 03/01/22 - 03/31/22 83.95 0251967022222 AN 8448 30 008 0251967 Service (02-22-22 / 03-21-22) 233.35 0355990030222 AN 8448 30 008 0355990 Service (03-02-22 / 04-01-22) 418.33 0357905030522 Account # 0357905030522: 03/05/22 - 04/04/22 130.55 Total for Check Number 314223: 4,753.57
314224 TOM4455 Tom's Men's Wear & Uniform's, Inc. 04/06/2022 170 Pepper spray for Lizeth 19.96
Total for Check Number 314224: 19.96
314225 UCL6115 UC Regents 04/06/2022
3013-97 Continuing Education and Certification for Fire Dept; MARCH 2022 2,215.02 Total for Check Number 314225: 2,215.02
314226 UND6710 Underground Service Alert/SC 04/06/2022
220220696 Utility Underground Service Alert March 2022 231.10 Total for Check Number 314226: 231.10
314227 POR4707 United Site Services, Inc. 04/06/2022
114-10374138 Skate Park Portable Toilet Services period 05/19/20- 06/15/20 72.03 114-12304333 Skate Park Portable Toilet Services period 08/10/21-09/06/21 339.72 114-12884022 Skate Park Portable Toilet Services period 02/22/22-03/21/22. 367.86 Total for Check Number 314227: 779.61
314228 UPP7789 Upper San Gabriel Valley MWD 04/06/2022
SoPas-1.6.22 Co-funding for MWD Water Conservation rebates for (Dec. 2021) 409.00 SoPas-10.12.21 Co-funding for MWD Water Conservation rebates (7/1/21 - 9/30/21) 1,536.58 SoPas-11.4.21 Co-funding for MWD Water Conservation rebates for (Oct. 2021) 632.00 SoPas-12.09.21 Co-funding for MWD Water Conservation rebates (Nov. 2021) 1,765.00 SoPas-2.8.22 Co-funding for MWD Water Conservation rebates (Jan. 2022) 862.00 SoPas-3.7.22 Co-funding for MWD Water Conservation rebates (Feb 2022) 3,545.10 Total for Check Number 314228: 8,749.68
314229 VALD4011 Catalina Valdez 04/06/2022
03/11/2022 Reimb. Training Expense for Officer Valdez 03/11/2022 14.51 Total for Check Number 314229: 14.51
314230 VPSI407 Valley Power Systems Inc. 04/06/2022
I36863 013070 Vehicle Rapair to Fire Engine RA-81: Engine / Crank Repair 9,239.31 Total for Check Number 314230: 9,239.31
314231 VMIS8011 Venmill Industries 04/06/2022
15580 Repair of Library's VMI-2500 CD cleaning machine 350.00 Total for Check Number 314231: 350.00
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 12 9 - 26
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
314232 VERW6711 Verizon Wireless 04/06/2022
9900265273 AN 571839627-00001 Service (01-24-22 / 02-23-22) 16.03 9900461882 AN 270619951-0004 Service (01-27-22 / 02-26-22) 508.92 9900813442 AN 642443919 Service (02-02-22 / 03-01-22) 1,645.20 Total for Check Number 314232: 2,170.15
314233 WLHD8020 Westlake Hardware 04/06/2022
14302301 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Water Div. 67.62 14302302 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Water Div. 94.68 14302303 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Water Div. 70.68 14302306 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 130.77 14302314 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 79.84 14302318 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 66.09 14302323 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 147.74 14302324 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Water Div. 209.89 14302325 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Faciliites Div. 328.51 14302326 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Faciliites Div. 405.59 14302337 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Parks Div. 98.01 14302339 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Water Div. 247.62 14302340 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 35.26 14302341 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Water Div. 487.06 14302342 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 38.57 14302343 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 13.73 14302360 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Facilities Div. 46.28 14302363 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Engineering Div. 88.14 14302364 Hardware Supplies for Public Works Water Div. 498.31 Total for Check Number 314233: 3,154.39
314234 WGZM6011 WG Zimmerman Engineering, Inc. 04/06/2022 21-10-646 815 Fremont Ave Impact Study: October 2021 8,044.00 21-11-665 815 Fremont Ave Impact Study: November 2021 14,197.50 Total for Check Number 314234: 22,241.50
314235 WIT6353 Wittman Enterprises LLC 04/06/2022
2202059 Paramedic Billing Services; FEBRUARY 2022 3,942.30 Total for Check Number 314235: 3,942.30
314236 GRA1244 Woods Maintenance Services, Inc. 04/06/2022 SPAS0222 City Wide Graffiti Removal Services -February 2022 912.00 SPAS1121 City Wide Graffiti Removal Services-November 2021 171.00 SPAS1221 City Wide Graffiti Removal Services - December 2021 1,311.00 Total for Check Number 314236: 2,394.00
314237 XRXF5010 Xerox Financial Services 04/06/2022
3107281 AN 010-0061587-003 (02/18-22 - 03/17/22) 162.35 Total for Check Number 314237: 162.35
314238 YTI1023 Y Tire Complete Auto Repair 04/06/2022
32192 Mount and balance 3 tires unit 1501 888.44
Total for Check Number 314238: 888.44
Total for 4/6/2022: 460,681.05
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 13 9 - 27
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
Report Total (113 checks): 460,681.05
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 1:26 PM) Page 14 9 - 28
ATTACHMENT 4
Supplemental ACH
Payments
9 - 29
Date Vendor Amount Description
3/16/2022 So Cal Gas $1,637.73 Online Payment for City's So Cal Gas Accounts.
3/16/2022 So Cal Edison $50,899.07 Online Payment for City's So Cal Edison Accounts.
3/24/2022 UMPQUA Bank $8,624.64
Online Payment for City's
February 2022 Credit Card
Expenses.

Total: $61,161.44
Supplemental ACH Payment Log
9 - 30
Accounts Payable
User:

Printed:
ealvarez
3/30/2022 9:16 AM
Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference
2114 UMQAMC UMPQUA Bank (Manual Check) 03/24/2022

02.01.2021 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 23.94

02.01.2022 Day Translation / Translation Services 148.92

02.01.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 20.67

02.02.2022 Hobby Lobby - Supplies for Community Services 225.65

02.03.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 23.19

02.03.2022 American Public Works - Job Posting 375.00

02.03.2022 TrueSens - Filters & UV Bulbs 31.97

02.03.2022 TrueSens - Filters & UV Bulbs 214.99

02.04.2022 Smart & Final - Supplies for Community Services 39.97

02.04.2022 Facebook - Advertisement 50.00

02.06.2022 Netflix - Community Services 13.99

02.07.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 30.04

02.08.2022 American Planning Association Chapter for B Madrid 125.00

02.08.2022 American Planning Association Chapter for S Martinez 125.00

02.08.2022 American Planning Association Chapter for M Chang 125.00

02.08.2022 Monthly Zoom Charge for Community Development 16.11

02.08.2022 American Planning Association Chapter for S Robles 125.00

02.08.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 18.78

02.08.2022 Day Translation / Translation Services 5.10

02.08.2022 Constant Contact Annual Renewal 940.00

02.08.2022 Grocery Outlet - Supplies for Community Services 85.50

02.09.2022 League of CA Cities 45.00

02.09.2022 National APA Membership for A Frausto-Lupo 194.00

02.09.2022 United States Postal Services - Stamps 174.00

02.10.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 30.82

02.11.2022 Cantu Graphics - Office Supplies for Community Services 137.81

02.11.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 18.70

02.11.2022 Day Translation / Translation Services 52.02

02.12.2022 GotPrint.com - Bookmarks for Library 165.13

02.13.2022 Staples - Table for Management Services 154.33

02.13.2022 American Planning Association - Job Posting 50.00

02.14.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Shell Oil 18.14

02.14.2022 Pavilions - Supplies for Community Services 59.94

02.15.2022 LA Area Fire Chiefs Dues 800.00

02.15.2022 Planetizen - Job Posting 99.95

02.15.2022 Ace - Supplies for Community Services 86.94

02.15.2022 Wayfair - Depository Safe for Community Services 213.38

02.15.2022 CP & DR Subscription 119.00

02.16.2022 Crowdcast - Virtual Events Platform for Library 10.00

02.17.2022 United States Postal Services - Stamps 58.00

02.17.2022 United States Postal Services - Stamps 5.80

02.17.2022 Southwest Airlines - Conference for Community Services 66.84

02.17.2022 Ace - Supplies for Community Services 132.61

02.17.2022 Southwest Airlines - Conference for Community Services 505.00

02.17.2022 Smart & Final - Supplies for Community Services 92.46

02.17.2022 Zoom 105.52

02.17.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 23.27

02.17.2022 Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena 25.82 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 9:16 AM) Page 1 9 - 31
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Check Amount
Invoice No Description Reference

02.17.2022 225.00

02.17.2022 19.51

02.17.2022 24.34

02.18.2022 119.99

02.18.2022 58.49

02.19.2022 190.58

02.22.2022 18.48

02.22.2022 120.00

02.23.2022 200.00

02.23.2022 24.85

02.23.2022 198.44

02.23.2022 100.00

02.24.2022 20.28

02.24.2022 43.95

02.24.2022 300.00

02.24.2022 42.09

02.26.2022 635.34

02.27.2022
Western Region IPMA-HR - Job Posting
Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena
Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena
Canva Subscription
4th of July Books
Crowdcast - Printing Press reader Bookmarks and Invites Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena
CA Library Association Membership for C. Mitchem
City Clerks Association - Job Posting
Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena
Ace - Power Tool for Community Services
Libert Cassidy - Event for HR Staff
Fuel for Motor Officers / Chevron South Pasadena
Costco - Supplies for Community Services
League of CA Cities - Human Resources
Westlake / Key Duplication
NBF / Reception Station for Community Svcs.

Facebook - Advertisement 75.00
Total for Check Number 2114: 8,624.64
Total for 3/24/2022: 8,624.64
Report Total (1 checks): 8,624.64
AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (3/30/2022 9:16 AM) Page 2 9 - 32
ATTACHMENT 5
Prepaid &Warrant Voids
9 - 33
Accounts Payable
ealvarez
Printed: 03/17/2022 - 3:01PM
User:

Void Check Proof List
Batch: 00004.03.2022
Account Number Amount Invoice No Inv Date Description Reference Task Label Type PONumber Close PO? Line Item Vendor: CHWP2010 Colantuono,Highsmith & Whatley,PC
Check No: 0 Check Date: 03/16/2022

24.50 50655 02/13/2022 Litigation: January 2022 No 0
101-2010-2501-8160-000
13,975.76 50654 02/13/2022 Litigation: January 2022 No 0 101-2010-2501-8160-000
196.00 50650 02/13/2022 Litigation: January 2022 No 0
101-2010-2501-8160-000
5,440.50 50652 02/13/2022 Special Projects: January 2022 No 0 101-2010-2501-8160-000
10,000.00 50648 02/13/2022 General Services: January 2022 No 0 101-2010-2501-8160-000
1,813.00 50651 02/13/2022 Water & Utilies: January 2022 No 0 101-2010-2501-8160-000
1,642.40 50653 02/13/2022 Litigation: January 2022 No 0 101-2010-2501-8160-000
13,517.00 50649 02/13/2022 Labor & Employment: January 2022 No 0 101-2010-2013-8160-000
Check Total: 46,609.16
Vendor Total: 46,609.16
Report Total: 46,609.16
AP-Void Check Proof List (3/17/2022 - 3:01 PM) Page 1
9 - 34
ATTACHMENT 6
Payroll Summary
9 - 35
Payroll
Payroll Summary Report
Payroll Date: 3/18/2022 Regular
Checks $ 5,217.01
Direct Deposits $ 445,621.76
IRS Payments $ 89,447.81
EDD - State of CA $ 25,482.42
PERS Pension $ 115,057.69
Deferred Comp $ 25,430.69
PERS Health
Subtotal: $ 706,257.38
Payroll Date: 3/19/2022 Off-Cycle
Checks $ -
Direct Deposits $ -
IRS Payments $ 4.52
EDD - State of CA $ 1,428.23
PERS Pension $ -
Deferred Comp $ -
PERS Health $ -
Subtotal: $ 1,432.75
Grand Total: $ 707,690.13
9 - 36
10 10 - 1
Consideration of the 2022 Legislative Platform
April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 3 ends

This proposed Legislative Platform has been drafted using the guiding priorities of the City Council, as established in the Goals and Objectives of the City's 2021-2026 Strategic Plan, the General Plan, and other adopted policy documents. Once adopted, the Legislative Platform remains in effect for the legislative cycle. The City Council may add, remove, or modify items on the Legislative Platform at any time.

Analysis
As a current member of CalCities, the City is part of a network of California jurisdictions that work together to enhance their knowledge and skills, exchange information, and combine resources so that they may influence policy decisions that affect cities.

CalCities engages in lobbying efforts at the State Capitol on bills that are of critical importance to cities. Often times, CalCities will ask its members for support or opposition on bills of interest. As the Legislature increasingly acts through "gut and amend" legislation, more cities are adding a “Quick Response Protocol” through their legislative platforms to authorize positions on these fast-moving bills that could be harmful to the City.

The City’s first Legislative Platform was adopted in June 2018. The California Legislative session typically begins in December and ends in November of the following year. By engaging early and staying engaged, the City has the opportunity to be a part of the legislative conversation, and remains proactive rather than reactive on potential impacts to our quality of life. Legislation impacts the City if there are unfunded mandates, financial effects, or local control from other jurisdictions.

The most recent Legislative Platform was adopted in February 2021 and covers the current Legislative Calendar through November 2022. As of the last update, many of the priorities remain the same. Priorities identified by the City Council since that time, including priorities identified in the City’s Strategic 2021-2026 Plan adopted December 15, 2021, have been included in the platform. Additional priorities have been included in consultation with Department Directors and in response to foreseeable challenges. Notable additions to the policy document include support for post-pandemic relief and economic recovery, equitable public safety reform, and consumer access to renewable energy. The document includes advocacy for the sale of Caltrans properties in the City in accordance with the Roberti Act, as well as a legislative stance regarding efforts to thwart catalytic converter thefts, which was approved by Council March 2022. All suggested changes have been redlined in the attached document.

Next Steps
Staff will continue to monitor key legislation as it moves through the legislative process, and provide City Council with quarterly updates on significant developments. At the end of each legislative session, a report will be submitted to the City Council summarizing all activity regarding measures on which the City has taken a position. 10 - 2
Consideration of the 2022 Legislative Platform
April 6, 2022

Page 3 of 3 ends

Fiscal Impact
While there is no fiscal impact with the adoption of a Legislative Platform, future implications on City finances could result from new legislation.

Attachment:

1. Proposed 2022 Legislative Platform Redlined to the 2021-2022 Adopted South Pasadena 2021-2022 Legislative Platform
10 - 3
Attachment 1
Redline Changes to Legislative Platform
10 - 4
City of South Pasadena
Legislative Platform
2021-2022 2022
The primary objective of the Legislative Platform is for the City Council to adopt official City positions on specific legislative issues, including proposed state initiatives, at the start of the legislative session. The legislative platform will streamline the approval process by providing staff clear direction on pertinent issues at the beginning of the legislative session.

The Platform is developed and maintained using the goals and objectives adopted by the City Council, a review of legislative priorities from the League of California Cities, input from City Council and staff, research of current law and pending legislation, as well as discussions with local legislative staff and the City’s legal counsel.

For proposed legislation, either consistent with the City’s legislative priorities or consistent with legislative positions the City has taken in the past; City staff shall be authorized to prepare position letters for the Mayor’s signature after City Council consideration. Items not addressed in the City’s legislative priorities will require further Council direction, and staff will be required to submit a request to Council. Legislative priorities may only address issues directly relevant to or impacting the provision of municipal services.

City departments are encouraged to monitor and be knowledgeable of any legislative issues related to their discipline. However, any requests for the City to take positions on a legislative matter must be directed to the City Manager’s Office. City departments may not take positions on legislative issues without City Manager’s Office review and approval.

The process for responding to legislative proposals is streamlined as follows:

1. Once a determination is made that a legislative proposal may impact the City, a letter outlining the City’s position (supporting or opposing the issue) will be drafted for the Mayor’s signature.

2. If the Mayor is unavailable, the Mayor Pro Tem will sign the position letter.

3. If a legislative issue is not addressed in the Legislative Platform but impacts the City, staff will place the matter on the next City Council agenda for consideration.

4. The position letter will be sent to the bill’s author, the City’s legislative representatives, the League of California Cities, and other stakeholders as deemed appropriate.

5. A copy of the final letter will be distributed to the City Council. 10 - 5
LOCAL CONTROL 1. Support legislation that enhances local control and allows cities to address the needs of local constituents within a framework of regional cooperation.

2. Oppose preemption of local authority whether by state or federal legislation or ballot propositions.

3. Support legislation that streamlines and simplifies the job of running a city and oppose efforts that erode the City’s authority to control its own affairs.

ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT 1. Oppose legislation that erodes the ability of cities to condition and deny projects that negatively impacts to the community.

2. Support legislation that preserves or increases funding for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program as provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Support legislation that expands the eligibility and allowable uses of CDBG funds. Oppose legislation that will reduce funds dedicated to the CDBG program.

3. Support legislation that enhances the City’s efforts to retain existing businesses and attract new businesses.

4. Support legislation that provides tangible and productive tools and incentives to support new investment and community development.

5. Support legislation that provides funding for the production of affordable housing.

6. Support efforts to increase resources for critical and sustainable local infrastructure projects including roads, public transit, active transportation, water availability, and broadband deployment that enhance workforce and economic development and improve quality of life.

City of South Pasadena
Legislative Platform
10 - 6

HOUSING/

HOMELESSNESS

1. Support legislation and local, state, and federal programs that employ evidence-based best practice strategies to reduce the number of people experiencing homelessness by: preventing homelessness for those at-risk; providing emergency and transitional housing; expanding affordable permanent
housing; and promoting self-empowerment through
counseling, job training, and other supportive services, including but not limited to mental health and substance abuse counseling services).

2. Support efforts to increase the supply and affordability of housing and resources to assist individuals at risk of
homelessness, while preserving historic resources and local decision making to ensure cities retain flexibility based on the land use needs of each community.

3. Work collaboratively to facilitate the purchase, rehabilitation, and resale of the Caltrans-owned SR 710 surplus properties in compliance.

LAND USE 1. Oppose legislation that imposes unreasonable mandatory development standards in transit intensive areas and
residential neighborhoods.

2. Support legislation that strengthens the concept of local control/local home rule for local decision making on land use and zoning matters.

3. Support legislation that would increase available funding for affordable housing.

4. Support reforms and improvements to housing element law to provide clear protections for local jurisdictions to preserve historic resources and processes and flexibility to allow regional cooperation; and to establish realistic housing goals and performance standards—including modifications in criteria and methodology -to meet the State’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) goals.

5. Oppose legislation that places new restrictions on local land use control and transportation funding tied to external factors beyond municipal control.

6. Support legislation that strengthens local governments’ regulatory authority and control over the siting of marijuana industries.

7. Oppose legislation and regulatory efforts that would diminish or eliminate the authority of cities to zone and plan for the development of telecommunications infrastructure, including the siting of cellular communications towers or transmission sites. 10 - 7
TRANSPORTATION 1. Support measures to finance local and regional transportation programs and improvements, including Active Transportation Mode and Complete and Green Streets, and extension of Gold Line.

2. Support continuous appropriations of new monies directly to cities for the preservation, maintenance, rehabilitation, and development of local street and road systems.

3. Support efforts to fully fund the TSM/TDM alternatives in accordance with prior City positions.

4. Support efforts to relinquish the property along the SR-710 freeway between the I-10 and I-210 back to the local
jurisdictions
FISCAL

RESPONSIBILITY

1. Oppose any legislation that would make local agencies more dependent on the State for financial stability and policy direction.

2. Oppose legislation that would impose State mandated costs for which there is no guarantee of local reimbursement or offsetting benefits.

3. Oppose any change in revenue allocations that would negatively (current or future) affect local government, including the redistribution of sales tax, property tax, COPS grants, Proposition 172 funds, gas tax (HUTA), transient occupancy tax (TOT) and vehicle in- lieu fees (VLF).

4. Support full cost reimbursement to the City for all federal, state and county-mandated programs.

5. Support legislation that strengthens and expands ongoing revenue for the City.

6. Oppose legislation that undermines and preempts local authority over local taxes and fees.

7. Support efforts to utilize American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to secure direct and flexible funding and resources for cities to protect residents from the recovery of the COVID-19 pandemic, deliver essential services, support small businesses, and assist the community’s ability to fully recover from the effects of the pandemic.

8. Monitor the partial suspension of Support suspension of the Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirement for SB1 funding (Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program) in consideration of the economic challenges cities are facing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
10 - 8
PUBLIC SAFETY 1. Support federal, state, and local assistance for local police, fire, and homeland security initiatives, and any measures that will help contribute to local public safety.

2. Oppose legislation that would impede local law enforcement from addressing crime problems and recovering costs resulting from a crime committed by the guilty party.

3. Support efforts that strengthen local law enforcement’s ability to prevent and fight crime.

4. Support legislation that minimizes alcohol-related criminal behavior and underage drinking.

5. Support equitable public safety reforms that reduces liability to cities, improves public safety in the community, and strengthens community relations with peace officers, while addressing concerns over excessive use of force and distrust in peace officers.

6. Oppose efforts to reprioritize public safety funding and programs without proper procedural or stakeholder engagement that would result in decreased public safety services and increased crime.

7. Support legislation and additional resources to strengthen community disaster preparedness, resiliency, and recovery in collaboration with the state and federal governments.

8. Support ongoing efforts to mitigate wildfire disasters through responsible brush and forestry management, including coordination between local and state governments and utility providers.

9. Support efforts to fund crisis response units such as the pilot program being considered by the SGVCOG.

ENERGY

1. Protect Community Choice Aggregation (CCA) local control and autonomy, especially with regard to finances, power procurement, reliability, and local customer programs.

2. Support legislation that keeps funding for public benefits programs in local communities.

3. Support CCA efforts to purchase renewable energy at competitive rates and create benefits and savings for cities, small businesses, and residents.

4. Support equal treatment of bundled and unbundled customers by the CPUC and other state agencies.

5. Support efforts to expand consumer access to renewable energy, such as incentives and grants for solar, which would reduce reliance on non-renewable sources.
10 - 9
WATER 1. Oppose efforts to mandate a state water public benefits charge unless funds remain within the local community.

2. Oppose new regulations that do not allow appropriate time and resources to achieve for compliance.

3. Oppose actions by Regional Water Quality Control Boards that impose mandates on cities that exceed state or federal
regulations and/or are outside their jurisdictional authority to impose or enforce.

4. Support legislation that provides funding for Water
Infrastructure, Security and Programs that promote water reuse and conservation.

5. Support legislation that extends the compliance period for Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs) in drinking water.

6. Support practical, feasible, and affordable solutions to meet mandatory compliance with water quality and treatment
standards, notwithstanding prior agreements that otherwise limit cities’ ability to undertake such activities.

ENVIRONMENT 1. Oppose legislation that imposes undue hardship on local agencies to implement environmental regulations.

2. Support policy development, funding, research, and implementation strategies based on scientific data and human/ecological risk assessment for addressing urban water and storm water runoff.

3. Support policy development, “watershed based” solutions, funding and research for addressing urban runoff and beach closures, which identify the sources of bacterial, viral and other contaminants as well as human pathogens.

4. Support initiatives to advance the State’s goals for sales of all new passenger vehicles to be zero-emission by 2035 and additional measures to eliminate harmful emissions from the transportation sector and lawn care maintenance industry.

ARTS & CULTURE 1. Support legislation that will help maintain and enhance the City's performance arts venues, and funding for arts development.

2. Oppose any reductions and/or eliminations of arts and library programming or funding.

COMMUNITY

SERVICES/

RECREATION

1. Support legislation that will help provide residents with safe, accessible services and facilities.

2. Oppose action that depletes services and funding sources created to enhance the community's varying needs.
10 - 10

EMPLOYEE AND

LABOR RELATIONS

1. Oppose any measure that imposes upon local government mandated employee benefits that are more properly decided at the local level.

2. Oppose efforts which reduce local control over public employee disputes and impose the regulations of an outside agency.

3. Support reform measures that provide sustainable and secure public pensions and other post-retirement benefits to ensure responsive and affordable public services.

4. Oppose efforts to legislate changes in how the California Public Employee Pension System invests its assets if the proposed changes will result in a loss of funds.

5. Support legislation that streamlines the Workers’ Compensation system and makes it easier for employers, employees, and health care providers to navigate.

ELECTIONS 1. Support legislation that provides small to mid-sized cities to have at-large elections instead of divisive districts.

FILMING 1. Support efforts to promote and retain film and television jobs in California.
10 - 11
11 - 1
11 Resolution to Oppose Initiative 21-0042A1
April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 4 ends

stage, CalCities recommends that cities now adopt a resolution in opposition to it because of its harmful effects if enacted.

Specifically, the measure would:

1. Limit voter authority and accountability
• Limits voter input as it prohibits local voters from providing direction on how local tax dollars should be spent by prohibiting local advisory measures.
• Invalidates the Upland decision that allows a majority of local voters to pass special taxes. Taxes proposed by the initiative process are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council. • All local tax measures passed between January 2022 and November 2022 would be invalidated unless reenacted within 12 months, costing taxpayers more for additional elections.

2. Restrict local fee authority to provide local services • Impacts franchise fees by setting new standard for fees and charges paid for local and state government property use. The standard may significantly restrict the amount that oil companies, utilities, gas companies, railroads, garbage companies, cable companies, and other corporations pay for the use of local public property, including roads. • Places new restrictions on setting local fees and charges for services under threat of legal challenge. Major examples of affected fees and charges are:
o Nuisance abatement charges for things such as weeds, rubbish, code enforcement, etc.
o Emergency response fees such as in connection with DUI. o Transit fees, parking fees, and facility use charges for parks or recreation centers.

3. Restrict authority of state and local governments to issue fines and penalties for violations of law
• Requires voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties.

4. Restricts local tax authority to provide local services • New taxes can only be collected for a specified time period.

5. Other changes
• No fee, charge, or exaction regulating vehicle miles traveled can be imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy, potentially severely limiting steps to curb greenhouse gas emissions in response to global warming.
11 - 2
Resolution to Oppose Initiative 21-0042A1
April 6, 2022

Page 3 of 4 ends

During the meeting held on December 2nd and 3rd of 2021, the League of California Cities Board of Directors voted unanimously to oppose Initiative 21-0026A1. Following the Board’s unanimous decision, a coalition of public safety, labor, local government and infrastructure advocates have joined together to fight against this measure.

Impacts to Voter Rights, Transparency, and Accountability:
• This proposed measure changes our constitution to make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and local infrastructure.
• It also includes a hidden provision that would retroactively cancel measures that were passed by local voters — effectively undermining the rights of voters to decide for themselves what their communities need. • It would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures, where voters provide direction to politicians on how they want their local tax dollars spent.

CalCities, along with a broad coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses, strongly oppose this initiative.

CalCities requests local leaders to take a stand against an affront to local control and adopt a resolution to demonstrate how harmful this measure would be to local communities.

The following 79 California cities have adopted a resolution to oppose this tax initiative; Agoura Hills, Albany, Angels Camp, Artesia, Azusa, Beaumont, Bell Gardens, Blue Lake, Brisbane, Buena Park, Burbank, Carson, Chowchilla, Colton Corte Madera, Cypress, Dinuba, Downey, Dunsmuir, El Cerrito, Fairfield, Fowler, Glendora, Gustine, Highland, Hughson, Indio, Kerman, King City, La Palma, Lafayette, Lakeport, Lakewood, Larkspur, Lathrop, Lomita, Madera, Manteca, Marina, Mill Valley, Montebello, Monterey, Monterey Park, Moorpark, Needles, Newman, Norco, Novato, Oakdale, Palm Desert, Paramount, Placentia, Placerville, Rancho Cucamonga, Redlands, Riverbank, Rolling Hills Estates, Salinas, San Jose, San Juan Bautista, San Leandro, San Pablo, San Rafael, Sebastopol, Selma, Signal Hill, South Gate, Sunnyvale, Torrance, Tracy, Tulelake, Ukiah, Vallejo, Ventura, West Hollywood, Williams, Woodlake, Yountville, and Yuba City.

Fiscal Impact
This potential measure puts billions of dollars of currently dedicated state and local revenues at risk, potentially forcing cuts to essential services such as public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, code enforcement, affordable housing, and support for the unhoused.

Attachments:

1. Resolution to Oppose Initiative 21-0042A1

2. Sample Opposition Letter
11 - 3
Resolution to Oppose Initiative 21-0042A1
April 6, 2022

Page 4 of 4 ends

3. League of California Cities Press Release Dated February 2, 2022

4. League of California Cities Legal Analysis for The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Initiative No. 21-0042A1

5. League of California Cities Fact Sheet for The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Initiative No. 21-0042A1

6. Fiscal Analysis of The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Initiative No. 21-0042A1
11 - 4
Attachment 1
Resolution to Oppose Initiative 21-0042A1
11 - 5

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA, CALIFORNIA
OPPOSING CALIFORNIA STATEWIDE BALLOT INITIATIVE 21-0042A1 WHEREAS, an association representing California’s wealthiest corporations is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot; and
WHEREAS, the measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources; and
WHEREAS, the measure includes undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and infrastructure, and would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures where voters provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent; and
WHEREAS, the measure makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the measure puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to state and local services at risk, and could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more; and
WHEREAS, the measure would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, and utilities.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
PASADENA HEREBY RESOLVES:

SECTION 1. The City of South Pasadena, opposes Initiative 21-0042A1.

SECTION 2. The City of South Pasadena will join the “NO on Initiative 21- 0042A1 Coalition”, a growing coalition of public safety, labor, local government, infrastructure advocates, and other organizations throughout the State. 11 - 6
We direct staff to email a copy of this adopted resolution to the League of California Cities at [email protected].

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day 6th day of April, 2022.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Michael A. Cacciotti, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christina A. Muñoz Andrew L. Jared, City Attorney
Deputy City Clerk
11 - 7
Attachment 2
Sample Opposition Letter
11 - 8
April 6, 2022
Bismarck Obando
Director of Public Affairs, League of California Cities 1400 K Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Letter Opposing Initiative 21-0042A1
On April 6, 2022, the City of South Pasadena voted to oppose Initiative 21-0042A1, a proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot that would significantly jeopardize cities’ ability to provide essential services and infrastructure for residents.

This measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including impacts on local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources.

Furthermore, the measure includes undemocratic provisions that would make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and infrastructure, and would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures where voters provide direction on how they want their local tax dollars spent.

This measure also makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods.

The measure, as proposed, puts billions of dollars currently dedicated to state and local services at-risk, and could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more.

You may list South Pasadena’s formal opposition resolution dated April 6, 2022 to Initiative #21-0042A1, and include our City as part of the growing coalition of public safety, labor, local government, infrastructure advocates, and other organizations throughout the State opposed to this deceptive proposition.

Sincerely,
Arminè Chaparyan
City Manager
City of South Pasadena
CC: South Pasadena City Council
11 - 9
Attachment 3
League of California Cities Press Release Dated
February 2, 2022
11 - 10
Public safety, labor, local government, and
infrastructure advocates announce strong
opposition to California Business Roundtable
ballot measure that would benefit wealthy
corporations while decimating vital local and state services Feb 2, 2022
Deceptive proposition enables large corporations to avoid paying their fair share and evade enforcement when violating environmental, public health, and safety laws ContactKayla Sherwood, (530) 844-1744, [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) Fera Dayani, (916) 921-9111, [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) Mila Myles, (812) 240-3938, [email protected]
(mailto:[email protected]) Kyle Packham, (916) 642-3808, [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Sacramento – Today, the League of California Cities, California Professional Firefighters, SEIU California, California Alliance for Jobs, AFSCME California, and the California Special Districts Association announced their strong opposition to the deceptively named “ (https://oag.ca.gov/system /files/initiatives/pdfs/21-0042A1%20%28Taxes%29.pdf) Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/initiatives/pdfs/21-0042A1%20%28Taxes%29.pdf) ,” a ballot measure sponsored by the California Business Roundtable (CBRT), an organization that advocates on behalf of the largest and wealthiest corporations in California.

The coalition of public safety, labor, local government, and infrastructure groups are vocalizing their opposition as the California Attorney General is set to issue an official Title and Summary for the measure tomorrow, February 3. Once Title and Summary is released, proponents can begin signature gathering. They must submit 997,139 valid signatures in order to qualify for the November 2022 ballot. The Secretary of State’s recommended date to turn in signatures is April 29, 2022. “This far-reaching measure would significantly jeopardize cities’ ability to provide services and critical infrastructure to local residents,” said Carolyn Coleman, Executive Director and CEO, League of California Cities. “It would impose undemocratic restrictions on local voters and local governments that could force significant cuts to vital services like fire and emergency response, infrastructure, libraries, parks, sanitation, and more.”
Firefox https://www.calcities.org/detail-pages/news/2022/02/02/public-safety-lab... 1 of 3 3/29/2022, 6:23 PM
11 - 11
“This irresponsible measure would significantly reduce state and local funding available for fire prevention and response, including emergency services,” said Brian K. Rice, President, California Professional Firefighters. “At a time when our state and local communities are reeling from the impacts of intense and prolonged wildfires, this proposition interferes with the ability of firefighters and first responders to do our jobs and keep the public safe.” The CBRT measure would create major new loopholes that allow wealthy corporations to avoid paying their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities; while also allowing corporations to evade enforcement when they violate environmental, health, safety, and other state and local laws.

It would also significantly restrict the ability of local voters, local governments, and state elected officials to fund critical services like public schools, fire and emergency response, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, homeless and mental health services, and public infrastructure. “This initiative is a deceptive scheme written and paid for by wealthy corporations for their sole benefit,” said Tia Orr, Interim Executive Director, SEIU California. “These rich corporations are trying to create constitutional loopholes to avoid paying their fair share, while shifting the burden onto hardworking Californians.”
“This measure would make it much more difficult to fund critical infrastructure that’s needed in California,” said Michael Quigley, Executive Director, California Alliance for Jobs. “It would undercut our ability to invest in virtually every form of infrastructure, including safe bridges, local streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water quality, new schools, and utilities.” “This proposition would make it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods,” said Alia Griffing, Political and Legislative Director, AFSCME California. “It’s a get out of jail free card for wealthy corporations that will hurt our efforts to provide critical public services necessary to keep our communities healthy and safe.” “This measure exposes taxpayers to a new wave of costly litigation, limits the discretion of locally elected officials to respond to the needs of their communities, and injects uncertainty into financing critical infrastructure,” said Neil McCormick, CEO, California Special Districts Association. “We are in strong opposition to this dangerous measure that jeopardizes the health and safety of communities and prevents critical investments in climate adaptation and community resilience to address drought, flooding, and wildfire as well as reduce emissions and harmful pollutants.” Background
A broad and growing coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses opposes this measure. The measure:

Gives Wealthy Corporations a Major Loophole to Avoid Paying their Fair Share — Forcing Local Residents and Taxpayers to Pay More
Firefox https://www.calcities.org/detail-pages/news/2022/02/02/public-safety-lab... 2 of 3 3/29/2022, 6:23 PM
11 - 12
The measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources — shifting the burden and making individual taxpayers pay more.

Allows Corporations to Dodge Enforcement When They Violate Environmental, Health, Public Safety and Other Laws
It creates new loopholes that makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods.

Jeopardizes Vital Local and State Services
This far-reaching measure puts at risk billions of dollars currently dedicated to critical state and local services.

It could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services, and more.

It would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, utilities, and more.

Opens the Door for Frivolous Lawsuits, Bureaucracy and Red Tape that Will Cost Taxpayers and Hurt Our Communities
The measure will encourage frivolous lawsuits, bureaucracy, and red tape that will cost local taxpayers millions — while significantly delaying and stopping investments in infrastructure and vital services.

Undermines Voter Rights, Transparency, and Accountability It would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures, where voters provide direction to politicians on how they want their local tax dollars spent.

It would change our constitution to make it more difficult for local and state voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and local infrastructure.

It also includes a hidden provision that would retroactively cancel measures that were passed by local voters — effectively undermining the rights of voters to decide for themselves what their communities need.

Firefox https://www.calcities.org/detail-pages/news/2022/02/02/public-safety-lab... 3 of 3 3/29/2022, 6:23 PM
11 - 13
Attachment 4
League of California Cities Legal Analysis for The
Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability
Act Initiative No. 21- 0042A1
11 - 14
The Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act Initiative No. 21-0042A1
January 21, 2022
Summary: The measure limits the voters’ input, adopts new and stricter rules for raising taxes and fees, and makes it more difficult to hold state and local law violators accountable.

Limiting Voter Authority and Accountability
• Limits voter input. Prohibits local voters from providing direction on how local tax dollars should be spent by prohibiting local advisory measures. • Invalidates Upland decision that allows majority of local voters to pass special taxes. Taxes proposed by the Initiative are subject to the same rules as taxes placed on the ballot by a city council. All measures passed between January 2022 and November 2022 would be invalidated unless reenacted within 12 months.

Restricting Local Fee Authority to Provide Local Services • Franchise fees. Sets new standard for fees and charges paid for the use of local and state government property. The standard may significantly restrict the amount oil companies, utilities, gas companies, railroads, garbage companies, cable companies, and other corporations pay for the use of local public property. Rental and sale of local government property must be “reasonable” which must be proved by “clear and convincing evidence.”
• Except for licensing and other regulatory fees, fees and charges may not exceed the “actual cost” of providing the product or service for which the fee is charged. “Actual cost” is the “minimum amount necessary.” The burden to prove the fee or charge does not exceed “actual cost” is changed to “clear and convincing” evidence.

Restricting Authority of State and Local Governments to Issue Fines and Penalties for Violations of Law.
• Requires voter approval of fines, penalties, and levies for corporations and property owners that violate state and local laws unless a new, undefined adjudicatory process is used to impose the fines and penalties. 11 - 15
Restricting Local Tax Authority to Provide Local Services • Expanding existing taxes (e.g., UUT, use tax, TOT) to new territory (e.g., annexation) or expanding the base (e.g., new utility service) requires voter approval.
• City charters may not be amended to include a tax or fee. • New taxes can be imposed only for a specific time period. • Taxes adopted after January 1, 2022, that do not comply with the new rules, are void unless reenacted.
• All state taxes require majority voter approval.
• Prohibits any surcharge on property tax rate and allocation of property tax to state.

Other Changes
• No fee or charge or exaction regulating vehicle miles traveled can be imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy. 11 - 16
Attachment 5
League of California Cities Fact Sheet for The
Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability
Act Initiative No. 21- 0042A1
11 - 17
Stop the Corporate Loopholes Scheme
Deceptive Proposition Allows Major Corporations to Avoid Paying their Fair Share and Evade Enforcement when they Violate Environmental, Health & Safety Laws An association representing California’s wealthiest corporations — including oil, insurance, banks and drug companies — is behind a deceptive proposition aimed for the November 2022 statewide ballot. Their measure would create major new loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities; while also allowing corporations to evade enforcement when they violate environmental, health, safety and other state and local laws. Here’s why a broad coalition of local governments, labor and public safety leaders, infrastructure advocates, and businesses oppose the Corporate Loophole Scheme:

Gives Wealthy Corporations a Major Loophole to Avoid Paying their Fair Share - Forcing Local Residents and Taxpayers to Pay More • The measure creates new constitutional loopholes that allow corporations to pay far less than their fair share for the impacts they have on our communities, including local infrastructure, our environment, water quality, air quality, and natural resources – shifting the burden and making individual taxpayers pay more.

Allows Corporations to Dodge Enforcement When They Violate Environmental, Health, Public Safety and Other Laws
• The deceptive scheme creates new loopholes that makes it much more difficult for state and local regulators to issue fines and levies on corporations that violate laws intended to protect our environment, public health and safety, and our neighborhoods.

Jeopardizes Vital Local and State Services
• This far-reaching measure puts at risk billions of dollars currently dedicated to critical state and local services.
• It could force cuts to public schools, fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, parks, libraries, affordable housing, services to support homeless residents, mental health services and more. • It would also reduce funding for critical infrastructure like streets and roads, public transportation, drinking water, new schools, sanitation, utilities and more.

Opens the Door for Frivolous Lawsuits, Bureaucracy and Red Tape that Will Cost Taxpayers and Hurt Our Communities
• The measure will encourage frivolous lawsuits, bureaucracy and red tape that will cost local taxpayers millions — while significantly delaying and stopping investments in infrastructure and vital services.
11 - 18
Undermines Voter Rights, Transparency, and Accountability • This misleading measure changes our constitution to make it more difficult for local voters to pass measures needed to fund local services and local infrastructure.
• It also includes a hidden provision that would retroactively cancel measures that were passed by local voters — effectively undermining the rights of voters to decide for themselves what their communities need.
• It would limit voter input by prohibiting local advisory measures, where voters provide direction to politicians on how they want their local tax dollars spent. 11 - 19
Attachment 6
Fiscal Analysis for The Taxpayer Protection and
Government Accountability Act Initiative No. 21-
0042A1
11 - 20
CaliforniaCityFinance.Com
Fiscal and Program Effects of
Initiative 21-0042A1 on Local Governments
If Initiative 21-0042A1 is placed on the ballot and passed by voters, it will result in:
 Billions of local government fee and charge revenues placed at heightened legal peril. Related public service reductions across virtually every aspect of city, county, special district, and school services especially for transportation, and public facility use.  Hundreds of millions of dollars of annual revenues from dozens of tax and bond measures approved by voters between January 1, 2022 and November 9, 2022 subject to additional voter approval if not in compliance with the initiative.
 Indeterminable legal and administrative burdens and costs on local government from new and more empowered legal challenges, and bureaucratic cost tracking requirements.  The delay and deterrence of municipal annexations and associated impacts on housing and commercial development.
 Service and infrastructure impacts including in fire and emergency response, law enforcement, public health, drinking water, sewer sanitation, parks, libraries, public schools, affordable housing, homelessness prevention and mental health services.

1. Local Government Taxes and Services Threatened
With regard to taxes, Initiative 21-0042A1:
 Prohibits advisory, non-binding measures as to use of tax proceeds on the same ballot. o Voters may be less informed and more likely to vote against measures.  Eliminates the ability of special tax measures proposed by citizen initiative to be enacted by majority voter approval (Upland).
o Because the case law regarding citizen initiative special taxes approved by majority vote (Upland) is so recent, it is unknown how common these sorts of measures might be in the future. This initiative would prohibit such measures after the effective date of the initiative. Any such measures adopted after January 1, 2022 through November 8, 2022 would be void after November 9, 2023.
 Requires that tax measures include a specific duration of time that the tax will be imposed. This seems to require that all tax increases or extensions contain a sunset (end date). o This would require additional tax measures to extend previously approved taxes at additional cost to taxpayers.
 Requires that a tax or bond measure adopted after January 1, 2022 and before the effective date of the initiative (November 9, 2022) that was not adopted in accordance with the measure be readopted in compliance with the measure or will be void twelve months after the effective date of the initiative (November 9, 2023).
o If past election patterns are an indication, dozens of tax and bond measures approving hundreds of millions of annual revenues may not be in compliance and would be subject to reenactment.

Most will be taxes without a specific end date. Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, measures not in compliance would need to be placed on a special election ballot for approval before November 9, 2023 or the tax will be void after that date. General tax measures would require declaration of emergency and unanimous vote of the governing board.
2217 Isle Royale Lane • Davis, CA • 95616-6616
Phone: 530.758.3952 • Fax: 530.758.3952
Rev. January 7, 2022
11 - 21
– 2 – rev January 7, 2022
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
 Requires voter approval to expand an existing tax to new territory (annexations). This would require additional tax measures and would deter annexations and land development in cities. o If a tax is "extended" to an annexed area without a vote after January 1, 2022, it will be void 12 months later until brought into compliance. Because there is no regularly scheduled election within the 12 months following the effective date of the initiative, such extensions for general taxes would, under current law, each require unanimous vote of the agency board to be placed on a special election ballot or would be void after November 9, 2023.

1.a. Number of Measures and Value of Local Taxes at Risk1 In 2020, voters in California approved 293 local tax and bond measures for cities, counties, special districts and schools (95 in March and 198 in November). The approved measures enacted $3.85 billion in new annual taxes including $1.3 billion for cities, $302 million for counties, $208 million for special districts (fire, wastewater, open space and transit districts), and $2.037 billion for schools (including for school bonds).

Most tax measures go to the ballot during a presidential or gubernatorial primary or general election in an even year. However, some tax measures are decided at other times. During 2019, there were 45 approved tax and bond measures (24 city, 14 special district, 7 school) adopting $154.0 million in new annual taxes ($124.0 million city, $10.5 million special district and $19.2 million school).

Most tax and bond measures comply with the new rules in Initiative 21-0042Amdt#1 except:
 Dozens of taxes would require end dates. This would require additional measures in future years to extend the taxes further. Very few extensions of existing local taxes fail.  Majority vote general tax measures could not be accompanied on the same ballot with an advisory, non-binding measure as to use of tax proceeds.  Special taxes placed on the ballot via citizen initiative would require two-thirds voter approval.

Bond measures have fixed terms. Historically, about 20 percent of other tax measures have included specific durations (i.e. sunsets). Advisory measures as to use of revenues are uncommon. I do not expect the provisions of 21-0042A1 to have any substantial effect on passage rates. However, some 2022 approved measures would likely have to put back on the ballot.

Based on history, a reasonable estimate of the annualized tax revenues estimated to be approved by 1 Source: Compilation and summary of data from County elections offices. 11 - 22
– 3 – rev January 7, 2022
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
voters in 2022 and placed at risk by this initiative is at least $1.5 billion, including $1.0 billion from cities and $500 million from counties and special districts. 2 1.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Tax Provisions In addition to service delays and disruption due to new tax revenues placed at greater legal risk, there will be substantial additional costs for legal defense. The deterrence of taxes for annexations will delay and deter municipal annexations.

2. “Exempt Charges” (fees and charges that are not taxes) and Services Threatened With regard to fees and charges adopted after January 1, 2022, Initiative 21-0042A1:
 Subjects new fees and charges for a product or service to a new "actual cost” test defined as “(i) the minimum amount necessary to reimburse the government for the cost of providing the service to the payor, and (ii) where the amount charged is not used by the government for any purpose other than reimbursing that cost. In addition, subjects these same charges to a new, undefined, “reasonable” standard.
 Subjects fees and charges for entrance to local government property; and rental and sale of local government property to a new, undefined, “reasonable” test.  Subjects a challenged fee or charge to new, higher burdens of proof if legally challenged.  Prohibits a levy, charge or exaction regulating or related to vehicle miles traveled, imposed as a condition of property development or occupancy.

2.a. Value on New Local Government Fees and Charges at Risk3 Virtually every city, county, and special district must regularly (e.g., annually) adopt increases to fee rates and charges and revise rate schedules to accommodate new users and activities. Most of these would be subject to new standards and limitations under threat of legal challenge. Based on the current volume of fees and charges imposed by local agencies and increases in those fees simply to accommodate inflation, the amount of local government fee and charge revenue placed at risk is about $1 billion per year including those adopted since January 1, 2022. Of this $1 billion, about $570 million is for special districts, $450 million is cities, and $260 million is counties.4
Major examples of affected fees and charges are:

1. Nuisance abatement charges - such as for weed, rubbish and general nuisance abatement to fund community safety, code enforcement, and neighborhood cleanup programs.

2. Commercial franchise fees.

3. Emergency response fees - such as in connection with DUI.

4. Advanced Life Support (ALS) transport charges.

5. Document processing and duplication fees.

6. Transit fees, tolls, parking fees, public airport and harbor use fees.

7. Facility use charges, fees for parks and recreation services, garbage disposal tipping fees.

In addition to fees and charges, the measure puts fines and penalties assessed for the violation of state and 2 This does not include citizen initiative special tax approved by majority but not two-thirds. Because this approach is new, the number of these measures and amount of revenue involved cannot be estimated. 3 Source: California State Controller Annual Reports of Financial Transactions concerning cities, counties and special districts, summarized with an assumed growth due to fee rate increases (not population) of 2 percent annually. 4 School fees are also affected but the amount is negligible by comparison. 11 - 23
– 4 – rev January 7, 2022
CaliforniaCityFinance.com
local law at risk, making them taxes subject to voter approval under certain circumstances.

2.b. Additional Costs and Public Service Effects of the Fee/Charge Provisions In addition to service delays and disruptions due to fee and charge revenues placed at greater legal risk, there would be substantial additional costs for legal defense. The risk to fees and charges will make infrastructure financing more difficult and will deter new residential and commercial development. ***********
mc
11 - 24
12 - 1
12 Reorganization of Public Works Department
April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

This item proposes an update to the Deputy Public Works Director classification/job specification to combine components of the two existing positions which currently oversee Water Operations and Engineering and Administration. This consolidated position will assist the Public Works Director in overseeing the four divisions of the Public Works Department. With the proposed changes, the Water Operations Manager, Public Works Operations Manager, and Environmental Services & Sustainability Manager will report directly to the Deputy Public Works Director, as will the Engineering staff. Administrative staff and the newly created Management Analyst positions will report to the Public Works Director.

The two Management Analyst positions will assist the Department in the administration, analysis, and management of Department programs and projects, including but not limited to management of department or division budget, grant funding and reporting, management of federal, state, and local compliance programs, operations programs, and capital improvement programs and projects. The proposed positions will assist the Department in preparing City Council and Commission reports, analysis, research, and other assignments as needed, and may also oversee work of other administrative staff within the department. The Management Analyst position is an existing classification.

In addition to these changes, city staff is exploring the feasibility of adding an Engineering position to focus on traffic and transportation projects. This is largely in response to the community feedback gathered during the recent Commission Study Session with City Council, which emphasized the need to enhance the Public Works Department’s transportation projects throughput, and further support the Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission.

Other recommended changes in the department’s operations and structure have been included in the proposed organizational chart, including:

1. Elimination of “Administration Division”;

2. Creation of “Environmental Sustainability Division”; and

3. Renaming of “Maintenance Division” to “Operations & Maintenance Division.” Fiscal Impact
The cost of the two new analyst positions will be mostly offset by the cost savings from combining the two Deputy Director positions into one position. The fiscal impact for the current fiscal year is nominal and will be covered by savings due to vacancies for the remaining fourth quarter. Staff will appropriate additional funds in the next fiscal year budget, not to exceed $30,000, to cover the net increase to the personnel budget from several Public Works funding sources, including the Water Fund, Sewer Fund, Gas Tax, and General Fund.

Attachments:

1. Deputy Public Works Director Job Description/Classification Specification

2. Proposed Public Works Organizational Chart

3. Public Works Organizational Assessment - Annealta Group – Fall 2021 12 - 2
Attachment 1
Public Works Deputy Director
Classification (redlined)
12 - 3
City of South Pasadena

DEPUTY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
(WATER UTILITY & SUSTAINABILITY)
Purpose
Under direction of the Public Works Director, plans, organizes and provides administrative direction and oversight for the field operations and engineering sections of the Public Works Department including Streets, Parks, Facilities, Transportation/Traffic, Inspection, Right-ofWay Acquisition, Capital Improvement Program, and Development Engineering, Water Utility Capital Improvement Projects, Water Utility Field Operations, and the development and administration of the City’s Sustainability Program; supervises staff, administers the division's budget, performs professional civil engineering work; acts as project manager for major Water Utility projects; provides highly responsible and complex administrative management support to the Public Works Director; may serve as Acting Public Works Director during absences, as assigned; and performs other related duties as required.

Distinguishing Characteristics
This is one of two Deputy Public Works Director positions for the Public Works Department.

This single-incumbent managerial and professional class serves as a division-manager with specific responsibility for Public Works related functions Water Utility capital improvement projects, Water Utility field operations, and the City’s Sustainability Program, and reports directly to the Public Works Director. This class is designated as “at-will” and is exempt from the classified service; the incumbent shall serve at the pleasure of the City Manager.

This classification is distinguished from the Public Works Director in that the higher-level class has overall responsibility for departmental operations. An employee in this class exercises supervision over multiple functions through assigned managers and supervisors, and exercises considerable discretion and independent judgment in the performance of assigned duties, based on extensive experience and training in municipal public works engineering and field operations.

Examples of Essential Duties
The duties listed below are examples of the work typically performed by employees in this class.

An employee may not be assigned all duties listed and may be assigned duties that are not listed below:

Develops and implements goals, objectives, policies and priorities of the assigned division within Public Works; evaluates division plans, policies and procedures to achieve goals and objectives.

Provides for the selection, training, professional development and work evaluation of assigned staff; works with employee to correct deficiencies; and provides policy guidance and interpretation to assigned staff.

Continually monitors and evaluates the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery methods and procedures; assesses and monitors workload, administrative and support systems, and internal reporting relationships; identifies opportunities for improvement and reviews with the Public Works Director; directs the implementation of improvements. 12 - 4
Develops and implements effective work management tracking tools; responds to citizen complaints or requests for service deploying staff as required; prioritizes needs and requests; prepares written responses to citizens and other parties, as required.

Develops long range plans to keep up with water usage demands and to conform with State and Federal water quality requirements; analyzes the cost of services and develops water rate schedules.

Assumes direct responsibility for oversight of all major Water Utility related capital improvement projects and activities, development projects, inspection, permits, and the full range of other engineering and related services and activities.

OverseesAt the direction of the Public Works Director, and through a subordinate manager, directs and monitors the City’s water production which produces, tests, treats and delivers potable water; and the maintenance of the City’s water distribution system including repairs to water mains, valves, and related pipes and equipment; ensures that the City conforms with all State and Federal water quality requirements and submits all operations, production, and quality reports as required.

At the direction of the Public Works Director, and through a subordinate manager and supervisors, directs and monitors the Department’s field operations including streets, sewers, parks, equipment, and facilities maintenance.

Oversees At the direction of the Public Works Director, directs and monitors the preparation of engineering plans and specifications for Water Utility capital improvement projects, the construction of water utility projects, and the administration of professional service, construction, maintenance and other contracts; performs engineering studies and cost/benefit analysis.

Reviews and approves plans and specifications for City infrastructure and facilities, assessment districts, subdivisions and developments.

Reviews and approves plans and specifications for City infrastructure and facilities, assessment districts, subdivisions and developments; directs aspects of rights-of-way and easement acquisition and abandonment.

At the direction of the Public Works Director, directs and monitors traffic engineering and transportation planning activities.

Oversees and directs At the direction of the Public Works Director, and through a subordinate manager, directs and monitors the City’s environmental and sSustainability pPrograms through a subordinate manager; leads and participates in developing concepts, initiatives and strategies; directs and leads in the development of a strategic plan and implementation of approved programs.

Develops and implements City policies, programs, and initiatives that promote sustainable and green practices for the City; monitors and measures effectiveness of policies and programs.

Provides leadership and support to continually move the City towards embracing innovative and sustainable practices.
12 - 5
Confers with and represents the Department and the City in meetings with members of the City Council, members of board and commissions, various governmental agencies, developers, contractors, business and industrial groups and the public.

Represents the Department and the Public Works Director before the City Council, boards and commissions, professional groups, at community meetings, and on inter-departmental working groups.

Responds to public concerns, problems, and complaints in a meaningful and timely manner.

Develops local, state and federal funding sources; prioritizes and allocate available resources.

Reviews and evaluates program and service delivery, makes recommendations for improvement and ensures maximum effective service provision.

Oversees and participates in the selection and management of consultants and contractors for activities and services to support the business needs of the department.

Stays abreast of new trends and innovations in the Public Works, Public Utilities, Engineering, and Green/Sustainability fields.

Prepares and directs the preparation of a variety of written correspondence, reports, procedures, ordinances and other written materials; prepares agenda items for City Council presentation and approval including staff reports, exhibits, PowerPoint presentations, and other information items and materials.

Assumes the duties of the Public Works Director in his/her absence, as assigned.

Performs other related duties, as assigned.

Employment Standards
Education/Experience
A minimum of five years of broad and progressively responsible experience in Water Utility engineering public works administration, including three years of supervisory experience; and the completion of a Bachelor’s Degree from an accredited college or university in Civil or Water Engineering, Engineering, Public Management, Public Administration or a closely related field.

Any combination of training, education, and/or experience that could likely provide the desired knowledge and abilities is qualifying. A Master’s Degree in a related field is highly desirable.

Possession of, or ability to obtain within six months of appointment, a Certificate of Registration as a Professional Civil Engineer in the State of California is highly desirable.

Knowledge of:

Principles and practices of Public Works Water Utility and Sustainability program management; principles of administration, organization and operation; principles, practices and techniques of Water Utilitypublic works engineering, including the planning, design, construction, contract management, and inspection of municipal utility projects; principles and practices of funding and budget development, administration and evaluation; principles and practices of street maintenance, traffic control device maintenance, equipment maintenance, storm drain systems maintenance, sewerage collection systems construction and maintenance, facilities maintenance, and capital projects; principles and practices of water production, water treatment, water distribution, water system maintenance and repair, capital projects, sustainability programs, and environmental services; methods and techniques of supervision, training and motivation; basic 12 - 6
principles of mathematics; applicable federal, state and local laws, codes and regulations; methods and techniques of scheduling work assignments; standard office procedures, practices and equipment; modern office practices, methods and equipment, including a computer and applicable software; methods and techniques for record keeping and report preparation and writing; proper English, spelling and grammar; occupational hazards and standard safety practices.

Ability to:

Plan, manage and coordinate the work of the Water Utility and Sustainability Division of the Public Works Department; read and interpret maps, sketches, drawings, specifications, and technical manuals; develop and administer sound division goals, objectives, policies and methods for evaluating achievement and performance levels; develop, present and participate in the administration of a program budget; facilitate group participation and consensus building; plan, organize, train, evaluate and direct work of assigned staff; perform mathematical calculations quickly and accurately; interpret, explain and apply applicable laws, codes and regulations; read, interpret and record data accurately; organize, prioritize and follow-up on work assignments; work independently and as part of a team; make sound decisions within established guidelines; analyze a complex issue, and develop and implement an appropriate response; follow written and oral directions; observe safety principles and work in a safe manner; communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing; establish and maintain effective working relationships; operate an office computer and a variety of word processing and software applications.

Physical Demands
The physical demands described here are representative of those that must be met by an employee to successfully perform the essential functions of this job. Reasonable accommodations may be made to enable individuals with disabilities to perform the essential functions.

Ability to exert light to moderate physical effort, and exert sufficient force to lift, carry, push, pull, or otherwise move objects up to 25 pounds. Ability to remain in a sitting/standing position for extended periods of time. Ability to hear and speak to the general public, and City staff on the telephone and in person. Hand and eye coordination are needed to operate office equipment.

Strength, dexterity, coordination and vision to use keyboard and video/computer display terminal.

Special Requirements
Possession of a valid Class “C” California Driver License and a satisfactory driving record.

Possession of a Certificate of Registration as a Professional Civil Engineer in the State of California is required.

Working Conditions
Environment is generally clean with limited exposure to conditions such as dust, fumes, odors, or noise. Environment is generally clean with some limited exposure to such conditions as dust, fumes, odors, or noise. Computer terminal, copier/scanner, and other office machines are used on a daily basis. Requires traveling throughout the City and adjacent areas, and the attendance of occasional night meetings.

FLSA Status
Exempt
12 - 7
Public Works Department
Public Works Operations
Manager Water Operations Manager
Parks
Supervisor
Street &
Sewer
Supervisor
Public Works
Inspector (2)
Civil
Engineering
Assistant
Electrician
Building
Maintenance
Worker (2)
Sr.

Maintenance
Worker
Sr.

Maintenance
Worker
Maintenance
Worker I/II
(5)
Sr. Water
Utility
Worker
Sr. Water
Production/
Treatment
Operator
Water Utility
Worker I/II
(5)
Water
Production/
Treatment
Operator (2)
Maintenance
Worker I/II
Operations & Maintenance
Division
Potable water production,
treatment, distribution,
operations, and maintenance
Water
Division
Full Time Employees: 37Part-Time Employees: 2
Director of
Public Works
Management
Intern P/T
Management
Intern P/T
Facilities
Maintenance
Supervisor
Senior Civil
Engineer
Associate
Civil
Engineer
Management
Analyst
Environmental Sustainability
Division
Management
Public Works Analyst
Assistant
Engineering
Division
Review plans, issue permits,
perform inspections, review
land development projects &
administer CIP
Deputy Director of
Public Works
Responsible for facilities
maintenance, LLMD, parks
maintenance, street/sewer,
and storm drains
Environmental Services &
Sustainability Manager
Water conservation,
recycling, refuse contract
management, and
environmental programs
Management
Assistant
12 - 8 Attachment 2
Proposed Public Works Organizational Chart
Attachment 3
Public Works Organizational Assessment
(Annealta Group)
12 - 9
City of South Pasadena
Public Works Department
Organizational Study
October 2021
12 - 10
October 22, 2021
Arminé Chaprayan, City Manager
City of South Pasadena
1414 Mission Street
South Pasadena, CA 91030
Dear Ms. Chaprayan:

Annealta Group is pleased to submit this report which contains the results of our Public Works Department Organizational Study. During our analysis we found that you have a strong and very capable core of existing staff members in the department; however, we also identified several areas for consideration of potential improvements in the delivery of services to your customers.

The objective of this study was to identify possible areas for change and provide you with suggested recommendations for consideration and implementation. Our recommendations are set forth in the body of the text as well as summarized in a table at the end of the report.

Thank you for the opportunity to assist the City of South Pasadena on this important project! Sincerely,
Tim D’Zmura PE, CBO, AICP
President
12 - 11
Table of Contents Annealta Group
i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 1 Background............................................................................................................................... 5 Methodology............................................................................................................................. 7 Document review ........................................................................................................... 7 Interviews....................................................................................................................... 7 Public Works Department ........................................................................................................ 8 Organizational Staffing and Structure.................................................................................... 10 Staffing.......................................................................................................................... 10 Structure ....................................................................................................................... 12 Technology and Business Systems ......................................................................................... 18 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 20 Attachment A: List of Recommendations............................................................................... 21 Attachment B: Commission Work Plans ................................................................................ 22 Attachment C: City Council Staff Report....................................................................................... 25 12 - 12
Executive Summary Annealta Group
1 Annealta Group was retained by the City of South Pasadena to analyze and make recommendations about the Public Works Department, which is responsible for the maintenance and construction of a wide array of public infrastructure.

The Public Works Department is comprised of four divisions:

Engineering & Operations, Maintenance, Water & Sustainability and Administration.

The Administration Division
• Overall supervision and coordinates all department activities, including workforce development, training, safety,
environmental programs, Lighting and Landscaping
Maintenance District (LLMD), solid waste, street sweeping, and graffiti abatement.
• Customer service and manages service requests (approximately 4000 service requests each year).

The Engineering & Operations Division
• Interagency Coordination (METRO, Arroyo Verdugo
Communities Joint Powers Authority, San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, Federal Highway Administration, Caltrans, CalRecyle, LA County, and neighboring jurisdictions).
• Capital Improvement Projects; Design, plan review, construction management, and inspections.
• Grants administration, and contracts award and management. • Traffic Operations; Active Transportation and Intelligent Transportation Systems.
• Private Developments; Plan reviews, right of way improvements inspections, traffic, and environmental impact studies. • Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit
compliance.
• Issuance of right of way encroachment permits (approximately 500 each year).
• Support Public Works & Mobility and Transportation
Infrastructure Commissions.

Executive Summary
12 - 13
Executive Summary Annealta Group
2 The Maintenance Division
• Parks and Urban Forest Management; 92 acres of open space and 21,000 trees.
• Traffic Signals, Street Lights, and Facilities; 12 Facilities for 98,971 Sq. Ft., 932 streetlights, and 33 traffic signals.
• Streets (69 lane miles), Sidewalks (83 miles), and Traffic Control setup for special events.
• Storm Drains (117) and Sewer System (58 miles) maintenance. • Utility Coordination.

The Water & Sustainability Division
• Water Production, Treatment, and Distribution, Delivery of safe, clean water to over 6,200 connections.
• Water Infrastructure Maintenance; consisting of eight water storage tanks, six pump stations, and 130 miles of pipelines. • Water Resources Planning and Coordination; for short and longterm reliable water supplies. • Water Conservation; educate, promote, and implement watersaving programs through rebates and workshops. • Sustainability; protect the environment and natural resources through sustainable initiatives, promote and implement the City’s Green Action Plan (GAP) and Climate Action Plan (CAP).

We were not able to identify a department level mission or value statement and therefore conducted this analysis within the framework of the City’s Mission Statement and Core Values which are as follows:

MISSION STATEMENT
The City of South Pasadena is committed to providing effective and efficient municipal services for the community while preserving our small town character.

CORE VALUES (not in priority order)
▪ Honesty and Integrity
▪ Teamwork
▪ Outstanding customer service
▪ Responsiveness
▪ Open and accessible government
▪ Community participation
▪ Fiscal responsibility
12 - 14
Executive Summary Annealta Group
3 Due to recent staff changes, the City of South Pasadena is seeking an independent review and assessment of the roles and responsibilities of the Public Works Department staff.

As part of this effort, Annealta Group examined the organizational structure and major management processes used by the department. We conducted individual interviews, reviewed department material and job descriptions/resumes. The scope of our work did not include an evaluation of individual staff members.

The purpose of this assessment is not to conduct an exhaustive audit of policies and procedures, but instead to provide an objective, high level management review and assessment that includes the following:
▪ Effectiveness of Communication between Director and staff ▪ Accountability within the department
▪ The assignment and prioritization of work
▪ Observations regarding organizational setup and staff utilization, both contract and in house
▪ The current assignment of roles and responsibilities
▪ Identification of team work improvements and possible longer term improvement opportunities in the organization
▪ Identification of opportunities and initiatives to improve the team’s performance
▪ Potential customer service improvements
▪ Alignment of Department operations with City Mission
Statement and Core Values
12 - 15
Executive Summary Annealta Group
4 As a result of our study, this report outlines several organization structural changes including possible changes to the makeup of City Commissions currently supported by the Public Works Department, elimination of a deputy director position and several other staffing changes. The goal of these recommendations is to better position the department to serve the public and to gain greater internal efficiencies.

The report also recommends several changes to internal processes and identifies several physical improvements that we believe will assist the department. Attachment A provides a list of the recommendations contained in this report.
12 - 16
Background Annealta Group
5 The City of South Pasadena has experienced a number of staff changes in the past year including several key changes within the Public Works Department. Recently, the adopted budget included two new positions:
a Senior Civil Engineer and Inspector. Due to these changes, staff turnover and the re-prioritization of capital projects due to the City’s success in its battle to stop the 710 Freeway extension project, the City is seeking an independent, high level review and assessment of the roles and responsibilities of the Public Works Department staff.

While internal changes have occurred in the department that affect its ability to effectively and efficiently deliver services, significant external factors have played a key role in changing the priorities and responsibilities of the department. Specifically, the City has been the recipient of significant amount of new funding for infrastructure improvements. As a result of the cessation of the 710 extension project, $100 million in regional funding has been granted for traffic and mobility projects. Also, the City received approximately $4.7 million of Federal Funds through the pandemic rescue fund program, a portion of which may be allocated to the department. Lastly, the Federal Infrastructure funding re-authorization will result in the City receiving a yet unknown amount of additional funding and/or provide the opportunity to apply for specific grant funding needs.

Changes in plans, programs and regulations related to the environment greatly impact the workload of the Public Works Department. Most notably is the creation and adoption of the Green Action Plan adopted by the City Council on November 20, 2019. This coupled with the Climate Action Plan adopted on December 16, 2020 created a tremendous amount of staff work required for the implementation of each plans recommendations.

Staff in the department has been faced with new challenges and responsibilities in the successful delivery of services to the public. The department is responsible for supporting three City Commissions: Public Works Commission, Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission and the Natural Resources and Environmental Commission.

Background
12 - 17
Background Annealta Group
6 The City’s Public Works Department is responsible for a wide variety of tasks, all of which we could characterize as traditional for public works.

Although the purpose of this study was to identify potential improvements, it is important to note that many aspects of the City’s approach to service delivery are working well. For example, the public counter at city hall is well staffed and coordinated with building and planning serving the public in one location for planning and development needs. Also, a Facility Condition Assessment was performed in 2017 and serves as an excellent reference for preparation of city facility projects for the capital improvement program. 12 - 18
Methodology Annealta Group
7 Annealta Group used a variety of analytical and management in completing techniques in completing this project. We reviewed documents and met with staff to obtain information about operations and functions. Each is described briefly below.

Document Review
Interviews
To gain an understanding of the roles and responsibilities, Annealta Group reviewed current organization charts, job descriptions, resumes and budget information. In addition, we examined the City’s adopted budget, information available on the City’s website, and other publicly available information.

Annealta Group conducted six individual interviews with department staff as well as meeting with the director. The purpose of the interviews was to gain an understanding of the roles and responsibilities. The interviews were helpful in gaining insight into the day-to-day operations as well as current issues facing the department.

Methodology
12 - 19
Public Works Department Annealta Group
8 The responsibilities assigned to the Public Works Department varies from city to city depending on local conditions and business practice approach by city management. Generally, Public Works includes the following core areas of responsibility: Capital Project Delivery, Street Maintenance including signals, stripping & signing, Refuse & Recycling, Sewer and Storm Drain. Additional areas of responsibility for the South Pasadena Department include Water and Parks Maintenance. We did not identify any non-traditional responsibilities performed by the department.

We were not able to identify an adopted Capital Improvement Program.

We understand that a program is being drafted and were provided a copy of the draft document.

According to the City’s adopted budget:
“The City maintains a long-range fiscal perspective through the use of a Capital Improvement Program to maintain the quality of City infrastructure, including streets, sidewalks, sewers, drains, lighting, buildings, parks, and trees. The City Council adopts capital projects budgets and may modify appropriations with majority approval. All changes in appropriations at the fund level during the year must be submitted to the City Council for approval.

Beginning in FY 2013/14, the City’s goal has been to commit a minimum of $2,000,000 per year towards street improvements. This amount has fluctuated based upon available resources. For Fiscal Year 2022, a total of $2,000,000 has been budgeted from Fund 104, Street Improvement reserves, and additional funding for street improvements have been budgeted using Prop C funds.”  Recommendation #1 – Create, adopt and publish a
minimum 5-year Capital Improvement Program in
conjunction with budget adoption process each year
(reference - Government Code Section 65403).

Public Works Department
12 - 20
Public Works Department Annealta Group
9 We were not able to locate any service delivery metrics for the department. For example, number of pot holes patched, trees trimmed, etc. within a given service period, typically for a given fiscal year.

Tracking of key performance indicators (KPIs) and reviewing trends will assist in maintaining proper levels of staffing and contract support services.
 Recommendation #2 – Create, adopt and publish
department KPI metrics in conjunction with budget
adoption process each year.
12 - 21
10 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group Staffing
The Public Works Department is led by the Public Works Director and two (2) Deputy Public Works Director. One Deputy is over Water and Sustainability and the other Deputy is charged with the responsibility of the Engineering and Maintenance divisions. At the time of the preparation of this report, there are thirty-five (35) authorized full time positions, seven (7) of which were vacant. This equates to a vacancy rate of 20% which is high and very impactful to the delivery of services. The vacant positions consist of the following:
• Senior Civil Engineer
• Associate Civil Engineer
• Public Works Operations Manager
• Maintenance Worker
• Public Works Inspector
• Public Works Intern (2)
A department of this small size and variety of duties and responsibilities requires a strong, hands-on leader who is able to communicate with the residents, CityManager and City Council about issues and priorities and take responsibility for communicating information from the City Manager andCity Council to staff. As such, this individual should ensure that priorities are set, schedules are monitored and that the quality of work remains high. During the interviews, we learned that internal communication could be more formalized and conducted on a more regular basis. Given the recent staff changes and reassignment of responsibilities, the need for additional lateral and vertical communication within the department is critical. We learned that allhands department meetings ceased as of August. We also learned that 1 on 1 meetings are not consistent for the management team in the department. Additionally, the department is not represented on a consistent basis at Executive Team Meetings.
 Recommendation #3 – Establish and maintain monthly
all-hands department meetings. Establish and maintain
weekly 1 on 1 meetings for Director level through
Supervisor level. Director must attend all Executive
Team Meetings.

Organizational Staffing and Structure
12 - 22
11 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group A consistent comment throughout the interviews was the lack of support staff to assist in the completion of administrative work - the majority of which we identified to be at the analyst level. For example, management and supervisor level staff are spending time drafting, administering and processing requests for proposals (RFPs) and the resulting contracts/agreements. Several staff members expressed frustration that Finance was not assisting with this task. It is our opinion the Public Works Department would be best served by having additional Management Analyst positions dedicated to the delivery of services such as this example provided. With additional support staff in place, managers and supervisors will be freed up to perform more of the duties that they have been hired to perform including many of the recommendations included in this report.

Additionally, based on the size of the department and comparing the City to others of a similar size, it would appear unwarranted to have two Deputy Directors.
 Recommendation #4 – Eliminate one of the Deputy
Director positions.
 Recommendation #5 – Add two (2) new Management
Analyst positions in the department.

The factor that we identified as most impactful to the Department’s ability to deliver services, was the level of support required to meet the expectations of the Commissions supported by Public Works. The Public Works Commission, Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission and the Natural Resources and Environmental
Commission, all have adopted work plans for calendar year 2021 (See attachment B for the current work plans). Each work plan contains a number of tasks for the year, task which are the responsibility of the public works staff serving the respective commissions. We realize this issue was recently reviewed in February of 2020, but it appears that opinion was not unanimous on the best way to proceed. Re-visiting how the February 2020 changes are working would appear to be appropriate and timely as part of the Fiscal year 2022-23 budget cycle. 12 - 23
12 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group We also learned that the Director does not regularly attend the Commission meetings. Given the importance of the assigned duties and responsibility of the Commissions and to ensure good communication and implementation of City Council and City Manager directives, it our opinion that the Director should be present at each of the Commission meetings.

The Commission work plans should be developed at the same time as the budget is developed each year so that staff/consultant resources can (1) be appropriately adjusted as needed for the proposed work plan or (2) communicated as a limiting factor as to the curtailing of work plan goals. The current practice of creating the work plans each calendar year and not as part of the budget process places added pressure on department staff should the work plans not be aligned with available resources.
 Recommendation #6 – Require that the Director attend
all Commission meetings.
 Recommendation #7 – Re-visit the need for all three (3) of the Commissions supported by the Public Works
Department. Consider consolidating the Public Works
Commission and Mobility and Transportation
Infrastructure Commission into one Commission.
 Recommendation #8 – Develop Commission work
plans for the fiscal year - not the calendar year - as part of the budget development process each year.

Structure
Structural coordination is important in any organization’s ability to effectively carry out its desired mission. Coordination is, by definition, the harmonious functioning of parts for effective results. For example, fora professional baseball player to hit a ball, his eyes must follow the trajectory of the pitched ball, his arms and hands must move in a fashion that meets the recognized trajectory and his muscles must support the desired movement at the moment of impact. In a professional business organization, coordination is defined as the process of organizing people or groups so that they work together properly and well. 12 - 24
13 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group Figure 1 shows the current organization of the Public Works Department.

Responsibilities are divided between four division with two divisions reporting to a Deputy Director, one to a Deputy Director and one to the Director. The division with the widest span of responsibility is the Water & Sustainability Division due to its assigned areas including potable water production & distribution, water conservation, sustainability including the Green Action Plan and the Climate Action Plan and supporting the Public Works Commission and the Natural Resources and Environmental Commission. The delivery of the Capital Improvement Program rests with the Engineering Division.

During interviews we heard some concern expressed over the division of duties and the ability of the assigned staff to effectively carry out said duties. Concerns were also expressed about adequate support staff resources such as assistants and analysts. Further analyses revealed insufficient resources to meet the demands placed on the department. In light of this and considering the potential for the staffing changes as outlined in recommendations #4 and #5, a change would appear warranted.
 Recommendation #9 – Reduce the number of divisions
in the department from four (4) to three (3). Reallocate existing staff and allocate new staff as depicted in
Figure 2. Reallocate functional responsibilities as
shown in Figure 3.

Given the issues identified during our interviews, a revised organizational structure will likely result in improved levels of service.

Figure 2 shows a revised organization structure with an emphasis in aligning resources with the priority responsibilities of the department.

The advantages of this approach include the following:
✓ Having one (1) Director and one (1) Deputy Director over all divisions will provide an opportunity for clarity and
consistency in the overall management of the department. 12 - 25
14 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group ✓ The approach permits the Director to focus on the area(s) of priority as needed in the organization. The current priority would appear to be the successful delivery of the CIP as executed by the Engineering Division. While the Maintenance Division and Water & Sustainability Divisions would continue to be led by operations managers, the Engineering Division should be led by the Director position. Given the size of the division we do not see any span of control issues in proceeding in this manner.

Aligning the responsibility for the successful delivery of the CIP with the department Director we see as critical to the success of the department meeting management’s expectations.

The disadvantages of this approach include the following:
✓ The changes recommended are not significant, however, implementing functional changes may result in short term confusion over the areas of responsibility and execution of assignments.
12 - 26
15 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group Figure 1. Current Organization Chart
12 - 27
16 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group Figure 2. Proposed Organization Chart

PUBLIC WORKS - PROPOSED STRUCTURE
Director of Public Works
Water &
Sustainability Division
Deputy Director of
Public Works
Engineering Division Maintenance Division
Civil Engineering
Assistant
Senior Civil
Engineer
Associate Civil
Engineer
Civil Engineering
Assistant
Inspector (2)
Public Works
Assistant
Management
Assistant
Facilities
Supervisor
Building Maintenance
Workers (2)
Electrician Maintenance
Worker I/II (4)
Sr. Maintenance
Worker
Maintenance
Worker
Parks Supervisor Street & Sewer
Supervisor
Public Works
Operations Manager
Management
Analyst (New)
Sr. Water Production
Operator
Water Operations
Manager
Water
Conservation
Analyst
Water Production
Operator (2)
Sr. Water Utility
Worker
Water Utility Worker
I/II (5)
Intern P/T
Intern P/T
Full Time Employees: 36
Part Time Employees: 2
Positions Eliminated: 1 Deputy Director of PW
Positions Added: 2 Management Analysts
Management
Analyst (New)
Sr. Maintenance
Worker
12 - 28
17 Organizational Staffing and Structure Annealta Group Figure 3. Recommended Functional Structure for the Public Works Department

E N G I N E E R I N G
Deliver Capital
Improvement Projects
Review Plans
Issue Permits
Perform Inspections
Review Land
Development Projects
Administer LLMD

M A I N T E N A N C E
Facilities
Parks
Streets
Sewers
Storm drains

W A T E R &

S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y
Potable Water
Production
Water Distribution
Water Conservation
Refuse & Recycling
Contract
City Storm Water Permit
Environmental
Programs
Public Works Department
12 - 29
Technology and Business Systems Annealta Group
18 Property, plant, and equipment (PP&E) are long-term assets vital to business operations and the long-term financial health of a city. In order to best serve the department’s customers, physical systems and structures must be in place and aligned with the department’s mission and values. The scope of our assignment did not include an evaluation of the department’s equipment.

The Public Works Department is currently housed in three (3) different facilities. They are as follows:
✓ City Hall, 1414 Mission Street – Approximately seven (7) staff members. This location is the only location that Public Works is open to the public. The counter service hours are coordinated with and physically connected to the planning and building department counter services.
✓ Public Works Yard, 825 Mission Street – Approximately twenty (20) staff members.
✓ Water Distribution Facility, 346 Garfield Avenue –
Approximately ten (10) staff members.

We understand that there currently is insufficient space available at city hall for community development needs. The second stories of both the Public Works Yard and Water Distribution Facility have space available for build out of additional offices. Tenant improvements would need to budgeted for, designed and built in order to accommodate new work spaces. In order to free up space at city hall, it is recommended that the Director and Engineering Division be re-located to the Water Distribution Facility. We do not recommend the relocation of public counter services. Engineering should maintain and staff a location at city hall to serve the public counter. This could be done on a rotating schedule basis for appropriate level staff as determined by the Director.  Recommendation #10: Re-house the Engineering
Division at the Water Distribution Facility.

Physical Support - PP&E
12 - 30
Technology and Business Systems Annealta Group
19 Also, during our field review of the public works facilities it was noted that the Public Works Yard, 825 Mission Street, is not protected by security gates. The Water Distribution Facility, 346 Garfield Avenue is protected by secure gates that are openable with key cards.  Recommendation #11: Install operable security gates at the Public Works Yard, 825 Mission Street, similar to the gates installed at the Water Distribution Facility.
12 - 31
Conclusion Annealta Group
20 The City of South Pasadena Public Works Department has a solid foundation from which to build from as it continues to adapt to changing external factors. The successful implementation of the recommendations in this report will result in a higher level of service to the community and greater internal efficiencies.

The proposed changes in the organizational structure will result in improved internal communications and clarity of roles and duties. An emphasis on training and staff development will also assist greatly as staff members take on new responsibilities.

Conclusion
12 - 32
Attachment A: List of Recommendations Annealta Group
21  Recommendation #1 – Create, adopt and publish a minimum 5-year Capital Improvement Program in conjunction with budget adoption process each year (reference - Government Code Section 65403).
 Recommendation #2 – Create, adopt and publish department KPI metrics in conjunction with budget adoption process each year.
 Recommendation #3 – Establish and maintain monthly all-hands department meetings. Establish and maintain weekly 1 on 1 meetings for Director level through Supervisor level. Director must attend all Executive Team Meetings.
 Recommendation #4 – Eliminate one of the Deputy Director positions.  Recommendation #5 – Add two (2) new Management Analyst positions in the department.
 Recommendation #6 – Require that the Director attend all Commission meetings.
 Recommendation #7 – Re-visit the need for all three (3) of the Commissions supported by the Public Works Department. Consider consolidating the Public Works Commission and Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission into one Commission.
 Recommendation #8 – Develop Commission work plans for the fiscal year - not the calendar year - as part of the budget development process each year.  Recommendation #9 – Reduce the number of divisions in the department from four (4) to three (3). Reallocate existing staff and allocate new staff as depicted in Figure 2. Reallocate functional responsibilities as shown in Figure 3.
 Recommendation #10: Re-house the Engineering Division at the Water Distribution Facility.
 Recommendation #11: Install operable security gates at the Public Works Yard, 825 Mission Street, similar to the gates installed at the Water Distribution Facility.

Attachment A: List of Recommendations
12 - 33
22 Attachment B: Commission Work Plans (2021) Annealta Group  Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure
 Public Works Commission
 Natural Resources and Environmental
Attachment B: Commission Work Plans (2021)
12 - 34
Objective Tasks and Activities Lead
Person(s) Timeline Desired Outcome
Private Development Project
briefing from Planning
Planning Staff January 2021 Update on Planning Development Projects Staff Briefing and Discussion:

Fremont Avenue grant and
projects
Staff Liaison Briefing on grant opportunities for Fremont Avenue
Action: 2021 Work Plan and 2020
Annual Report
Staff Liaison &
Commission
Review and Approve MTIC 2021 Work Plan and
2020 Annual Report
Action: Elect a Chair and Vice
Chair
Staff Liaison &
Commission
February 2021 Elect MTIC Chair and Vice Chair
Action: COVID-19 Ad Hoc
Committee
Commission Selection of Commissioners
Discussion: Measure M Projects Staff Liaison &
Commission
Discuss the Measure M projects.

Discussion: Ramona Traffic Study Discuss Ramona Traffic Study Staff Briefing: Update on Measure
R Projects
Staff Liaison Update on status of the project.

Discussion: Preferential Parking
Policy
Staff Liaison &
Commission
March 2021 Develop a preferential parking policy.

Update on implementation of
NTMP
Staff Liaison Update on NTMP
Update on implementation of
Meridian Avenue traffic
management measures
Staff Liaison Update on status
Staff Briefing: Rogan Fund Project
Update (Information Item)
Staff Liaison April 2021 Update on current status of the project Mobility and Transportation
Infrastructure Commission
2021 Work Plan
12 - 35
Continue Discussion on Measure
M Projects
Staff Liaison Continue discussion on Measure M projects.

Discussion: Fremont Avenue
projects
Staff Liaison Continue discussion on proposed projects to implement with grant funds.

Presentation: Transportation &
CIP Project Overview (Information
Item)
Staff Liaison May 2021 Staff Presentation on current Transportation Projects and CIP Projects under the MTIC
purview.

Private Development Project
briefing from Planning
Planning Staff Update on Planning Development Projects.

Action: Draft SB1 Street
Resolution
Staff Liaison &
Commission
June 2021 Review and recommend that City Council adopt
the SB1 resolution (deadline for City Council
approval is July 15, 2020)
Continued discussion on
Preferential Parking Policy
Staff Liaison Continue discussion.

COVID-19 Update Staff Liaison Update on COVID-19 Measures CIP Transportation Projects Status
Update
Staff Liaison July 2021 Update on CIP Transportation Projects Action: Selection of Measure M
Projects
Staff Liaison &
Commission
Recommend to City Council
Measure R Project Update Staff Liaison Update on Measure R Projects Discussion: Fremont Avenue
projects
Staff Liaison August 2021 Continue discussion on proposed projects to implement with grant funds.

Private Development Project
briefing from Planning
Planning Staff Update on Private Development Projects
Measure M Projects Staff Liaison September 2021 Update on current status of the projects Update on implementation of
NTMP
Staff Liaison Update on NTMP
Staff Briefing: Rogan Fund Project
Update (Information Item)
Staff Liaison October 2021 Update on current status of the project Cal Recycle Grant Update Staff Liaison November 2021 Cal Recycle Grant Discussion: Review 2022 Work
Plan
Staff Liaison &
Commission
December 2021 Review 2022 Work Plan
Discussion: Review 2021
Accomplishments
Staff Liaison Review 2021 Accomplishments
12 - 36
25 Attachment C: City Council Staff Report February 5, 2020 Annealta Group Attachment C: City Council Staff Report of February 5, 2020 12 - 37
15 12 - 38
At this juncture, the development of an overarching mobility strategy, and associated community engagement, is a critical framework needed to define allocation of current and future dollars.

This unprecedented opportunity to create a comprehensive vision that will drive the City’s mobility, land use and economic future. While numerous studies have been conducted over the past several decades, those studies must be knit together, and in some cases updated, to create a current definition of objectives and priorities.

The City has had a FTC charged with oversight of all things related to the now-dead freeway, and a PWC charged with oversight of major street construction projects. The scope of each is somewhat narrow and focused on specific issues that were of concern at the time the commissions were formed. The City now finds itself in a new position, needing broad policy support regarding the creation of a framework to guide the expenditure of an extraordinary amount of grant funding. As currently stated in the City’s Municipal Code, this task does not fall within the purview of either commission.

At Councils direction, staff is proposing to restructure both the FTC and PWC to have clearly defined roles and responsibilities that do not overlap. The FTC would be restructured to create the Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission (MTIC) to include a broader focus on mobility policy and transportation infrastructure. The PWC would be restructured to focus on non-transportation infrastructure including water, sewer, stormwater, buildings and city facilities.

This alternative retains the current composition of both commissions, while still effectively generating a cohesive framework for future mobility and infrastructure planning.

Commission Review and Recommendation
On June 19, 2019, the Council established an Ad Hoc Committee comprised of Mayor Khubesrian, Councilmember Schneider, FTC Chair Nuckols, and PWC Vice-Chair Abelson to explore the possibility of merging the two commissions to address the overlapping roles and responsibilities of the two commissions.

On October 16, 2019, the Ad Hoc Committee met to discuss the potential FTC and PWC merger.

There was consensus regarding the need for citizen oversight, however, the Ad Hoc Committee was split on the decision to merge. Following the Ad Hoc Committee, the FTC and PWC met in a special joint meeting to discuss the potential merger of the two commissions. The commissions were split on the decision whether to merge or to remain as two separate commissions (4-4).

On November 19, 2019, the Ad Hoc Committee met to discuss the purview of both commissions.

The Ad Hoc Committee agreed that both commissions provide valuable policy recommendations to the Council and the Ad Hoc Committee recommended keeping the PWC as a permanent commission. In order to address the overlap between the commission purviews, the Ad Hoc Committee suggested that the PWC should provide policy oversight over large local projects (Capital Improvement Plan, Measure M Multi-year Subregional Plan, and mobility initiatives) and the FTC should provide oversight over regional and legislative issues related to mobility and transportation items surrounding the SR-710.
12 - 39
Discussion/Analysis
The original intent of the FTC was to provide support to the City Council regarding the fight against the SR-710. On October 12, 2019, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 29 (Holden) and Senate Bill 7 (Portantino) to remove the SR-710 from the State Streets and Highway Code and deem the SR-710 North Project Freeway Alternatives as infeasible. The PWC was established seven years ago for oversight of large capital improvement projects, an outgrowth of specific concern with construction on Fair Oaks Avenue. Both commissions have successfully accomplished the goals set forth by the City Council.

At this juncture however, the City now finds itself in a new position, needing broad policy support regarding the creation of a framework to guide the expenditure of an extraordinary amount of grant funding. As currently stated in the City’s Municipal Code, this task does not fall within the purview of either commission.

In the Municipal Code, the PWC was initially set to sunset in November of 2018. Prior to that date, City Council discussed the potential merger of the commissions, rather than a sunset of PWC, in the context of the lack of a future role for the FTC once the freeway was dead.

Although there was consensus regarding a need to reexamine the commission structure, council determined that it was too early to consider because final action on the freeway was still pending.

The Council voted at that time to extend the sunset date of the PWC to December 31, 2019. On December 4, 2019, council discussed the issue and directed staff to return on December 18, 2019 with an outline of potential alternatives.

On December 18, 2019, staff presented, and the City Council considered, two alternatives: 1) Merge the two commissions to establish a Mobility and Infrastructure Commission (MIC); or 2) establish the PWC as a permanent commission and establish clear roles and responsibilities for each of the two commissions. The City Council also discussed a modified second alternative which included restructuring the FTC as the Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission (MTIC) to include a broader focus on mobility policy and transportation infrastructure and restructuring the PWC to focus on non-transportation infrastructure including water, sewer, stormwater, buildings and city facilities. The City Council directed Staff to bring back an updated staff report with further information on this alternative. Below is a discussion of the roles and responsibilities of each commission as requested by the Council.

Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission (MTIC) The FTC would be restructured as the MTIC, expanding its purview to include a broader focus on mobility policy and transportation infrastructure, including the development of a framework for expenditure of the $100 million in transportation grant funding. All mobility and transportation policy would be consolidated under one advisory body, eliminating overlap and friction between the FTC and PWC.

Metro and Caltrans have recently discussed the need for the City to complete a feasibility study of the corridor to provide data and analysis that supports implementation of specific projects such as the proposed State Route 110 Hook Ramp project. This feasibility analysis will likely 12 - 40
generate multiple technical options that may or may not align with prior studies and will need to be weighed in consideration of current community priorities and funding availability. In addition to the regional transportation funding opportunities, the City is currently undertaking major planning efforts such as the development of long-term Capital Improvement Program (CIP), Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan, Pavement Management Information System Plan, and has a pending grant application for an Active Transportation Plan. All of these plans are interconnected and complement each other.

The new MTIC would be established for the purpose of advising the City Council on policy matters regarding traffic, multi-modal transportation, new transportation technologies, and transportation infrastructure. As proposed, the MTIC would have the following roles and responsibilities:
• Advise the City Council on policy matters related to transportation and mobility including traffic management plans, transit, multi-modal transportation and active transportation, evolving transportation and mobility technologies, parking management, and regional transportation matters;
• Advise the City Council on regional transportation funding and planning; • Provide input on mobility and transportation policies such as the transportation related CIP items, Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan, Active Transportation Plan, etc.; and • Provide a forum for community input on mobility topics.

A single commission with a new focus on guiding mobility policy and community engagement may be the most effective structure to meet these pressing needs. Having one commission to link these components together and advise the City Council on mobility and transportation infrastructure policy matters is prudent and an effective way to oversee an integrated process.

Public Works Commission (PWC)
The Public Works Commission (PWC) would be restructured to focus on non-transportation infrastructure including water, sewer, stormwater, buildings and city facilities. The restructured PWC would advise on the integrated water/wastewater plan and non-transportation portions of the CIP. This structure would allow for a new focus on non-transportation infrastructure and policy that is currently secondary under the existing commission structure. In addition, water utility management and stormwater are not within the scope of any city commission, but new focus and funding at the local and state level in these areas is likely to present a number of critical policy issues that would benefit from commission perspective. As proposed, the PWC would have the following roles and responsibilities:
• Advise the City Council on policy matters related non-transportation infrastructure including water, sewer, stormwater, buildings and city facilities. • Advise the City Council on regional non-transportation infrastructure funding and planning.
12 - 41
• Advise the City Council on policy matters related to utility management including water, sewer and stormwater.
• Provide input on infrastructure policies and plans such as the utility and infrastructure CIP items (non-transportation), Integrated Water and Wastewater Resource Management Plan, Safe Clean Water and Measure W Plans, Facility Assessment Plan, etc.; and • Provide a forum for community input on infrastructure topics.

Due to the long-term nature of utility and infrastructure planning and projects, staff would recommend that the PWC meet bi-monthly with the provision that special meetings can be scheduled if needed.

MTIC and PWC Composition of Members
Due to the technical nature of the proposed MTIC and PWC, it is proposed that the City make a concerted effort to recruit members with technical expertise:

MTIC: All members shall have an expressed interest in and knowledge of mobility policy, multi-modal transportation, and transportation infrastructure. The City shall make a concerted effort to recruit at least one registered civil engineer or traffic engineer with an active license, and professionals with expertise in other areas such as traffic engineering, mobility planning, transportation infrastructure, contracting or construction, construction law, or construction management and inspection.

PWC: All members shall have an expressed interest in and knowledge of public works projects, methods and procedures. The City shall make a concerted effort to recruit at least one registered civil engineer with an active license, and professionals with expertise in other areas such as utilities, structural engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, stormwater, contracting or construction, construction law, or construction management and inspection.

The SPMC would be updated to include new sections for each commission effectively creating two new commissions. The initial composition of the commission shall consist of one member being appointed by each councilmember and their term lengths will be staggered as follows: one member will serve one three-year term; two members will serve one year and then be eligible for one additional three-year term; and the remaining two members will serve two years and then be eligible for one additional three-year term. Future appointments will be made by the mayor pursuant to SPMC 2.23 (Composition, appointment and removal of members).

Background
The PWC was formed on November 7, 2012, for a period of six years and was set to sunset on November 7, 2018. In September 19, 2018, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 2324 to extend the sunset of the PWC by an additional year, to sunset on December 31, 2019. In November 2018, to address the overlap in roles and responsibilities between the PWC and FTC, the City Council considered merging the PWC and FTC. At that time the State of California legislation 12 - 42
regarding the SR-710 was not finalized, therefore the Council directed staff to return in one year with recommendations regarding merging the two commissions. On June 19, 2019, the City Council established an Ad Hoc Committee to explore the possibility of merging the two commissions. The Ad Hoc Committee has had several meetings and discussions regarding this matter. Several alternatives have been discussed regarding the two commissions, whether to merge into one commission or remain as two separate commissions.

Legal Review
The City Attorney has reviewed this item.

Fiscal Impact
There is no fiscal impact.

Public Notification of Agenda Item
The public was made aware that this item was to be considered this evening by virtue of its inclusion on the legally publicly noticed agenda, posting of the same agenda and reports on the City’s website and/or notice in the South Pasadena Review and/or the Pasadena Star-News.

Attachments:
1) Ordinance to Establish the Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission 2) Ordinance to Establish the new Public Works Commission 12 - 43
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance to establish a Mobility
and Transportation Infrastructure Commission
12 - 44
ORDINANCE NO.____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA, CALIFORNIA

REPEALING ARTICLE IVD (FREEWAY AND TRANSPORTATION

COMMISSION) AND ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IVD (MOBILITY AND

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE COMMISSION)

OF THE SOUTH PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 1. Article IVD (Freeway and Transportation Commission), Sections 2.47 through 2.50, is repealed.

SECTION 2. A new and renumbered Article IVD (Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission), Sections 2.47-1 through 2.47- 5, is added to Chapter 2 (Administration) to read as follows:
"ARTICLE IVD. MOBILITY AND TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE

COMMISSION

2.47-1 Creation.

There is hereby created a five-member Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission.

2.47-2 Responsibilities.

It shall be the responsibility of the Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission to serve in an advisory capacity to the city council, as directed by the city council or city manager, on policies regarding:
(a) Mobility policy matters related to transportation and mobility including traffic management plans, transit, multi-modal transportation and active transportation, evolving transportation and mobility technologies, parking management, and regional transportation matters;
(b) Regional transportation funding and planning;
(c) Input on mobility and transportation policies such as the transportation related CIP items, Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan, Active Transportation Plan, etc.; and
(d) A forum for community input on mobility topics.

2.47-3 Limitations.

The Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission may discharge its responsibilities in the manner and means selected by it, except as follows:
(a) Unless expressly authorized to do so by the city council, it shall not represent itself to be, nor in any way act for or on behalf of the city council, nor shall it commit the officers, employees or staff of the city in any manner to any course of 12 - 45
action; to the contrary, it shall act as a study center and clearinghouse for advisory action to the city council; and
(b) It shall not encroach upon any area preempted by state or federal law; and (c) It shall forward all of its findings and recommendations to the city manager and the city council prior to public release.

2.47-4 Composition of members.
(a) The initial composition of the commission shall consist of one member being appointed by each councilmember and their term lengths will be staggered as follows: one member will serve one three-year term; two members will serve one year and then be eligible for one additional three-year term; and the remaining two members will serve two years and then be eligible for one additional threeyear term. Future appointments will be made by the mayor pursuant to SPMC

2.23 (Composition, appointment and removal of members). (b) All members shall have an expressed interest in and knowledge of mobility policy, multi-modal transportation, and transportation infrastructure. The city shall make a concerted effort to recruit at least one registered civil engineer or traffic engineer with an active license, and professionals with expertise in other areas such as traffic engineering, mobility planning, transportation infrastructure, contracting or construction, construction law, or construction management and inspection.

2.47-5 Meetings.

The Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission shall hold up to one regular meeting each month. The chair may call for a special meeting if needed with concurrence of the commission."
SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is rendered or declared invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words of this ordinance, and their application to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect and, to that end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable.

SECTION 4. CEQA. This ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to 14 Cal. Code Regs. Section 15378(b)(5) as an agency organizational or administrative activity that produces no physical changes to the environment.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its passage and adoption pursuant to California Government Code Section 36937.

SECTION 6. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage and within fifteen (15) days after its passage, the City Clerk of the City of South Pasadena shall 12 - 46
certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and to its approval by the Mayor and City Council and shall cause the same to be published in a newspaper in the manner required by law.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 19th day of February, 2020. ____________________________________
Robert S. Joe, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Evelyn G. Zneimer, City Clerk Teresa L. Highsmith, City Attorney (seal)
Date: ____________________
\\
\\
\\
I HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing ordinance was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of South Pasadena, California, at a regular meeting held on the 19th day of February, 2020, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

Evelyn G. Zneimer, City Clerk
(seal)
12 - 47
ATTACHMENT 2
Ordinance to establish the new
Public Works Commission
12 - 48
ORDINANCE NO.____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA, CALIFORNIA

REPEALING ARTICLE IVK (PUBLIC WORKS

COMMISSION) AND ADDING A NEW ARTICLE IVK (PUBLIC

WORKS COMMISSION)

OF THE SOUTH PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 1. Article IVK (Public Works Commission), Sections 2.79-1 through 2.79-6, is repealed.

SECTION 2. A new and renumbered Article IVK (Public Works Commission), Sections

2.79-1 through 2.79- 5, is added to Chapter 2 (Administration) to read as follows:
"ARTICLE IVK. PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION

2.79-1 Creation.

There is hereby created a five-member Public Works Commission.

2.79-2 Responsibilities.

It shall be the responsibility of the Public Works Commission to serve in an advisory capacity to the city council, as directed by the city council or city manager, on policies regarding:
(a) Policy matters related to non-transportation infrastructure including water, sewer, stormwater, buildings and city facilities;
(b) Regional non-transportation infrastructure funding and planning; (c) Utility management including water, sewer and stormwater; (d) Input on infrastructure policies and plans such as the utility and infrastructure CIP items (non-transportation), Integrated Water and Wastewater Resource Management Plan, Safe Clean Water and Measure W Plans, Facility Assessment Plan, etc.; and
(e) A forum for community input on infrastructure topics.

2.79-3 Limitations.

The Public Works Commission may discharge its responsibilities in the manner and means selected by it, except as follows:
(a) Unless expressly authorized to do so by the city council, it shall not represent itself to be, nor in any way act for or on behalf of the city council, nor shall it commit the officers, employees or staff of the city in any manner to any course of action; to the contrary, it shall act as a study center and clearinghouse for advisory action to the city council; and
(b) It shall not encroach upon any area preempted by state or federal law; and 12 - 49
(c) It shall forward all of its findings and recommendations to the city manager and the city council prior to public release.

2.79-4 Composition of members.
(a) The initial composition of the commission shall consist of one member being appointed by each councilmember and their term lengths will be staggered as follows: one member will serve one three-year term; two members will serve one year and then be eligible for one additional three-year term; and the remaining two members will serve two years and then be eligible for one additional threeyear term. Future appointments will be made by the mayor pursuant to SPMC

2.23 (Composition, appointment and removal of members). (b) All members shall have an expressed interest in and knowledge of public works projects, methods and procedures. The city shall make a concerted effort to recruit at least one registered civil engineer with an active license, and professionals with expertise in other areas such as utilities, structural engineering, architecture, landscape architecture, stormwater, contracting or construction, construction law, or construction management and inspection.

2.79-5 Meetings.

The Public Works Commission shall hold up to one regular meeting every other month.

The chair may call for a special meeting if needed with concurrence of the commission." SECTION 3. SEVERABILITY. If any provision, section, paragraph, sentence or word of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is rendered or declared invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences or words of this ordinance, and their application to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby and shall remain in full force and effect and, to that end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its passage and adoption pursuant to California Government Code Section 36937.

SECTION 6. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage and within fifteen (15) days after its passage, the City Clerk of the City of South Pasadena shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and to its approval by the Mayor and City Council and shall cause the same to be published in a newspaper in the manner required by law.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 19th day of February, 2020. 12 - 50
____________________________________
Robert S. Joe, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAINED:

Evelyn G. Zneimer, City Clerk
(seal)
12 - 51
13 - 1
13 Redistricting – Ordinance Designating City Council Election District Map April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 4 ends

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.

As required by law, the City held four public hearings and two public workshops for community members to provide input on the drawing of district maps.

Community Outreach
The City commenced the redistricting process in September 2021 with the assistance of a demographer, National Demographics Corporation (NDC), and communications consultant, Tripepi Smith. The City has conducted comprehensive outreach to engage community stakeholders. Efforts to date include:
• Dedicated webpage on redistricting with information on the process, schedule, and mapping tools.
• Social media, phone and email outreach promoting educational material on redistricting, including press releases, flyers and videos. • Direct contact with community-based organizations via phone to inform them of the redistricting process and how to get involved.
• October 28, 2021 virtual community workshop about redistricting and communities of interest. Recording made available on the City website. • Public Hearings held November 17, 2021 and January 19, 2022 to gather public input on neighborhoods and communities of interest.
• Community survey encouraging residents to share their communities of interest through the City’s redistricting website.
• Mailer sent to all South Pasadena residents on January 14, 2022 with information on the redistricting process and schedule.
• January 31, 2022 virtual community workshop to review redistricting process, gather input on neighborhoods and communities of interest, and demonstrate the various mapping tools. Recording is available on the City website. • Public Hearing held March 2, 2022 to review draft maps and receive input on district boundaries.
• Public Hearing held March 16, 2022 to review draft maps and select new district boundaries.

On November 17, 2021, the City Council held its first public meeting to receive a report on the redistricting process and permissible criteria to be considered to redraw district boundaries. Public input on communities of interest was also gathered during the meeting, as well as an introduction to the City’s redistricting website. Following the first public hearing, the City launched a survey asking residents to identify their communities of interest, which are communities that should remain intact in the redistricting process.

Survey results and comments received throughout the process were posted to the City’s redistricting website. Online and paper mapping tools were made available for residents to draw their own maps for City Council to consider for adoption. Informational mailers 13 - 2
Redistricting – Ordinance Designating City Council Election District Map April 6, 2022

Page 3 of 4 ends

were sent to residents early January to provide a brief explanation of the process, availability of mapping tools, and upcoming public meeting dates.

On January 19, 2022, the City Council conducted a second public hearing to seek additional public input on communities of interest, the composition of maps, and to review the available public mapping tools. Following that hearing, a virtual community workshop was held on January 31, 2022 to demonstrate the various public mapping tools to the public.

On March 2, 2022, the City Council conducted a third public hearing to receive public input on district boundaries. NDC presented draft maps, received by the February 18, 2022 deadline, and reviewed criteria, such as population balance and geographical contiguity. After receiving public input, Council provided direction to eliminate Maps 102, 104, 106 and 108 (Blue) from consideration. Additional direction was provided on the balance of the maps.

On March 16, 2022, the City Council conducted a fourth public hearing to receive public input on district boundaries and select a final map. NDC presented draft maps, including modified maps per Council direction and those submitted by the March 7 deadline.

Maps 101, 103a, 105a, 107, 109, Green and Teal were considered. After receiving public input and council deliberation; the City Council voted 3-2 to select map 105a.

The Council then voted 4-1 to introduce for first reading an ordinance, as amended, adopting the new district boundaries as map 105a.

The final map is posted to the City’s website (www.southpasadenaca.gov/redistricting) and available at City Hall in the Office of the City Clerk.

Fiscal Impact
The FY 2021-22 Budget includes funding for the demographic consultant, outreach and meeting facilitation services, and translation services in the Elections Account 101- 1020-1022-8170.

Next Steps
The City Council is required to adopt new district boundaries before the April 17, 2022 deadline. Upon second reading and adoption of the ordinance ratifying the new boundaries, staff will notify the Los Angeles County Registrar/Recorder’s Office of the new district boundaries. The adopted district map will be in effect for the next regular municipal election in November 2022.

Attachment: Ordinance Designating City Council Election District Map 13 - 3
Attachment 1
Ordinance Designating City Council Election District Map 13 - 4
272076.1

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF SOUTH PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A

CITY COUNCIL ELECTION DISTRICT MAP UNDER
ELECTIONS CODE SECTIONS 21600–21609
WHEREAS, the City of South Pasadena transitioned from at-large to by-district elections in October 2017;
WHEREAS, the City is required to adopt new district boundaries after each federal decennial census pursuant to a process called “redistricting” under Elections Code sections 21600–21609;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21607.1, subdivisions (a)–(b), before the election district maps were drawn, the City Council held two public hearings on November 17, 2021 and January 19, 2022, to solicit feedback regarding communities of interest;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21607.1, subdivisions (a)–(b), after the election district maps were drawn, the City Council held two public hearings on March 2, 2022 and March 16, 2022, to evaluate the draft maps; WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608, subdivision (a), the City took steps to encourage residents to participate in the redistricting public review process by making redistricting data and computer software accessible to members of the public for the purposes of drawing draft maps and providing training on that software;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608, subdivision (a), the City took additional steps to encourage residents to participate in the redistricting public review process by contacting community-based organizations, hosting virtual community workshops, mailing flyers to all residents of the City, and publishing notices and flyers through the City’s website and social media platforms; WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608, subdivision (a), the City took steps to encourage underrepresented communities and non-English speaking communities to participate in the redistricting public review process by translating the web page material into Spanish, Chinese, and Korean and making a live translator available upon request;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608, subdivision (d)(2), the City contracted with National Demographics Corporation for demographic consulting 13 - 5
272076.1
services which produced two draft maps that included information regarding total population, citizen voting age population, and racial and ethnic characteristics of the citizen voting age population of each proposed council district; WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608, subdivision (e), the public was able to submit testimony and draft maps in writing and electronically, and submitted a total of nine draft maps;
WHEREAS, the demographer revised two of the publicly submitted maps for further consideration;
WHEREAS, pursuant to Elections Code section 21608, subdivisions (f)–(g), the City created https://www.southpasadenaca.gov/government/redistricting, a web page for the redistricting process which includes or links to the following information: (1) a general explanation of the redistricting process for the City in English, Spanish, Chinese, and Korean; (2) the procedure for a member of the pubic to testify during a public hearing or to submit written testimony; (3) a calendar of all public hearings and workshop dates; (4) the notice and agenda for each public hearing and workshop; (5) the recording or written summary of each public hearing and workshop; (6) each draft map considered by the City Council at the public hearing; and (7) the adopted final map of council district boundaries;

NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Ordinance by this reference.

SECTION 2. Redistricting Map. Commencing with the City’s next regular election in 2022, the map included as Attachment A shall serve as the new City Council election district map.

SECTION 3. District Boundaries. The City Clerk is directed to request the demographer provide a list of the census tracts and/or blocks for each district and to attach that list to this Ordinance as Attachment B.

SECTION 4. Controlling Authority. If there is a discrepancy between the adopted map in Attachment A and the list in Attachment B, the adopted map in Attachment A shall control.

SECTION 5. Web Page Maintenance. The City Clerk is directed to maintain the web page dedicated to redistricting listed above for a period of 10 years from the date of this Ordinance pursuant to Elections Code section 21608, subdivision (g). 13 - 6
272076.1
SECTION 6. Transmittal to County. The City Clerk is directed to provide a signed original of this Ordinance to the Elections Division of the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder.

SECTION 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption pursuant to California Government Code Section 36937, subdivision (a).

SECTION 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Ordinance shall nonetheless remain in full force and effect. The City hereby declares that it would have adopted each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions of this Ordinance be declared invalid or unenforceable.

SECTION 9. Certification and Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published or posted according to law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of South Pasadena, State of California, on this 6th day of April, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
______________________________
Michael A. Cacciotti, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________ ______________________________ Christina Muñoz, Deputy City Clerk Andrew L. Jared, City Attorney 13 - 7
272076.1

ATTACHMENT A
District Map
13 - 8
272076.1

ATTACHMENT B
Census Blocks by District
DISTRICT 1
060374806023006
060374806023007
060374806023010
060374806023011
060374806023012
060374806023020
060374807021000
060374807021001
060374807021002
060374807021003
060374807021004
060374807021005
060374807021006
060374807021007
060374807021008
060374807021009
060374807021010
060374807021011
060374807022000
060374807022001
060374807022002
060374807022003
060374807022004
060374807022005
060374807022006
060374807022007
060374807022008
060374807022009
060374807022010
060374807022011
060374807022012
060374807022013
060374807022014
060374807032006
060374807032007
060374807032017
060374807032018
060374807032019
060374807032027
13 - 9
272076.1 DISTRICT 2
060374805004010
060374805004011
060374805004012
060374805004013
060374805004014
060374805004025
060374805004026
060374805004027
060374805004028
060374805004029
060374805004032
060374806012011
060374806012012
060374806012013
060374806021000
060374806021001
060374806021002
060374806021003
060374806021004
060374806021005
060374806021006
060374806021007
060374806021008
060374806021009
060374806021010
060374806021011
060374806021012
060374806021013
060374806021014
060374806022000
060374806022001
060374806022002
060374806022003
060374806022004
060374806022005
060374806022006
060374806022007
060374806022008
060374806022009
060374806022010
060374806022011
060374806022012
060374806022013
060374806022014
060374806022015
060374806022016
060374806023000
060374806023001
060374806023002
060374806023003
060374806023004
060374806023005
060374806023008
060374806023009
060374806023013
060374806023014
060374806023015
060374806023016
060374806023017
060374806023018
060374806023019
060374806024000
060374806024001
060374806024002
060374806024003
060374806024004
060374806024005
060374806024006
060374806024007
060374806024008
060374806024009
060374806024010
060374806024011
060374806024012
060374806024013
060374806024014
060374806024015
060374806024016
060374806024017
060374806024018
060374806024019
060374807032000
060374807032001
060374807032002
060374807032008
060374807032009
060374807032010
060374807032011
060374807032012
060374807032022
060374807032023
060374807032024
060374807032025
060374807041000
060374807041001
060374807041002
060374807041003
060374807041004
060374807041005
13 - 10
272076.1
DISTRICT 3
060374807031000
060374807031001
060374807031002
060374807031003
060374807031004
060374807031005
060374807031006
060374807031007
060374807031008
060374807031009
060374807031010
060374807031011
060374807032003
060374807032004
060374807032005
060374807032013
060374807032014
060374807032015
060374807032016
060374807032020
060374807032021
060374807032026
060374807041006
060374807041009
060374807041010
060374807041011
060374807041012
060374807042002
060374807042003
060374807042004
060374807042005
060374807042006
060374807042010
060374807042011
060374807042012
060374807042013
060374807043001
060374807043003
060374807043004
060374807043005
060374807043006
060374807043010
13 - 11
272076.1
DISTRICT 4
060374805001000
060374805001001
060374805001002
060374805001003
060374805003000
060374805003001
060374805003002
060374805003003
060374805004000
060374805004001
060374805004002
060374805004003
060374805004004
060374805004005
060374805004006
060374805004007
060374805004008
060374805004009
060374805004015
060374805004016
060374805004017
060374805004018
060374805004019
060374805004020
060374805004021
060374805004022
060374805004023
060374805004024
060374805004030
060374805004031
060374806011000
060374806011001
060374806011002
060374806011003
060374806011004
060374806011005
060374806012000
060374806012001
060374806012002
060374806012003
060374806012004
060374806012005
060374806012006
060374806012007
060374806012008
060374806012009
060374806012010
060374806012014
060374806013000
060374806013001
060374806013002
060374806013003
060374806013004
060374806013005
060374806013006
060374806013007
13 - 12
272076.1
DISTIRCT 5
060374805001004
060374805001005
060374805001006
060374805001007
060374805001008
060374805001009
060374805001010
060374805001011
060374805001012
060374805001013
060374805001014
060374805001015
060374805001016
060374805001017
060374805002000
060374805002001
060374805002002
060374805002003
060374805002004
060374805002005
060374805002006
060374805002007
060374805002008
060374805002009
060374805002010
060374805002011
060374805002012
060374805002013
060374805002014
060374805002015
060374805002016
060374805002017
060374805002018
060374805003004
060374805003005
060374805003006
060374805003007
060374805003008
060374805003009
060374805003010
060374805003011
060374805003012
060374805003013
060374805003014
060374805003015
060374805003016
060374807041007
060374807041008
060374807041013
060374807041014
060374807042000
060374807042001
060374807042007
060374807042008
060374807042009
060374807043000
060374807043002
060374807043007
060374807043008
060374807043009
13 - 13
14 - 1
14 Ordinance Regarding Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 5 ends

277834.1
advocacy groups is that the California firearm storage law only applies to homes where children live or where “a child is likely to gain access to the firearm.” (CA Penal Code section 25100).

Analysis
The Safe Storage of Firearms Ordinance requires all firearms in residences to be securely stored in a Department of Justice (DOJ) approved locked container or disabled with a DOJ-approved firearm safety device, unless being carried on the person or within the immediate control of the owner/authorized user. The ordinance defines a “locked container” as a secured container on the DOJ list of approved storage devices. A locking device is any device on the DOJ list of approved devices that when applied to the firearm, renders the firearm inoperable.

There are currently 2,103 storage and safety devices on the Department of Justice approved safe gun storage list. (https://oag.ca.gov/firearms/certified-safetydevices/search). Storage devices can be purchased for under $10, and trigger locks are often distributed for free at police stations. In May 2021, the South Pasadena Police Department offered these free locking devices to firearm owners upon request.

The locking requirements under the Safe Storage of Firearms Ordinance apply only to firearms that are not being carried on the person or in the person’s immediate control.

Therefore, firearm owners may carry loaded and unlocked firearms in the home at any time if kept in the owner/authorized user’s immediate control. The safe storage requirements allow owners to store firearms loaded if they choose.

On September 13, 2021, the Public Safety Commission (PSC) recommended the term “person’s immediate control” be defined by adding the term “within arms-reach.” The PSC determined that immediate control was open to interpretation by the homeowner.

The arms-reach clarified standards is based on Fourth Amendment search procedures used by law enforcement where a safety search for weapons can be conducted of a suspect’s arms-reach area where a weapon may be hidden. The PSC believed this term clarified the obligation over control of the weapon.

The City Attorney has reviewed the proposed ordinance and provided amendments to strengthen enforcement and address clarity as to control over the firearm. Further, the ordinance has been amended to clarify the locking devices are those specified under the Department of Justice safety device list. The amendment also changes the term “trigger lock” for “locking device” to allow those devices on the DOJ-approved list that do not involve the trigger to be used, such as a cable lock or chamber lock.

Comparable Ordinances
At least 37 cities across California have enacted similar ordinances imposing storage requirements when the firearm is in a residence regardless of the presence of a child or other person not legally able to possess a gun. Los Angeles, Cudahy, Culver City and San Marino are the closest in proximity. Staff contacted 16 of the cities that adopted the 14 - 2
Ordinance Regarding Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences April 6, 2022

Page 3 of 5 ends

277834.1
ordinance. Of those cities contacted, representatives indicated the ordinances are used as an educational tool and the California Penal Code is used for prosecution.

It was also noted by the PSC that a safe storage ordinance had been upheld by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal (Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) 746 F.3D 953, 965). Two provisions of the San Francisco ordinance were challenged, the specific challenge that required a firearm to be stored in a locked container or secured with a locking device as a provision concerning the sales of ammunition. The Ninth Circuit held that neither of provisions in the ordinance was an impermissible infringement of the Second Amendment. The ordinance allowed persons to possess firearms in their homes secured when not under their control. The United States Supreme Court chose not to hear the case in 2015.

As to the storage requirement, the court held that San Francisco had shown that the requirement that a person store firearms in a locked storage container or with a trigger lock when not carried on the person is substantially related to the important government interest of reducing firearm-related deaths and injuries. Testimony before the PSC echoed those same concerns. San Francisco had shown an important government interest of preventing firearms from being stolen and reducing the number of hand-gun related suicides and deadly domestic violence incidents. The court further held that such storage requirements does not substantially prevent law-abiding citizens from using firearms to defend themselves, but merely regulates how residence must store their handguns when not carrying them on their persons. Such regulation was held to still allow a handgun to be readily accessed in the case of an emergency, and still allowed residents to defend their home by carrying firearms on their person.

Important Government Interests
According to the Gun Violence Archive data, gun violence killed nearly 20,000 Americans in 2020, more than any other year in at least two decades. Suicides account for 6 out of 10 firearm-related deaths. An additional 24,000 people died by suicide and accidental deaths by firearms. Last year, the United States saw the highest one-year increase in homicides within the country’s largest cities, including the City of Los Angeles. During that period, the City of Los Angeles suffered a 30 percent spike in shooting deaths. For non-fatal shootings, the numbers are significantly higher.

According to the Brady Institute, approximately 114,000 people are shot each year in the U.S. Of those, almost 8,000 are 17 years old or younger.

Firearm purchases in 2020 soared with a record-setting number. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, people purchased about 23 million guns in 2020, which signifies a 64 percent increase over 2019 sales. The compounded effects of the COVID19 pandemic hampered anti-crime efforts, and the consequent shutdowns and stay-athome orders led to a significant rise in unemployment and homicide rates. According to a Washington Post analysis of gun sales in 2021, gun purchases skyrocketed almost 14 - 3
Ordinance Regarding Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences April 6, 2022

Page 4 of 5 ends

277834.1
80% in January (Denham & Tran, 20211). The effort to reduce the spread of COVID-19 led to food shortages, millions of lost jobs, and empty streets. Additionally, amid waves of civil unrest across the country, a significant increase in firearms sales occurred in the weeks after massive protests throughout the nation. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the flood of gun sales recorded in 2020 included more than 8 million first-time buyers.

According to data obtained in 2021 by the Gun Violence Archive, nearly 300 children were shot and killed in 2020, a 50 percent increase from the previous year. More than 5,100 kids and teens 17 and younger were killed or injured last year – an increase that is particularly alarming because it occurred in a year when most children were not attending class in person. Experts believe this points to the severity of teen suicide and domestic violence.

Given these risks, and the limitations on state and federal laws concerning storage of firearms, the attached ordinance is presented to address these issues within the City of South Pasadena.

Enforcement
A City ordinance may be enforced criminally as provided in SPMC Chapter 1 – General Provisions, Section 1.7 – General penalty; continuing violations:

Whenever in this code or in any other ordinance of the city, any act is prohibited or is made or declared to be unlawful or an offense, or the doing of any acts is required or the failure to do any act is declared to be unlawful or a misdemeanor, where no specific penalty is provided for, the violation of any such provision of this code or any other ordinance of the city shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.

Every day any violation of this code or any other ordinance of the city shall continue shall constitute a separate offense (Ord. No. 1983, § 1).

A representative from the Alhambra District Attorney’s Office indicated that the filing of criminal charges based on the municipal code would be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Administrative citations, misdemeanor citations, and civil enforcement would be filed by the City Prosecutor.

1 https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/02/03/gun-sales-january-background-checks/ 14 - 4
Ordinance Regarding Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences April 6, 2022

Page 5 of 5 ends

277834.1
Recommendations from City Council Meeting of March 16, 2022 During the City Council meeting held on March 16, 2022, the ordinance was introduced as-amended, with the following additions:

In section 20F-1.1, language was added to clarify that the intent of the City Council is not to impose storage restrictions on model rocketry engines, as the state law defining firearms mentions rocket propelled projectiles. Moreover, language was added to clarify that the storage requirement does not extend to BB, pellet or paint guns. The ordinance was introduced as-amended with the following language added to section 20F-1.1:
“Notwithstanding the foregoing, rockets and rocket-propelled projectile launchers not intended for use as a weapon are not subject to this Chapter. A BB, pellet, or paint gun is not considered a firearm.”

In section 20F-1.3 language was also added to clarify that the restriction includes temporary structures. The word “tents,” was inserted after “timeshares,” and the ordinance was introduced as-amended with the following language added to section 20F-1.3 to read as follows:
“Residence means any structure intended or used for human habitation, including, but not limited to, houses, condominiums, apartments, rooms, accessory dwelling units, motels, hotels, single room occupancies, timeshares, tents, and recreational and other vehicles where human habitation occurs.”
The ordinance attached reflects the changes discussed at the March 16, 2022 City Council meeting where the first reading of the ordinance occurred.

Fiscal Impact
The costs associated with community education, outreach, or prosecution under this ordinance would be absorbed through the police department’s existing outreach plan consisting of the Public Safety Commission, social media, neighborhood watch, and community groups.

Commission Review and Recommendation
This matter was reviewed by the Public Safety Commission. The Commission unanimously recommends that the City Council approve the ordinance.

Attachments:

1. Ordinance SPMC Chapter 20F

2. California Penal Codes 25100 and 23635

Resources:

Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America https://momsdemandaction.org/ Gun Violence Archive https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/ 14 - 5
ATTACHMENT 1
City Ordinance Chapter 20F
“Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences”
14 - 6
277837.1

CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
ORDINANCE NO.________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 20F “SAFE
STORAGE OF FIREARMS IN RESIDENCES” TO THE SOUTH

PASADENA MUNICIPAL CODE

WHEREAS, firearm injuries have a significant public health impact both nationally and locally; and
WHEREAS, the Gun Violence Archive data indicates that in 2020, more than 20,000 people persons died from firearm-related injuries in the United States; and WHEREAS, in 2020, firearms were used in 24,000 suicides or accidental deaths in the United States; and
WHEREAS, in 2020, the United States saw the highest one-year increase in homicides; and
WHEREAS, having a loaded or an unlocked firearm in the home is associated with an increased risk of gun-related injury and death; and WHEREAS, while children are particularly at risk of injury and death, or causing injury and death, when they can access firearms in their own homes or homes that they visit, injury and death can occur whenever a firearm is kept unlocked or outside of an unlocked storage container; and
WHEREAS, more than two-thirds of school shooters obtain their guns from their own home or that of a relative; and
WHEREAS, research shows that while most mass shootings involve handguns, shootings involving rifles contribute to higher casualty counts; and WHEREAS, hundreds of thousands of firearms are stolen from homes and vehicles of legal gun owners each year and flow into the underground market; and WHEREAS, applying trigger locks or using lockboxes when storing firearms in the home reduces the risk of firearm injury and death and is associated with a reduction of unintentional firearm deaths and decreases in suicides among children and teens; and
14 - 7
277837.1
WHEREAS, the California Penal Code 25100 (2010) address the issue of criminal storage of a firearm regarding children in the home, it does not apply to all homes; and
WHEREAS, keeping a firearm locked or stored in a locked container when it is not being carried prevents unauthorized users, including children, from accessing and using firearms, which can reduce tragedies due to suicide, unintentional discharges, and firearm theft; and
WHEREAS, safe storage measures have a demonstrated protective effect in homes with children and teenagers where firearms are stored; and WHEREAS, there is a broad consensus among medical professionals, gun control advocates, and gun rights groups that applying trigger locks or using lockboxes to store unsupervised firearms in the home promotes health and safety; and
WHEREAS, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that, if families must have firearms in their homes, the firearms should be stored locked, unloaded, and separate from locked ammunition; and
WHEREAS, requiring firearms to be stored in a locked container, with trigger locks or with a locking device does not substantially burden the right or ability to use firearms for self-defense in the home; and
WHEREAS, the locking requirements apply only to firearms that are not being lawfully carried and allow gun owners and adults over 18 years of age to carry loaded and unlocked firearms in the home at any time; and
WHEREAS, firearms can be safely stored in and quickly accessed from affordable, widely available lockboxes, including those with easily operable combination devices or biometric locks; and
WHEREAS, portable lock boxes can store loaded firearms such that they are within easy reach in closets, under the bed, or on tables or nightstands.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH
PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Chapter 20F Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences is added to the South Pasadena Municipal Code in its entirety to read as follows:
14 - 8
277837.1
Chapter 20F Safe Storage of Firearms in Residences
20F-1. Definitions.

1. Firearm means a firearm as defined in California Penal Code, Section 16520, as amended from time to time. Notwithstanding the foregoing, rockets and rocket-propelled projectile launchers not intended for use as a weapon are not subject to this Chapter. A BB, pellet, or paint gun is not considered a firearm.

2. Locked container means a secure container that is fully enclosed and locked that is listed on the California Department of Justice’s roster of approved firearm safety devices and that is identified as appropriate for that firearm by reference to either the manufacturer and model of the firearm or to the physical characteristics of the firearm that match those listed on the roster for use with the device under Penal Code Section 23655(d).

3. Residence means any structure intended or used for human habitation, including, but not limited to, houses, condominiums, apartments, rooms, accessory dwelling units, motels, hotels, single room occupancies, timeshares, tents, and recreational and other vehicles where human habitation occurs.

4. Locking device means a locking device that is listed on the California Department of Justice’s roster of approved firearm safety devices and that is identified as appropriate for that firearm by reference to either the manufacturer and model of the firearm or to the physical characteristics of the firearm that match those listed on the roster for use with the device under Penal Code Section 23655(d).
20F-2 Prohibition. No person shall keep a firearm within a residence unless the firearm is:

1. Stored in a locked container or disabled with a locking device that has been approved by the California Department of Justice; or

2. Carried on the person of the owner, or other lawfully authorized user of the firearm who is over the age of 18, in a manner to allow such person to retrieve and control the use of the firearm, in accordance with all applicable laws; or
14 - 9
277837.1

3. Within arms-reach proximity of the owner, or other lawfully authorized user of the firearm who is over the age of 18, to allow such person to readily retrieve and physically control the use of the firearm, as if carried on the person. Arms-reach refers to the area of physical control an individual has over the firearm from a standing, or seated position without moving from such position.

4. An exemption for this section shall apply if the firearm owner is a peace officer or a member of the Armed Forces or the National Guard using the firearm during, or incidental to, the performance of the person’s official duties.
20F-3 Penalty. Every violation of this Section shall constitute a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $1,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail not to exceed six months, or by both. 20F-4 Severability. If any provision of this Section is found to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, that invalidity shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Section which can be implemented without the invalid provisions, and to this end, the provisions of this Section are declared to be severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Section and each provision thereof irrespective of whether any one or more provisions are found invalid, unconstitutional, or otherwise unenforceable.

SECTION 2. CEQA. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Code amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines § 15061(b)(3), which states the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.

SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its final passage, the City Clerk of the City of South Pasadena shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and its approval by the Mayor and City Council and shall cause the same to be published in a newspaper in the manner required by law.

14 - 10
277837.1
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON this 6th day of April, 2022.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

Michael A. Cacciotti, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christina A. Muñoz Andrew L. Jared, City Attorney
Deputy City Clerk
14 - 11
ATTACHMENT 2
California Penal Codes 25100 and 23635
14 - 12
14 - 13
14 - 14
15 - 1
15 Police Department Mobile Data Computer Purchase Using Grant Funds April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 3 ends

international terrorists and persons listed on the FBI watch list, career criminals, missing persons, and those restricted from owning or possessing firearms. The Police Department does not currently have any operational MDCs. The purchase of MDCs will allow officers to conduct thorough investigations in the field, rapidly identify persons wanted locally and federally, and communicate vital information to allied agencies.

Analysis
The South Pasadena Police Department is currently implementing a new Computer Aided Dispatch and Records Management Software (CAD/RMS) that expands greatly on what the previous CAD/RMS can perform. In order to fully take advantage of this new software, it is recommended that the Department outfit the fleet of police vehicles with MDCs, as the Department does not currently have any operational MDCs.

Currently, officers rely solely on radio communications between officers and dispatchers, which can hinder communication during critical incidents, leading to ineffective policing in this modern age. The Police Department recommends that 10 MDCs be purchased using the funds from the 2020 UASI grant and the balance from the Police Department general fund. The Police Department currently has eight operational frontline patrol vehicles.

The South Pasadena Police Department received three bids after publishing a notice inviting bids for 10 MDCs with a specific set of requirements in compliance with SPMC

2.99-29(11) Formal Contract Procedure, Purchases Greater Than Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars.

The lowest responsible vendor that met the specifications outlined in the Request for Proposals, CODE 3 Technologies, is a full-spectrum public safety consulting firm and technology provider for day-to-day emergency response operations. CODE 3 was founded by professionals with backgrounds in Law Enforcement, Military, and Construction. The firm understands work conducted in rugged environments and the importance of having dependable technology in the field.

CODE 3 Technologies received high recommendations from several Southern California law enforcement agencies, including the Fontana, Huntington Beach, and Palm Springs Police Departments. All three departments praised CODE 3's customer service, competitive pricing, and attention to detail. CODE 3’s South Pasadena Police Department quote came in at $63,920.20, and includes installation of 10 Getac K120 MDCs and 10 additional keyboards that will remain in the vehicles. Additional keyboards are necessary to reduce the wear and tear on the MDCs. The MDCs the Department is proposing to purchase have removable screens that double as a tablet, adding to the usability in the field. For example, tablets can be used to capture signatures, reducing the use of paper citations and other police forms, leading to a decrease of environmental paper waste. Reducing paper usage would propel the Department forward in to the modern age of digital storage, making it safer to store sensitive information and comply with the Department of Justice’s regulations. 15 - 2
Police Department Mobile Data Computer Purchase Using Grant Funds April 6, 2022

Page 3 of 3 ends

Fiscal Impact
The City of South Pasadena was awarded a $62,680 grant award from UASI 2020 for the purchase and installation of ten (10) Mobile Data Computers. The award was formally accepted by the City Council at the October 20, 2021 regular meeting. The UASI grant sets forth procedures that must be followed for the purchase of the MDCs for the grant to be reimbursed. The funding is provided approximately 1-2 months after documentation outlining the purchase procedure is submitted to the City of Los Angeles Mayor’s Office. No local matching funds are required for the grant.

The UASI grant award of $62,680 has been appropriated to account 274-4010-4019- 8520-000 for a portion of the Mobile Data Computers purchase and installation. An additional $3,000 from the Police Department's Professional Services account 101- 4010-4011-8170 will be transferred into account 101-4010-4011-8520-000 Machinery and Equipment, to cover the remaining cost. The bidding and purchasing process undertaken for this project complies with South Pasadena Municipal Code 2.99-29 Purchasing System subsection (11) - Formal Contract Procedure, Purchases Greater Than Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars.

Commission Review and Recommendation
On May 13, 2020, the Public Safety Commission (PSC) reviewed the purchase of a new CAD/RMS software during their regularly scheduled meeting. The PSC unanimously supported the purchase of a new CAD and RMS software. The purchase of MDCs is a continuation and considered the next phase of implementation of the CAD/RMS software. The MDCs are needed to run the CAD/RMS software in the patrol vehicles.

Attachment: Price Quote from CODE 3 Technologies Inc.
15 - 3
ATTACHMENT 1
Price Quote from CODE 3 Technologies in the
amount of $63,920.20
15 - 4
15 - 5
16 - 1
16 LLMD Engineer’s Report Preparation Resolution Adoption for FY 2023 April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

conducting a Public Hearing to proceed with levying the assessments. The LLMD Proceedings Schedule is shown in Attachment 2.

As a result of Proposition 218 (Prop 218), the City cannot increase the proposed assessments without going through a public ballot process. The City Council has supported the staff’s recommendation to rely on an exemption of Prop 218 (passed in 1997), which allows the renewal of the LLMD assessments, provided the rates are not changed. If the assessment rates are changed, then the balloting requirements under Prop 218 must be fulfilled.

In January 2017, a ballot to increase assessments was performed. However, the weighted vote of the “No” ballots was 60.9%, therefore, the ballot measure failed as the simple majority requirement was not met. As a result, assessment rates the stayed the same as those previously in effect. In FY 2022-23, there will be no change or increase in assessments under the currently proposed LLMD.

Next Steps
The LLMD Proceedings Schedule (Attachment 2) proposed the following schedule:

1. Harris & Associates will prepare the Engineer’s Report.

2. The Engineer’s Report and Resolution of Intention will be presented for consideration at the May 18, 2022, City Council Meeting.

3. A Public Hearing will be conducted on June 15, 2022, to adopt a Resolution confirming the annual levy and collection of assessments for the LLMD for FY 2022-23.

4. In August 2022, Harris & Associates will submit the proposed assessments to the Los Angeles County (County) Assessor’s Office.

Fiscal Impact
The LLMD establishes the funding mechanism to provide approximately $900,000 in revenues to exclusively cover the maintenance costs within the LLMD boundaries. In FY 2021-22, the LLMD estimated cost was $1,227,881, and the General Fund subsidized the difference. For FY 2022-23, the LLMD update will evaluate the cost as part of the Engineering Report. The revenue is collected through the County Assessor’s Office as part of the property tax rolls. The consulting services of Harris & Associates have been engaged to prepare the Engineer’s Report reflecting individual parcel assessments, including recordation with the County. The consultant fee of $8,700 is budgeted in the LLMD Account Number 215-6010-6201-8170-000.

Community Outreach
The public will have an opportunity to speak on this matter during the Public Hearing at the June 15, 2022 City Council meeting.

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. LLMD Proceedings Schedule
16 - 2
Attachment 1
LLMD Resolution to Initiate Engineer’s Report for
Fiscal Year 2022-2023
16 - 3

RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA, CALIFORNIA,
INITIATING PROCEEDINGS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2022-23

LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN

LIGHTING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE IN AN EXISTING

DISTRICT AND ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF A
REPORT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 15,
PART 2, OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE OF THE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of South Pasadena, California, has previously formed a street lighting and landscaping maintenance district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the “Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972,” Division 15, part 2 Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, in what is known and designated as City of South Pasadena Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance District (District); and
WHEREAS, at this time, this City Council desires to conduct proceedings to provide for the annual levy of assessments for the next ensuing Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23, to provide for the costs and expenses necessary for continual maintenance of improvements within said District; and
WHEREAS, the provisions of said Streets and Highways Code of the State of California Division 15, Part 2, Chapter 3 requires a written report (commencing with Section 22620).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH

PASADENA, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. That the above recitals are all true and correct.

SECTION 2. That the public interest and convenience requires, and it is the intention of the City Council, to initiate proceedings for the annual levy and collection of special assessments for the continual maintenance of certain improvements, all to serve and benefit said District as said area is shown and delineated on a map as previously approved in prior annual levy’s by this City Council and on file in the Office of the City Clerk, open to public inspection, and herein so referenced and made a part hereof.

SECTION 3. Staff is hereby authorized and ordered to have prepared and file with the City Council an engineers report relating to the FY 2022-23 levy of 16 - 4
annual assessment for said District in accordance with the provisions of Streets and Highways Code of the State of California Division 15, Part 2, Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 22620).

SECTION 4. That this resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.

SECTION 5. For any and all information relating to the proceedings, project procedure, any documentation and/or information of a procedural or technical nature, your attention is directed to the below listed person at the lcoal agency or deparment so designated.

H. Ted Gerber, Public Works Director
City of South Pasadena
1414 Mission Street
South Pasadena, CA 91030
SECTION 6. The City Clerk of the City of South Pasadena shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and its approval by the City Council and shall cause the same to be listed in the records of the City.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON this 6th day of April, 2022.

Michael A. Cacciotti, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christina Muñoz, Deputy City Clerk Andrew L. Jared, City Attorney 16 - 5
Attachment 2
LLMD Proceedings Schedule
16 - 6
City of South Pasadena
Street Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance District
FY 2022/23 Assessment Levy Schedule as of March 3, 2022 MARCH 4
Harris to review City Council Meeting #1 Staff Report and Resolution and provide comments for council agenda
MARCH 15
City staff to begin developing annual budget and Harris to begin updating parcel database and preparing engineer’s report APRIL 1
City staff to provide Harris with annual budget information APRIL 6 - 7:30 pm
City Council Meeting #1 (Resolution of Initiation)
City Council Chambers, 1424 Mission Street
APRIL 27
Harris to review City Council Meeting #2 Staff Report and Resolution and provide comments for council agenda, Harris to provide engineer’s report for council agenda
MAY 18 - 7:30 pm
City Council Meeting #2 (Resolution of Intention)
City Council Chambers, 1424 Mission Street
MAY 26
Harris to review City Council Meeting #3 Staff Report and Resolution and provide comments for council agenda,
JUNE 3
Last Day for City to Publish Notice of Public Hearing
JUNE 15 - 7:30 pm
City Council Meeting #3 (Public Hearing)
City Council Chambers, 1424 Mission Street

MONTH OF JULY
Harris updates District database parcel changes and prepares levy files.

Harris works with City Staff to gather required levy submittal documentation.

AUGUST 9
Harris submit levy to County Auditor-Controller for collection. Harris then researches levy rejects, if any, and provides resubmittal information to the County. Upon acceptance of final levy by County, Harris provides levy confirmation to City .

MARCH

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31
APRIL

S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
MAY

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31
JUNE

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30
JULY

S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31 AUGUST

S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 20 31
ENGINEER’S
REPORT
CITY

COUNCIL
MEETING #1
LEVY

SUBMITTAL
CITY

COUNCIL
MEETING #2
CITY

COUNCIL
MEETING #3
16 - 7
17 - 1
17 Approve MOA for 626 Golden Streets Mission-to-Mission 2022 Event April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

278182.1
cultural performances, family-friendly games and activities, kids play zones, vendors, zero-emission demo zones, and more. The event also includes the “626 Run”, a familyfriendly 5K Fun Run free to all youth 17 years of age and under, starting from the San Gabriel Hub. Participants are encouraged to enjoy the day by foot, bike, skate, skateboard, scooter, rollerblades, roller skates, tricycles, or any other type of humanpowered vehicle.

The SGVCOG and the Cities have partnered together to host this event. The portion of the event in South Pasadena will begin at Mission Street and Meridian Avenue, and continue east to Marengo Avenue, where it will run south to the City of Alhambra. The streets will be closed from 6:00 am to 5:00 pm to motor vehicles, with event hub areas closing around 4:00 am. All driveways on the route will be blocked and inaccessible starting at 6:00 am on event day. No parking will be allowed along the event route from 12:00 am - 5:00 pm. There will be multiple street crossings for cars to pass freely across the event route, following normal signal times.

Fiscal Impact
The event programming requires a 20% ($99,000) in-kind or local fund match of the total cost of the event ($495,000) for the SGVCOG. The City’s portion of this match amount is $22,500. The City is expected to submit one invoice to the SGVCOG in an amount not to exceed $22,500, with supporting documentation evidencing those eligible expenses the City incurred and are eligible for reimbursement. At the same time the above invoice is submitted, the City will submit supporting documentation evidencing the City provided eligible in-kind services satisfying the in-kind match requirement of $22,500.

Environmental Impact
This is the approval of an agreement to conduct a one-day event, that does not construct physical facilities or improvements. It is a minor use of land with no permanent effects on the environment for the use of the existing public right of way as bike lanes. Therefore, in accordance with California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Article 19, Section 15403(e) and (h) this activity is exempt from further CEQA analysis.

Attachment: Memorandum of Agreement
17 - 2

ATTACHMENT
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the San Gabriel
Valley Council of Governments and the Cities of Alhambra, San Gabriel, and South Pasadena to share resources and to plan and host the 626 Golden Streets Mission-to-Mission 2022 Event
17 - 3
1666026.1

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT (MOA) BETWEEN THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY

COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE CITIES OF ALHAMBRA, SAN GABRIEL,

AND SOUTH PASADENA TO SHARE RESOURCES AND TO PLAN AND HOST THE 626 GOLDEN STREETS MISSION-TO-MISSION 2022 EVENT
This Memorandum of Agreement (“MOA”) is dated for identification purposes as of January 26, 2022 by and between the City of Alhambra, a municipal corporation, the City of San Gabriel, a municipal corporation, the City of South Pasadena, a municipal corporation (referred to herein individually as a “City” and collectively as the “Cities”), and the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments, a California joint powers authority (“SGVCOG”). Cities and SGVCOG may be referred to herein collectively as the “Parties” or individually as a “Party.”
RECITALS:

A. On December 2, 2021, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) Board approved the Open Streets Grant Program Cycle Four providing Los Angeles County Proposition C 25% (“Proposition C”) Funds for one-day events that close the streets to automotive traffic and open them to people to walk or bike (“Open Street Event”). Further, the LACMTA Board approved the SGVCOG to serve as the pass-through agency of the Proposition C Funds with its member cities.

B. The SGVCOG was successful in securing $396,000 in Proposition C funds (the “Grant”) during Cycle Four from the LACMTA county-wide “Open Streets Event” program to host the 626 Golden Streets Mission-to-Mission Event (the “Event”), including outreach, pre-event planning, and day of event staging costs.

C. The Event programming requires a 20% ($99,000) in-kind or local fund match of the total cost of the event ($495,000).

D. The SGVCOG and the Cities have partnered together to host the Event as a 5-mile contiguous open street event on Sunday, May 1, 2022 from South Pasadena to San Gabriel.

E. The SGVCOG and the Cities desire to work jointly and collaboratively to share monetary, staffing, and other resources in planning and hosting the Event, and desire to formalize their relationship through the creation of the “Mission-to-Mission Working Group” to coordinate their activities and in furtherance thereof agree as follows:

I. RECITALS
The above Recitals are made a substantive part of this MOA.

II. TERM:

The term of this MOA shall commence on the date executed by all Parties and 17 - 4
1666026.1
shall continue through the completion of all work contemplated under this MOA. The term of this MOA may be amended or extended by mutual written agreement of the Parties.

III. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES:

A. SGVCOG Responsibilities:

1. Designate a point-of-contact with name, title, and contact information who will serve as the SGVCOG’s representative throughout the development of the Event. If the point-of-contact is reassigned or no longer with the SGVCOG, a new point-of-contact will be designated within fourteen (14) calendar days.

2. Contract with ActiveSGV to provide pre-planning, communication, permitting, implementation and volunteer coordination. SGVCOG shall require ActiveSGV to defend and indemnify the Cities in accordance with Section VI.C. of this MOA.

3. Contract with Right of Way to implement the traffic control plan shown in Exhibit B. SGVCOG shall require Right of Way to defend and indemnify the Cities in accordance with Section VI.C. of this MOA.

4. Coordinate invoicing and backup documentation to ensure Proposition C grant compliance.

5. Coordinate with the Cities and their consultant(s) as necessary throughout the development and implementation of the Event.

6. Timely respond to all communications from the Cities and their consultant(s) as they relate to the Event and attend meetings when needed.

7. Review and provide comments on draft communications and documents related to the Event.

8. Upon 30 days of receipt and approval of an invoice submitted by a City, reimburse the City for eligible costs in an amount not to exceed the City Allocation as outlined in Exhibit A.

9. It is understood that SGVGOG will not bear any responsibility for the Cities Responsibilities listed below.

B. Cities Responsibilities:

1. Each City shall designate a point-of-contact with name, title, and contact information who will serve as the City’s representative throughout the development of the Event. If the point-of-contact is reassigned or no longer with the City, a new point-of-contact will be designated within fourteen (14) calendar days.

2. Each City will be responsible for public safety along the Event route - as identified in Exhibit B - in their respective jurisdictions including, without limitation, the provision of police, security, fire protection and emergency services. It is understood that each City will not bear any responsibility for activities or acts occurring in another City. It is further understood that each City will not bear any responsibility for the SGVCOG Responsibilities listed above.
17 - 5
1666026.1

3. Assist with sending out event information via City communication channels.

4. Coordinate with the SGVCOG and its consultant(s) as necessary throughout the development and implementation of the Event.

5. Timely respond to all communications and data requests from the SGVCOG and its consultant(s) that relate to the Event and attend meetings when needed.

6. Submit one invoice to the SGVCOG in an amount not to exceed the City’s Funding Amounts as described in Exhibit A, with supporting documentation evidencing those eligible expenses the City incurred and are eligible for reimbursement.

7. At the same time the above invoice is submitted, submit supporting documentation evidencing the City provided eligible in-kind services satisfying the In-Kind Match Requirement as described in Exhibit A.

IV. PROJECT MANAGEMENT:

A. Project Managers.

1. For the purposes of this MOA, SGVCOG designates the following individual as its Project Manager: Sam Pedersen, Management Analyst, whose contact information is set forth below.

2. For the purposes of this MOA, the City of Alhambra designates the following individual as its representative: Mike Macias, Parks Director, whose contact information is set forth below.

3. For the purposes of this MOA, the City of San Gabriel designates the following individual as its representative: Nzhde Matevosyan, Assistant Civil Engineer, whose contact information is set forth below.

4. For the purposes of this MOA, the City of South Pasadena designates the following individual as its representative: Ted Gerber, Public Works Director, whose contact information is set forth below.

Any of the Parties may change the designations set forth herein upon written notice to the other Parties.

V. DEFAULT; REMEDIES:

A. Default. A “Default” under this MOA is defined as any one or more of the following: (i) failure of any Party to comply with the terms and conditions contained in this MOA; and/or (ii) failure of any Party to perform its obligations set forth herein satisfactorily or make sufficient progress towards completion of the Event.

B. Remedies. In the event of a Default by any Party, the non-defaulting Parties will provide a written notice of such Default to the defaulting Party. The defaulting Party shall have thirty (30) days from the date such written notice was mailed in accordance with this MOA to cure the Default 17 - 6
1666026.1
to the reasonable satisfaction of the non-defaulting Party. In the event the Default is of a nature that it cannot be cured within 30 days, the defaulting Party shall commit to and commence the cure within such 30-day period and act promptly to cure the Default to the reasonable satisfaction of the non-defaulting Parties, but in no event more than 60 days from the mailing of the notice of Default. If the defaulting Party fails to cure within 30 days of the Default notice or in the event the Default is not curable within 30 days to commit to and commence the cure of such Default within no more than 60 days, the non-defaulting Party may terminate this MOA. Such termination shall be effective immediately upon the mailing of written notice by the non-defaulting Party to the defaulting Party in accordance with this MOA. The remedies described herein are non-exclusive. In the event of a Default by any Party, the non-defaulting Parties shall have the right to seek any and all remedies available at law or in equity.

VI. INDEMNIFICATION:

A. Each City agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the SGVCOG, its elected and appointed boards, officials, officers, agents, employees, members, and volunteers, and the other Cities, their elected officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers (collectively the “Indemnitees”) at City’s sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits, or other legal proceedings brought against the Indemnitees arising out of or relating to the acts or omissions of the City in connection with this MOA.

B. SGVCOG agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Cities, their elected officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers, at SGVCOG’s sole expense, from and against any and all claims, actions, suits, or other legal proceedings brought against the Cities, their elected officials, officers, agents, employees, and volunteers arising out of or relating to the acts or omissions of SGVCOG in connection with this MOA.

C. To the extent allowed by State law, SGVCOG and Cities shall require that the consultant(s) they retain for the Event defend and indemnify the Indemnitees from and against any and all claims, actions, suits, or other legal proceedings (collectively, “Claims”) brought against either the City or the SGVCOG arising out of or relating to the acts or omissions of the consultant(s) in connection with the Event and add such Indemnitees as additional insureds on any general or automotive liability insurance policies required by any City of SGVCOG. Neither the Cities nor SGVCOG shall be liable to each other or any of their respective Indemnitees by way of agency or any other theory of liability for any such Claims.

VII. INSURANCE:
17 - 7
1666026.1
Cities and SGVCOG shall maintain and keep in full force and effect during the term of this MOA insurance or a program of self-insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise in connection with Cities or SGVCOG’s performance of its obligations hereunder.

VIII. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS:

A. Notices. All notices required or permitted to be given under this MOA shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered, or sent by electronic mail or certified mail, postage prepaid and return receipt requested, addressed as follows:

To SGVCOG: Sam Pedersen
Management Analyst
1000 S. Fremont Avenue, Unit 42
Building A-10N, Suite 10-210
Alhambra, CA 91803
(626) 457-1800
[email protected]

with a copy to: Marisa Creter
Executive Director
1000 S. Fremont Avenue, Unit 42
Building A-10N, Suite 10-210
Alhambra, CA 91803
(626) 457-1800
[email protected]
To Alhambra: Mike Macias
Parks Director
111 S First Street
Alhambra, CA 91801
(626) 570-5044
[email protected]
with a copy to: Jessica Binnquist
City Manager
111 S First Street
Alhambra, CA 91801
(626) 570-5010
[email protected]
To San Gabriel: Nzhde Matevosyan
Assistant Civil Engineer
425 South Mission Drive
17 - 8
1666026.1
San Gabriel, CA 91776
(626) 308-2805
[email protected]
with a copy to: Mark Lazzaretto
City Manager
425 South Mission Drive
San Gabriel, CA 91776
(626) 308-2805
[email protected]
To South Pasadena: Ted Gerber
Public Works Director
1414 Mission Street
South Pasadena, CA 91030
(626) 403-7240
[email protected]
with a copy to: Arminé Chaparyan
City Manager
1414 Mission Street
South Pasadena, CA 91030
(626) 403-7210
[email protected]
B. No Partnership. This MOA is not intended to be, and shall not be construed as, an agreement to form a partnership, agency relationship, or a joint venture between the Parties. Except as otherwise specifically provided in the MOA, neither Party shall be authorized to act as an agent of or otherwise to represent the other Party.

C. Entire MOA. This MOA constitutes the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to the subject matter herein and supersedes any and all other prior writings and oral negotiations. This MOA may be modified only in writing and signed by the Parties in interest at the time of such modification.

D. Governing Law. This MOA shall be governed by and construed under California law and any applicable federal law without giving effect to that body of laws pertaining to conflict of laws. In the event of any legal action to enforce or interpret this MOA, the Parties hereto agree that the sole and exclusive venue shall be a court of competent jurisdiction located in Los Angeles County, California.

E. Excusable Delays. No Party shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligations hereunder to the extent that the performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed by unforeseen causes including acts of 17 - 9
1666026.1
God, floods, earthquakes, fires, acts of a public enemy, pandemic, epidemic, and government acts beyond the control and without fault or negligence of the affected Party. Each Party hereto shall give notice promptly to the others of the nature and extent of any such circumstances claimed to delay, hinder, or prevent performance of any obligations under this MOA.

F. Waiver. Waiver by any Party to this MOA of any term, condition, or covenant of this MOA shall not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. No waiver of any provision of this MOA shall be effective unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom enforcement of a waiver is sought.

G. Headings. The section headings contained in this MOA are for convenience and identification only and shall not be deemed to limit or define the contents to which they relate.

H. Assignment. No Party may assign its interest in this MOA, or any part thereof, without the prior written consent of the other Parties. Any assignment without consent shall be void and unenforceable.

I. Severability. If any provision of this MOA is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

J. Authority to Execute. The person executing this MOA on behalf of a Party warrants that they are duly authorized to execute this MOA on behalf of said Party, and that by doing so said Party is formally bound to the provisions of this MOA.

K. Counterparts. This MOA may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

L. Electronic Signatures. This MOA may be executed with electronic signatures in accordance with Government Code Section 16.5. Such electronic signatures will be treated in all respects as having the same effect as an original signature.
17 - 10
1666026.1
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have caused this MOA to be executed and to be effective on the date it has been fully executed by the Parties as set forth below.

FOR THE CITY OF ALHAMBRA: Approved as to form:

By:___________________________ By: _________________________ Jessica Binnquist Joseph Montes
City Manager City Attorney
Date:__________________________
FOR THE CITY OF SAN GABRIEL: Approved as to form:

By:___________________________ By: _________________________ Mark Lazzaretto Keith Lemieux
City Manager City Attorney
Date:__________________________
FOR THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA: Approved as to form:

By:___________________________ By: _________________________ Arminé Chaparyan Andrew L. Jared
City Manager City Attorney
Date:__________________________
FOR THE SAN GABRIEL VALLEY Approved as to form:

COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS:

By: ____________________________ By: __________________________ Marisa Creter David DeBerry
Executive Director General Counsel
Date:___________________________
17 - 11
1666026.1
Exhibit A:

Grant Funding and In-Kind Match by City
Funding Amounts In-Kind Match
Requirement
Alhambra $22,500.00 $22,500.00
San Gabriel $15,000.00 $15,000.00
South
Pasadena
$22,500.00 $22,500.00
Total $60,000.00 $60,000.00
Exhibit B
The Traffic Control Plan
17 - 12
DATE:

FROM:

City Council
Agenda Report
April 6, 2022
Armine Chaparyan, City Manager �
PREPARED BY: Brian Solinsky, Police Chief
Alison Wehrle, Management Analyst
ITEM NO.

SUBJECT: First Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18, Article VI of the South Pasadena Municipal Code to Prohibit the Sale of All Tobacco Products and Electronic Smoking Devices
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Select the version of the proposed ordinance for introduction; and

Executive Summary
At the July 21, 2021 regular meeting, City Council directed staff to study and recommend key policy provisions for an ordinance that would ban the sale of all tobacco products in South Pasadena. After researching the issue, staff determined that these goals could be accomplished in an amendment to the existing tobacco regulations, South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) Chapter 18, to ban the sale of tobacco products. The attached draft ordinance would repeal the existing Tobacco Retailer Permit Ordinance (SPMC 18.101, et seq.) and replace such with a prohibition of tobacco sales citywide.

Background
While many cities have prohibited the sale of flavored tobacco products, only two other cities in the United States, Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach, have passed bans on all tobacco products.

According to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Fast Facts, 2020), Cigarette smoking causes more than 480,000 deaths each year in the United States.

Smoking is associated with more deaths than the following causes combined:
278314.1
o Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
o Illegal drug use
o Alcohol use
18 - 1
18 First Reading of an Ordinance to Prohibit the Sale of Tobacco Products April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 8 ends

278314.1
o Motor vehicle injuries
o Firearm-related incidents
Tobacco use is linked to several chronic diseases, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia, diabetes, and arthritis. Exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke also poses a risk for chronic disease, coronary heart disease, stroke, and lung cancer.

The California Department of Public Health’s California Tobacco Control Program (CTCP) states that nearly 12,000 young people try their first cigarette every day, with approximately 68% of adult smokers in California starting to smoke before the age of

18. It is estimated that more than 440,600 Californian children living today will die prematurely because they will become smokers.

The University of California at San Francisco conducted a study (Findings from the California Tobacco Program Media Campaign Evaluation Endgame Questions, September 2021) and found that residents in Los Angeles County between the ages of 18-55 years old overwhelmingly supported the phasing out of cigarette sales within the next five years. The survey was conducted between August 2019 and August 2021 with respondents from multiple ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

Restricting the sale of tobacco products differs from restricting smoking activity:
• Smoking Activity: To promote healthy living, the City has long supported no-smoking policies. In 2018, the City prohibited smoking on public sidewalks, walkways, parkways, curbs, and gutters. One of the primary goals of the City's aggressive approach with these policies is to protect the public from unwanted exposure to secondhand smoke.
• Sale of Tobacco Products: While the City prohibits smoking in many locations, the City does allow the sale of tobacco products through a regulatory permit process. On February 18, 2009, the City Council formally adopted Ordinance 2184 requiring establishments selling tobacco products to obtain a Tobacco Retailer Permit, renewable every year.

The South Pasadena Municipal Code (SPMC) § 18.102(a) currently states: Tobacco Retailer Permit Required. It is unlawful for any person to act as a tobacco retailer in the city without first obtaining and maintaining a valid tobacco retailer permit ("permit") pursuant to this article for each location at which that activity is to occur. Tobacco retailing without a valid tobacco retailer permit is a nuisance as a matter of law.

SPMC §18.101(g) defines a tobacco product as "Tobacco product" means any substance containing tobacco leaf, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snus, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco; and any product or formulation of matter containing 18 - 2
First Reading of an Ordinance to Prohibit the Sale of Tobacco Products April 6, 2022

Page 3 of 8 ends

278314.1
biologically active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be introduced into the human body, but does not include any cessation product specifically approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use in treating nicotine or tobacco dependence.

Analysis
At the October 18, 2021 Public Safety Commission Special Meeting, Staff introduced a framework for discussion on exploring and developing a policy to ban the sale of tobacco products within the City of South Pasadena. The Commission reviewed a number of documents, took public comment, and held a discussion on the subject matter, putting together a set of recommendations for an initial draft ordinance to be presented to the City Council at a later date.

At the January 10, 2022 Public Safety Commission Regular Meeting, the Commission reviewed an updated a draft ordinance, incorporating suggestions of both the Commission and the City Attorney. With five of seven Commissioners in attendance, the Commissioners voted 4-1 in favor of supporting an endorsement of the updated draft ordinance (Attachment 1) as written.

Legal Review
Ahead of the January 10, 2022 Public Safety Commission regular meeting, the City Attorney provided guidance and made updates to the original draft ordinance, incorporating many of the Public Safety Commission’s recommendations for a potential ban of the sale of all tobacco products, including adding structure to the hardship exemption process and the addition of a recommended effective date of June 30, 2023.

Two drafts are presented for consideration. Both versions have updated text regarding operative dates of the ordinance relative to second reading (April 22 for cutoff of permit applications), and the effective date of the ordinance (30 days after passage for operative date of ordinance). Both limit the additional information provided by staff at hardship appeals hearings to information relevant for consideration. Both amend the department responsible for compliance as the Community Development Department, and typographic errors.

The first draft ordinance (Attachment 1) is updated from the version presented to the Public Safety Commission and previously circulated to the Council on March 2, 2022. It includes changes to the appropriate sections of the City’s current municipal code that would need to be altered, including sections outlining the tobacco retailer permit application, issuance, requirements, renewal, compliance, and monitoring processes.

Under this version, current permits will be allowed to run or extend through November 20, 2022. Also included in the first draft ordinance are new sections regarding ban enforcement, requirements for a single hardship exemption application, and the hearing procedure for a requested hardship exemption. Hardship exemptions could be applied for through June 16, 2022. The City Attorney has opined that only allowing small 18 - 3
First Reading of an Ordinance to Prohibit the Sale of Tobacco Products April 6, 2022

Page 4 of 8 ends

278314.1
businesses to apply for a hardship exemption be omitted, and is not included in this attached updated draft ordinance.

After the March 2, 2022 City Council meeting, staff conducted additional research, and received input regarding changes to the draft ordinance. A second draft ordinance (Attachment 2) was created for consideration. The second draft ordinance extends the current permit renewal timeframe and ordinance effective date. Current permits would be allowed to be extended through June 30, 2023. This version allows the existing cigar shop to change ownership. It also allows for the cigar shop to reopen after ceasing operations in the event of a natural disaster. The second draft ordinance also extended the hardship exemption application period through September 30, 2022, and removed Section 18.104(e)(10) regarding hardship exemption criteria.

Business Impact Mitigation Update
Several of the tobacco retailers contacted, including gas stations, convenience stores, and a cigar lounge have provided various figures as to the extent to which a ban on tobacco sales could impact or affect their businesses. Some have estimated between 15-20% of their revenue is from tobacco sales.

Staff has considered various options to assist small businesses in mitigating the impact of revenue lost from tobacco sales. Staff members met with a representative from the Small Business Development Center ("SBDC") at Pasadena City College and discussed options to support the small businesses within the City, including providing a presentation of local businesses' services at a Chamber of Commerce meeting. The SBDC offers free one-on-one advising with small business experts to help them avoid many of the common problems faced by entrepreneurs. Other benefits include locating and applying for small business loans, including financing and educational workshops and events.

The representative also informed staff about the SCORE program, which is the nation's largest volunteer, expert business mentoring program. A resource partner for the Small Business Administration, the SCORE business mentorship program gives entrepreneurs a unique opportunity to receive personalized counseling from someone with more than 20 years of experience in their industry. Mentors retain accessibility with clients via email and schedule in-person appointments to meet with and mentor both existing and future business owners. There are also a large variety of hosted webinars, workshops, and interactive online training modules available for businesses to participate in.

A representative from the SBDC at Pasadena City College provided a presentation at the December 7, 2021 Chamber of Commerce ShopTalk meeting. The representative presented on the organization and the variety of services and consulting that are available to all types of businesses, including business planning, legal and accounting, loan advice, sales and marketing, product diversification, and more. Additional information about the offerings of the SBDC can be found in Attachment 8. The 18 - 4
First Reading of an Ordinance to Prohibit the Sale of Tobacco Products April 6, 2022

Page 5 of 8 ends

278314.1
recording of the presentation will be available on the Chamber of Commerce’s website, and Staff is able to put any interested business in contact with the SBDC and/or the Chamber of Commerce for any business advising needs.

Tobacco Retailers in South Pasadena
There are currently 11 establishments with active City-issued Tobacco Cigarette Retailer Permits. One retailer is a cigar lounge, Fair Oaks Cigar, which sells tobacco and liquor-related products and allows smoking indoors. Other retailers include three grocery stores, four gas stations, two convenience stores, and one convenience store/pharmacy.

Staff Composition of Existing Retailers
Category Number of Retailers
Cigar lounges 1
Grocery stores 3
Gas stations 4
Associated with bed and
breakfast
0 Convenience stores or
pharmacies
3 Total 11

The magnitude to which a business relies on revenue generated from tobacco sales varies upon its category and business model. For a large grocery store selling a higher volume of various goods, tobacco-related products might represent a small or even insignificant portion of overall sales. For small businesses such as gas stations or convenience stores, tobacco has not been shown to be a significant portion of revenue.

The cigar lounge at issue has tobacco sales as the primary source of revenue, and an amortization period is more difficult to calculate and address. Therefore, a sufficient time for implementing such an ordinance should be evaluated. Here, the impacts regarding youth exposure are minimized due to the lounge/club arrangement of the business.

Staff has discussed options with experts in retail tobacco sales, who have indicated that a phased approach to prohibiting tobacco sales would be appropriate and has worked well for the Cities of Beverly Hills and Manhattan Beach. Considering these issues, staff recommends adopting a provision to exempt the one existing cigar lounge, Fair Oaks Cigars, from the ban. Other businesses that do not rely solely on tobacco sales revenue would not be issued new or renewal permits (permits must be renewed annually or will expire). Under this approach, tobacco products would still be available for sale at one location in South Pasadena, yet others sell off their inventory and explore other products and business models.
18 - 5
First Reading of an Ordinance to Prohibit the Sale of Tobacco Products April 6, 2022

Page 6 of 8 ends

278314.1
Key Provisions of the Proposed Ordinance and Updated Timeline The proposed ordinance includes two primary modifications to Article VI of Chapter 18 of the South Pasadena Municipal Code. The proposed ordinance:

1. States that it shall be unlawful for any Retailer to sell or offer for sale any Tobacco Product; and

2. Establishes an effective date of June 30, 2023 for the tobacco ban for any retailer operating at the effective date of the Ordinance. This delay allows expiration of all known current tobacco retailer permits, and provides all existing tobacco retailers with several months to sell their remaining inventory of tobacco products, notwithstanding any granted hardship exemption. This provision is recommended to address any takings challenges, in order to allow tobacco retailers a reasonable time to amortize the value of remaining tobacco products that cannot be used after the prohibition takes effect.

The ordinances will become effective 30 days after adoption by City Council. However, the ordinance includes an implementation period to allow the City to notify tobacco retailers in South Pasadena. This will provide time for tobacco retailers to sell their existing inventory of tobacco products and comply with the ban or apply for a one-time hardship exemption. Tobacco retailers have indicated that they could face a financial strain if an ordinance were to go into effect immediately. If the City Council were to adopt the ordinance as presented, the implementation timeline would be as follows:
• April 6, 2022: First Reading and Introduction of Ordinance • April 20, 2022: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance • May 20, 2022: Ordinance Takes Effect
• June 30, 2023: Enforcement Takes Effect
Fiscal Impact
Should City Council choose to adopt a ban on the sales of all tobacco products, a direct fiscal impact to the City would be the elimination of revenue from issuing the Tobacco Retailer Permits. The current fee for the permit is $120, paid annually by each retailer. Since there are currently eleven retailers in the City, staff estimates the immediate loss of permit revenue to be approximately $1,320 annually. The permit revenue is a cost-recovery fee; therefore, staff time involved in the administration and enforcement of the permits could be reallocated to other activities. Total fiscal impact is difficult to quantify due to the fact that tobacco is not taxed at the retail level and retailers are not required to report sales data to the City.

Alternatives Considered

1. Consideration of a potential ban on the sale of only flavored tobacco products.

2. Consideration of a potential ban on the sale of only vaping products.

3. Decline to enact a ban on the sale of tobacco products. 18 - 6
First Reading of an Ordinance to Prohibit the Sale of Tobacco Products April 6, 2022

Page 7 of 8 ends

278314.1
Community Outreach
Staff has notified retailers multiple times through in-person visits, mail, email, and telephone regarding upcoming meetings and discussions. The City's website has been updated with the latest meeting information, and multiple notices were disseminated notifying retailers and interested parties of public meetings and Commission recommendations. Additionally, the following public meetings and outreach have taken place:
• August 3, 2021 – South Pasadena Chamber of Commerce Regular Meeting. • August 18, 2021 – Outreach to Fair Oaks Cigar.
• September 8-9, 2021 –In-person outreach at all retail establishments that sell tobacco products in the City
• September 27, 2021— Mailed and emailed outreach to retailers • October 7, 2021 – Police Department staff provided additional in-person outreach reminder for October 18th special meeting
• October 18, 2021 – Public Safety Commission (PSC) Special Meeting review • December 7, 2021 – Small Business Development Center (“SBDC”) Pasadena City College presentation at Chamber of Commerce Meeting • December 30, 2021 – In-person, mailed, and emailed outreach regarding the continued PSC discussion on January 10th
• January 5, 2022 – In-person and emailed outreach update to advise that the PSC Regular Meeting on January 10th would be held remotely via Zoom • January 10, 2022 Public Safety Commission Regular Meeting review • February 17, 2022 - In-person, mailed, and emailed outreach for City Council March 2, 2022 review
• February 18, 2022 – Notice of Public Hearing for March 2nd City Council review published in the South Pasadena Review
• February 28, 2022 – Reminder email sent to retailers with email addresses on file for March 2nd City Council Review
• March 18, 2022 – Notice of Public Hearing for April 6th City Council review published in the South Pasadena Review
• March 24, 2022 – In-person, mailed, and emailed outreach for City Council April 6th review
Environmental Analysis
The action considered is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as it is not considered a "project" pursuant to Section 15378(b)(5) of CEQA Guidelines.

The action involves an organizational or administrative activity of government that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment.

Commission Review and Recommendation
This matter was reviewed by the Public Safety Commission. On January 10, 2022, the Commission recommended in a 4-1 vote that the City Council support the draft ordinance as written (Attachment 1).
18 - 7
First Reading of an Ordinance to Prohibit the Sale of Tobacco Products April 6, 2022

Page 8 of 8 ends

278314.1
Public Noticing
A Public Hearing Notice was published March 18, 2022 in the South Pasadena Review.

Attachments:

1. Draft Ordinance Amending SPMC Chapter 18 Article VI

2. Draft Ordinance Option 2 Amending SPMC Chapter 18 Article VI

3. CDC Fast Facts

4. Findings from the California Tobacco Program Media Campaign Evaluation Endgame Questions

5. Ordinance 2184 – Tobacco Retail Fee - 2009

6. Not for Sale: The State Authority to End Cigarette Sales

7. South Pasadena Climate Action Plan Link

8. Small Business Development Center (“SBDC”) Flyer
18 - 8
ATTACHMENT 1
Draft Ordinance Option with Public Safety
Commission and City Attorney Edits (includes SPMC
Article VI Chapter 18 edits)
18 - 9
278316.1
ORDINANCE NO. [_________]

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
AMENDING CHAPTER 18, ARTICLE VI OF THE SOUTH

PASADENA CITY CODE TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF ALL

TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND ELECTRONIC SMOKING

DEVICES
WHEREAS, tobacco use causes disease and death and constitutes an urgent public health threat as it remains the leading cause of preventable death and disability in the United States, with 480,000 people dying prematurely in the United States from smoking-related diseases every year. In the United States, smoking is responsible for about one in every five deaths, more deaths each year than human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), illegal drug use, alcohol use, motor vehicle injuries, microbial agents, and toxic agents combined.

WHEREAS, cigarette smoking kills 40,000 Californians annually, and is the cause of more than one in four cancer deaths in California.

WHEREAS, tobacco use can affect nearly all organ systems and is responsible for 87 percent of lung cancer deaths, 79 percent of all chronic obstructive pulmonary disease deaths, and 32 percent of coronary heart disease deaths. According to the World Health Organization, tobacco use accounts for the greatest cause of death worldwide, responsible for nearly 6 million deaths per year. Over 16 million Americans have at least one disease caused by smoking.

WHEREAS, secondhand smoke, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, causes stroke, lung cancer, and coronary heart disease in adults. In addition, it increases risks for sudden infant death syndrome, respiratory symptoms, middle-ear disease, and slows lung growth in children.

WHEREAS, smoking costs California $13.29 billion in annual health care expenses, $3.58 billion in Medicaid costs caused by smoking, and $10.35 billion in smoking-caused productivity losses.

WHEREAS, unless smoking rates decline, 441,000 of California youth alive today will die prematurely. California youth tobacco usage is increasing. The U.S.

Surgeon General declared youth e-cigarette use an “epidemic,” and 1 in 10 Los Angeles County high school students say they are current e-cigarette users.

WHEREAS, the City of South Pasadena recognizes that the use of tobacco products has devastating health and economic consequences.

WHEREAS, cigarette butts are the most-littered object in the world and the item most often found in beach cleanups globally. Cigarette butts contribute 18 - 10
278316.1
nonbiodegradable plastic, nicotine, heavy metals, pesticides, and other toxic substances to land and marine environments, down to the bottom of the oceans.

California’s Trash Amendments, a standard under the federal Clean Water Act, requires prevention or capture of trash such as cigarette butts and other tobacco product waste before it enters state waterways.

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council of the City of South Pasadena to provide for the public’s health, welfare, and safety by protecting its residents, especially young people, from the inherent dangers of tobacco use.

WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Council of the City of South Pasadena to provide for sufficient time to businesses currently selling tobacco products to phase out stocks on hand and cease operations in an orderly manner.

NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby amends the South Pasadena Municipal Code Chapter 18, Article VI, section 18.103 to read as follows, with additions denoted in underline and deletions denoted in strikethrough, to become effective thirty days after final approval:

18.103. LIMITS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR A TOBACCO PERMIT.
(a) No permit may issue to authorize tobacco retailing at other than a fixed location. For example, tobacco retailing by persons on foot or from vehicles is prohibited.
(b) No tobacco retailer may be located within five hundred feet of any public school as measured from the closest point on the property line of the parcels containing the retailer’s establishment and the school. Such measurement shall be in a straight line without regard to intervening structures. No existing business within five hundred feet of a public school may begin operation as a tobacco retailer after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section. (c) No permit shall be issued after April 22, 2022.

SECTION 2. The City Council hereby amends the South Pasadena Municipal Code Chapter 18, Article VI, section 18.106 to read as follows, with additions denoted in underline and deletions denoted in strikethrough, to become effective thirty days after final approval:

18.106. PERMIT RENEWAL AND EXPIRATION.
(a) Renewal of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit is invalid if the appropriate fee has not been timely paid in full or if the term of the permit has expired. The term of 18 - 11
278316.1
a tobacco retailer permit is one year. Each tobacco retailer shall apply for the renewal of his or her tobacco retailer permit and submit the permit fee no later than thirty days prior to expiration of the term. All new tobacco retailer permits and renewal of existing permits issued after April 22, 2022 shall be renewed only through November 20, 2022.
(b) Expiration of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit that is not timely renewed shall expire at the end of its term. To renew a permit not timely renewed pursuant to subsection (a), the proprietor must:
(1) Submit the permit fee and application renewal form; and (2) Submit a signed affidavit affirming that the proprietor:
(A) Has not sold and will not sell any tobacco product or tobacco paraphernalia after the permit expiration date and before the permit is renewed, or
(B) Has waited the appropriate ineligibility period established for tobacco retailing without a permit, as set forth in Section 18.112(a) of this article, before seeking renewal of the permit.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby amends the South Pasadena Municipal Code Chapter 18, Article VI to read as follows, with additions denoted in underline and deletions denoted in strikethrough, to become effective November 20, 2022:

ARTICLE VI – TOBACCO RETAILER PERMIT PROHIBITION OF THE

RETAIL SALE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND ELECTRONIC SMOKING

DEVICES

18.101 – DEFINITIONS.

The following words and phrases, whenever used in this article, shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise:
(a) “Arm’s length transaction” means a sale in good faith and for valuable consideration that reflects the fair market value in the open market between two informed and willing parties, neither of which is under any compulsion to participate in the transaction. A sale between relatives, related companies or partners, or a sale for which a significant purpose is avoiding the effect of the violations of this article is not an arm’s length transaction.
“Cigar” means any roll of tobacco other than a cigarette wrapped entirely in tobacco or any substance containing tobacco and weighing more than 4.5 pounds per thousand.
18 - 12
278316.1
“Cigar lounge” means a tobacco retailer that (1) contains an enclosed area in or attached to the tobacco retailer that is dedicated to the use of cigars, (2) does not sell any tobacco products other than cigars, and (3) only permits patrons who are the state minimum age to purchase (currently 21 years of age or older) to enter the premises.
(b) “Department” means the finance department and any agency or person designated by the department to enforce or administer the provisions of this article.
“Electronic smoking device” means any device that may be used to deliver any aerosolized or vaporized substance to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an e-cigarette, e-cigar, e-pipe, vape pen, or e-hookah.

Electronic smoking device includes any component, part, or accessory of the device, and also includes any substance that may be aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine and whether or not sold separately.

Electronic Smoking Device does not include drugs, devices, or combination products authorized for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as those terms are defined in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
(c) “Person” means any natural person, partnership, cooperative association, corporation, personal representative, receiver, trustee, assignee, or any other legal entity.

(d) “Proprietor” means a person with an ownership or managerial interest in a business. An ownership interest shall be deemed to exist when a person has a ten percent or greater interest in the stock, assets, or income of a business other than the sole interest of security for debt. A managerial interest shall be deemed to exist when a person can or does have or share ultimate control over the day-to-day operations of a business.
(e) “Self-service display” means the open display or storage of tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia in a manner that is physically accessible in any way to the general public without the assistance of the retailer and a direct person-to-person transfer between the purchaser and the retailer. A vending machine is a form of self-service display.
“Sale” or “Sell” means any transfer, exchange, barter, gift, offer for sale, or distribution for a commercial purpose, in any manner or by any means whatsoever. (f) “Smoking” means possessing a lighted tobacco product, lighted tobacco paraphernalia, or any other lighted weed or plant (including a lighted pipe, cigar, hookah pipe, or cigarette of any kind), and means the lighting of a tobacco 18 - 13
278316.1
product, tobacco paraphernalia, or any other weed or plant (including a pipe, cigar, hookah pipe, or cigarette of any kind).
(g) “Tobacco product” means: any substance containing tobacco leaf, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snus, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco; and any product or formulation of matter containing biologically active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be introduced into the human body, but does not include any cessation product specifically approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use in treating nicotine or tobacco dependence. 1) any product containing, made of, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption or is likely to be consumed, whether inhaled, absorbed, or ingested by any other means, including but not limited to, a cigarette, a cigar, pipe tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff, or snus; 2) any electronic smoking device as defined in this section and any substances that may be aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine and whether or not sold separately; or 3) any component, part, or accessory of 1) or 2), whether or not any of these contains tobacco or nicotine, including but not limited to filters, rolling papers, blunt or hemp wraps, hookahs, and pipes. “Tobacco product” does not mean drugs, devices, or combination products authorized for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as those terms are defined in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. (h) “Tobacco retailer” means any person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers to exchange for any form of consideration, tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia. “Tobacco retailing” means the doing of any of these things.

This definition is without regard to the quantity of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco paraphernalia sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange. A tobacco retailer can be a primary or accessory land use (as defined in SPMC 36.700.020 or its successor) means any person who sells, exchanges, or offers to sell or exchange, for any form of consideration, tobacco products or electronic smoking devices. This definition is without regard to the quantity of tobacco products sold, offered for sale, exchanged, or offered for exchange. A tobacco retailer can be a primary or accessory use (as defined in SPMC 36.700.020 or its successor)
“Tobacco retailing” means engaging in the activities of a tobacco retailer.

18.102 – REQUIREMENTS AND PROHIBITIONS.
(a) Tobacco Retailer Permit Required. It is unlawful for any person to act as a tobacco retailer in the city without first obtaining and maintaining a valid tobacco retailer permit (“permit”) pursuant to this article for each location at which that activity is to occur.

Tobacco retailing without a valid tobacco retailer permit is a nuisance as a matter of 18 - 14
278316.1
law. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or offer for sale a tobacco product in the city unless authorized by this chapter.
(b) Lawful Business Operation. In the course of tobacco retailing or in the operation of the business or maintenance of the location for which a permit issued, it shall be a violation of this article for a permittee, or any of the permittee’s agents or employees, to violate any local, state, or federal law applicable to tobacco products or tobacco retailing.
(c) Display of Permit. Each tobacco retailer permit shall be prominently displayed in a publicly visible location at the permitted location. (d) Positive Identification Required. No person engaged in tobacco retailing shall sell or transfer a tobacco product to another person who appears to be under the age of twenty-seven years without first examining the identification of the recipient to confirm that the recipient is at least the minimum age under state law to purchase and possess the tobacco product.
(e) Minimum Age for Persons Selling Tobacco. No person who is younger than the minimum age established by state law for the purchase or possession of tobacco products shall engage in tobacco retailing.
(f) Self-Service Displays Prohibited. Tobacco retailing by means of a selfservice display is prohibited. (g) False and Misleading Advertising Prohibited. A tobacco retailer or proprietor without a valid tobacco retailer permit, including, for example, a person whose permit has been suspended or revoked:
(1) Shall keep all tobacco products out of public view. The public display of tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia in violation of this provision shall constitute tobacco retailing without a permit under Section 18.112; and
(2) Shall not display any advertisement relating to tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia that promotes the sale or distribution of such products from the tobacco retailer’s location or that could lead a reasonable consumer to believe that such products can be obtained at that location. (Ord. No. 2184, § 2, 2009.)
(b) This section shall not apply to a cigar lounge that:
(1) held a valid tobacco retailer permit in the city and is operating as a cigar lounge as of April 22, 2022;
(2) does not allow the use of any tobacco products, except cigars, on the premises;
18 - 15
278316.1
(3) all cigar sales are conducted only in-person at the location licensed as of April 22, 2022;
(4) is in compliance with State law;
(5) has not changed ownership after April 22, 2022;
(6) has not expanded in size or changed its location after April 22, 2022; and
(7) has not closed for more than 60 consecutive days after April 22, 2022.

18.103. LIMITS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR A TOBACCO PERMIT.
(a) No permit may issue to authorize tobacco retailing at other than a fixed location.

For example, tobacco retailing by persons on foot or from vehicles is prohibited. (b) No tobacco retailer may be located within five hundred feet of any public school as measured from the closest point on the property line of the parcels containing the retailer’s establishment and the school. Such measurement shall be in a straight line without regard to intervening structures. No existing business within five hundred feet of a public school may begin operation as a tobacco retailer after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section. (Ord. No. 2258, § 23, 2013.)

18.104. APPLICATION PROCEDURE
(a) Application for a tobacco retailer permit shall be submitted in the name of each proprietor proposing to conduct retail tobacco sales and shall be signed by each proprietor or an authorized agent thereof.
(b) It is the responsibility of each proprietor to be informed regarding all laws applicable to tobacco retailing, including those laws affecting the issuance of a tobacco retailer permit. No proprietor may rely on the issuance of a permit as a determination by the city that the proprietor has complied with all state and federal laws applicable to tobacco retailing. A permit issued contrary to this article, contrary to any other law, or on the basis of false or misleading information supplied by a proprietor shall be revoked pursuant to Section 18.111(d) of this article. Nothing in this article shall be construed to vest in any person obtaining and maintaining a tobacco retailer permit any status or right to act as a tobacco retailer in contravention of any provision of law. (c) All applications shall be submitted on a form supplied by the department and shall contain the following information:
(1) The name, address, and telephone number of each proprietor of the business seeking a permit;
18 - 16
278316.1
(2) The business name, address, and telephone number of the single fixed location for which a permit is sought;
(3) A single name and mailing address authorized by each proprietor to receive all communications and notices (the “authorized address”) required by, authorized by, or convenient to the enforcement of this article. If an authorized address is not supplied, each proprietor shall be understood to consent to the provision of notice at the business address specified in subsection (c)(2); (4) Proof that the location for which a tobacco retailer permit is sought has been issued a valid state tobacco retailer permit by the California Board of Equalization;
(5) Whether or not any proprietor or any agent of the proprietor has admitted violating, or has been found to have violated, this article and, if so, the dates and locations of all such violations within the previous five years; (6) A nonrefundable application fee, as set and as may be amended from time to time by city council resolution;
(7) Such other information as the department deems necessary for the administration or enforcement of this article as specified on the application form required by this section.
(d) A permitted tobacco retailer shall inform the department in writing of any change in the information submitted on an application for a tobacco retailer permit within ten business days of a change.
(e) All information specified in an application pursuant to this section shall be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.) or any other applicable law, subject to the laws’ exemptions. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.105. ISSUANCE OF PERMIT.

Upon the receipt of a complete application for a tobacco retailer permit and the permit fee required by this article, the department shall issue a permit unless substantial evidence demonstrates that one or more of the following bases for denial exists:
(a) The information presented in the application is inaccurate or false. Intentionally supplying inaccurate or false information shall be a violation of this article; (b) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing at a location for which this article prohibits issuance of tobacco retailer permits. However, this subsection shall not constitute a basis for denial of a permit if the applicant provides the city with documentation demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that the applicant has acquired or is acquiring the location or business in an arm’s length transaction 18 - 17
278316.1
(c) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing for a proprietor to whom this article prohibits a permit to be issued;
(d) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing that is prohibited pursuant to this article (e.g., mobile vending), that is unlawful pursuant to this Code including, without limitation the zoning code, building code, and business license tax code, or that is unlawful pursuant to any other law. (Ord. No. 2184, § 2, 2009.)

18.106. PERMIT RENEWAL AND EXPIRATION.
(a) Renewal of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit is invalid if the appropriate fee has not been timely paid in full or if the term of the permit has expired. The term of a tobacco retailer permit is one year. Each tobacco retailer shall apply for the renewal of his or her tobacco retailer permit and submit the permit fee no later than thirty days prior to expiration of the term.
(b) Expiration of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit that is not timely renewed shall expire at the end of its term. To renew a permit not timely renewed pursuant to subsection (a), the proprietor must:
(1) Submit the permit fee and application renewal form; and (2) Submit a signed affidavit affirming that the proprietor:
(A) Has not sold and will not sell any tobacco product or tobacco paraphernalia after the permit expiration date and before the permit is renewed, or (B) Has waited the appropriate ineligibility period established for tobacco retailing without a permit, as set forth in Section 18.112(a) of this article, before seeking renewal of the permit. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.107. PERMITS NONTRANSFERRABLE.
(a) A tobacco retailer permit may not be transferred from one person to another or from one location to another. A new tobacco retailer permit is required whenever a tobacco retailing location has a change in proprietorship. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, prior violations at a location shall continue to be counted against a location and permit ineligibility periods shall continue to apply to a location unless:
(1) The location has been or is being fully transferred to a new proprietor in an arm’s length transaction; and
(2) The new proprietor provides the city with clear and convincing evidence that the new proprietor has acquired or is acquiring the location in an arm’s length transaction. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.108. PERMITS CONVEYS A LIMITED, CONDITIONAL PRIVILEGE 18 - 18
278316.1
Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant any person obtaining and maintaining a tobacco retailer permit any status or right other than the limited conditional privilege to act as a tobacco retailer at the location identified on the face of the permit. For example, nothing in this article shall be construed to render inapplicable, supersede, or apply in lieu of, any other provision of applicable law, including, but not limited to, any provision of this Code including without limitation the zoning code, building codes, and business license tax code, or any condition or limitation on smoking in an enclosed place of employment pursuant to California Labor Code Section 6404.5. For example, obtaining a tobacco retailer permit does not make the retailer a “retail or wholesale tobacco shop” for the purposes of California Labor Code Section 6404.5. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.109. FEE FOR PERMIT.

The initial fee to issue or to renew a tobacco retailer permit is hereby established at one hundred twenty dollars or as set and amended from time to time by city council resolution. The fee shall be calculated so as to recover the cost of administration and enforcement of this article, including, for example, issuing a permit, administering the permit program, retailer education, retailer inspection and compliance checks, documentation of violations, and prosecution of violators, but shall not exceed the cost of the regulatory program authorized by this article. All fees and interest upon proceeds of fees shall be used exclusively to fund the program. Fees are nonrefundable except as may be required by law. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.110. COMPLIANCE MONITORING
(a) Compliance with this article shall be monitored by the finance department. In addition, any peace officer may enforce the penal provisions of this article. The city may designate any number of additional persons to monitor compliance with this article.
(b) The department or other person designated to enforce the provisions of this article shall check the compliance of each tobacco retailer at least one time per twelvemonth period. The department may check the compliance of new permit and tobacco retailers previously found in violation of the licensing law more frequently. Nothing in this subsection shall create a right of action in any permittee or other person against the city or its agents.
(c) Compliance checks shall be conducted so as to allow the department to determine, at a minimum, if the tobacco retailer is conducting business in a manner that complies with laws regulating youth access to tobacco. When the department deems appropriate, the compliance checks shall determine compliance with other laws applicable to tobacco retailing.
18 - 19
278316.1
(d) The city shall not enforce any law establishing a minimum age for tobacco purchases or possession against a person who otherwise might be in violation of such law because of the person’s age (hereinafter “youth decoy”) if the potential violation occurs when:
(1) The youth decoy is participating in a compliance check supervised by a peace officer or a code enforcement official of the city of South Pasadena; (2) The youth decoy is acting as an agent of a person designated by the city to monitor compliance with this article;
(3) The youth decoy is participating in a compliance check funded in part, either directly or indirectly through subcontracting, by the Los Angeles County department of health and/or Pasadena health department; or (4) The youth decoy has an immunity letter from the district attorney’s office. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.)

18.111 SUSPENSION/REVOCATION OF PERMIT
(a) Suspension of Permit for Violation. In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, a tobacco retailer permit shall be suspended or revoked if any court of competent jurisdiction determines, or the department finds based on a preponderance of the evidence, after the permittee is afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard, that the permit, or any of the permittee’s agents or employees, has violated any of the requirements, conditions, or prohibitions of this article or has pleaded guilty, “no contest” or its equivalent, or admitted to a violation of any law designated in Section

18.102 of this article. A tobacco retailer or proprietor whose permit has been suspended is deemed not to have a valid tobacco retailer permit during the suspension period for purposes of this article.
(b) Tobacco Retailer Permit Suspension/Revocation.
(1) After suspension for a first violation of this article at a location within any twelve-month period, no person may engage in tobacco retailing at the location until fifteen days have passed from the date of suspension.
(2) After suspension for a second violation of this article at a location within any twenty-four-month period, no person may engage in tobacco retailing at the location until thirty days have passed from the date of suspension. (3) After suspension for a third violation of this article at a location within any thirty-six-month period, no person may engage in tobacco retailing at the location until ninety days have passed from the date of suspension.
18 - 20
278316.1
(4) After revocation for four or more violations of this article at a location within any forty-eight-month period, no new permit may issue for the location until one year has passed from the date of revocation.
(c) Appeal of Suspension/Revocation. A decision of the department to suspend or revoke a permit is appealable to the city manager and must be filed with the city clerk within ten days of mailing of the department’s decision. If such an appeal is made, it shall stay enforcement of the appealed action. An appeal to the city manager is not available for a suspension or revocation made pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.
(d) Revocation of Permit Wrongly Issued. A tobacco retailer permit shall be revoked if the department finds, after the permittee is afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard, that one or more of the bases for denial of a permit under Section 18.105 existed at the time application was made or at any time before the permit issued. The decision by the department shall be the final decision of the city. Such a revocation shall be without prejudice to the filing of a new permit application. (e) Notice of City Manager Decision. The decision of the city manager (or of the department in the event of revocation pursuant to Section 18.111(d)) shall be mailed to the permittee within five working days of the hearing and shall be final. The decision shall make reference to the time limitation to file a writ to challenge the decision in Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.)

18.112 TOBACCO RETAILING WITHOUT A PERMIT
(a) In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, if a court of competent jurisdiction determines, or the department finds based on a preponderance of evidence, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, that any person has engaged in tobacco retailing at a location without a valid tobacco retailer permit, either directly or through the person’s agents or employees, the person shall be ineligible to apply for, or to be issued, a tobacco retailing permit as follows:
(1) After a first violation of this section at a location within any sixty-month period, no new permit may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until thirty days have passed from the date of the violation.
(2) After a second violation of this section at a location within any sixty-month period, no new permit may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until ninety days have passed from the date of the violation. (3) After a third or subsequent violation of this section at a location within any sixtymonth period, no new permit may issue for the person or the location (unless 18 - 21
278316.1
ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until five years have passed from the date of the violation. (b) Tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia offered for sale or exchange in violation of this section are subject to seizure by the department or any peace officer and shall be forfeited after the permittee and any other owner of the tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia seized are given reasonable notice and an opportunity to demonstrate that the tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia were not offered for sale or exchange in violation of this article. The decision by the department may be appealed pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 18.111(c). Forfeited tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia shall be destroyed after all internal appeals have been exhausted and the time in which to seek judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 or other applicable law has expired without the filing of a writ or, if such a writ is filed, after judgment in that writ becomes final. (c) For the purposes of the civil remedies provided in this article, the following shall constitute a separate violation of this article:
(1) Each day on which any tobacco product or tobacco paraphernalia is offered for sale in violation of this article; or
(2) Each individual retail tobacco product and each individual retail item of tobacco paraphernalia that is distributed, sold, or offered for sale in violation of this article. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.)

18.113. ENFORCEMENT
(a) Violations of this article are subject to a civil action brought by the city prosecutor or the city attorney, punishable by a civil fine not less than two hundred fifty dollars and not exceeding one thousand dollars per violation.
(b) Violations of this article may, in the discretion of the city prosecutor, be prosecuted as infractions or misdemeanors when the interests of justice so require. (c) Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of this article shall also constitute a violation of this article. (d) Any violation of this article is hereby declared to be public nuisances. (e) The remedies provided by this article are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. In addition to other remedies provided by this article or by other law, any violation of this article may be remedied by a civil action brought by the city attorney, including, for example, administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings, civil or criminal code enforcement proceedings, and suits for injunctive relief. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.)

18.103. ENFORCEMENT.
18 - 22
278316.1
(a) Compliance with this article shall be monitored by the Community Development Department. The city may designate any number of additional persons to monitor compliance with this article.
(b) Violations of this article are subject to a code enforcement action brought by the city, punishable by a civil fine pursuant to Chapter 1A of this Code. (c) Violations of this article may be prosecuted as infractions or misdemeanors when the interests of justice so require.
(d) Any violation of this article is hereby declared to be a public nuisance. (e) The remedies provided by this article are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. In addition to other remedies provided by this article or by other law, any violation of this article may be remedied by a civil action brought by the city attorney, including administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings and suits for injunctive relief. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.) (f) For the purposes of the civil remedies permitted under this article and state law, each day on which a tobacco product or electronic smoking device is offered for sale in violation of this article, and each individual tobacco product or electronic smoking device that is sold, or offered for sale in violation of this article, shall constitute a separate violation of this article.

18.104. HARDSHIP EXEMPTION.
(a) An application for a hardship exemption to extend the time to comply with this article may be filed pursuant to this section.
(b) The term of any hardship exemption granted under this article shall be no longer than 12 months beyond November 20, 2022, based on the circumstances presented by such applicant.
(c) Any tobacco retailer that holds a valid tobacco retailer permit in the city and is operating as of April 22, 2022, that finds it necessary to sell tobacco products on or after November 20, 2022, may apply for one hardship exemption. A tobacco retailer must submit a complete application for a hardship exemption at any time between April 22 and June 16, 2022. Such application shall be made in writing on a form prescribed by the department and shall be accompanied by the filing fee established by resolution of the City Council. The tobacco retailer shall bear the burden of proof in establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the application of Ordinance _____, amending South Pasadena’s Municipal Code Chapter 18, to the tobacco retailer’s business is unreasonable, and will cause significant hardship to the tobacco retailer by not allowing the tobacco retailer to recover his or her investment backed expectations. The tobacco retailer applying for the exemption shall furthermore 18 - 23
278316.1
be required, in order to meet its burden of proof, to submit the documents set forth in this section.
(d) A complete application for a hardship exemption shall include the following:
(1) The tobacco retailer’s name and street address of business; (2) The address to which notice is to be mailed, at the tobacco retailer’s option, a telephone number and email address;
(3) The tobacco retailer’s signature;
(4) A declaration, under penalty of perjury, that all the information in the application is true and correct;
(5) The term of the requested extension not to exceed the maximum length of time permissible under subsection (b) of this section; (6) Documentation relevant to the information requested in subsection (e) of this section;
(7) Evidence of valid current tobacco retailer permit; and (8) The required filing fees.
(e) In determining whether to grant a hardship exemption to the tobacco retailer, and in determining the appropriate length of time that the tobacco retailer will be authorized to continue retailing, the hearing officer, or City Council on appeal by the tobacco retailer, may consider, among other factors:
(1) The percentage of the retail sales over the last three years that have been derived from tobacco products;
(2) The amount of investment in the business;
(3) The present actual and depreciated value of any business improvements dedicated to the retail sale of tobacco products; (4) The applicable Internal Revenue Service depreciation schedule or functional non-confidential equivalent;
(5) The remaining useful life of the business improvements that are dedicated to the sale of tobacco products;
(6) The remaining lease term of the business, if any;
18 - 24
278316.1
(7) The ability of the retailer to sell other products; (8) The opportunity for relocation of the business and the cost of relocation;
(9) A business plan demonstrating how long the business will need to sell tobacco products to recoup any investment backed expectations, and a plan for phasing out the sale of those products; and
(10) Relevant information submitted by City staff.
(f) The hardship exemption hearing shall be conducted by an Administrative Hearing Officer appointed by the City Manager. Written notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given at least 10 calendar days prior to the date of the hearing to the retailer by the City either by causing a copy of such notice to be delivered to the retailer personally or by mailing a copy thereof, postage prepaid, addressed to the retailer at the address shown on the hardship exemption application. (g) Within 45 days after a completed application is filed, the hearing officer shall open the hearing on the hardship exemption. The hearing officer shall receive and consider evidence presented by the retailer and City staff and shall determine whether to grant or deny the hardship exemption, and if granting the hardship exemption, the length of time that the retailer will be permitted to operate. The hearing officer shall make written findings in support of the decision. The decision of the hearing officer shall be final and conclusive, unless a timely and complete appeal is filed by the retailer with the City Clerk pursuant to subsection (h) of this Section. (h) Any decision of the hearing officer may be appealed to the City Council by the tobacco retailer by filing a complete notice of appeal with the City Clerk within 15 days after notice of the decision was mailed to the applicant. To be deemed complete, the notice of appeal shall be signed by the tobacco retailer, shall state the grounds for disagreement with the decision of the hearing officer, and shall be accompanied by the filing fee established by resolution of the City Council. (i) Failure of any person to file a timely appeal in accordance with the provisions of this section shall constitute an irrevocable waiver of the right to an administrative hearing and a final adjudication of the hardship exemption. (j) A tobacco retailer may continue to sell tobacco products while a hardship exemption application is pending before a hearing office or on appeal to the City Manager.
(k) Only those matters or issues specifically raised by the appellant in the appeal notice shall be considered in the hearing of the appeal. 18 - 25
278316.1
SECTION 4. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW. Staff is hereby directed that within three years of the effective date of the ordinance, a study session item shall be scheduled whereby the City Council can assess the impacts that the ordinance has had on local businesses.

SECTION 5. SEVERABILITY. If any portion or provision of this Ordinance or its application is deemed invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the City Council intends that such invalidity will not affect the validity of the remaining portions or provisions or their application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.

SECTION 6. CERTIFICATION AND PUBLICATION. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause this Ordinance to be published within 15 days after its passage, in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code.

SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE. Unless expressly stated otherwise as to a specific Section of this Ordinance, this Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its passage.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this __ th day of April, 2022.

Tameka J. Cook, Chief City Clerk
Michael A. Cacciotti, Mayor
ATTEST:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christina Muñoz, Deputy City Andrew L. Jared, City Attorney Clerk
18 - 26
ATTACHMENT 2
Draft Ordinance Option Two with Addition of
Councilmember Edits (includes SPMC Article VI
Chapter 18 edits)
18 - 27
278317.1
ORDINANCE NO. [_________]

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA
AMENDING CHAPTER 18, ARTICLE VI OF THE SOUTH

PASADENA CITY CODE TO PROHIBIT THE SALE OF ALL

TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND ELECTRONIC SMOKING

WHEREAS, cigarette smoking kills 40,000 Californians annually, and is the cause of more than one in four cancer deaths in California.

WHEREAS, smoking costs California $13.29 billion in annual health care expenses, $3.58 billion in Medicaid costs caused by smoking, and $10.35 billion in smoking-caused productivity losses.

WHEREAS, unless smoking rates decline, 441,000 of California youth alive today will die prematurely. California youth tobacco usage is increasing. The U.S.

Surgeon General declared youth e-cigarette use an “epidemic,” and 1 in 10 Los Angeles County high school students say they are current e-cigarette users.

WHEREAS, the City of South Pasadena recognizes that the use of tobacco products has devastating health and economic consequences.

WHEREAS, cigarette butts are the most-littered object in the world and the item most often found in beach cleanups globally. Cigarette butts contribute 18 - 28
278317.1
nonbiodegradable plastic, nicotine, heavy metals, pesticides, and other toxic substances to land and marine environments, down to the bottom of the oceans.

NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH PASADENA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

18.106. PERMIT RENEWAL AND EXPIRATION.
(a) Renewal of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit is invalid if the appropriate fee has not been timely paid in full or if the term of the permit has expired. The term of 18 - 29
278317.1
a tobacco retailer permit is one year. Each tobacco retailer shall apply for the renewal of his or her tobacco retailer permit and submit the permit fee no later than thirty days prior to expiration of the term. All new tobacco retailer permits and renewal of existing permits issued after April 22, 2022 shall be renewed only through June 30, 2023.
(b) Expiration of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit that is not timely renewed shall expire at the end of its term. To renew a permit not timely renewed pursuant to subsection (a), the proprietor must:
(1) Submit the permit fee and application renewal form; and (2) Submit a signed affidavit affirming that the proprietor:
(A) Has not sold and will not sell any tobacco product or tobacco paraphernalia after the permit expiration date and before the permit is renewed, or
(B) Has waited the appropriate ineligibility period established for tobacco retailing without a permit, as set forth in Section 18.112(a) of this article, before seeking renewal of the permit.

ARTICLE VI – TOBACCO RETAILER PERMIT PROHIBITION OF THE

RETAIL SALE OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND ELECTRONIC SMOKING

DEVICES

18.101 – DEFINITIONS.

The following words and phrases, whenever used in this article, shall have the meanings defined in this section unless the context clearly requires otherwise:
(a) “Arm’s length transaction” means a sale in good faith and for valuable consideration that reflects the fair market value in the open market between two informed and willing parties, neither of which is under any compulsion to participate in the transaction. A sale between relatives, related companies or partners, or a sale for which a significant purpose is avoiding the effect of the violations of this article is not an arm’s length transaction.
“Cigar” means any roll of tobacco other than a cigarette wrapped entirely in tobacco or any substance containing tobacco and weighing more than 4.5 pounds per thousand.
18 - 30
278317.1
“Cigar lounge” means a tobacco retailer that (1) contains an enclosed area in or attached to the tobacco retailer that is dedicated to the use of cigars, (2) does not sell any tobacco products other than cigars, and (3) only permits patrons who are the state minimum age to purchase (currently 21 years of age or older) to enter the premises.
(b) “Department” means the finance department and any agency or person designated by the department to enforce or administer the provisions of this article.
“Electronic smoking device” means any device that may be used to deliver any aerosolized or vaporized substance to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an e-cigarette, e-cigar, e-pipe, vape pen, or e-hookah.

(d) “Proprietor” means a person with an ownership or managerial interest in a business. An ownership interest shall be deemed to exist when a person has a ten percent or greater interest in the stock, assets, or income of a business other than the sole interest of security for debt. A managerial interest shall be deemed to exist when a person can or does have or share ultimate control over the day-to-day operations of a business.
(e) “Self-service display” means the open display or storage of tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia in a manner that is physically accessible in any way to the general public without the assistance of the retailer and a direct person-to-person transfer between the purchaser and the retailer. A vending machine is a form of self-service display.
“Sale” or “Sell” means any transfer, exchange, barter, gift, offer for sale, or distribution for a commercial purpose, in any manner or by any means whatsoever. (f) “Smoking” means possessing a lighted tobacco product, lighted tobacco paraphernalia, or any other lighted weed or plant (including a lighted pipe, cigar, hookah pipe, or cigarette of any kind), and means the lighting of a tobacco 18 - 31
278317.1
product, tobacco paraphernalia, or any other weed or plant (including a pipe, cigar, hookah pipe, or cigarette of any kind).
(g) “Tobacco product” means: any substance containing tobacco leaf, including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snus, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco; and any product or formulation of matter containing biologically active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be introduced into the human body, but does not include any cessation product specifically approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for use in treating nicotine or tobacco dependence. 1) any product containing, made of, or derived from tobacco or nicotine that is intended for human consumption or is likely to be consumed, whether inhaled, absorbed, or ingested by any other means, including but not limited to, a cigarette, a cigar, pipe tobacco, chewing tobacco, snuff, or snus; 2) any electronic smoking device as defined in this section and any substances that may be aerosolized or vaporized by such device, whether or not the substance contains nicotine and whether or not sold separately; or 3) any component, part, or accessory of 1) or 2), whether or not any of these contains tobacco or nicotine, including but not limited to filters, rolling papers, blunt or hemp wraps, hookahs, and pipes. “Tobacco product” does not mean drugs, devices, or combination products authorized for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as those terms are defined in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. (h) “Tobacco retailer” means any person who sells, offers for sale, or does or offers to exchange for any form of consideration, tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia. “Tobacco retailing” means the doing of any of these things.

Tobacco retailing without a valid tobacco retailer permit is a nuisance as a matter of 18 - 32
278317.1
law. It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or offer for sale a tobacco product in the city unless authorized by this chapter.
(b) Lawful Business Operation. In the course of tobacco retailing or in the operation of the business or maintenance of the location for which a permit issued, it shall be a violation of this article for a permittee, or any of the permittee’s agents or employees, to violate any local, state, or federal law applicable to tobacco products or tobacco retailing.
(c) Display of Permit. Each tobacco retailer permit shall be prominently displayed in a publicly visible location at the permitted location. (d) Positive Identification Required. No person engaged in tobacco retailing shall sell or transfer a tobacco product to another person who appears to be under the age of twenty-seven years without first examining the identification of the recipient to confirm that the recipient is at least the minimum age under state law to purchase and possess the tobacco product.
(e) Minimum Age for Persons Selling Tobacco. No person who is younger than the minimum age established by state law for the purchase or possession of tobacco products shall engage in tobacco retailing.
(f) Self-Service Displays Prohibited. Tobacco retailing by means of a selfservice display is prohibited. (g) False and Misleading Advertising Prohibited. A tobacco retailer or proprietor without a valid tobacco retailer permit, including, for example, a person whose permit has been suspended or revoked:
(1) Shall keep all tobacco products out of public view. The public display of tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia in violation of this provision shall constitute tobacco retailing without a permit under Section 18.112; and
(2) Shall not display any advertisement relating to tobacco products or tobacco paraphernalia that promotes the sale or distribution of such products from the tobacco retailer’s location or that could lead a reasonable consumer to believe that such products can be obtained at that location. (Ord. No. 2184, § 2, 2009.)
(b) This section shall not apply to a cigar lounge that:
(1) held a valid tobacco retailer permit in the city and is operating as a cigar lounge as of April 22, 2022;
(2) does not allow the use of any tobacco products, except cigars, on the premises;
18 - 33
278317.1
(3) all cigar sales are conducted only in-person at the location licensed as of April 22, 2022;
(4) is in compliance with State law;
(5) has not expanded in size or changed its location after April 22, 2022; and
(6) has not ceased operation for more than 60 consecutive days after April 22, 2022 unless such cessation is due to unforeseeable circumstances outside the retailer’s control, such as a natural disaster or an Act of God.

18.103. LIMITS ON ELIGIBILITY FOR A TOBACCO PERMIT.
(a) No permit may issue to authorize tobacco retailing at other than a fixed location.

18.104. APPLICATION PROCEDURE
(a) Application for a tobacco retailer permit shall be submitted in the name of each proprietor proposing to conduct retail tobacco sales and shall be signed by each proprietor or an authorized agent thereof.
(b) It is the responsibility of each proprietor to be informed regarding all laws applicable to tobacco retailing, including those laws affecting the issuance of a tobacco retailer permit. No proprietor may rely on the issuance of a permit as a determination by the city that the proprietor has complied with all state and federal laws applicable to tobacco retailing. A permit issued contrary to this article, contrary to any other law, or on the basis of false or misleading information supplied by a proprietor shall be revoked pursuant to Section 18.111(d) of this article. Nothing in this article shall be construed to vest in any person obtaining and maintaining a tobacco retailer permit any status or right to act as a tobacco retailer in contravention of any provision of law. (c) All applications shall be submitted on a form supplied by the department and shall contain the following information:
(1) The name, address, and telephone number of each proprietor of the business seeking a permit;
18 - 34
278317.1
(2) The business name, address, and telephone number of the single fixed location for which a permit is sought;
(3) A single name and mailing address authorized by each proprietor to receive all communications and notices (the “authorized address”) required by, authorized by, or convenient to the enforcement of this article. If an authorized address is not supplied, each proprietor shall be understood to consent to the provision of notice at the business address specified in subsection (c)(2); (4) Proof that the location for which a tobacco retailer permit is sought has been issued a valid state tobacco retailer permit by the California Board of Equalization;
(5) Whether or not any proprietor or any agent of the proprietor has admitted violating, or has been found to have violated, this article and, if so, the dates and locations of all such violations within the previous five years; (6) A nonrefundable application fee, as set and as may be amended from time to time by city council resolution;
(7) Such other information as the department deems necessary for the administration or enforcement of this article as specified on the application form required by this section.
(d) A permitted tobacco retailer shall inform the department in writing of any change in the information submitted on an application for a tobacco retailer permit within ten business days of a change.
(e) All information specified in an application pursuant to this section shall be subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act (California Government Code Section 6250 et seq.) or any other applicable law, subject to the laws’ exemptions. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.105. ISSUANCE OF PERMIT.

Upon the receipt of a complete application for a tobacco retailer permit and the permit fee required by this article, the department shall issue a permit unless substantial evidence demonstrates that one or more of the following bases for denial exists:
(a) The information presented in the application is inaccurate or false. Intentionally supplying inaccurate or false information shall be a violation of this article; (b) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing at a location for which this article prohibits issuance of tobacco retailer permits. However, this subsection shall not constitute a basis for denial of a permit if the applicant provides the city with documentation demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that the applicant has acquired or is acquiring the location or business in an arm’s length transaction 18 - 35
278317.1
(c) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing for a proprietor to whom this article prohibits a permit to be issued;
(d) The application seeks authorization for tobacco retailing that is prohibited pursuant to this article (e.g., mobile vending), that is unlawful pursuant to this Code including, without limitation the zoning code, building code, and business license tax code, or that is unlawful pursuant to any other law. (Ord. No. 2184, § 2, 2009.)

18.106. PERMIT RENEWAL AND EXPIRATION.
(a) Renewal of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit is invalid if the appropriate fee has not been timely paid in full or if the term of the permit has expired. The term of a tobacco retailer permit is one year. Each tobacco retailer shall apply for the renewal of his or her tobacco retailer permit and submit the permit fee no later than thirty days prior to expiration of the term.
(b) Expiration of Permit. A tobacco retailer permit that is not timely renewed shall expire at the end of its term. To renew a permit not timely renewed pursuant to subsection (a), the proprietor must:
(1) Submit the permit fee and application renewal form; and (2) Submit a signed affidavit affirming that the proprietor:
(A) Has not sold and will not sell any tobacco product or tobacco paraphernalia after the permit expiration date and before the permit is renewed, or (B) Has waited the appropriate ineligibility period established for tobacco retailing without a permit, as set forth in Section 18.112(a) of this article, before seeking renewal of the permit. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.108. PERMITS CONVEYS A LIMITED, CONDITIONAL PRIVILEGE 18 - 36
278317.1
Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant any person obtaining and maintaining a tobacco retailer permit any status or right other than the limited conditional privilege to act as a tobacco retailer at the location identified on the face of the permit. For example, nothing in this article shall be construed to render inapplicable, supersede, or apply in lieu of, any other provision of applicable law, including, but not limited to, any provision of this Code including without limitation the zoning code, building codes, and business license tax code, or any condition or limitation on smoking in an enclosed place of employment pursuant to California Labor Code Section 6404.5. For example, obtaining a tobacco retailer permit does not make the retailer a “retail or wholesale tobacco shop” for the purposes of California Labor Code Section 6404.5. (Ord. No. 2258, § 24, 2013.)

18.109. FEE FOR PERMIT.

18.110. COMPLIANCE MONITORING
(a) Compliance with this article shall be monitored by the finance department. In addition, any peace officer may enforce the penal provisions of this article. The city may designate any number of additional persons to monitor compliance with this article.
(b) The department or other person designated to enforce the provisions of this article shall check the compliance of each tobacco retailer at least one time per twelvemonth period. The department may check the compliance of new permit and tobacco retailers previously found in violation of the licensing law more frequently. Nothing in this subsection shall create a right of action in any permittee or other person against the city or its agents.
(c) Compliance checks shall be conducted so as to allow the department to determine, at a minimum, if the tobacco retailer is conducting business in a manner that complies with laws regulating youth access to tobacco. When the department deems appropriate, the compliance checks shall determine compliance with other laws applicable to tobacco retailing.
18 - 37
278317.1
(d) The city shall not enforce any law establishing a minimum age for tobacco purchases or possession against a person who otherwise might be in violation of such law because of the person’s age (hereinafter “youth decoy”) if the potential violation occurs when:
(1) The youth decoy is participating in a compliance check supervised by a peace officer or a code enforcement official of the city of South Pasadena; (2) The youth decoy is acting as an agent of a person designated by the city to monitor compliance with this article;
(3) The youth decoy is participating in a compliance check funded in part, either directly or indirectly through subcontracting, by the Los Angeles County department of health and/or Pasadena health department; or (4) The youth decoy has an immunity letter from the district attorney’s office. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.)

18.102 of this article. A tobacco retailer or proprietor whose permit has been suspended is deemed not to have a valid tobacco retailer permit during the suspension period for purposes of this article.
(b) Tobacco Retailer Permit Suspension/Revocation.
(1) After suspension for a first violation of this article at a location within any twelve-month period, no person may engage in tobacco retailing at the location until fifteen days have passed from the date of suspension.
(2) After suspension for a second violation of this article at a location within any twenty-four-month period, no person may engage in tobacco retailing at the location until thirty days have passed from the date of suspension. (3) After suspension for a third violation of this article at a location within any thirty-six-month period, no person may engage in tobacco retailing at the location until ninety days have passed from the date of suspension.
18 - 38
278317.1
(4) After revocation for four or more violations of this article at a location within any forty-eight-month period, no new permit may issue for the location until one year has passed from the date of revocation.
(c) Appeal of Suspension/Revocation. A decision of the department to suspend or revoke a permit is appealable to the city manager and must be filed with the city clerk within ten days of mailing of the department’s decision. If such an appeal is made, it shall stay enforcement of the appealed action. An appeal to the city manager is not available for a suspension or revocation made pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.
(d) Revocation of Permit Wrongly Issued. A tobacco retailer permit shall be revoked if the department finds, after the permittee is afforded notice and an opportunity to be heard, that one or more of the bases for denial of a permit under Section 18.105 existed at the time application was made or at any time before the permit issued. The decision by the department shall be the final decision of the city. Such a revocation shall be without prejudice to the filing of a new permit application. (e) Notice of City Manager Decision. The decision of the city manager (or of the department in the event of revocation pursuant to Section 18.111(d)) shall be mailed to the permittee within five working days of the hearing and shall be final. The decision shall make reference to the time limitation to file a writ to challenge the decision in Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.)

18.112 TOBACCO RETAILING WITHOUT A PERMIT
(a) In addition to any other penalty authorized by law, if a court of competent jurisdiction determines, or the department finds based on a preponderance of evidence, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, that any person has engaged in tobacco retailing at a location without a valid tobacco retailer permit, either directly or through the person’s agents or employees, the person shall be ineligible to apply for, or to be issued, a tobacco retailing permit as follows:
(1) After a first violation of this section at a location within any sixty-month period, no new permit may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until thirty days have passed from the date of the violation.
(2) After a second violation of this section at a location within any sixty-month period, no new permit may issue for the person or the location (unless ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until ninety days have passed from the date of the violation. (3) After a third or subsequent violation of this section at a location within any sixtymonth period, no new permit may issue for the person or the location (unless 18 - 39
278317.1
ownership of the business at the location has been transferred in an arm’s length transaction), until five years have passed from the date of the violation. (b) Tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia offered for sale or exchange in violation of this section are subject to seizure by the department or any peace officer and shall be forfeited after the permittee and any other owner of the tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia seized are given reasonable notice and an opportunity to demonstrate that the tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia were not offered for sale or exchange in violation of this article. The decision by the department may be appealed pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 18.111(c). Forfeited tobacco products and tobacco paraphernalia shall be destroyed after all internal appeals have been exhausted and the time in which to seek judicial review pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 or other applicable law has expired without the filing of a writ or, if such a writ is filed, after judgment in that writ becomes final. (c) For the purposes of the civil remedies provided in this article, the following shall constitute a separate violation of this article:
(1) Each day on which any tobacco product or tobacco paraphernalia is offered for sale in violation of this article; or
(2) Each individual retail tobacco product and each individual retail item of tobacco paraphernalia that is distributed, sold, or offered for sale in violation of this article. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.)

18.103. ENFORCEMENT.
18 - 40
278317.1
(a) Compliance with this article shall be monitored by the Community Development Department. The city may designate any number of additional persons to monitor compliance with this article.
(b) Violations of this article are subject to a code enforcement action brought by the city, punishable by a civil fine pursuant to Chapter 1A of this Code. (c) Violations of this article may be prosecuted as infractions or misdemeanors when the interests of justice so require.
(d) Any violation of this article is hereby declared to be a public nuisance. (e) The remedies provided by this article are cumulative and in addition to any other remedies available at law or in equity. In addition to other remedies provided by this article or by other law, any violation of this article may be remedied by a civil action brought by the city attorney, including administrative or judicial nuisance abatement proceedings and suits for injunctive relief. (Ord. No. 2258, § 25, 2013.) (f) For the purposes of the civil remedies permitted under this article and state law, each day on which a tobacco product or electronic smoking device is offered for sale in violation of this article, and each individual tobacco product or electronic smoking device that is sold, or offered for sale in violation of this article, shall constitute a separate violation of this article.

18.104. HARDSHIP EXEMPTION.
(a) An application for a hardship exemption to extend the time to comply with this article may be filed pursuant to this section.
(b) The term of any hardship exemption granted under this article shall be no longer than 12 months beyond June 30, 2023, based on the circumstances presented by such applicant.
(c) Any tobacco retailer that holds a valid tobacco retailer permit in the city and is operating as of April 22, 2022, that finds it necessary to sell tobacco products on or after June 30, 2023, may apply for one hardship exemption. A tobacco retailer must submit a complete application for a hardship exemption at any time between April 22, 2022 and September 30, 2022. Such application shall be made in writing on a form prescribed by the department and shall be accompanied by the filing fee established by resolution of the City Council. The tobacco retailer shall bear the burden of proof in establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the application of Ordinance _____, amending South Pasadena’s Municipal Code Chapter 18, to the tobacco retailer’s business is unreasonable, and will cause significant hardship to the tobacco retailer by not allowing the tobacco retailer to recover his or her investment backed expectations. The tobacco retailer applying for the exemption shall furthermore be 18 - 41
278317.1
required, in order to meet its burden of proof, to submit the documents set forth in this section.
(d) A complete application for a hardship exemption shall include the following:
(1) The tobacco retailer’s name and street address of business; (2) The address to which notice is to be mailed, at the tobacco retailer’s option, a telephone number and email address;
(3) The tobacco retailer’s signature;
(4) A declaration, under penalty of perjury, that all the information in the application is true and correct;
(5) The term of the requested extension not to exceed the maximum length of time permissible under subsection (b) of this section; (6) Documentation relevant to the information requested in subsection (e) of this section;
(7) Evidence of valid current tobacco retailer permit; and (8) The required filing fees.
(e) In determining whether to grant a hardship exemption to the tobacco retailer, and in determining the appropriate length of time that the tobacco retailer will be authorized to continue retailing, the hearing officer, or City Council on appeal by the tobacco retailer, may consider, among other factors:
(1) The percentage of the retail sales over the last three years that have been derived from tobacco products;
(2) The amount of investment in the business;
(3) The present actual and depreciated value of any business improvements dedicated to the retail sale of tobacco products; (4) The applicable Internal Revenue Service depreciation schedule or functional non-confidential equivalent;
(5) The remaining useful life of the business improvements that are dedicated to the sale of tobacco products;
(6) The remaining lease term of the business, if any;
18 - 42
278317.1
(7) The ability of the retailer to sell other products; (8) The opportunity for relocation of the business and the cost of relocation;
(9) A business plan demonstrating how long the business will need to sell tobacco products to recoup any investment backed expectations, and a plan for phasing out the sale of those products.; and (10) Relevant information submitted by City staff.
(f) The hardship exemption hearing shall be conducted by an Administrative Hearing Officer appointed by the City Manager. Written notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given at least 10 calendar days prior to the date of the hearing to the retailer by the City either by causing a copy of such notice to be delivered to the retailer personally or by mailing a copy thereof, postage prepaid, addressed to the retailer at the address shown on the hardship exemption application. (g) Within 45 days after a completed application is filed, the hearing officer shall open the hearing on the hardship exemption. The hearing officer shall receive and consider evidence presented by the retailer and City staff and shall determine whether to grant or deny the hardship exemption, and if granting the hardship exemption, the length of time that the retailer will be permitted to operate. The hearing officer shall make written findings in support of the decision. The decision of the hearing officer shall be final and conclusive, unless a timely and complete appeal is filed by the retailer with the City Clerk pursuant to subsection (h) of this Section. (h) Any decision of the hearing officer may be appealed to the City Council by the tobacco retailer by filing a complete notice of appeal with the City Clerk within 15 days after notice of the decision was mailed to the applicant. To be deemed complete, the notice of appeal shall be signed by the tobacco retailer, shall state the grounds for disagreement with the decision of the hearing officer, and shall be accompanied by the filing fee established by resolution of the City Council. (i) Failure of any person to file a timely appeal in accordance with the provisions of this section shall constitute an irrevocable waiver of the right to an administrative hearing and a final adjudication of the hardship exemption. (j) A tobacco retailer may continue to sell tobacco products while a hardship exemption application is pending before a hearing office or on appeal to the City Manager.
(k) Only those matters or issues specifically raised by the appellant in the appeal notice shall be considered in the hearing of the appeal. 18 - 43
278317.1
SECTION 4. CITY COUNCIL REVIEW. Staff is hereby directed that within three years of the effective date of the ordinance, a study session item shall be scheduled whereby the City Council can assess the impacts that the ordinance has had on local businesses.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this ___ th day of April, 2022.

Tameka J. Cook, Chief City Clerk
Michael A. Cacciotti, Mayor
ATTEST:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christina Muñoz, Deputy City Andrew L. Jared, City Attorney Clerk
18 - 44
ATTACHMENT 3
CDC Fast Facts
18 - 45
18 - 46
18 - 47
18 - 48
ATTACHMENT 4
Findings from the California Tobacco Program Media
Campaign Evaluation Endgame Questions
18 - 49
Findings from the
California Tobacco Control Program
Media Campaign Evaluation
Endgame Questions
Data request for South Pasadena
9/10/2021
18 - 50
Methods
• The California Tobacco Control Program’s (CTCP) Media Campaign Evaluation Survey is a panel, non-probability-based online survey conducted monthly
• Monthly sample sizes include about 3,000 Californians and 1,500 people in the rest of the United States (US), to compare Californians who are exposed to CTCP’s campaigns with those living outside of California, who have not been exposed
• Data presented in these slides are for California residents only • Sample size was sufficient enough to provide breakouts for Los Angeles County residents • Respondents are between 18-55 years old
• The survey asks respondents about their attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge related to tobacco use and policies, and awareness, recall, and opinions of California’s tobacco media campaigns • Results presented in subsequent slides contain percentages pooled by year and weighted to be representative of both the California and Los Angeles County residents between ages 18 and 55 • Data were collected between August 14, 2019 and April 23, 2021 • All slides with significant trend over time include p-values (p-value considered significant if p < .05)
• Due to small sample size, data on Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and multiracial (two or more races) respondents are combined in the presentation as “other”
• Since the sample was sufficient, we also provide data on ethnic Chinese respondents 18 - 51
Percentage of respondents who
agreed/strongly agreed with the following
statement: “Cigarette sales should be phased
out completely over the next 5 years.”
18 - 52
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “Cigarette sales should be phased out completely over the next 5 years.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Cigarette Sales to be Phased Out Completely Over the Next 5 Years among non-Hispanic Whites by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 62.2% 65.1% 66.3%71.1% 71.3%

69.5%

62.6%

67.1%

68.2%

71.4%

73.6%

72.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
White NH, California Rest of Calfornia White NH, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 53
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “Cigarette sales should be phased out completely over the next 5 years.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Cigarette Sales to be Phased Out Completely Over the Next 5 Years among Hispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs.

Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 71.1% 70.3% 65.6%

66.0%

68.2%

70.0%

71.9%

74.1%

74.3%

66.4%

69.7%

68.3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Hispanic, California Rest of Calfornia* Hispanic, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 54
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “Cigarette sales should be phased out completely over the next 5 years.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Cigarette Sales to be Phased Out Completely Over the Next 5 Years among Black non-Hispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 71.5% 71.4% 71.0% 67.4% 68.0% 68.9%

68.2%

66.0%

71.3%

69.2%

72.1%

70.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Black NH, California Rest of Calfornia Black NH, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 55
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “Cigarette sales should be phased out completely over the next 5 years.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Cigarette Sales to be Phased Out Completely Over the Next 5 Years among Asians by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs.

Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 71.7% 74.4%

77.5%

66.8%

67.9%

66.4%

71.1%

75.5%

68.7%

67.6%

70.9%

71.6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Asian, California Rest of Calfornia Asian, LA County* Rest of LA County 18 - 56
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “Cigarette sales should be phased out completely over the next 5 years.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Cigarette Sales to be Phased Out Completely Over the Next 5 Years among Chinese California Residents and Chinese Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 69.0%74.9%

77.1%

67.6%

68.6%

67.7%

69.9%

75.1%

71.5%

69.0%

71.4%

70.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Chinese, California Rest of Calfornia Chinese, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 57
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. “Other” combines Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and multiracial (two or more races) respondents due small sample sizes. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “Cigarette sales should be phased out completely over the next 5 years.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Cigarette Sales to be Phased Out Completely Over the Next 5 Years among Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Multiracial (Other) California and Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 59.3%

63.7%

67.8%

66.4%

69.1%

68.4%

73.9%

75.5%

62.2%

69.0%

71.6%

71.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Other, California Rest of Calfornia Other, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 58
Percentage of respondents who
agreed/strongly agreed with the following
statement: “The sale of products that contain
nicotine should not be allowed, except for
aids that help smokers quit, such as nicotine
gum and patches.”
18 - 59
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of products that contain nicotine should not be allowed, except for aids that help smokers quit, such as nicotine gum and patches.” Rest-of-California respondents include nonLos Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Restriction of Sale of Nicotine Products (Except Nicotine Replacement Therapy) among non-Hispanic Whites by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 59.3%64.0% 63.9%69.6%72.3% 69.4% 60.0%66.2% 69.7% 72.1% 74.9% 73.8% 0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
White NH, California* Rest of Calfornia White NH, LA County* Rest of LA County 18 - 60
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of products that contain nicotine should not be allowed, except for aids that help smokers quit, such as nicotine gum and patches.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Restriction of Sale of Nicotine Products (Except Nicotine Replacement Therapy) among Hispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 69.3% 71.1% 66.8% 63.4%68.0% 67.9%73.8% 75.2%

75.2%

64.3%

69.9%

70.3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Hispanic, California Rest of Calfornia* Hispanic, LA County Rest of LA County* 18 - 61
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of products that contain nicotine should not be allowed, except for aids that help smokers quit, such as nicotine gum and patches.” Rest-of-California respondents include nonLos Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Restriction of Sale of Nicotine Products (Except Nicotine Replacement Therapy) among Black non-Hispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 73.1% 70.8% 67.2% 65.2%69.2% 67.5% 64.7%69.6%76.4% 69.3% 72.5% 72.2% 0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Black NH, California Rest of Calfornia* Black NH, LA County* Rest of LA County 18 - 62
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of products that contain nicotine should not be allowed, except for aids that help smokers quit, such as nicotine gum and patches.” Rest-of-California respondents include nonLos Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Restriction of Sale of Nicotine Products (Except Nicotine Replacement Therapy) among Asians by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 69.8%76.3% 76.5% 64.8%67.8%

65.5%

70.9%

76.6%

68.6%

69.3%

71.5%

73.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Asian, California Rest of Calfornia* Asian, LA County* Rest of LA County 18 - 63
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of products that contain nicotine should not be allowed, except for aids that help smokers quit, such as nicotine gum and patches.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Restriction of Sale of Nicotine Products (Except Nicotine Replacement Therapy) among Chinese California Residents and Chinese Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 76.1% 76.4%

79.7%

64.9%

68.7%

67.6%

66.5%

74.7%

71.5%

69.1%

72.1%

72.6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Chinese, California Rest of Calfornia* Chinese, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 64
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. “Other” combines Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and multiracial (two or more races) respondents due small sample sizes. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of products that contain nicotine should not be allowed, except for aids that help smokers quit, such as nicotine gum and patches.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Restriction of Sale of Nicotine Products (Except Nicotine Replacement Therapy) among Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Multiracial (Other) California and Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 58.6%

62.5%

65.7%

66.4%

69.4%

67.5%

65.5%

72.2%

61.7%

69.0%

72.3%

72.6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Other, California Rest of Calfornia* Other, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 65
Percentage of respondents who
agreed/strongly agreed with the following
statement: “I’d support regulation to ban or
restrict sale of flavored tobacco products,
including e-cigarette and vape products.”
18 - 66
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “I’d support regulation to ban or restrict sale of flavored tobacco products, including e-cigarette and vape products.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Wav es 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Regulation to Ban or Restrict Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products among non-Hispanic Whites by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 71.6% 73.6% 72.6% 76.1% 77.2% 73.7%

74.0%

76.3%

74.1%

77.7%

77.9%

77.4%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
White NH, California Rest of Calfornia White NH, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 67
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “I’d support regulation to ban or restrict sale of flavored tobacco products, including e-cigarette and vape products.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. Source:

California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Regulation to Ban or Restrict Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products among Hispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs.

Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 74.6% 76.1%

70.6%

74.2%

75.8%

75.4%

78.0%

77.2%

77.7%

75.4%

77.5%

75.3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Hispanic, California Rest of Calfornia Hispanic, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 68
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “I’d support regulation to ban or restrict sale of flavored tobacco products, including e-cigarette and vape products.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Wav es 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Regulation to Ban or Restrict Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products among Black non-Hispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 75.1% 74.3% 74.0% 74.0% 76.0%

73.5%

67.9%

70.0%

77.4%

75.9%

78.0%

76.4%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Black NH, California Rest of Calfornia Black NH, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 69
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “I’d support regulation to ban or restrict sale of flavored tobacco products, including e-cigarette and vape products.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Wav es 1-

23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Regulation to Ban or Restrict Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products among Asians by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs.

Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 80.6% 81.5%

82.1%

73.1%

74.8%

71.7%

81.6%

83.1%

75.7%

76.3%

77.3%

76.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Asian, California Rest of Calfornia* Asian, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 70
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “I’d support regulation to ban or restrict sale of flavored tobacco products, including e-cigarette and vape products.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. Source:

California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Regulation to Ban or Restrict Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products among Chinese California Residents and Chinese Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 82.4% 83.3%

84.3%

73.8%

75.4%

72.7%

84.9%

83.4%

78.8%

76.0%

77.0%

76.2%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Chinese, California Rest of Calfornia Chinese, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 71
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. “Other” combines Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and multiracial (two or more races) respondents due small sample sizes. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “I’d support regulation to ban or restrict sale of flavored tobacco products, including e-cigarette and vape products.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Wav es 1-

23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Regulation to Ban or Restrict Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products among Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Multiracial (Other) California and Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 66.3%

72.9%

71.1%

74.5%

76.0%

73.5%

76.8%

79.9%

73.2%

76.7%

77.4%

76.4%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Other, California Rest of Calfornia Other, LA County Rest of LA County 18 - 72
Percentage of respondents who
agreed/strongly agreed with the following
statement: “The sale of menthol cigarettes
should not be allowed.”
18 - 73
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of menthol cigarettes should not be allowed.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Ending the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes among non-Hispanic Whites by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 53.4%

59.9%

62.4%

68.1%

69.3%

67.6%

57.8%

66.2%

63.5%

64.7%

72.1%

70.6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
White NH, California* Rest of Calfornia White NH, LA County* Rest of LA County* 18 - 74
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of menthol cigarettes should not be allowed.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Ending the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes among Hispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 67.4%

68.3%

63.3%

59.5%

64.3%

66.5%

67.3%

71.9%

70.9%

61.7%

67.6%

67.1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Hispanic, California Rest of Calfornia* Hispanic, LA County Rest of LA County* 18 - 75
Notes. NH = Non-Hispanic. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of menthol cigarettes should not be allowed.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Ending the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes among Black nonHispanics by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 72.1%

68.2%

72.4%

61.8%

66.4%

65.7%

65.3%

69.1%

74.1%

63.9%

69.6%

68.3%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Black NH, California Rest of Calfornia* Black NH, LA County Rest of LA County* 18 - 76
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of menthol cigarettes should not be allowed.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Ending the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes among Asians by California and Los Angeles County Residency vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 69.3%

72.8%

76.6%

61.0%

64.5%

63.5%

65.7%

74.5%

68.4%

63.7%

68.6%

68.8%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Asian, California* Rest of Calfornia* Asian, LA County* Rest of LA County* 18 - 77
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of menthol cigarettes should not be allowed.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Ending the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes among Chinese California Residents and Chinese Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 66.7%

72.6%

75.9%

62.1%

65.4%

65.0%

61.0%

72.3%

66.9%

64.3%

69.4%

68.9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Chinese, California* Rest of Calfornia* Chinese, LA County Rest of LA County* 18 - 78
Notes. LA = Los Angeles. “Other” combines Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and multiracial (two or more races) respondents due small sample sizes. Percentage of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with the following statement: “The sale of menthol cigarettes should not be allowed.” Rest-of-California respondents include non-Los Angeles County residents. *p for trend < .05. Source: California Tobacco Control Program Media Evaluation Survey, conducted by Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International, Waves 1-23. Data collected from 8/14/2019-4/23/2021.

Support for Ending the Sale of Menthol Cigarettes among Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Multiracial (Other) California and Los Angeles County Residents vs. Remaining Racial/Ethnic Groups, 2019-2021 54.1%61.0% 58.0%62.6%66.0% 65.8% 61.6%66.9% 67.9% 64.1%69.6%

68.8%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2019 2020 2021
% Agree or Strongly Agree
Year
Other, California Rest of Calfornia* Other, LA County Rest of LA County* 18 - 79
ATTACHMENT 5
Ordinance 2184
18 - 80
18 - 81
18 - 82
18 - 83
18 - 84
18 - 85
18 - 86
18 - 87
18 - 88
18 - 89
18 - 90
18 - 91
18 - 92
18 - 93
18 - 94
ATTACHMENT 6
Not for Sale: The State Authority to End Cigarette Sales 18 - 95
† ††
†
18 - 96
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 69
forms of cancer, and reproductive issues.2 Additionally, the economic impact of smoking is enormous, approaching $300 billion annually.3 Smoking causes $150 billion per year in lost productivity and at least $130 billion per year in healthcare costs.4 While policy interventions such as smoke-free laws and cigarette taxes have reduced the prevalence of smoking, the risk of dying from cigarette smoking has increased over the last fifty years in the United States.'' One concern is the continuing problem of underage and young adult smoking. Each day 3,200 adolescents try smoking for the first time .6 An additional 2,100 adolescents will become daily smokers.7 While adolescent smoking rates declined from 1997-2003, the decline has subsequently slowed, stalling among certain subpopulations.8 Also alarming is the phenomenon of disproportionate tobaccorelated health effects among minority subpopulations.9 While overall smoking rates have declined in recent years, health disparities related to tobacco use have increased.10 Racial and ethnic minorities, particularly African Americans and certain Native American populations, bear a disproportionate burden of tobacco-related disease.11 For example, African American men have higher rates of

2. See id.

3. See The Health Consequences of Smoking-50 Years of Progress: A &port of the Surgeon General, U.S. DEr'T OF HEALTH &HUMAN SERVS., https://www.surgeongener al.gov/library/ reports/50-years-of-progress/fact-sheet.html [https:// perma.cc/M A7KGHBT] (last visited.June 21, 2018).

4. See id.

5. See id.

6. See Youth and Tobacco Use, CTRS. FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION, https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/youth_data/ tobacco_us e/index.htm [https:/ /perma.cc/3V2Y-2G5E] (last updated Sept. 20, 2017).

7. See id.

8. See Cigarette Use Among High School Students-United States 1991-2009, CTRS.

FORDISEASECONTROL&PREVENTION, https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr html/mm5926al.htm [https:/ /perma.cc/3DQ9-9MNR] (last updated.July 9, 2010) (noting that after declines from the late 1990s to 2003, current cigarette use remained stable from 2003--2009 among male students overall, white students overall, white male students, Hispanic female students, Hispanic male students, and eleventh and twelfth grade students).

9. See Tobacco-Related Disparities, CTRS. FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION, h ttps://www.cdc.gov/ tobacco/ disparities/ index.htm [https:/ / perma.cc/S38R-B3 CK] (last updated Dec. 1, 2016).

10. See id.

11. See Wendy Max et al., The Disproportionate Cost of Srnokingfor African Americans in California, AM. J. PUB. HEALTH,Jan. 2010, at 152-58. 18 - 97
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 70 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
smoking-attributable lung cancer than any other group.12 In addition, multiple studies have found that lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals are 1.5 to 2.5 times more likely to smoke than their non-LGBT counter par ts.13 Such statistics are especially disturbing given that racial and sexual minorities are generally lesslikely to accesstobacco cessation treatments and health care services.14
Strikingly, this death and disease along with the associated economic costs are preventable. In fact, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has characterized the reduction of tobacco use as a public health priority, or "Winnable Battle."Fi In other words, a significant progress can be made in a relatively short time, thus meriting continued investment in innovative policy interventions by national, state, and local governmentsY' While the federal government has enacted legislation in recent years, 17 most of the regulation of tobacco products occurs at the state and local levels.18 With congressional paralysis and recent executive actions ,19 it seems likely that state and local governments will continue to drive most tobacco control policy.20

12. See id.

13. See TRUTH INITIATIVE ET AL., ACHIE\1NG HEALTH EQUI1Y IN TOBACCO CONTROL 1, 12 (2015), https:// truthinitiative.org/sites/default/files/Achieving% 20Health%20Equity%20in%20Tabacco%20Control%20-%20Version%201.pdf [ht tps:// perma.cc/9NYA-GDMR].

14. See id. at 5.

15. See Winnable Battles, CTRS. FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION, https://www.cdc.gov/winnablebattles/ report/ tobacco.html [https:// perma.cc/A G9LHH6B] (last updated Dec. 14, 2017).

16. See id.

17. See, e.g., Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, Pub.

L. No. 111-31, 123 Stat. 1776 (2009) (codified at 21 U.S.C. § 387a (2012)).

18. See, e.g., Sam Schaust, Plymouth Becomes Fourth MN City to Raise Tobacco Sales Age to 21, TWIN CITES Bus. (Nov. 30, 2017), http:/ /tcbmag.com/news/articles/2017 / november/ plymouth-becomes-fourth-mn-city-to-raise-tobacco-s [https:// perma.c c/ GYF5-D8 Jl.

19. See, e.g., Exec. Order No. 13,771, 82 Fed. Reg. 9,339 (Jan. 30, 2017) (establishing a federal policy requiring that two regulations be identified for elimination for each new regulation issued).

20. See Scott Gottlieb, &marks by Dr. Gottlieb on New Strategies for Tobacco Policy and Therapeutic Nicotine & placement, U.S. FOOD & DRUG AoMIN. (Dec. 12, 2017), https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Speeches/ucm588661.htm [https:// perma.cc/ JV7ULGC7]. 18 - 98
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM ''
2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 71
Given the overwhelming evidence of harm to individual health caused by tobacco use, as well as the impact on health care costs and the economy, public health advocates are looking for additional policy interventions to further reduce the toll of disease and death from smokin g.21 The biggest public health gains may be realized by focusing policy interventions on reducing access to the most harmful tobacco produ cts.22
Cigarettes are the most harmful tobacco product.23 The 2014 Surgeon General's report, The Health Consequences of Smoking-50 Years of Progress,24 includes two key conclusions related to combusted tobacco products, their role in the tobacco epidemic, and the potential for greater restrictions on the sale of these products on improving public health. First, "[t] he burden of death and disease from tobacco use in the United States is overwhelmingly caused by cigarettes and other combusted tobacco products; rapid elimination of their use will dramatically reduce this burden ."2 Second, "[n]ew 'end game' strategies have been proposed with the goal of eliminating tobacco smoking. Some of these strategies may prove useful for the United States, particularly reduction of the nicotine content of tobacco products and greater restrictions on sales (including bans on entire categories of tobacco products) ."26 Preventing youth from smoking is critical to reducing tobaccorelated death and disease, given the vast majority of smokers start before the age of eigh teen ,27 and the lifetime risk of many tobaccorelated diseases is linked to the duration of smoking.28 Policies to

21. See, e.g., OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GEN., U.S. DEP'T OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVS.,THE HEALTH CONSEQUENCES OFSMOKINC50YEARS OFPROGRESS: AREPORT OF THE SURGEON GENERAL (2014), https://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/ reports/50-years-of-progress/full-report.pdf [https:/ /perma.cc/ XG-JSGC]; Institute for Global Tobacco Control, JOHNS HOPKINS UNIV., https:/ /wwwjhsph.edu/ research/centers-and-institutes/institu te-for-glo bal-tobacco-con trol/in<lex.html [https://perma.cc/7BSB-CKT3] (last visited.June 21, 2018).

22. See, e.g., Gottlieb, supra note 20.

23. SeeScott Gottlieb,&marks by Dr. Gottlieb, U.S.FOOD&DRUGAoMIN. Quly 28, 2017), https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Speeches/ucm569024.htm [https:/ /per ma.cc/D8Y6-ALGY].

24. OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GEN., supra note 21.

25. Id. at 7.

26. Id. at 13.

27. See Youth and Tobacco Use, supra note 6.

28. See Niloofar Taghizadeh, Lifetime Smoking History and Cause-Specific Mortality in a Cohort Study with 43 Years of Follow-Up, PLOS (Apr. 7, 2016), http://journals.plos.org/plosone/ article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.O153310 18 - 99
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 72 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
reduce youth access to tobacco products, especially cigarettes, may be one of the most effective means to decrease the long-term health effects of tobacco use.29
There are many existing policy interventions from all levels of government focused on reducing youth access to tobacco products.30 These efforts include establishing a minimum legal age to purchase tobacco products, restricting sales locations, increasing the minimum price, and confining the sale of certain product classes by location or type of re tailer. 31
To date, however, no jurisdiction in the United States has taken the next step and prohibited the sale of an entire class of tobacco products. This inaction is mainly due to the political challenges of adopting, implementing, and enforcing such a bold policy option . 32 Any jurisdiction pursuing such bold sales restrictions on tobacco products will need to marshal significant community education and advocacy resources, conduct careful drafting to address the legal issues laid out in this Article, and should expect vocal opposition to their efforts.33
A prohibition against the sale of the most hannful tobacco products would have the greatest potential for a significant public health impact.34 This is due to the fact that cigarettes and other combustible tobacco products cause the vast majority of illness and [https:/ /perma.cc/BJ5R-KT4P].

29. See OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GEN., supra note 21.

30. See, e.g., Paula M. Lantz, Youth Smoking Prevention Policy: Lessons Learned and Continuing Challenges, NCBI (2004), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK376 08/ [https://perma.cc/AGL5-7HDQ].

31. See id.

32. See, e.g., Lisa Kroon, Characterization of Public Opinion on the Ban of Tobacco Salesin San Francisco Pharmacies, UCSFCTR. FORTOBACCO CONTROL RES. &EDUC., https:// tobacco.ucsf.edu/ research/ characterization-public-opinion-ban-tobacco- sales-- san-francisco-pharmacies [https:/ /perma.cc/83V5-TS94] (last visited.June 21, 2018).

33. An example of the need for community education and outreach as well as vocal opposition to prohibiting the sale of all tobacco products can be found in the story of Westminster, Massachusetts. See Katharine Q. Seelye, Massachusetts Town Votes to End Bid for Tobacco Ban, N.Y. TIMES (Nov. 19, 2014), https:/ /www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20 /us/westminster-votes-to-end-bid-for-tobac coban.html [https://perma.cc/3HKA-R4AB].

34. See OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GEN., note 21, at 853 (citing ROBERT N.

PROCTOR, GOLDEN HOLOCAUST: ORIGINS OF THE CIGARETTE CATASTROPHE AND THE CASE FOR ABOLITION 556 (2012)); then citing Richard A. Daynard, Doing the Unthinkable (and Saving Millions of Lives), 18 TOBACCO CONTROL 1, 2-3 (2009) ). 18 - 100
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM ''
2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 73
death associated with tobacco produ cts.3 A less dramatic variation on this policy would be to prohibit the sale of all flavored tobacco products, including menthol flavored products.36 This approach would address the youth appeal of flavors,37 especially with regard to electronic cigarettes;38 and the disproportionate hann that menthol cigarettes inflict on African Americans, 39 women, youth, and the LGBT com munity.40 San Francisco, California, is moving in this direction: the Board of Supervisors for the city adopted a ban on the sale of flavored tobacco products that will be subject to a voter referendum in June 2018.41 Either approach could face a legal challenge, most likely under the theory that such a policy is preempted by federal law.42 However, we conclude that a welldrafted policy prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products would probably survive a federal preemption challenge in court.

This Article begins with an overview of general preemption principles.43 The focus of this Article is on the scope, and limitations, of federal preemption of state and local tobacco control laws

35. See OFFICE OF THE SURGEON GEN., supra note 21, at 7.

36. See Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, Pub. L.

No. 111-31, 123 Stat. 1799 (2009) (codified at 21 U.S.C. § 387g (2012)) (banning certain flavors from cigarettes).

37. See Charles Courtemanche et al., Influence of the Flavored Cigarette Ban on Adolescent Tobacco Use, 52 AM.J.OFPREVENTIVE MEDICINE 139 (2017).

38. See GINNAKOSTYGINA ETAL., UCSFCTR. FORTOBACCO CONTROLRES. & EDUC., FDA SHOULD PROHIBIT FLAVORS IN ALL TOBACCO PRODUCTS IN THE CURRENT RULE MAKING (2014), https://tobacco.ucsf.edu/sites/tobacco.ucsf.edu/files/ u9/FDA-comment-deeming%20rule%20flavor%20comment% 2QJune3AAA- ljy-8c hlvs81.pdf [https:/ /perma.cc/U74R-UQCD].

39. See LaTrisha Vetaw, lVhy We Have to Curb the Targeting of Menthol Tobacco Products to African-Americans, MINNPOST (Aug. 14, 2015), https://www.minnpost.co m/ community-voices/2015/ 08/why-we-have-curb-targeting-menthol-tobacco-prod ucts-african-americans [https:// perma.cc/ QH4A-FDPP].

40. See TOBACCO CONTROL LEGAL CONSORTIUM, CHICAGO'S REGULATION OF MENTHOL FLAVORED TOBACCO PRODUCTS: A CASE STUDY 1 (2016), http:/ /www.public healthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/ resources/ tclc-fs-Chicago-Regulation-of-M enthol-Case-Study-Update-2016.pdf [https://perma.cc/W9X8-2T6E].

41. See, e.g.,AngelicaLaVito, SanFrancisco,BigTobacco Setfora Showdown over Flavored Products, CNBC (Sept. 6, 2017), https://www.cnbc.com/20l7/09/06/sanfrancisco-big-tobacco-set-for-a-showdown-over-flavored-products.html [https://per ma.cc/TN8S-47S4].

42. See, e.g., U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of NewYork, 708 F.3d 428, 430 (2d Cir. 2013) (holding the local ordinance governing flavored tobacco products is not preempted by federal law).

43. See inft-a Part IL
18 - 101
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM ''
74 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
through a review of existing federal law.44 Specifically, the analysis reviews arguments for preemption that the tobacco industry is likely to use against state and local efforts to restrict or prohibit the sale of a class of tobacco products.4 The analysis also surveys the federal case law to assess the relative strength of any arguments the tobacco industry may advan ce. 46 Next, this Article considers other federal laws and legislation that could add to the preemption threat.47Lastly, this Article considers some additional obstacles local governments may face when attempting to restrict the sale of tobacco products.48

IL GENERAL PREEMPTION PRINCIPLES
Preemption is a legal principle in which a higher level of government can restrict or eliminate the authority of a lower level of government to regulate a certain issue.49 Article VI of the U.S.

Constitution provides that the laws of the United States "shall be the supreme Law of the Land." ''0 Thus, federal law prevails if there is a conflict with a state or local law.''1 Preempted laws have no force or effect.'' 2 Because local control is so integral to tobacco control, the tobacco industry and its allies have long used preemptive strategies to thwart local smoke-free laws, youth access restrictions, tobacco retailer licensing systems, advertising and promotion regulations, and similarpolicies.''3
For decades, the strongest and most innovative tobacco control policies have emerged at the local level-often after long and hardfought grassroots community efforts-before ultimately being adopted at the state or federal level.'w These grassroots campaigns

44. See infra Part III.

45. See id.

46. See id.

47. See infra Parts IV, V.

48. See infra Part VI.

49. See Cipollone v. Liggett Grp., 505 U.S. 504, 516 (1992) ("[I]t has been settled that state law that conflicts with federal law is 'without effect.'"); NAT'LPOLICY AND LEGAL ANALYSIS NETWORK TO PREVENT CHILDHOOD OBESITY (NPLAN) & PUB.

HEALTH LAW CTR., THE CONSEQUENCES OF PREEMPTION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH ADVOCACY, (2010), http:/ /www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/ resources/ nplan-fs-consequences-2010.pdf [https:/ /perma.cc/FS9A-W62N].

50. U.S. CONST. art. VI, cl. 2.

51. See Cipollone, 505 U.S. at 516.

52. See id.

53. See NPLAN & PUB. HEALTH LAw CTR., supra note 49, at 2-3.

54. See, e.g., Andrew Hyland et al., Smoke-free Air Policies: Past, Present and Future, 18 - 102
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 75
increase local awareness of tobacco control issues, build community readiness and support, and foster public debate about the need for policy change and healthy social norms.'''' A preemptive state or federal law can invalidate many local tobacco control policies that represent years of efforts at the local level.''6
When determining whether a federal law preempts a state or local law, courts examine a variety of factors, including the plain language of the law and Congressional in ten t.''7 As the United States Supreme Court explained, '"the purpose of Congress is the ultimate touchstone' in every pre-emption analysis."''8
The Supreme Court has held that an analysis to determine the scope of federal preemption begins with "the assumption that the historic police powers of the States were not to be superseded by the Federal [law] unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Co ngress."''9 Indeed, this presumption against preemption is heightened when a state orlocality seeksto exercise its police powers to protect the health and safety of its citizens, asis the case with laws restricting access to tobacco products.6°
Analyzing the scope of a preemptive statute begins with the text of the law.61 When Congress includes a legislative provision explicitly addressing preemption, there is no need to infer congressional in ten t.62 With no explicit statement of preemptive intent, courts must consider the statute as a whole to determine whether Congress intended the federal law "to occupy the legislative field, or if there is an actual conflict between state and federal law."63 "[I]f there is any ambiguity as to whether the local and federal laws can coexist, [a court] must uphold the ordinance."64
TOBACCO CONTROL 154, 154-61 (2012).

55. See NPIAN & PUB. HEALTH LAw CTR., supra note 49.

56. See id.

57. See id. at 521.

58. Id. at 542 (quoting Malone v. White Motor Corp., 435 U.S. 497, 504 (1978)).

59. Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp., 331 U.S. 218, 230 (1947).

60. See Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470,485 (1996).

61. See Cipollone v. Liggett Grp., 505 U.S. 504, 517 (1992).

62. See id.

63. Altria Grp., Inc. v. Good, 555 U.S. 70, 76-77 (2008).

64. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of New York, 708 F.3d 428, 433 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 544 U.S. 431, 449 (2005) ); N.Y. St. Rest. Ass'n v. N.Y. City Bd. of Health, 556 F.3d 114, 123 (2d Cir. 2009)). 18 - 103
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 76 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
Similar principles apply with respect to state preemption oflocal laws, although in some states there may be different presumptions based on the type of locality involved or how the state delegates policy power authority.fr' This Article will not review the scope of local authority, which varies significantly from state to state. It will also not consider state preemption of local tobacco control laws.

Instead, the focus is whether federal law preempts state or local governments from prohibiting the sale of classes of tobacco products.

III. TOBACCO CONTROL STATUTES
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
(Tobacco Control Act) 66 and the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act67 are the two main federal tobacco laws relevant to this Article's analysis. Understanding the reach of each of these federal statutes is an essential starting point for determining the scope of state and local regulatory authority.

A. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
The Tobacco Control Act provides the primary federal
regulatory system for tobacco products.68 It explicitly delineates the regulatory roles of federal, state, and local governments.69 The Tobacco Control Act contains requirements related to the distribution, manufacturing, and marketing of tobacco prod ucts.70 Some of the restrictions include requiring the buyer to show identification prior to the sale of tobacco produ cts,71 limiting tobacco sponsorship of even ts,72 prohibiting the use of flavors other

65. See, e.g., Mangold Midwest Co. v. Richfield, 274 Minn. 347,356, 143 N.W.2d 813, 819 (1966) ("[A] state law may fully occupy a particular field of legislation so that there is no room for local regulation).

66. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-31, 123Stat.1776 (2009) (codified asamended inscattered sectionsof21U.S.C. § 387 (2012)).

67. Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-92, 79 Stat. 282 (1965) (codified as amended at 15 U.S.C. §§ 1331-1340 (2012)).

68. See 21 U.S.C. § 387 (2012).

69. Id.§§ 387c, e, f-1, h, p.

70. Id. § 387.

71. Id.§387e(e).

72. Id.§ 387a-l.
18 - 104
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 77
than menthol or tobacco in cigare ttes,73 and requiring larger and more graphic warning labels.74 The law also grants the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority to regulate tobacco products, including the power to set product standards, such as tar and nicotine levels, as deemed appropriate to protect the public health.7''
However, the FDA's power is not limitless. The law's tobacco product standards section notes that the FDA is prohibited from banning certain classes of tobacco products, such as all cigarettes; all smokeless tobacco products; all cigars, excepting little cigars; all pipe tobacco; and all roll-your-own tobacco produ cts.76 Furthermore, the FDA may neither prohibit face-to-face sales of any tobacco products in a specific category of retail outlets nor establish a minimum age over eighteen for the sale of these products.77
Although the FDA's authority may be limited in some respects, state and local governments do not have the same restrictions. The Tobacco Control Act contains a specific section relating to the authority of state and local governments,78 which is divided into three provisions: the preservation clause, 79 a preemption provisio n,80 and a saving clause. 81
The preservation clause explicitly preserves state and local authority for laws and regulations that are "in addition to, or more stringent than, requirements under this subch apter." 82 Examples include laws and regulations "relating to or prohibiting the sale, distribution, possession, exposure to, access to, advertising and promotion of, or use of tobacco products by individuals of any age, information reporting to the State, or measures relating to fire safety standards for tobacco products."83 The preemption provision reserves power to the federal government for state and local requirements "relating to tobacco product standards, premarket

73. Id.§ 387g(a) (1) (A).

74. Id. § 387c(a); Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act, 21 U.S.C. § 301 (2012).

75. 21 U.S.C. § 387g (2012).

76. Id.

77. Id.§ 387f(d) (3) (A).

78. Id.§ 387p(a).

79. Id.§387p(a)(l).

80. Id.§387p(a)(2).

81. Id.§ 387p(a)(2)(B).

82. Id.§387p(a)(l).

83. Id.§ 387p(a) (1) (emphasis added).
18 - 105
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM ''
78 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
review, adulteration, misbranding, labeling, registration, good manufacturing standards, or modified risk tobacco produ cts."84 Lastly,the saving clause explicitly allowsstateandlocalgovernments toestablish requirements "relating tothe sale,distribution, possession, information reporting to the State, exposure to, access to, the advertising and promotion of, or use of, tobacco products by individuals of any age, or relating to fire safety standardsfor tobacco products."8 Collectively, these three provisions of the Tobacco Control Act give state and local governments broad authority to enact a wide range of tobacco product sales restrictions, including prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products.86
The tobacco industry is likely to use three main arguments to support its assertion that the Tobacco Control Act preempts a state or local law prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products. First, banning a class of tobacco products "constitutes a 'tobacco product standard,' authority expressly reserved to the FDA."87 Second, states and local governments cannot ban classes of tobacco products with salesregulations because the FDAis prohibited from banning classes of products.88 Third, even if states and local governments have the power to restrict the sale of a certain class of tobacco products, they are barred from completely prohibiting the sale ofsuch products.89 Based on two recent court decisions upholding local laws that restrict the sale of flavored tobacco produ cts,90 the first two arguments can be overcome with little difficulty. Both casessupport the conclusion that a state or local government sales restriction prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products is not a regulation of "tobacco product standards" under the Tobacco Control Act.91

84. Id.§ 387p(a)(2)(A).

85. Jd.§387p(a)(2)(B) (emphasisadded).

86. This issue was also discussed in two law review articles by Michael Freiberg.

See Michael Frieberg, The Minty Taste of Death: State and Local Options to Regulate Menthol in Tobacco Products, 64 CATH. U. L. REv. 949 (2015); see also Michael Freiberg, Options for State and Local Governments to Regulate Non-Cigarette Tobacco Products, 21 ANNALSHEALTHL. 407 (2012).

87. Joelle M. Lester & Stacey Younger Gagosian, Finished With Menthol: An Evidence-Based Policy Option That Will Save Lives, 45J.L. MED. &ETHICS 41, 43 (2017).

88. See id.

89. See id.

90. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of New York, 708 F.3d 428, 428 (2d Cir. 2013); Nat'! Ass'n of Tobacco Outlets v. City of Providence, C.A. No. 12-96- -ML, 2012 vVL 6128707, at *13 (D.R.I. Dec. 10, 2012).

91. See U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 428; Nat'lAss'n of Tobacco Outlets, 2012 18 - 106
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 79
The third argument will be the most challenging. Nevertheless, there is a strong argument that the Tobacco Control Act allows a state or local law to completely prohibit the sale of a class of tobacco products.

1. Tobacco Product Standards
In U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Manufacturing Co. v. City ofNewYork,the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that the Tobacco Control Act does not preempt New York City's ordinance prohibiting the sale of any flavored, non-cigarette tobacco product (except in tobacco bars).92 The court reasoned that the ordinance regulated the sale of a finished product rather than establishing a product stan dard. 93 The ordinance governed tobacco products based only on their characteristics as an end prod uct,94 not on whether the product was manufactured in a particular way or with particular ingredients?' The court of appeals further found that even if the ordinance was construed as establishing a tobacco product standard under the Tobacco Control Act, "it would not be preempted, because it also falls within that section's saving clause.

The saving clause excepts from preemption local laws that establish 'requirements relating to the sale ... of ... tobacco prod ucts."'96 The district court opinion in this case also stated that the tobacco companies' "theory-that a sales ban amounts to a manufacturing standard-is specious. How a thing is made and whether and where it can be sold are entirely different issues, in theory and as a matter of fact."97
Similarly, in NationalAss'n of Tobacco Outlets v. City ofProviden ce,98 a Rhode Island federal district court upheld the Providence ordinance prohibiting the sale of flavored non-cigarette tobacco products (except in smoking bars).99 The court held that the Tobacco Control Act's preemption provision "relates to tobacco WL 6128707, at *13.

92. See 708 F.3d 428,428.

93. See id.

94. N.Y.C., N.Y., AoMIN. CODE§ 17-715 (2013).

95. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 434-35.

96. Id. at 435.

97. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of New York, No. 09 Civ. 105ll(CM), 2011 \VL 5569431, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 15, 2011).

98. See No. 12-96---ML, 2012 vVL 6128707, at *l (D.R.I. Dec. 10, 2012).

99. See id.
18 - 107
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 80 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
product standards, not the sale and/or distribution of tobacco products."100 The court also noted that the additional saving clause of the Tobacco Control Act "reaffirms that state or local regulations related to the sale and/or distribution of tobacco products are not preempted" by the Tobacco Control Act.101 On appeal, the First Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately ruled that neither federal nor state law preempted theordinance.102
Both the New York City and Providence decisions support the conclusion that restricting, and even prohibiting, the sale of tobacco products does not implicate tobacco product standards and therefore should not be preempted by the Tobacco Control Act. The tobacco industry, however, is likely to rely on a recent Supreme Court case to assert that a sales prohibition is an impermissible evasion of the Tobacco Control Act's preemption provisions. Even so, the facts in that case are distinguishable from the question at hand.

In National Meat Association v. Harris,101 the Supreme Court held the Federal Meat Inspection Act ("FMIA")104 expressly preempted a California law prohibiting slaughterhouses from buying or selling meat from a "nonambulatory" animal.105The FMIA contains a broad preemption clause prohibiting states from imposing any "additional or different-even if non-conflicting-requirements that fall within the scope of the Act and concern a slaughterhouse's facilities or ope rations."106 The Court found that the California law was preempted because it imposed "additional or different requirements on swine slaughterhouses" "at every turn." 107
The tobacco industry relied on National Meat Association in U.S.

Smokeless Tobacco. There, the Second Circuit distinguished National Meat Association by stating that "to constitute a product standard subject to preemption, a local sales regulation must be 'something more than an incentive or motivator,' it must require manufacturers 100. Id. at *13.
101. See id.
102. Nat'! Ass'n of Tobacco Outlets, Inc. v. City of Providence, 731 F.3d 71, 85 (1st Cir. 2013).
103. 565 U.S. 452 (2012).
104. Federal Meat Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. § 601 (2012). 105. Nat'l Meat Ass'n, 565 U.S. at 468. A "nonambulatory" animal is unable to walk on its own. Id. at457.
106. 21 U.S.C. § 678 (2012); Nat'l Meat Ass'n, 565 U.S. at 459-60. 107. National Meat Ass'n, 565 U.S. at 460.
18 - 108
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 81
to alter 'the construction, components, ingredients, additives, constituents ... and properties' of their products."108 In contrast, the New York City ordinance restricting the sale of flavored tobacco products regulated only the sale of finished products based on characteristics such as flavor.109 The court further distinguished the National Meat Association decision:

The City's regulation is therefore easily distinguishable from the California statute invalidated as a manufacturing standard in National Meat Association. That law expressly prohibited the sale of meat that was not produced in
accordance with specific rules to be applied at the
slaughterhouse with respect to the kinds of animals that were, according to the state, fit for butchering-rules that were in conflict with more forgiving federal standards. To be sold in the state, meat would have to be processed in a particular way. The ordinance at issue here does not
concern itself with the mode of manufacturing, or with the ingredients that may be included in tobacco products.

Rather, it prohibits the sale of a recognized category of tobacco products, characterized by their flavor and
marketed as a distinct product. Plaintiffs' effort to
characterize the ordinance as a manufacturing standard is tantamount to describing a ban on cigarettes as a
manufacturing standard mandating that cigars be
manufactured in minimum sizes and with tobacco-leaf
rather than paper wrap pin gs_ll0
Despite this holding, tobacco companies will likely argue that the National Meat Association decision supports their view-a state or local tobacco sales restriction is merely a way to undermine the Tobacco Control Act's preemption provision. As the Court noted in National Meat Association: "[I]fthe sales ban were to avoid the FMIA's preemption clause, then any State could impose any regulation on slaughterhouses just by framing it as a ban on the sale of meat produced in whatever way the State disapproved. That would make a mockery of the FMIA's preemption provision."lll
However, the National Meat Association decision is
distinguishable from a regulation of a class of tobacco products for 108. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of New York, 708 F.3d 428, 434 (2d Cir. 2013) (internal citations omitted).
109. See id.
110. Id. at 435 n.2 (citation omitted).
111. National Meat Ass'n, 565 U.S. at 464.
18 - 109
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 82 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
several reasons. Foremost, the FMIA's preemption provision prohibits the imposition of an "additional or different requirement," which is a far broader restriction than the language of the Tobacco Control Act.112 In contrast, the Tobacco Control Act's preservation clause explicitly allowsfor state or local lawsthat are "in addition to, or more stringent than, requirements under this subchapter," including laws and regulations "relating to or prohibiting the sale" of tobacco products.m While the preemption provision in 21 U.S.C. § 387p(a) (2) (A) limits this clause, a prohibition on the sale ofa type of tobacco product should not be considered a tobacco product standard. Further, the Tobacco Control Act contains the additional saving clause that explicitly allows state and local requirements "relating to the sale" of tobacco products.114
In sum,thedecisionsin U.S. Smokeless Tobaccoand NationalMeat Ass'n support the argument that a state or local law prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products should not be deemed a "tobacco product standard" preempted by the Tobacco Control Act. Rather, like the flavored tobacco ordinances in New York and Providence, such a law regulates the sale of a particular type of tobacco product, rather than the manner in which the product is manufactured. To make it more likely that courts will reach this conclusion, laws regulating a class of tobacco products should prohibit only the products' end sale rather than specifying how such products are created.

While the New York City and Providence decisions are not binding outside of their federal circuits, they serve as persuasive authority to other courts ruling on related issues.115
112. 21 U.S.C. § 678 (2012).
113. Id.§ 387p(a)(l).
114. Id.§ 387p(a)(2)(B).
115. Although the courts in U.S. Smokeless Tobacco and National Association of Tobacco Outlets were unpersuaded by the tobacco companies' preemption arguments, these arguments are likely to recur if a state or local government restricts the sale of a class of tobacco products. These arguments include:
(1) Preemption of tobacco product standards in the Tobacco Control Act is designed to create uniformity. Brief & Special Appendix of PlaintiffsAppellants at 1, U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co., 708 F.3d 428 (2d Cir. 2013) (No. 11-5167-cv). Characterizing an ordinance as a sales ban isjust a way to undermine this uniformity and a clever drafting technique to hide the regulation of tobacco product standards. Id. at2-3.
(2) The distinction between sales and manufacturing is inconsistent with the language and structure of the Tobacco Control Act. Id. at 19. 18 - 110
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 83

2. Eliminating Certain Tobacco Products
The industry will likely raise a second argument to challenge a state or local sales prohibition: the Tobacco Control Act provision prohibiting the FDA from eliminating the sale of certain tobacco products also applies to state and local governments attempting to do the same.

As noted above, the TobaccoControl Act explicitly prohibitsthe FDA from"banning all cigarettes, allsmokelesstobacco products, all little cigars, all cigars other than little cigars, all pipe tobacco, or all roll-your-own tobacco prod ucts."116 Furthermore, one of the Tobacco Control Act's stated purposes is "to continue to permit the sale of tobacco products to adults in cortjunction with measures to ensure that they are not sold or accessible to underage purchasers."
117
In U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, tobacco companies claimed that under the Tobacco Control Act "local governments 'may not make it impossible or impracticable for adults to purchase tobacco products whose contents comply with the federal standards."'118 They further argued that such action "would undermine another express purpose of the Act-namely, 'to continue to permit the sale of tobacco products to adults."'119 The Second Circuit disagreed, finding that while the Tobacco Control Act prohibits an FDA ban against entire categories of tobacco products, the law "nowhere extend[ed] that prohibition to state and local governm en ts."120 The court noted instead that the preservation clause of the Tobacco Control Act:
expressly preserveslocalities' traditional powerto adopt any "measure relating to or prohibiting the sale" of tobacco products. That authority is limited only to the extent that a state or local regulation contravenes one of the specific (3) Under the saving clause, state and local governments may regulate when, where, how, and to whom tobacco products may be sold, but they may not make it impossible or impracticable for adults to purchase tobacco products whose contents comply with the federal standards. Id. at 37. 116. 21 U.S.C. § 387g(d) (3) (A).
117. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control and Federal Retirement Reform, Pub. L. No. 111-31, § 3(7), 123Stat. 1776, 1782 (2009). 118. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co, 708 F.3d 428 at 433 (2d Cir. 2013) (citing Brief & Special Appendix of Plaintiffs-Appellants at 37). 119. Brief and Special Appendix of Plaintiffs-Appellants at 27, U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co., 708 F.3d 428 (2d Cir. 2013) (No. 11-5167--cv) (citing 21 U.S.C. § 387 (2009)).
120. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 433.
18 - 111
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 84 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
prohibitions of the preemption clause. The only
prohibition relevant here forbids local governments to
impose "any requirement ... relating to tobacco product standards." Even then, pursuant to the saving clause, local lawsthat would otherwise fall within the preemption clause are exempted if they constitute "requirements relating to the sale ... of ... tobacco products." In other words, [the preservation clause] . . . reserves regulation at the
manufacturing stage exclusively to the federal government, but allowsstates and localities to continue to regulate sales and other consumer-related aspects of the industry in the absence of conflicting federal regulation.121
Similarly, the district court in U.S. Smokeless Tobacco held that because the preemption clause is "silent regarding sales prohibitions, it seems far more likely that prohibitions are preserved and never preempted, and therefore need never be saved."122 Based on the decision in U.S. Smokeless Tobacco and the language of the Tobacco Control Act, while the FDA is statutorily barred from banning a class of tobacco products, the limitation likely does not extend to a state or local government prohibiting the sale of cigarettes or flavored tobacco products.

3. Laws that Prohibit versus Laws that Restrict
If a court holds that a tobacco product prohibition is a restriction on the sale of tobacco products rather than a regulation of their standards, tobacco companies will still likely assert that a complete prohibition on a class of tobacco products is preempted.

This distinction arises because the preservation clause of the Tobacco Control Act applies to laws and regulations "relating to or prohibiting the sale" of tobacco products.121 However, the saving clause refers only to laws "relating to the sale" of tobacco productstheword "prohibiting" is not used again.124 The tobacco industry raised this argument in U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, but the appellate court did not resolve the issue for purposes 121. Id. at 433-34 (citations omitted) (citing 21 U.S.C. §§ 387p(a)(l), p(a)(2)(A)-(B) (2009)).
122. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of New York, No. 09 Civ. 10511 (CM), 2011 WL 5569431, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 15, 2011).
123. 21 U.S.C. § 387p(a) (1) (2012).
124. Id.§ 387p(a)(2)(B).
18 - 112
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 85
of its decision .
125 This is in part because the New York City ordinance allows the sale of flavored tobacco products in "a tobacco bar."126 At the time of the lawsuit, there were only eight tobacco bars in New York City, none of which sold flavored smokeless tobacco produ cts.127 Tobacco companies claimed that the ordinance constituted an "outright ban on the sale of flavored tobacco products"128 and could not be rescued by the Tobacco Control Act's saving clause.

The appellate court refused to consider whether the tobacco companies' interpretation of the saving clause was correct, stating that "[w]hile the sales restriction imposed by the City's ordinance is severe, it does not constitute a complete ban, asit permits the limited sale of flavored tobacco products within New York City."129 Further, the tobacco bar owners made a commercial decision not to sell flavored tobacco on their own.130
However, the appellate court also stated that the flavored tobacco ordinance "regulates a niche product, not a broad category of productssuch as cigarettes orsmokelesstobacco, and it allowsthat product to be sold within New York City, although to a limited extent."131The court thusfound NewYork City's ordinance advances the Tobacco Control Act's goal of reducing the use of harmful tobacco products, especially among young people, without impeding Congress' competing goal of keeping tobacco products generally available to ad ults.132
The district court's decision to deny the tobacco companies' request for a preliminary irtjunction presents a more favorable analysis. The Southern District of New York held that the preservation clause "plainly contemplates local regulations restricting and/or banning the sale ofsubclasses of tobacco products (such as flavored tobacco products)-it explicitly refers broadly to all 'tobacco products."'133 The court found that the preservation 125. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 435.
126. SeeN.Y.C.,N.Y.,AoMIN. CODE§ 17-715 (2013).
127. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 432.
128. Id. at 435.
129. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 435-36 (internal citation omitted). 130. Id. at 436 n.3.
131. Id. at 436; see also Freiberg, The Minty Taste of Death, supra note 86 (noting courts distinguish niche product regulation from category-wide regulation). 132. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 436.
133. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of New York, 703 F. Supp. 2d 329, 343---44 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) (internal citation omitted).
18 - 113
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 86 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
clause barred any interpretation of the Act's provis10ns "as preventing a city from 'prohibiting' (or otherwise restricting) the 'sale' of tobacco prod ucts."134
This distinction between laws "relating to" tobacco products and laws "relating to or prohibiting" the sale of tobacco productsislikely to be raised again if jurisdictions prohibit the sale of a class of tobacco produ cts.135 In response, the jurisdiction can assert that 134. Id. at 344 (internal citationomitted).
135. In appealing the district court's decision, the parties each provided their own interpretation of the language of the saving clause. These arguments may be instructive in a future case. For example, the tobacco companies made the following arguments:
(1) A saving clause should not be interpreted broadly. See Geier v. Am. Honda Motor Co., 529 U.S. 861, 870 (2000) (stating courts may not "give broad effect to saving clauses where doing so would upset the careful regulatory scheme established by federal law"); Brief and Special Appendix of Plaintiffs-Appellants at 25, U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 780 F.3d 428 (No. 11- 5167-cv).
(2) The saving clause makes clear that state or local requirements "relating to," but not prohibiting, sales of tobacco products are saved. The saving clause thus comes into play where a state or locality establishes a requirement that does not prohibit altogether the sale of a tobacco product complying with federal standards, but merely regulates where, when, or to whom such products may be sold. Reply Brief and Addendum of Plaintiffs-Appellants at 3-5, U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 780 F.3d 428 (No. 11-5167-cv), 2012 WL 2953441, at *3--5.
(3) "[U] nder noscitur a sociis [a rule of statutory construction under which the questionable meaning of a doubtful word can be derived from its association with other words], the word 'sale' should be construed consistently with the rest of the series to refer to where, when, and to whom finished tobacco products may be sold, not whether they may be sold at all." Id. at 19.

In contrast, the City of New York dissected the language of the saving clause and argued that Congress intended the phrase "related to" to include a prohibition on the sale thereof. Appellee's Brief at 28, U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 780 F.3d 428 (No. 11- 5167-cv), 2012 WL 2366520, at *28. The city further argued that:
(1) Failing to give meaning to the word "prohibiting" in the preservation clause would violate the canons of statutory construction to give effect to every clause and word of a statute. Id. at 25--26.
(2) The entire preemption clause relates to tobacco product standards and the saving clause specifies the exceptions to the preemption clause. See id. at 26--27. Thus, the exceptions in the saving clause relate only to tobacco product standards. Id. Any law that does not relate to tobacco product standards is not preempted to begin with and is expressly authorized by the preservation clause.Id.
(3) Congress understood that a "requirement relating to the sale" of tobacco 18 - 114
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 87
there is a general presumption against preemption, particularly if the police powers to protect health and safety are implicated. 136 The state or locality can also avail itself to the sweeping Tobacco Control Act provision that explicitly preserves state and local governments' authority to regulate tobacco sales.137 Although the Tobacco Control Act provides some limits on the FDA's authority, this limitation does not extend to state or local governments.

Finally, state or local governments could parse both the structure and wording of the preservation and saving clauses to argue that the saving clause refers only to tobacco product standards, whereas the preservation clause applies more broadly to any state or local law "relating to or prohibiting the sale' of tobacco products.138 Under this reading, state or local laws prohibiting the sale of a type of tobacco product are not preempted because they do not relate to tobacco product standards, and the laws are expressly authorized by the preservation clause.

B. Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act
The second key federal law that relates to tobacco control is the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA), which requires warning labels on tobacco products and advertisin g.139 The FCLAAshould not present a barrier to a state orlocal law prohibiting the sale of cigarettes orflavored tobacco products.The law, however, contains a preemption provision that historically has been problematic for certain state and local activities, and therefore, it products could potentially include a total ban. As evidence of this, the city points to the limitations on FDA authority (e.g., that the FDA may not prohibit the sale of tobacco products in face-to-face transactions in a specific category ofretail outlet). 21 U.S.C.A. 387f(d) ); id. at 35. (4) These limitations on FDA authority demonstrate that "Congress considered and understood the ramifications of unqualified authority to restrict the sale and distribution of tobacco products, yet intentionally chose not to limit the powers of states and localities in those very same areas." Id.
136. See Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr, 518 U.S. 470, 475, 485 (1996) ("In all preemption cases ... we 'start with the assumption that the historic police powers of the States were not to be superseded by the Federal Act unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress.'" (internal quotations and citations omitted)). 137. 21 U.S.C. § 387p(a) (1) (2012).
138. Id.§ 387p(a) (1) (emphasis added).
139. See Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89- 92, § 4, 79 Stat. 282,283 (codified as amended at 15 U.S.C. § 1331-41 (2012) ). 18 - 115
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 88 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
warrants a review of potential legal implications.140 While the FCLAA regulates the advertising and marketing of tobacco products, it is relevant in this context because the tobacco industry could argue that a sales prohibition is a de facto restriction on its ability to market its products. Thus far, courts have consistently distinguished allowable sales restrictions from preempted advertising and marketing restrictions.141
The FCLAA's preemption language, which was amended by the Tobacco Control Act, prohibits state and local governments from imposing any "requirement or prohibition based on smoking and health ... with respect to the advertising or promotion of any cigarettes the packages of which are labeled in conformity with the provisions of [the] chapter."142 But in 2009, after the passage in Tobacco Control Act, the restrictions were amended to allow state and local governments to impose "specific bans or restrictions on the time, place, and manner, but not the content, of the advertising or promotion of any cigare ttes."141
The amended preemption provision of the FCLAA144 was
analyzed in two recent cases. While the decisions reinforce the distinction between advertising and marketing restrictions versus sales restrictions, the industry may still argue that a sales restriction impacts its promotional activities.

In 23-34 94th St. Grocery Corp. v. New York City Board of Health, 145 the court found that New York City's resolution that requires graphic images at the point of sale to show the adverse effects of smoking was "preempted by the Labeling Act because it is a requirement 'with respect to the advertising or promotion' of cigare ttes."146 Due to the narrow scope of this decision, which reviewed local warning 140. See 15 U.S.C. § 1334. See generallyTOBACCO CONTROLLEGALCONSORTIUM, PREEMPTION: THE BIGGEST CHALLENGE TO TOBACCO CONTROL, http:/ /www.public healthlawcenter.org/sites/default/files/ resources/ tclc-fs-preemption-tobacco-con trolchallenge-2014.pdf [https:/ /perma.cc/EQA5-'.:0GN] (last visited June 21, 2018). 141. See, e.g., 23---34 94th St. Grocery Corp. v. N.Y.C. Bd. of Health, 685 F.3d 174 (2d Cir. 2012) (distinguishing advertising and marketing restrictions versus sales restrictions).
142. 15 U.S.C. § 1334(b).
143. Id.§1334(c).
144. Id.
145. 685 F.3d 174 (2d Cir. 2012).
146. Id. at 182.
18 - 116
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM ''
2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 89
requirements in light of the federal warning requirements, it seems unlikely to pose a barrier.

National Association of Tobacco Outlets v. City of Providence 47 involved a Providence ordinance that prohibited the redemption of tobacco coupons and multi-pack discounts.148 The federal district court in Rhode Island found that Providence's pricing ordinance was not preempted by FCLAA because it regulates the "time, place, and manner" of how cigarettes may be purchased in the City of Providence, rather than controlling the content of promotional or advertising materials.149 The court did focus on the time, place, and manner of how products may be purchased, versus the time, place, and manner of how products are advertised or promoted (the actual focus of the FCLAA).bo Nevertheless, this decision makes clear that the FCLAA does not pose a barrier to sales restrictions.bl IV. OTHER FEDERAL LAWS
A state or local law prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products is designed to regulate the distribution of such products but has no effect on the communicative impact. Nevertheless, tobacco companies may attempt to argue that such a law violates their First Amendment rights. A handful of cases decided after the adoption of the Tobacco Control Act have addressed whether various tobacco control laws violate the First Amen dment.1 2 Although none of these cases specifically addressed preemption arguments, they are included here forreference.

In Rf Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Food & Drug Administration/'" the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down the FDA's proposed graphic warning labels (as required 147. C.A. No. 12-96--ML, 2012 vVL 6128707, at *l (D.R.I. Dec. 10, 2012). 148. Id. at *4.
149. Id. at *11.
150. Id.
151. The First Circuit agreed that a price regulation concerns the manner of promotion and is not preempted. Nat'! Ass'n of Tobacco Outlets v. Providence, 731 F.3d 71, 81 (1st Cir. 2013).
152. This Article does not address tobacco cases decided prior to the adoption of the 2009 Tobacco Control Act, such as Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly, 533 U.S. 525 (2001) or Food & DrugAdmin. v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp., 529 U.S. 120 (2000).
153. 696 F.3d 1205 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
18 - 117
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM ''
''
''
90 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
by the Tobacco Control Act)_ i,w The court held that the warnings violate the First Amendment because the FDA could not prove that the labels directly advanced the government's goal of reducing smoking rates under the standards in Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public ServiceCommission.1:,5Although the industry successfully argued that its speech rights were violated, this case involved requirements concerning packaging, not requirements related to the sale of products.1:,
6 In Discount Tobacco City & Lottery, Inc. v. United States,1 7tobacco companies and retailers challenged the constitutionality of numerous Tobacco Control Act provisions.1 8 The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld most elements of the Tobacco Control Act.1 9 The court also found a few elements of the Tobacco Control Act unconstitutionally overbroad, such as the requirement for black and white textual advertising.160 The opinion did not discuss a state or local government's authority to adopt laws that supplement or complement the Tobacco Control Act, and the opinion therefore should not have any bearing on a state or local tobacco product sales restriction.
161
In addition to the FCLAA challenge, the plaintiffs in National Association of Tobacco Outlets v. City of Providen ce62 also argued that Providence's ordinance prohibiting the redemption of tobacco coupons and multi-pack discounts impermissibly restricted its ability to communicate with custom ers.161 The court found that this "pricing" ordinance did not violate the First Amendment because it did not prohibit the distribution of coupons nor the dissemination of 154. Id. at 1221-22; Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-31, 123 Stat. 1776 (2009) (codified as amended in scattered sections of 21 U.S.C.).
155. See R]. Reynolds, 696 F.3d at 1222 (citing Cent. Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 557 (1980)).
156. See id. at 1208.
157. 674 F.3d 509 (6th Cir. 2012).
158. See id. at 518.
159. See id. (affirming "the district court's decision to uphold the constitutionality of the color graphic and non-graphic warning label requirement, with Judge Clay dissenting on this issue").
160. See id. at 548.
161. See id. at 509.
162. C.A. No. 12-96-ML, 2012 vVL 6128707, at *l (D.R.I. Dec. 10, 2012). 163. See id. at *1-2.
18 - 118
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 91
pncmg information.164 Instead, the ordinance prohibits the "redemption of such coupons and the sale of cigarettes or tobacco products through multi-pack discounts. Therefore, the prohibited activity constitutes neither commercial speech nor expressive conduct and is not subject to First Amendment protection...." 165
Like a restriction on the sale of products at a discounted rate, a restriction on the sale of a class of tobacco products should not be subject to First Amendment protections.166
The tobacco industry might argue a tobacco product sales restriction imposed by state or local law violates the First Amendment because it limits information conveyed through product packaging. This type of argument was unsuccessful in a lawsuit challenging a prohibition on the sale of tobacco products at pharmacies in San Fran cisco.167 The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit stated that selling cigarettes "doesn't involve conduct with a significant expressive element. It doesn't even have an expressive component."168However, it is possible that the tobacco industry will raise it again. Such an argument was raised in National Association of Tobacco Outlets,where the tobacco industry argued that laws prohibiting the sale of flavored tobacco products will by necessity limit the companies' First Amendment rights to communicate the infonnation normally conveyed on product packaging.169 Like the San Francisco case, the Rhode Island court was not persuaded and found that the economic conduct regulated was neither commercial speech nor expressive con duct.170 164. Id. at *5.
165. Id. at *6.
166. See 44 Liquormart, Inc. v. Rhode Island, 517 U.S. 484, 499 (1996) ("[T]he State retains less regulatory authority when its commercial speech restrictions strike at 'the substance of the information communicated' rather than the 'commercial aspect of [it]-with offerors communicating offers to offerees."' (quoting Linmark Assocs. v. Twp. ofWillingboro, 431 U.S. 85, 96 97 (1977))). 167. Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. City & Cty. of S.F., 345 F. App'x 276, 277 (9th Cir. 2009) (upholding a city ordinance that limited where cigarettes may be sold but did not prevent the tobacco company from advertising in the city). 168. Id. (internal quotations and citations omitted). In National Association of Tobacco Outlets, the court found that "the prohibited activity [coupon redemption] constitutes neither commercial speech nor expressive conduct and is not subject to First Amendment protection under either the Central Hudson or the O'Brien standard." 2012 WL 6128707, at *6.
169. Nat'lAss'n of Tobacco Outlets, 2012 vVL 6128707, at *4. 170. Id. at *7.
18 - 119
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 92 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
Though other federal laws also regulate tobacco products, none of those laws should preempt a state or local law from prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products because those laws primarily address different aspects of tobacco control. Examples of such statutes include: the federal tobacco tax;171 federal laws requiring smoke-free areas, such as airplanes and federally funded daycare; 172 federal laws requiring the carrier to confirm the age and identity of the buyer upon delivery of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco, and requiring the recipient to be of the minimum legal age;171 and the AffordableCareActrequirementsregarding cessation coverage.174 V. ADDITIONAL PREEMPTION THREATS ON THE HORIZON
Existing federal law should not prevent a state from prohibiting the sale of a class of tobacco products, but new preemption threats loom. There hasbeen a proliferation of recent state laws preempting local activity in a wide variety of policy areas.175 While many focus on issues like employment and gun control, other state laws restrict local authority to regulate the sales of consumer goods, which could affect tobacco sales restrictio ns.176
In addition to the efforts to preempt local tobacco control policy in statehouses around the country, threats also appear at the federal level on occasion. For example, in 2016, federal legislation was introduced that would have preempted local regulation of ecigarettes.177 New preemptive legislation at the state and federal level 171. 26 U.S.C. §§ 5701-04 (2012).
172. 49 U.S.C. § 41706 (2012); 20 U.S.C. § 6083 (2012). 173. 15 U.S.C. §§ 375, 376a (2012).
174. 42 U.S.C. §§ 300gg-13, 1396d (2012).
175. See, e.g.,FightingPreemption: TheMovementfor Higher WagesMust Oppose State Efforts to Block Local Minimum Wage Laws, NAT'L EMP. L. PROJECT (July 6, 2017), http://www.nelp.org/publication/fighting-preemption-local-minimum-wage-laws/ [https://perma.cc/GJ8P-9S2Y] (discussing state preemption of minimum wage laws); Kriston Capps, The Cities That Are Fighting Back Against State Intervention, CrTYLAB.COM (Oct. 3, 2016), https://www.citylab.com/equity/2016/10/cities- fightingback-against-state-intervention/502232/ [https:// perma.cc/T9PG-Q49P] (discussing the issue of state preemption laws for guns and employment); Preemption of Local Laws, GIFFORDS L. CTR., http://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy- areas/other-lawspolicies/preemption-of-local-laws/ (last visited June 21, 2018) [https://perma.cc/9AVS-- vVF4W] (discussing state preemption of gun laws).
176. See, e.g., IOWA CODE § 331.301 (6) (a) (2018) (preventing counties from enacting less stringent regulations than those already imposed by state law). 177. See21 C.F.R. §§ 1100, 1140, 1143 (2012); see also PUB. HEALTH LAW CTR., 18 - 120
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 93
may be a threat to anyjurisdiction that is considering a prohibition on the sale of a class of tobacco products.

VI. LOCAL AUTHORI1Y TO RESTRICT SALES IN MINNESOTA
Local authority to regulate tobacco products variesfrom state to state.178 In some states, local jurisdictions have extensive authority to regulate and restrict the sale and use of tobacco products.179 In others, state law prevents local jurisdictions from adopting smoke free laws,180 youth access restrictio ns,181 or local retail licensure.182 As demonstrated above, federal law does not preempt a sales restriction on a class of tobacco products.181 However, any local jurisdiction pursuing such a prohibition must consider authority issues arising under state law. This Article does not address what, if any, authority issues may present themselves in each state. But interested jurisdictions can generally expect the challenge to appear in one of two ways: (1) authority may be an issue where a local body has insufficient power to adopt a sales restriction on a class of

TOBACCO CONTROL LEGAL CONSORTIUM, REGULATING ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES & SIMILAR DE\1CES 1-2 (2017), http:/ /www.publichealthlawcenter.org/sites/ default/files/ resources/ tclc-guide-reg--ecigarettes--2016.pdf [https:/ / perma.cc/X2 H2-GESL].
178. See State Preemption of Local Tobacco Control Policies Restricting Smoking, Advertising, and Youth Access-United States, 2000-2010, CTRS. FOR DISEASE CONTROL &PREVENTION (Aug. 26, 2011), https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ mm6033a2.htm [https://perma.cc/K4P5--vVRCY].
179. See id.
180. As of September 30, 2017, twelve states have laws in effect that explicitly preempt local ordinances from restricting smoking in government worksites, private worksites, restaurants, and/or bars. STATE System Preemption Fact Sheet, CTRS. FOR DISEASE CONTROL & PREVENTION (Nov. 21, 2017), https:// chronicdata.cdc.gov/Leg islation/STATE-System-Preemption-Fact-Sheet/uu8y-j6ga [https:/ /perma.cc/694 HC2C9]. 181. As of September 30, 2017, twenty-two states have laws preempting local ordinances related to youth access to tobacco. See id. Twenty states preempt local restrictions on selling tobacco products to young people, and nineteen states preempt local restriction on distributing tobacco products to youth. See id. 182. As of September 30, 2017, ten states have laws preempting localities from passing ordinances related to licensure of tobacco products-including both overthe-counter and vending machine sales of tobacco, while eight states preempt local restrictions on retail licenses for the over-the-counter sale of tobacco products only.

See id.
183. Supra Parts III, IV.
18 - 121
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 94 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
tobacco products,184 or (2) a state has prohibited a municipal body from regulating tobacco sales or from regulating certain types of tobacco products, and has reserved that power to the state.185 The first scenario can arise if a body, such as a city council or local board of health, has insufficient authority to adopt a law or regulation prohibiting the sale of a particular type of product. For example, some local legislative bodies only have the power to address issues expressly provided for in a state statute under what is known as "Dillon's Rule ."186 In many states, local legislative bodies have broad authority, whereas administrative bodies, such as a local board of health, may have limited authority. As a recent example, the New York City Board of Health adopted a rule restricting the sale oflarge sugary sodas, known as the "Sugary Drinks Portion Cap Rule."187 A recent appellate decision held that the Board of Health exceeded its authority to regulate public health and usurped the policy-making role of the New York City Counci l.188 A local body considering a sales restriction on a class of tobacco products should ensure that it has the authority to adopt such a restriction and should be prepared to defend legal challenges to its authority.

In the second scenario, a preemption issue may arise if a state law or regulation prohibits a municipal body from regulating tobacco sales or types of tobacco products.189 This preemption may 184. See State Preemption of Local Tobacco Control Policies Restricting Smoking, Advertising, and Youth Access-United States, 2000-2010, supra note 178 (recognizing the states that restrict local authority).
185. See id.
186. Dillon's Rule is the doctrine that a unit of local government may exercise only those powers that the state expressly grants to it, the powers necessarily and fairly implied from that grant, and the powers that are indispensable to the existence of the unit of local government. Dillon's R:ule, BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY (10th ed. 2014);seealsoNICOLEDUPUISETAL.,NAT'LLEAGUEOFCITIES,CITYRIGHTS IN AN ERA OF PREEMPTION: ASTATE-BY-STATE ANALYSIS 5 (2017), https://www.nlc.org/ sites/default/files/2017-03/NLC-SML%20Preemption %20Report%202017-pages. pdf [https:/ /perma.cc/KGR2-ULBQ] ("Dillon's Rule, which is derived from an 1868 court rnling, states that if there is a reasonable doubt whether a power has been conferred to a local government, then the power has not been conferred."). 187. N.Y.C. DEP'T OF HEALTH & MENTAL HYGIENE, NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF AN AMENDMENT (§81.53) TO ARTICLE 81 OF THE NEW YORK CITY HEALTH CODE, https://wwwl.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/notice/2012/notice-adoption- amendarticle81.pdf [https:/ /perma.cc/27AN-SFEH] (last visited June 21, 2018). 188. N.Y. Statewide Coal. of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Health & Mental Hygiene, 970 N.Y.S.2d 200, 213 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013). 189. Cf Freiberg, Options for State and Local Governments, supra note 86, at 18 - 122
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 95
be express or implied.mo An expressly preemptive state law may specifically reserve the authority to regulate tobacco sales or products to the state.m1 An impliedly preemptive state law may fully regulate the topic, leaving no room for local regulationm. 2 In Minnesota, there is currently no preemption of local authority to regulate the sale of tobacco products. Many communities in Minnesota have enacted a wide range of tobacco control sales restrictions, including increasing the minimum legal sale age to twenty-one,m" restricting the sale of flavored tobacco products to adult-only retail stores,m4 and implementing minimum pricing policies.195 Like many other states, however, legislators have introduced preemption bills in recent sessio ns.m6 In 2017, the Minnesota legislature passed a bill that would have preempted local governments from establishing certain worker pro tections.m7 However, Governor Mark Dayton vetoed this bill.m8 While this particular law would not have preempted local tobacco sales restrictions, it seems likely that the Minnesota legislature will consider more preemptive laws in the future given the increase in broader preemptive laws around the country.mg Currently, however, as long as a Minnesota community has sufficient statutory or home 424-26 (discussing various state-level efforts to regulate non-cigarette tobacco products and the role of local governments in these efforts). 190. See Am. Fin. Servs. Ass'n v. City of Oakland, 104 P.3d 813,820 (Cal. 2005). 191. See id.
192. For example, state law preempted an anti-predatory lending ordinance in Oakland, CA, because the state legislature "impliedly fully occupied the field of regulation of predatory practices in home mortgage lending." See id. 193. See, e.g., EDINA, MINN., MUN. CODE§ 12-247 (2017). 194. See Jessie Van Berke!, St. Paul Prohibits Flavored Tobacco at Most Stores, STAR TRIB. (Jan. 6, 2016, 10:05 PM), http:/ /www.startribune.com/st-paul-prohibitsflavored-tobacco-at-most-stores/364455011/ [https:/ /perma.cc/8 J-8V4P]. 195. See, e.g., MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., MUN. CODE§ 281.45(g) (2017). 196. See generally Michael Freiberg, (Don't) See More Butts: Preemption and Local Regulation of Cigarette Litter; 37 HAMLINE L. REv. 205, 206--08 (2014) (giving an overview of various states' efforts to regulate various tobacco products). 197. See HF 180, 90th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Minn. 2017).
198. See Veto Details, Minnesota Legislature, MINN. LEGIS. REFERENCE LIBR., https:/ /www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/vetoes/vetodetails?years=all [https:/ /perma.cc/ 9BJK97T8] (last visited June 21, 2018). 199. Cf Lynn M. Mueller, MN's E-Cigarette Ban a &minder to &view Smoking/Tobacco Policies, MINN. EMP. L. LETTER, Sept. 2014, at 1 (discussing the Minnesota Legislature's recent efforts to regulate a new form of tobacco products: ecigarettes). 18 - 123
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 96 MITCHELL HAMLINE LAW REVIEW [Vol. 44:5
rule authority to prohibit the sale of a class of tobacco products, such laws are not preempted by state or federal law.200
VII. CONCLUSION
A state law that prohibits the sale of a class of tobacco products would likely survive a litigation challenge on federal preemption grounds.201 A local law of this nature would likely face federal, and possibly state, preemption challe nges.202 In addition, local laws often face challenges based on whether or not the jurisdiction has adequate authority.201 Should such a challenge turn on federal law, the sales prohibition likely will be upheld. Challenges based on state law will have varying results depending on the relevant language in each state's constitution and statutes.204
The Tobacco Control Act is the most relevant federal statute, and its preservation, preemption, and saving provisions clearly allow state and local governments to adopt laws "relating to the sale of tobacco produ cts."205 The tobacco industry may argue that such a prohibition is actually a regulation of tobacco product standards.

This argument relies on the Tobacco Control Act's language that preempts state and local laws relating to tobacco product standards. 206 However, U.S. Smokeless T obaccrJ07 and National Association of Tobacco Outlets2°8 support a finding that a restriction on the sale of a tobacco product is not a regulation of tobacco product standards. Opponents may also argue that state and local governments are barred from eliminating a particular class of tobacco products.209 Again, public health advocates can rely on U.S.

Smokeless Tobacco to support the conclusion that the Tobacco Control 200. See Freiberg, Options for State and Local Governments, supra note 86, at 443. 201. See discussion supra Parts II, III.
202. See supra Parts I, II.
203. See Dillon's Rule, BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY (10th ed. 2014). 204. See discussion supra Part II.
205. 21 U.S.C. § 387p(a) (1) (2012).
206. Id.§ 387p(a) (2)(A).
207. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Mfg. Co. v. City of New York, 708 F.3d 428, 433 (2d Cir. 2013).
208. Nat'! Ass'n of Tobacco Outlets, Inc. v. City of Providence, No. C.A. No. 12- 96--ML, 2012 vVL 6128707 (D.R.I. Dec. 10, 2012).
209. See Freiberg, Options for State and Local Governments, supra note 86, at 444. 18 - 124
Lester and Meaney_NotForSale (Do Not Delete) 9/16/2018 2:17 PM 2018] STATE AUTHORI1Y TO END CIGARETTE SALES 97
Act's limits on the FDA's power to eliminate tobacco products does not extend to state and local governments. 210
The most challenging argument in favor of tobacco product restrictions will likely be that, although state and local governments are free to limit the sale of certain tobacco products, the restrictions are barred from completely prohibiting the sale of those products.

This reasoning relies on the Tobacco Control Act's conflicting language in its preemption provision and saving clause. 211 State and local governments can support a sales restriction via the general presumption against preemption, and the broad language of the preservation clause that explicitly allows laws "prohibiting" the sale of tobacco products. Proponents can make a strong case that failure to give effect to the word "pro hibitin g"212would violate congressional intent, but an absence of precedent makes it unclear whether this would convince a court to rule in favor of a sales restriction on these grounds.

In sum, the tobacco industry will likely level preemption challenges against any jurisdiction that proposes to restrict the sale of a class of tobacco products. Although federal preemption claims would probably fail, public health advocates will have to investigate potential state preemption or general authority issues for a sales restriction at the local level.
210. U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708 F.3d at 433.
211. See21 U.S.C.§§387p(a)(2),p(a)(2)(B) (2012).
212. Brief for Appellee at 26, U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 780 F.3d 428 (No. 11-5167- cv).
18 - 125
ATTACHMENT 7
South Pasadena Climate Action Plan
Due to file size, the Executive Summary is attached in this report, and the full South Pasadena Climate Action Plan can be viewed here: http://southpasadenacap.rinconconsultants.com
18 - 126
18 - 127
Figure 2 2016 Community-wide Emissions Summary by Sector 18 - 128
18 - 129
18 - 130
ATTACHMENT 8
Small Business Development Center (“SBDC”) Flyer
18 - 131
Your local Small Business Development Center offers
no-cost business advising and training. We help with:
• Business Planning • Sales & Marketing
• Legal & Accounting • Web & Social Media Strategy
• Business Loan Advice • Importing & Exporting
Contact us today for expert advice on growing your business. 626.585.310ד • [email protected] • pccsbdc.org
The Small Business Development Center at Pasadena City College is part of the Los Angeles Regional Small Business Development Center Network.

Funded in part through a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Small Business Administration.

SBDC client: Click & Carry
SBDC client: GoTRIBE Fitness
Business owners!
Are you looking to
grow your business by diversifying
product offerings?
Do you need help getting a business
loan?
For no-cost, one-on-one business advising in
Pasadena, cBMM us at 626-585-310
hosted by:
18 - 132
City Council
Agenda Report
DATE: April 6, 2022
FROM: Armine Chaparyan, City Manager T�
PREPARED BY: Domenica Megerdichian, Deputy City Manager Mary Jerejian, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Direction on Citywide Commissions
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council:

ITEM NO.

1. Dissolve the Animal Commission;

2. Consolidate the Youth, Senior Citizen and Park and Recreation Commissions' scopes of work to create a seven-member Community Services Commission, and reserve at least one seat each for members of youth and senior citizen populations;

3. Direct the City Manager and staff to implement an annual Animal Events Advisory Committee to focus on "Doggy Days" and "Be Kind to Animals Day" and other programming;

4. Change frequency of meetings for the Public Arts Commission to quarterly, or on an as-needed basis;

5. Change frequency of meetings for the Public Safety Commission to quarterly, or on an as-needed basis;

6. Dissolve the Finance Ad Hoc Committee;

7. Dissolve the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee; and

8. Consider adding an engineering staff position to further support the Mobility and Transportation Infrastructure Commission in the Public Works Department.

Background
Following the discussion at the February 23, 2022 Commission Study Session, City Council directed staff to return with additional information:
• Solicit feedback from the Community to see if they have additional ideas or recommendations;
• Provide an analysis on the City's current administrative processes in the City Clerk's office in relation to Commission and Boards; and • Provide alternatives to initial consolidation recommendations by exploring changes to administrative processes including meeting less frequently, hiring support specialists, or increasing staff capacity.
19 - 1
19 Direction on Citywide Commissions
April 6, 2022

Page 2 of 5 ends

South Pasadena City CouncilApril 6, 2022

South Pasadena City Council
April 6, 2022