Adobe Acrobat Reader


SUP. KNABE: YOU CAN STILL SPEAK, BUT EVERYONE IS IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE THAT IS HERE. SUP. BURKE, CHAIR



Download 243.19 Kb.
Page2/7
Date conversion29.03.2017
Size243.19 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7

SUP. KNABE: YOU CAN STILL SPEAK, BUT EVERYONE IS IN FAVOR OF THE ORDINANCE THAT IS HERE.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: YEAH. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK? I THINK THEY WANT TO SPEAK.
ROBERT LOPEZ: GOOD MORNING, HONORABLE SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS ROBERT LOPEZ, AND I REPRESENT THE CITY OF CERRITOS, I'M THE CITY'S ADVANCED PLANNING AND REDEVELOPMENT MANAGER. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE A LETTER TO THE EXECUTIVE OFFICE DATED JULY 18TH FROM OUR CITY MANAGER, ARCA LUCCI, FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE RECORD. I DO HAVE ADDITIONAL COPIES HERE WITH ME. THE LETTER REITERATES THE CITY'S POSITION ON THIS MATTER AND EXPRESSES SUPPORT FOR THE EXTENSION OF THE INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE. IN ADDITION, THE CITY'S LETTER OUTLINES SEVERAL CHANGES THAT ARE REQUESTED OF THE L.A. COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR THIS AREA, INCLUDING INCREASED PUBLIC NOTICING FOR ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND THE CREATION OF A SPECIFIC PLAN FOR THE CERRITOS ISLAND. AGAIN, THE CITY RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT THIS LETTER BE INCORPORATED INTO THE RECORD AND THAT THE BOARD EXTEND THE INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU. THANK YOU.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: THANK YOU. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME.

LUIS TERRAZAS: MY NAME IS LUIS TERRAZAS. I'M A RESIDENT OF THE CITY OF CERRITOS. I HAPPEN TO LIVE WEST OF THIS AREA THAT IS NOW BEING UNDER CONSTRUCTION, THE INCORPORATED AREA. AND I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE MY RECOMMENDATIONS. ALSO THE RECOMMENDATIONS, A REQUEST THAT IS BEING APPLIED BY THE CITY OF CERRITOS AND MY NEIGHBORS THAT RESIDE AROUND THIS AREA THAT HAS BEEN UNDER CONSTRUCTION I FIND TO BE VERY REASONABLE. SOME OF THE QUESTIONS, AS YOU ALREADY KNOW, THAT I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE IS THE BUILDING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED RIGHT BEHIND MY RESIDENCE, WHICH IS A THREE-STORY BUILDING THAT IS UNIQUE AND DIFFERENT IN COMPARISON TO ALL THE BUILDINGS IN THE CITY OF CERRITOS, OF ALL THE HOUSES IN THE CITY OF CERRITOS, WHICH MAKES IT STICK LIKE A SORE THUMB OR AN EYESORE. WE HAVE LOST OUR PRIVACY BEING THAT IT IS RIGHT BEHIND US. IT'S A THREE-STORY, SO IT COVERS ALL OUR BACKYARD PRACTICALLY. AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S GOING TO BE 27 MORE FAMILY RESIDENCES BEING BUILT IN THAT SMALL AREA. SO IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD 27 RESIDENCES, THEY'RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO GO BE THREE-STORY BUILDINGS. TO EMPHASIZE OTHER PROBLEM IS THE-- BESIDES THAT HOUSE THAT IS BEING BUILT, OR OTHER HOUSES THAT BE GOING TO BE BUILT SIMILAR TO THAT ONE-- IS THE ROAD THAT LEADS INTO THIS AREA. IT IS A VERY NARROW ROAD. IT ISN'T PAVED. IT IS A VERY DUSTY AREA. JUST BIG ENOUGH FOR ONE CAR TO GO THROUGH. AND THIS IS THE IN AND OUT ROAD FOR THIS AREA. IF YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD 27 RESIDENCES AND YOU ONLY HAVE THE EXIT OR ACCESS TO THIS SMALL AREA-- EXCUSE ME, ROAD, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY FIRE DEPARTMENT OR TRUCK TO GO IN AND DRIVE OUT OF THIS NARROW PASSAGE.

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: THANK YOU. YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED. THANK YOU. YES, SIR.
CHARLIE ARA: YES. MY NAME IS CHARLIE ARA, AND ACTUALLY I WAS HERE 43 YEARS AGO AT THE INVITATION OF SUPERVISOR WARREN DORN, TO GIVE THE INVOCATION AND THEN 40 YEARS AFTER THAT, SUPERVISOR DON KNABE ASKED ME TO GIVE THE INVOCATION. I'M NOT HERE TO PRAY THAT THIS ORDINANCE BE EXTENDED, BUT I'M JUST-- AND ALSO I DO WANT TO THANK YOU, YVONNE, FOR YOUR MANY, MANY YEARS OF SERVICE AT L.A. COUNTY.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: THANK YOU.
CHARLIE ARA: I KNOW YOU'RE GOING ON TO BIGGER AND BETTER THINGS. THERE'S NOT TOO MUCH I COULD ADD TO THIS EXCEPT THAT WITH ALL MY YEARS OF EDUCATION, I DID NOT KNOW WHAT THE TERM "YARD MODIFICATION" WAS. AND THAT'S HOW THE NEIGHBORS WERE INFORMED OF ALL THIS. I DON'T KNOW, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT TERM MEANS? IS THAT A PATIO? IS THAT EXTRA PLANTERS OR SOMETHING? ANYWAY, I THINK IT REALLY WOULD HAVE BEEN MUCH BETTER IF THE NOTIFICATION HAD COME OUT AND SAID "HEY, WE ARE BUILDING A THREE-STORY HOME IN THIS AREA." AND THAT AS LAYMEN, WE WOULD UNDERSTAND WHAT A THREE-STORY HOME IS. ANYWAY, I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF EXTENDING THE ORDINANCE. AND I JUST ASK THAT YOU KEEP US ALL INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS IN THE NEXT 10 1/2 MONTHS SO THAT WE ALL KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL THAT YOU HAVE DONE. GOD BLESS THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS! [APPLAUSE.]
SUP. KNABE: MADAME CHAIR? MADAME CHAIR, I WOULD MOVE THE ITEM.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: MOVED BY KNABE. SECONDED BY MOLINA. WITHOUT OBJECTION, ITEM 1 IS APPROVED.
SUP. KNABE: THANK YOU.

CLERK SACHI HAMAI: ON HEARING ITEM NUMBER. 2, THIS IS THE HEARING ON APPROVAL TO ENTER INTO A 10-YEAR LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH EL SEGUNDO DEVELOPMENTS FOR CONTINUED USE OF A 32-SQUARE FOOT PORTION OF THE DEL AIRE COUNTY PARK FOR AN EMERGENCY EXIT STAIRWAY. THERE IS NO DEPARTMENT STATEMENT ON THIS MATTER AND NO CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED.

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: ON ITEM 2, IT'S MOVED BY BURKE. SECONDED BY YAROSLAVSKY. WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: ON ITEM NUMBER 3, THIS IS A HEARING ON CONFIRMATION OF THE 2007-2008 WEED ABATEMENT CHARGES TO BE ASSESSED OWNERS OF UNIMPROVED PARCELS THAT WERE DECLARED AS BEING OVERGROWN WITH HAZARDOUS WEEDS, BRUSH AND RUBBISH AND REQUIRED ABATEMENT ENFORCEMENT. THERE IS NO DEPARTMENT STATEMENT AND NO CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED ON THIS MATTER.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: ON ITEM 3? IT'S MOVED BY MOLINA-- [INAUDIBLE] ARNOLD SACHS?
ARNOLD SACHS: GOOD MORNING, COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. VERY QUICKLY, ALTHOUGH IT DOESN'T HAVE WEEDS, HAZARDOUS WEEDS, BRUSH OR RUBBISH, I WAS WONDERING IF THE COUNTY MIGHT BE ABLE TO TAKE SOME ACTION ON THE BIG PIT THAT'S LOCATED AT FIRST AND HILL STREETS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE--
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: I THINK YOU HAVE TO GO TO THE CITY FOR THAT, UNFORTUNATELY. WE CAN'T TAKE IT UP.
ARNOLD SACHS: SO MAYBE YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO PASS A LITTLE NOTE ON TO THE CITY THAT THEY SHOULD TAKE SOME ACTION ON THE BIG PIT THAT'S LOCATED RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE RED LINE.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: WHEN YOU'RE OVER THERE.
ARNOLD SACHS: I'LL BE THERE TOMORROW. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR ANSWERS AND YOUR ATTENTION.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: MOVED BY YAROSLAVSKY, SECONDED BY ANTONOVICH; WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.

CLERK SACHI HAMAI: ON ITEM NUMBER 4, THIS IS THE HEARING ON CONFIRMATION OF THE 2007-2008 HAZARDOUS VEGETATION ABATEMENT COSTS TO BE ASSESSED TO OWNERS OF IMPROVED PARCELS WHICH WERE DECLARED A NUISANCE DUE TO EXCESSIVE HAZARDOUS BRUSH, DRY GRASS, WEEDS, COMBUSTIBLE GROWTH, OR FLAMMABLE VEGETATION, INCLUDING NATIVE AND ORNAMENTAL VEGETATION AND REQUIRED ABATEMENT ENFORCEMENT. THERE IS NO DEPARTMENT STATEMENT ON THIS MATTER AND NO CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED.

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: MOVED BY KNABE, SECONDED BY MOLINA; WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: ON ITEM NUMBER 5, THIS IS THE HEARING ON THE REVISION OF VARIOUS FEES CHARGED BY BEACHES OF HARBORS AND ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF FEES EFFECTIVE JULY 1ST, 2008 TO ASSIST IN COVERING BEACH AND MARINA OPERATING COSTS INCREASES AND TO FUND GENERAL BEACH OPERATING COST INCREASES. THERE IS NO DEPARTMENT STATEMENT AND NO CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED ON THIS MATTER.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: MOVED BY YAROSLAVSKY, SECONDED BY ANTONOVICH; WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: ON ITEM NUMBER 6, THIS IS THE HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO THE COUNTY CODE TITLE 12, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TITLE 20, UTILITIES TITLE 21, SUBDIVISIONS TITLE 22, PLANNING AND ZONING TITLE 26, BUILDING CODE AND TITLE 32 FIRE CODE TO CONSOLIDATE NEW AND EXISTING FEES TO BE COLLECTED FOR REVIEWING, EVALUATING AND PROCESSING LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS. NO DEPARTMENT-- THERE IS NO DEPARTMENTAL STATEMENT AND NO CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED ON THIS MATTER.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: MOVED BY ANTONOVICH, SECONDED BY KNABE; WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: AND ON ITEM NUMBER 10, THIS IS THE COMBINED HEARING ON PROJECT NUMBER R2005-02279-1, ZONE CHANGE CASE NUMBER. 2005-00015-1 AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE 2005-00161-1, AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION RELATING TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2213 EAST MANCHESTER AVENUE AND 2210-2214 EAST 85TH STREET IN THE COMMUNITY OF FLORENCE-FIRESTONE, ROOSEVELT PARK ZONE DISTRICT PETITIONED BY JAY LITE ON BEHALF OF SUN-LITE METALS. THERE IS NO DEPARTMENT STATEMENT ON THIS MATTER AND NO CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED.

JAMES CRISP: YES, I'M JAMES CRISP, P.O. BOX 551, VERDUGO CITY. I REPRESENT MR. JAY LIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO INDICATE TO YOU THAT THE WHOLE PROCESS OF THIS PROCEDURE IS TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO CONFORMANCE WITH THE PLAN. IT WAS AN EXISTING LAND USE THAT'S BEEN THERE SINCE 1964. WE HAVE HAD NO CONCERN, NO CONTROVERSY, NO APPEALS. AND I WOULD REQUEST THE BOARD ACT APPROPRIATELY. THANK YOU.

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: THANK YOU. MOVED BY MOLINA, SECONDED BY YAROSLAVSKY; WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: ON ITEM NUMBER 11, THIS IS THE COMBINED HEARING ON PROJECT NO. R2007-01819-2, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE CASE NUMBER. 2007-00006-2, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NUMBER 2007-00134-2 AND HOUSING PERMIT CASE NUMBER. 2007-0003-2 AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION RELATED TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 15160 FRAILEY AVENUE, IN THE UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY OF EAST COMPTON IN THE CITY OF COMPTON, EAST COMPTON ZONE DISTRICT, PETITIONED BY SUNY LAY CHANG ON BEHALF OF COMPTON SENIOR HOUSING L.P. ON THIS MATTER, SUPERVISOR BURKE WILL ABSTAIN FROM THE VOTE.
ANITA GUTIERREZ: GOOD MORNING. ANITA GUTIERREZ FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF REGIONAL PLANNING AS WELL AS SOREN ALEXANIAN AND DENNIS HUNTER FROM PUBLIC WORKS. TODAY'S AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11 IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE AN 84-UNIT MULTI-STORY SENIOR CITIZEN AND DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED PERSON APARTMENT COMPLEX WITH A ONE-STORY COMMUNITY CENTER KNOWN AS THE SEASONS OF COMPTON. THIS REQUEST ALSO INCLUDES A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DENSITY FROM CATEGORY 1 TO CATEGORY 3, A ZONE CHANGE TO CHANGE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DENSITY FROM R-1 TO R-3 D.P. WITH A DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. ADDITIONALLY, AN ADMINISTRATIVE HOUSING PERMIT WAS APPROVED TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL DENSITY OVER THE OTHERWISE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE IN THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY UNDER R-3 ZONING. THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD BE 100 PERCENT AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY FOR PERSONS WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES AS WELL AS SENIOR CITIZENS WITH VERY LOW INCOME, EARNING BETWEEN 35 TO 50 PERCENT OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED BEFORE THE REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION ON MAY 21ST, 2008.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: YES. DAVID MOSS?

DAVID MOSS: YES, GOOD MORNING. I'M DAVID MOSS FROM MOSS & ASSOCIATES 613 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 105 IN SANTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA. THIS IS OUR 23RD YEAR OF DOING PROJECTS HERE IN THE COUNTY. WE'RE HERE REPRESENTING LINK HOUSING, AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER BASED IN LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA. WE TRULY RESPECT THE HARD WORK OF THE COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING STAFF AND THE CITY OF COMPTON WHO TOGETHER HAVE JOINED FORCES TO HELP PROVIDE THE ENTITLEMENT TO THIS POINT. WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THIS PROJECT BE APPROVED. IT IS TRUE THAT IT IS 100 PERCENT AFFORDABLE. AND WE ARE HERE TODAY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE IN REGARD TO THIS IMPORTANT LOCAL SERVING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT.

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: SUPERVISOR MOLINA HAS A MOTION.
SUP. MOLINA: THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FINDS THAT THE COMPTON SENIOR HOUSING REFERRED TO AS "SEASONS AT COMPTON," PROJECT NUMBER R2007 01819-2, COMPLIES WITH THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT IN THE R-3 LIMITED MULTIPLE RESIDENCE ZONED FOR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ZONE. IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE PROJECT WITH A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM CATEGORY 1, WHICH IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, TO CATEGORY 3, WHICH IS MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, A ZONE CHANGE FROM R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO R-3 D.P., A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A HOUSING PERMIT ARE REQUIRED. I THEREFORE MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVE PROJECT NUMBER. R2007-01819-2, WHICH INCLUDES GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NUMBER-- ALL OF THE NUMBERS, LET'S SEE-- 2007-00006-2, ZONE CHANGE CASE NUMBER, AGAIN, 2007-0006-2, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NUMBER 2005-00134-2 AND A HOUSING PERMIT NUMBER--. AND I PROMISE THIS IS THE LAST NUMBER-- 2007-00003-2. AND INSTRUCT THE COUNTY COUNSEL TO PREPARE FINAL FINDINGS AND ADDITIONS FOR FINAL APPROVAL.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: SECOND BY KNABE. WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED, AND RECORD IT THAT I ABSTAIN.
SUP. MOLINA: COULD YOU MAKE IT EASIER?
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: YES. MADAME CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD THAT COMPLETES THE PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS.

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: I MOVE THAT WHEN WE ADJOURN TODAY, WE ADJOURN IN MEMORY OF GRADY MILTON LEVERETT, JR. A LONG TIME SECOND DISTRICT RESIDENT WHO RECENTLY PASSED AWAY. HE LEAVES TO CHERISH HIS MEMORY A HOST OF FAMILY AND FRIENDS. AND ORA LEE HAWKINS LONG TIME SECOND DISTRICT RESIDENT. SHE WAS KNOWN BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD MOTHER BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. SHE WAS A DEDICATED MEMBER OF MOUNT OLIVE BAPTIST CHURCH. SHE LEAVES TO CHERISH HER MEMORY 11 CHILDREN. SO ORDERED. I'LL CALL UP ITEM NUMBER 24. MR. SACHS, WOULD YOU LIKE TO START FORWARD? IS HE HOLDING OTHER ITEMS?

CLERK SACHI HAMAI: HE'S ALSO ON ITEM NUMBER 26-B. BUT THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER SPEAKER ON 26-B.
ARNOLD SACHS: GOOD MORNING AGAIN, COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. ARNOLD SACHS. LOWERING THE RATE BUT INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF TAXABLE ITEMS IS WHAT THIS AMOUNTS TO. IS THERE A-- SINCE THE PREVIOUS UTILITY TAX WAS MEANING TO WHAT THE FUNDS WERE ALLOCATED FOR, WILL THE INCREASED FUNDING THAT WILL OCCUR FROM THIS TAX GO FOR THE SAME ENTITIES, OR WILL THERE BE OTHER THINGS THAT THIS WILL FUND? AND THIS IS SIMILAR TO THE CITY'S IDEA TO LOWER THEIR UTILITY USERS' TAX AND INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF ITEMS THAT ARE GOING TO BE TAXED UNDER THE UTILITY USERS' TAX, SUCH AS INTERNET AND ALL THE PROTOCOLS THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT, AND THE CABLE. IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM-- I CAN APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO GET MORE MONEY, BUT THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY END TO THE MEANS HERE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR ATTENTION AND YOUR ANSWERS.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: ALL RIGHT. MOVED BY KNABE, SECONDED BY MOLINA; WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. ITEM NO 20-- I'M GOING TO-- I KNOW SUPERVISOR YAROSLAVSKY IS HOLDING ITEMS. SUPERVISOR YAROSLAVSKY? I'LL NOW CONCLUDE MINE.
SUP. MOLINA: STILL ON 24?

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: NO, THAT WAS PASSED. BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT? I DO HAVE A MOTION TO READ IN BEFORE I CALL ON YOU. I'LL PASS THIS OUT. IT'S A REPORT BACK. THE COUNTY MADE SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL INVESTMENTS IN EMPLOYING, TRAINING OVER 1,000 STUDENT WORKERS. AND IN 2007, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AN ALLOCATION OF 150,000 TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES FOR THE CREATION OF A STUDENT WORKER COORDINATED POSITION. AND BASICALLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES AND C.E.O. TO REPORT BACK IN 30 DAYS AS IT RELATES TO THE STUDENT WORKER POSITION AND THE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE BEING PLANNED FOR IT AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN TERMS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROGRAM, AND PARTICULARLY A PROGRAM MANUAL, A POLICY DEFINITION OF A STUDENT WORKER, ACTIVITIES, FEASIBILITY OF PARTNERING FOR CAREER DEVELOPMENT AND A NUMBER OF THINGS. AND THIS IS A REPORT BACK IN 30 DAYS.

SUP. MOLINA: SUPERVISOR BURKE, COULD I ADD TO THAT IF YOU DON'T MIND? I'D LIKE TO HAVE A REPORT BACK FROM THE DEPARTMENTS AS TO THE NUMBER OF STUDENT WORKERS, THE NUMBER OF YEARS THAT SOME OF THESE WORKERS HAVE BEEN WORKING THERE, AS WELL AS WHAT OUR POLICY GUIDELINES ARE WITH REGARD TO STUDENT WORKERS IN COMPARISON TO THE IMPLEMENTATION BY THE DEPARTMENTS, IF YOU DON'T MIND.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: CERTAINLY. THAT AMENDMENT WOULD BE ACCEPTED AS A REPORT BACK IN 30 DAYS.
SUP. KNABE: YEAH, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN THERE. A STUDENT WORKER, LIKE OUR STUDENT WORKERS WORK DURING THE SUMMER.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: BUT THERE ARE STUDENT WORKERS-- WE HAD THE WHOLE STUDENT WORKER PROGRAM, AS DOES CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES.
SUP. KNABE: ALL RIGHT.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: THERE ARE ABOUT THREE OR FOUR DIFFERENT PROGRAMS. WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. THAT'S A REPORT BACK. ALL RIGHT. SUPERVISOR YAROSLAVSKY? AND I DID NOT CALL UP THE EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY. I THOUGHT YOU'D WANT TO DO THAT. OR YOU MAY WANT TO CALL IT.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: IS THAT A SPECIAL ITEM OR REPORT? I'LL CALL UP ITEM 20. HAVE WE TAKEN UP ITEM 20 YET?
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: NO. WE DID NOT.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: IT WAS GOING TO BE CONTINUED BUT THERE IS SOMEONE WHO WANTS TO BE HEARD.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: ARNOLD SACHS.
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: HE JUST SPOKE ON ITEM 24.
SUP. MOLINA: WHAT ITEM IS THIS?
CLERK SACHI HAMAI: ITEM 20.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: THIS IS 20. IT'S GOING TO BE CONTINUED. BUT HE ASKED TO SPEAK.

ARNOLD SACHS: YES, GOOD MORNING AGAIN. ITEM NUMBER 20. ALTHOUGH I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO GET A HALF-CENT SALES TAX, I AM CONCERNED REGARDING SENATOR FUEHRER'S REQUIREMENTS THAT THE MONEY BE SPENT ON ITEMS OUTLINED ACCORDING TO THIS GREEN SHEET MATERIAL THAT WAS HANDED OUT DURING ONE OF THE L.A. COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AUTHORITY BOARD MEETINGS, WHICH SPECIFIES FUNDING FOR A LIST OF PROJECTS LETTERED A THROUGH R, THAT I'M NOT REALLY GOING TO GO ALL THE WAY THROUGH, ALTHOUGH IT DOES INCLUDE A METRO RED LINE EXTENSION TO FAIRFAX AVENUE AND WHY HE WOULD WANT THAT INCLUDED WHEN THE PURPLE LINE IS THE LINE THAT RUNS FURTHER WEST. BUT I'M ALSO CONCERNED WITH THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T-- OR IT ELIMINATES A COMPLETION DATE FOR CERTAIN PROJECTS, WHICH MEANS THAT PROJECTS CAN BE STARTED BUT OR THEY'LL BE PUT ON-- THERE'S NO TIMETABLE. AND AS WE'VE KNOWN THROUGH THE DYSFUNCTIONAL M.T.A. BOARD, PROJECTS GO EVERY WHICH WAY, BUT NONE OF THEM EVER RUN FROM EAST TO WEST OF THE COUNTY OR NORTH TO SOUTH OF THE COUNTY. THERE'S ALWAYS THE STOP AND A START AND A STOP AND A START. SO WE NEED TO HAVE A COMPLETION DATE. THAT WOULD BE REALLY A REQUIREMENT TO GET THIS PROJECT GOING SO THAT PEOPLE WOULD KNOW THAT THE MONEY IS BEING SPENT AND IT'S GOING TO BE INVESTED IN SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE COMPLETE AND NOT DONE IN A HALF-ASSED MANNER, WHICH SO MANY OF THE PROJECTS HAVE DONE IN THE RAIL. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR ANSWERS AND YOUR ATTENTION.

SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: THAT WILL BE CONTINUED FOR TWO WEEKS, WITHOUT OBJECTION. I'M SORRY. SUPERVISOR ANTONOVICH APPARENTLY WAS NOT AWARE WHEN WE TOOK UP 24. SO ACTUALLY YOU CAN MOVE TO REOPEN IT. IT WAS UNANIMOUS. IT'S MOVED BY ANTONOVICH. SECONDED BY YAROSLAVSKY. ITEM 24 IS RECONSIDERED AND WOULD BE BEFORE US.
SUP. ANTONOVICH: ON 24, I HAVE AN AMENDMENT. FEDERAL LAW CURRENTLY PRECLUDES TAXATION ON INTERNET ACCESS. HOWEVER IF THAT FEDERAL PROHIBITION WAS REPEALED, THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE COULD BE READ TO ALLOW FOR SUCH TAXATION. SO I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE AMENDED TO ADD THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE TO THE EXEMPTION FOUND IN THE DEFINITION OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, SECTION 462-0304, "NOR SHALL IT APPLY TO SUCH INTERNET SERVICES AS BROWSERS, SEARCH ENGINES AND EMAIL." I BELIEVE KEEPING FAITH NOT TAXING THE INTERNET WOULD BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HELPING TO ENSURE THAT THIS PROPOSAL WAS ADOPTED IN OUR REDUCTION OF THE TAX THAT IS GOING TO BE ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER.
SUP. MOLINA: SECOND.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT IT. I DON'T THINK THAT SUBJECT EVER CAME UP, BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES DID WHEN IT DID ITS USERS' TAX BALLOT MEASURE? DID IT EXEMPT INTERNET USE? HAS ANY OTHER JURISDICTION EXEMPTED INTERNET USE? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT OUT OF STEP WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THAT'S GOING ON OVER TIME. YOU DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?
C.E.O. FUJIOKA: I KNOW THAT THEY BROADENED THE DEFINITION TO ALLOW FOR AS WIDE AN APPLICATION AS POSSIBLE, WHICH INCLUDED SOME OF THE INTERNET SERVICES. IF WE COULD HOLD THIS A WHILE, WE CAN MAKE A QUICK CALL TO VERIFY THAT.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST.
C.E.O. FUJIOKA: WE COULD DO THAT.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: THANK YOU.

SPEAKER: WE MAY HAVE THE ANSWER, MADAME CHAIR.

SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
RAY FORTNER, COUNSEL: THE CITY ORDINANCE DOES NOT CONTAIN A SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT SUPERVISOR ANTONOVICH IS PROPOSING, BUT THEIR ORDINANCE IS VERY SIMILAR TO OURS IN THE SENSE THAT IT WAS NOT INTENDED TO TAX THE INTERNET IN THIS FASHION. THIS LANGUAGE HERE--
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: IN WHAT FASHION?
RAY FORTNER, COUNSEL: THAT THERE WOULD NOT BE A TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE TAX IMPOSED ON ACCESSING THE INTERNET THROUGH A BROWSER OR A SEARCH ENGINE AND EMAIL. OUR ORDINANCE DOES--
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: I HAVE A COMPUTER AT HOME. AND IT'S TIED TO A TELEPHONE LINE OR A CABLE. MY CABLE COMPANY, LET'S SAY. RIGHT? I'M GOING TO PAY A TAX ON MY CABLE TELEVISION, AM I NOT, USING THAT? DOESN'T THAT BROADENED DEFINITION ALLOW THAT?
RAY FORTNER, COUNSEL: I BELIEVE IT DOES, YES.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: SO IF MY COMPUTER IS TIED UP TO A--
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: NO.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: WHO IS HE?
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: LET'S CLARIFY THAT.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: SO WHAT IS THE BROADENING OF THE DEFINITION THAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS ACTION?
RAY FORTNER, COUNSEL: IT IS A NARROWING. BUT LET US CLARIFY IT AND RETURN TO YOU.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: YOU CAN'T TAX INTERNET IS MY UNDERSTANDING BY FEDERAL LAW.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: CURRENTLY. WHAT MR. ANTONOVICH IS SAYING IN THE EVENT THAT LAW CHANGES --
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: WE WOULDN'T TAX IT.
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: WE WOULDN'T TAX IT. BUT RIGHT NOW, AND I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS, I SHOULD KNOW, BUT I PROBABLY HELPED PASS THE LAW IN THE CITY, DOES CABLE TELEVISION GET TAXED, MR. FUJIOKA? DO YOU KNOW OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?

C.E.O. FUJIOKA: I BELIEVE IT DOES. AND ACCORDING TO OUR OFFICE, WITH RESPECT TO THE CITY'S NEW ORDINANCE, SHOULD THE FEDERAL LAW CHANGE, THE CITY'S LANGUAGE SPECIFICALLY STATES IF THE LAW CHANGES, THEY WILL AT THAT POINT TAX INTERNET SERVICES.

SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: THE LAW SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT THEY WILL?
C.E.O. FUJIOKA: THE CURRENT ORDINANCE SAYS SHOULD THE FEDERAL LAW CHANGE AND BECOME PERMISSIVE, THEN THE CITY ORDINANCE WILL BE EXPANDED TO INCLUDE TAXING INTERNET SERVICES. SO IT DOES STATE THAT.
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
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: HOW WOULD YOU IDENTIFY THE BILLS ON BROWSER AND SEARCH ENGINES?
SUP. YAROSLAVSKY: I DON'T KNOW. YOU'RE ASKING MIKE.
SUP. BURKE, CHAIR: OR EMAIL. I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'D EVER IDENTIFY IT.

SUP. ANTONOVICH: I DON'T KNOW. I WOULD SAY THAT A PROHIBITION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO ENSURE THAT THIS TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY, THE COMPUTERS ARE NOT GOING TO BE INTERNET TAXED GIVES A LEVEL OF COMFORT TO THE TAXPAYER THAT THEY CAN SUPPORT THIS REDUCTION FROM 5 TO 4 1/2 PERCENT AND BE ASSURED THAT THE INTERNET WOULD NOT BE A FUTURE TAX. WITH THE TECHNOLOGY THE WAY IT'S ADVANCING, WHO KNEW HOW THE COMPUTER WAS GOING TO BE WORKING A FEW YEARS AGO.


1   2   3   4   5   6   7


The database is protected by copyright ©hestories.info 2017
send message

    Main page