City Council Meeting — July 16, 2025

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

person walk up here first.

Let's call the meeting to order. It's 643.

Let me read the land acknowledgement. We would like to acknowledge

that the land we inhibit today was once known as the Tavengard, the home of the Gabalino Tongva people. We show our respect to the Gabalino Tongva people as well as to all indigenous people past, present, and future and honor their labor as original caretakers of this land. We commit to uplifting the Gabalino Tongva people, invite you to acknowledge the history and join us in caring for this land.

Please join me for the flag salute. Please stand if you're able to.

Thank you. Thank you. Face the flag.

Put your right hand over your heart.

Ready? Again. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for

which it stands, one nation, another, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. You may be seated.

Madam Clerk, roll call please.

Council Member Wong.

Present.

Council Member Sanchez. Council Member Lo.

Here. Mayor Pro Tem Yang. Present. Mayor Ngo. Present.

We have a quorum.

Agenda additions, deletions, and changes in adoptions.

None. Okay.

Okay, let's go with public communications.

First speakers, Bob Jin and Carol Sullivan.

Monterey Park. Monterey Park. Oh, here. Mary Gold, City Council, City Manager. We're here on behalf of the Monterey Park Library Foundation. And we just wanted to share with you, the City Council, and the city about our gala that's coming up on October 10th at Luminaris. So we hope that everybody will join us. This will probably put us over the top to get that to purchase the bookmobile. So we're really excited this year for this year's gala. And the theme of it is Aloha Blossom. So, you know, you're going to come in your best Hawaiian shirt or dress and we're just going to have a good time like we did last year.

We won't be hitting it out of the ballpark this time though. But we will. It's Let Aloha Blossom and we're honoring the Cherry Blossom committee because they bring so much to our city. Their event is one of the biggest that draws people from all over. So we want to honor them and we're honoring our prior mayor, city council, Peter Chan, who has stayed active in the city. And he does bring every year to the library gala at least four tables. And he has continued over the years. So we want to honor him and thank him for his service to the city. and you can either wear aloha shirts or kimonos or hoppy coats, whichever way you want to go. So we hope you'll all be there to enjoy, and we'll have a little entertainment, but like I say, we won't be hitting it out of the ballpark this year. Thank you. Thank you.

Next speaker, Andrea Zung.

Well, before we go to the next speaker, I just want to say last year it was right in the middle of the Dodgers playoff where before the gala ended, Freddie Freeman hit that Grand Slam walk-off. Yeah, the place went crazy because of that.

Thank you.

Hello, student mayor and city council members. My name is Andrea Zeng. I'm an incoming senior at Mark Keppel High School

and a cohort member of Mike Fong's 8049 Young Leaders Program.

I'm here today to advocate for a left-turned light at the intersection between Garvey Avenue and Alhambra Avenue.

Every day on my way back from school, I have to wait for the green light to turn left while looking at incoming traffic. As a provisional driver, I've only had my license for three months.

Turning left while waiting for incoming traffic can sometimes be extremely dangerous. For example, I was following a car that was turning left with me, and a car was coming straight at me in the middle of the intersection.

Many students from Marquette will take the same route as me on their way home and have similar experience as well. As students, many of us are new drivers, and the current intersection has a high risk for collisions. A single mistake could lead to possibly irreversible consequences. A study from Oregon State University states that older pedestrians are among the most likely to be killed in traffic accidents, according to the National Safety Council. In the United States in 2020, there were 709 pedestrian fatalities in the 65 to 74 age group, 20% of total road user deaths in the age bracket. Monterey Park's elderly population is around 22.5% of our total population. Our city has at least one resident hit and killed by vehicle nearly every year. It's important to protect our elderly, especially the ones that often walk through our intersections to get groceries or to get to the park. Many studies show that left-turn lights significantly reduce collisions. One large-scale U.S. study by the United States Department of Transportation across four states found that implementing flashing yellow arrows lead to a 50% to 50% reduction in left-turn crashes. These improvements have shown to save lives, reduce injuries, and make intersections safer for everyone, from high schoolers like me to the elderly crossing to get groceries, and sincerely hope that the city will act promptly to prevent future accidents and protect our community.

Thank you.

Actually, I believe you emailed someone, didn't you?

I believe you emailed someone about this issue.

Are you the same person? I emailed his name about this issue.

Okay, okay, because I believe it was you whose email also we got.

Have we, should this issue be looked at by either our traffic commission or the public works, especially given that she's brought it up?

Yeah.

So I think the proper, thank you for bringing it up and say hi to the assembly member for us if you see. The proper channel would be to kind of go through the traffic and then look at it, let the traffic commission take a look at it and get through some kind of a study. and then this will come back up.

But this is the start.

Thank you for bringing that to attention.

Next speaker, Alex Song.

Thank you, city council members, for having me on.

My name is Alex Song. I'm a former captain, last year's captain, and I would like to again address the Barnes Park pool and its issues and a lot of support that I come here for today for the Barnes Park pool.

I would like to also just remind you guys how useful this swimming career has brought to me in Monterey Park.

It helps me pay for schooling in my future four years at university.

It employs me. The city pool here employs me.

and we're missing a huge opportunity with the many future swimmers and students

that are going to be able to attend university because of swimming.

And without the Barnes Park Pool, we won't be able to do that. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Dawn Rock.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council members, and dedicated staff. On June 17th, Brandy Wheeler shared a message in the Monterey Park Life Facebook group that was not only informative, but deeply inspiring. Her words struck a chord with me, and I knew immediately they deserved to be heard beyond the screen. I reached out to her on June 23rd, hoping she would join us tonight to share her message in person. I haven't heard back yet, but I still wanted to honor her words and in the spirit in which they were written. Brandi Wheeler posted, In the view of keeping in the commentary on community, I thought perhaps some of you would appreciate this missive I just read from The Power in Community. I hope it lifts, informs, and inspires you all. There are few things more healing than being truly seen and heard. As a therapist, I witnessed that transformation. It doesn't just come from within. then it comes, it also blooms in the space between us, in relationships, in support groups, in families, in neighborhoods, and ultimately in communities. Margaret J. Wheatler once said, there's no power for change greater than a community discovering what it cares about. This quote carries more than insight. It carries hope. It reminds us that change is not only possible but deeply powerful when it grows from the hearts of people who connected by something bigger than themselves. Many of the communities carry silent pain, unspoken grief, historic injustice, or lingering disconnection. Often these wounds go unattended not because people don't care but because they've never been given a space to name what hurts or what matters. When a community creates room for real listening, things begin to shift. I've seen it happen in healing circles, in churches, in town hall meetings, and even in families around a kitchen table. When people are invited to name their truth without judgment, healing begins. And when people collectively say, we want something better, they begin to build it. If you're part of any group, whether it's a workplace, faith community, parent group, neighborhood association, or city council, I invite you to begin gently and asking together, what do you care about?

What do we hope for each other? What breaks our hearts?

What would it look like to care for one another intentionally? These are not easy questions, but they are loving ones. They open doors to new understanding. They help us slow down, listen deeply, and begin building something that reflects our shared humanity. Margaret Wheatley's words remind us that the real power of change comes not from top-down solutions, but from within us, together. When we uncover what we care about as a community, we begin to change not just systems, but stories. We become builders of healing, tellers of truth, carriers of compassion. Thank you, Brandy Wheeler, for your inspiring post. Now back to my own words. In the spirit of Wheatley's vision, where community is a catalyst for meaningful change, I'm proud to share that a group of Monterey Park residents have come together to form a non-profit organization called SGV Power Up Beacon. What united us was a shared urgency, the need to save the historic Barnes Park pool. Our mission is grounded in advocacy and action. We aim to, one, champion the development, improvement, and access to public facilities. Two, promote equitable access to recreational, educational, and wellness resources. Three, foster civic engagement and community volunteerism. Four, strengthen the bonds that hold our neighborhoods together. And five, collaborate with local governments, organizations, and residents to bring these goals to life. If you feel moved to be part of this work, to help preserve a place where generations have gathered, grown, and thrived, please visit our Facebook page and our work in progress website, sgvpub.org, to connect with us. Together we can protect more than our community and our pool. Together we can protect a legacy.

Thank you.

Next speaker is Arlene Rodriguez, who is yielding her time to Cindy Yee. Cindy Yee, next speaker, seven minutes.

It's kind of hot in here.

Yeah, we need to pull the cool off. All right.

Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council,

I actually have another announcement from the library

that I've been participating in from my lifelong idol,

actress Nancy Kwan, who will be at our library on July 26,

signing her book, her memoir.

And if you can't make it that day, you could buy tickets to the Los Feliz 3 Theater, July 31st, and see a doubleheader, The World of Suzy Wong, and FLor Drum Song. And I told my son when he was in high school that he needed to see the movie, and he really enjoyed it because Hong Kong does not look like it was back in the 60s,

where his grandparents on both sides came to the land of the free. And he really loved the movie, and the beautiful, beautiful scenery from that movie is depicted throughout.

Anyway, on to important issues. Since April 16, a handful of residents, primarily from the swimming community, have been steadily growing and meeting, While also attending every city council meeting to pressure this council to rebuild Barnes Swing Pool, speakers have touched upon the city's reputation as a mediocre one, to accusing the city council of neglecting the city's infrastructure, especially the historical Barnes Pool and the wasteful spending of $500,000 of taxpayer dollars by throwing dirt into the pool without a proper engineering report, which further compromised the pool's integrity. Consent calendar item 9G tonight, the California Parks and Water Conservation Fund Grant, is a start in the right direction, and according to the documentation, it's due on August 5th, a day before the next city council meeting. Our newly formed 501 organization would definitely like to be included and work with the city on the successful review process and any other recommendations on additions and corrections as a partner in achieving a successful solution. We humbly request that all failed grants and any other relevant items concerning the pool be submitted to ensure a successful ribbon-cutting event in the near future. However, SGV Pub would also like you to consider...

to include the swimming pool. California Development Block Grant. The second one, donations received from our newly found SGV Power Up Beacon. Three, Alhambra School District, which knows the importance of aquatic swimming programs for both Alhambra High and Mark Keppel High. Four, formal applications submitted to the state and or federal levels declaring Barns Pool a historic site of the Summer 84 Olympics. The 10-page application is ready to be submitted. Five, collection of any outstanding liens that Monterey Park taxpayers are holding, like the $17 million wall on private property on Garvey Avenue, known as the Goodview property. Six, and the remaining balance, if any, to be withdrawn from the general funds, which was explained by two members of our team in late May, that we really have funds and can participate after all outside avenues have been exhausted. The newest member of our team is a third-generation resident of Monterey Park, who resides directly above Barnes Park. She has an outstanding record of writing award-winning grants at both the state and federal levels, having secured a $54 million community grant in 2019

and achieved funding for other aquatic centers in California, such as Gardena.

She has also played a role in obtaining funding resources for the beautiful SoFi Stadium.

And due to our accidental encounter at the doors of City Hall exactly nine days ago, I would not have been aware of the Federal California Development Block Grant.

Even with her busy schedule, she is willing to assist in our endeavors to rebuild Barnes Pool for the next generation of Monterey Park residents and neighbors.

Lastly, our city should consider collecting taxes on the use of Airbnb rentals within our city.

These Airbnb taxes should be used to maintain the Barnes swimming pool by designating a name like Preventative Maintenance Fund to cover the monthly, quarterly, and annual maintenance fees, rather than letting it deteriorate as our city has over the years.

We are all stakeholders and willing to work with the city to achieve and focus on the successful completion of Barnes pool. It's up to you, the city council, the city manager, the city attorney, and your congressional rep who endorsed all of you to make this dream a reality before she herself retires. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Dave Jones.

Mr. Mayor, Council Members, Distinguished Staff,

I come here today to speak against the proposed increase in fees for trash pickup. Last year, the City of Monterey Park...

Last year, the city of Monterey Park moved to a direct billing service for trash pickup with the company Ware. Prior to that, for a three-unit property on Sefton Avenue, the city utility bill was $195. After that, the where bill itself was $179, and the city bill was still $136 for a total of $316. The difference there is $121, which is 62%. So that means last year our charges for city services already went up 62%. A four-unit property on Sefton went from $269 to $188 for city services and $239 for wear, an increase of $159 or 59%. So again, pretty much across the board, we're looking at a 60% increase in services already last year, not even a full year from today. Now, we have received notice that the city wants to contract with Ware to increase the billing another 18%, saying that that's due to Senate Bill 1383 and that they're required to do a five-year contract with CPI increase. Well, the CPI is 2.7% right now. 18% is not 2.7%.

Now, if you want to say that that's for over five years, well, guess what? Five times 2.7 isn't 18% either.

The math ain't mathin', folks. Okay?

So I get it that costs go up. I've been in the city of, I've lived on Taylor Drive for 31 years. I grew up in the city. I lived on Newmark for another 14 years. When I wasn't in Monterey Park, I was just across the Tin Freeway in Elhambra.

This is the only place I've lived my entire life.

I worked in the city of Monterey Park for 20 years.

Okay. I don't mind.

I make more now than I made then.

I'm glad of that.

I'm glad that the people who are servicing us are going to make more. But they're not getting 18%. I'll do a little bit more math for you since I have some time. It takes less than a minute to pick up my trash cans. It takes less than a minute to pick up all three trash cans. Four times a week, that's four minutes. That's $900 an hour to service a property. $900 an hour. Now, you can say, oh, well, they've got to drive to and from, they've got to dispose the trash.

But that's all collective.

That's not going to take more than an aggregate of five minutes or so. These prices are outrageous.

We pay them. I don't mind paying them.

But when you say I've got to pay another 18% for no reason at all because the math ain't mathin', I think that that's ridiculous. I encourage you to go back and look at this contract. I encourage you first to vote no.

Thank you very much.

Next.

Mr. Mayor, just a really quick procedural question on this. If there are comments on the item, the specific public hearing item, if they speak during public comment, are they still alLod to speak during the public comment period for the public hearing item, or is that something we should reserve for? So just to let people know, if you are here for the public hearing item

on the trash fee item, that you should probably reserve

that and make sure your request for public comment is for during the public hearing portion of the meeting for that item.

I chose to speak during all the communication because I have to take my pickup at the airport. So he understands that. I think we have speakers in the item later.

No, I have plenty more. Next speaker, John Lem. So as he noted, if you are going to speak on this item at this point, you will not be able to speak on this item during the item when it's heard. So would you like to speak now still or would you like to wait until later?

John?

So that's Mr. Lim. Okay.

Next speaker is Amarani Arce.

Good evening, respective city manager, city mayor, and council members, along with our city attorney and city clerk, and everybody else here. I am a resident of this city. I am a mother along with paralegal and city attorney services. I understand the complexity of our city issues along with how important it is for a residence to come and speak up about our city issues. I am in support of our Barnes Park pool. As a community member, we bring our children to different parks.

We bring them to our pools.

Our pool, our Barnes Park pool, has been closed since 2021. It's been about four years. Our community needs it. Our children need it. It's important to exercise and to bring our children together.

And without our pool, many of us parents, and I speak for myself, along with other parents, we all get together and bring our kids together. We have to drive out to other pools.

Other pools, along with George Elder, is a little bit farther out, borderline to Montebello. Another pool that we have to drive out to is Rosemead and Beldebeer in East L.A. I believe that if we bring our pool here, we're able to make money by charging children and adults for entering. The Rosemead Pool right now charges $2 for adult, $1 per child. We can do the same here and be able to have our pool in our city. It's very important, please. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Vivian.

Hi, everyone. Thank you so much for being here tonight. And thank you for so many residents coming here for, I think, the same reason. I'm here to talk about the swimming pool.

I go up here, and then my kids go up here from the school,

and they learn swim from the city pool. and then they become part of the swimming team and then get into all kinds of champions. And that helps them to get into a good college. I think this is essential for the city to help the children in the future. And Montreux Park is one of the best cities to live. you know, so I think having a part here is essential for the residents and to help the city maintain that status too, you know. So, you know, so Montreux City, I know the mayors have been doing a lot of work to help the city to do better. in the Costco area. I know there's a lot of the vendors I mean there. I think that helps the city generate a lot of profits. I don't understand why the city councils can we think about a way to either get some of the profit from the revenue and ask for donation and and doing some kind of increase of the expense to help to build a swimming pool, I think the city residents will be happy to help. You know, so because, like, I think not only building a regular pool, I would suggest to build an Olympic-sized swimming pool, too, if possible.

Thank you.

You know, I know like Cerrito City, they have one of the best high schools there.

And then I think Montreux Park has a very good high school too.

Marquebo is fabulous.

You know, they help my kids get into UCLA, get into medical school. So they are good schools.

As like you guys are young, you know, I'm glad we have so many young,

city councils here. So I think like for as a young generation, yeah, we have to think about

our families, our neighborhoods. We need to help our children in the future. So what you're doing

here is helping panning a pan with your vision to helping the city. So when you're sitting on that seat, you're not only thinking about one years, two years, we think about five years,

10 years or 100 years to plan for the city.

So I hope we can count on you guys to do a good job to protect our city, to protect our swimming pool, not just fill it out with the soil, you know. So that's not right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Angie Chu.

It's already built in rich city that has the ability to go everywhere within 25 minutes. So I'm hoping when we have a bigger vision besides the city to be outstandingly globally stood up when Olympic guests come and visit us.

I totally would support the nonprofit that's starting. and from my end, I run the non-profit foundation hours.

We already initiated a group that is going to be a welcome mobile team

who would drive people to the Olympics and place and drive them back to Monterey Park to eat.

So whoever likes to join the team, I'm in charge of the training.

I'm an excellent driver because I drive eight hours every day

during my young years, driving all these kids to a swimming pool. I don't need GPS. And I am hoping when a city is so welcoming, visitors, whoever see us, we represent United States.

We represent Montreux Park in a bigger light.

And we will generate money coming in from all those well-careful visitors. and that would be part of the funding donated to build the international Olympic pool too. So this is on our table, and I hope the city manager will continue to connect us with the international group.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Dylan Colosa.

Good afternoon. Ooh, it's a sword. Okay. Good afternoon, City Hall. I'm here today on behalf of this pool. I'm an incoming senior for my Keppel High School,

and you're the Keppel's next swim captain, at least one of five of them. And, of course, I'd like to talk about the pool today. So one thing that I've always kept in mind is the big little motto we have above us. Pride in the past, faith in the future.

And, you know, pride in the past is pretty self-explanatory, right? You take pride for what you've done in the past. All these talk about 1984 Olympics. I'm obviously not that old. I was never, I never even knew that we held Olympics until last month. Born in 2008, you know, Gen Zs. but I'd like to say, right, we hosted Olympics or something like that, and Barnes Park was clearly somewhat involved in this, and I think if we have pride in this, we wouldn't be burying dirt in it.

Am I right, guys? So, and here's where, you know, the second part of this comes in, faith in the future.

We have so many people coming to these meetings bi-weekly, every single day, about the swimming pool, about these other problems that we have, right? I'm clearly extremely biased towards the swimming pool.

I've been swimming for 11, 12 years of my life. I work for the park. I'm a lifeguard there. That's also an issue.

But faith in the future, I'm a very simple guy. All this means to me is that there is faith about news for the pool, specifically Barnes or maybe a new pool in general, but preferably Barnes because there's a lot of people at work

who told me stories about how Barnes was just an amazing pool back then and how it brought in a lot more money than Elder does. Speaking of that, when we work recreational swimming, and I work there and I look at cashier, look at how much money we make at the end of the day, we're barely making above $100 to $200 on Saturdays. I don't know if you guys know this, but this is a massive issue because Saturdays are supposed to be our best days, especially in the middle of summer, right?

Everybody's free. There's a lot of people who want to come in. A lot of regulars I see, I'm friends with some of the regulars, who've told me that before Barnes was closed, they would go to that pool, right?

It's just much bigger.

It's bigger. The kiddie pool was functional. Staff was just much greater over there.

And, you know, just things in general. It was close to everything. My boss, Scott, tells me that before Barnes was closed and I was a student at Shaoxing summer school or after school program, they would call us the Red Army because there was a bunch of Chinese little kids coming with red shirts. And he told us that when we would come, they would make around $300 on a weekday, like a Monday.

$300, I'm not too sure, but if my math is correct, $300 is a lot better than $100, especially compared to Monday and Saturday. So I'd just like to bring that up.

if you guys don't think that the pool is a good investment which probably it isn't it i know it does lose a lot of money all i would like to say is that it would bring in a lot more money just

due to the fact that barnes park pool is just much closer to everything like the boys and girls club from a month ago right they came up to spoke saying oh yeah we want to have all these programs which some of you guys supported right you guys want to talk about the program for barnes Park, there you go. Boys and Girls Club has a swimming program. A lot of other schools, like my Chaoxing, right, they're looking for a pool right now too. I don't think they have a pool right now. Barnes Park was that pool for me. Every single Monday we would go and swim.

One last thing I'd like to bring up is lessons. A lot of parents who go to lessons would just

have some issues with how far it is. Although I'd say that it's not too far compared to Barnes, or at least they're not too far spaced out between each other. I'd like to say that there are some people who may or may not want to be interested in taking lessons for morning lessons, afternoon lessons, adult lessons especially. We're sharing a pool with our adult lessons with water aerobics, which isn't a really big problem, but I'd like to state that, hey, you know, maybe we get these aerobics people doing the stretches in the water, get their own pool, give them a lot more space, and we can have our adult lessons who are overcrowded get their other pool at Barnes or maybe possibly another pool. That's about all. There's just one thing to keep in mind, pride in the past, faith in the future. I came to the student thing for my history class and this was the first thing that I was told by a lot of the council members, pride in the past, faith in the future. I'm not seeing too much pride in the past. I'm kind of seeing faith in the future and I'd really like to see more of everything. Thank you. Thank you, Dylan. No other speakers.

Staff communications. None? Okay.

Presentation.

My Park Community Healing Fund update.

Sorry, I hurt my knee, so I'm limping around.

Good evening, Mayor, Pro Tem, City Council members.

This is Amy Lee.

I'm the City Treasurer, but I'm also the Liaison for the Community Healing Fund for Monterey Park.

On January 21, 2023, Monterey Park experienced one of the most tragic events we've ever seen.

I can't believe it's been over two years. If we think about it, it just felt like yesterday.

Our group came to be in efforts to help the community heal. With community members, we were assigned with the funds that we had raised to distribute grants and funds to the community that needed support. So we were able to do that. I'm happy to report that we've accomplished our mission and we have given out over $230,000.

We've supported 48 individual grants for victims that were present at the shooting.

We were also able to support 15 projects by community organizations,

the Bookmobile, the Boys and Girls Club, the Monterey Park Fired Relief Fund, Villa Vista Elementary School Asian Youth Group Asian Youth Center

Alhambra and Monterey Park Rotary Club Thera Picasso

The Resiliency Center

and the Anti-Asian Hate Coalition So we are happy to let you know

that we have accomplished a mission

and have distributed all the funds.

Do you have any questions?

So my question was going to be how much funding remains.

It sounds like we're at zero. Almost zero. Very close. Almost zero. All right.

And then is there any formal activity to close up the show? Have we already stopped taking donations?

Yeah, we've instructed California Community Foundation to close down the donation fund site.

And if possible, maybe we can just do a final report

on how the grants were, all the grants that were made

and the funds were expended, and then maybe that's something we can just post online

on the webpage for that.

And just wanted to add my appreciation to you, Amy, and to the steering committee members for your multiple years-long service in this effort and really appreciate a lot of the thoughtfulness and commitment that you and the other committee members have really just shown in helping to steer the committee and steer the effort in terms of helping to fundraise but also to support community groups that are doing this programming to help with healing and reestablishing hope and improving the community in the wake of the mass shooting at the Star Ballroom.

So really appreciate that.

I would ask maybe the city manager to schedule an appreciation session or certificate session for the steering committee members, past and present, to be recognized by the council at some point.

I just want to thank the community of Monterey Park and all the donors across the country. I'm not sure if you know, but we did get donations

from all corners of the United States. New York, Virginia, Texas, donations came from across the country.

People were thinking about the victims here and our city. So thank you very much.

Mr. Mayor? Again, thank you, Amy, for that report.

And I also want to just thank everyone in the community who came together to Monoday Park during our time of crisis and for opening not just their hearts, but their hearts as well. And I remember, I know, like some of us, like, you know, for our birthday, you know, we had asked donations to Hope and Healing Fund, and I was just impressed that people continue to give during that period. And it just shows that certainly, you know, when the community comes together that we are able to leverage resources, and hopefully that is something that, you know, we can take with us in moving forward as a community.

Even two years after the shooting, we've gotten some checks as late as January of this year.

Okay.

Yeah, thank you, Amy, for leading these efforts, and thanks to all the donors, everyone who contributed to the healing fund. I think a lot of the victims' families really appreciated it. And we're looking forward to acknowledging everyone who contributed at a later time, as well as the memorial that's going to be built as well.

Thank you.

Again, Amy, thank you for all your support and service during this trawling times in the last two and a half years. I was actually a little hopeful that maybe we have some money there. We can kind of push it toward the big memorial that we're kind of helping design, the permanent memorial. but you may not be done yet because we're going to need you to go for the longer term fundraising goal of getting more money to help so we can create a longer lasting memorial for

the city. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Well, thank you. But a separate but related item, if we can maybe schedule the Resiliency Center to come do an update as well at some point in a future council meeting. It's also my understanding that they have not received federal reimbursement

for their costs up front of funding and putting up the

Resiliency Center the last two years or so. And maybe on the webpage for the healing fund is that sunsets, maybe we can include a link to contribute or to support the Resiliency Center and their operations since they've been essentially absorbing those costs, which I think are over a million dollars a year, to provide mental health and other services for survivors and for those in the community that want to seek services. And there's less and less guarantee or less and less likelihood, I think, that they will recover those funds from the federal government at this point as we get further and further away from the incident. So maybe we can find a way to provide some support there.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, definitely I could work back with Amy and ensure that we put together an article or information on our webpage about how the dollars were spent. I sat in with Amy on a few of the meetings right in the initiation stage of the Oversight Committee and I want to take a moment to just thank her for her volunteerism to this committee and know it wasn't an easy task and definitely understand that it was probably a longer commitment than maybe first anticipated. So we appreciate you Amy but we'll definitely work back and we will also schedule an update from the CSC Resiliency Center as well. Thank you.

Any other items?

I would just note, Mr. Mayor, if the remaining items on consent are moved for the minutes, the meeting of May 21st, I was not here, so if I can recuse myself on that specifically. AND THEN ON ITEM 9H, MY PERSONAL PROPERTY IS WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE PROJECT PROPOSED. SO I WILL ALSO NOTE MY RECUSAL ON 9H.

SO THAT'S A MOTION FROM COUNSELMAN WANG.

DO YOU HAVE A SECOND?

I SECOND.

SECOND BY PRO TEM YANG. let's go ahead and take that vote

approved unanimously

okay now let's get to the part where everyone's waiting for

9G

Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, City Council members, Robert Aguirre, Director of Recreation and Community Services, and tonight I also have Recreation Manager Christina Alatorre

with me.

Just to kind of update everyone, we're in our final phase of the Parks System Master

plan process and we'll be bringing that back to city council in the very near future one of the

projects that's been identified throughout the process as a community priority has been the redevelopment of the barns park swimming pool the california state parks land and conservation fund is presents a unique opportunity for funding to apply for a grant to support new developments in new outdoor recreational spaces. For the current funding cycle, there's $35 million that will be available, and agencies are able to apply for up to $6 million with a 50% match. If awarded the $6 million, the city would be responsible for at least $3 million, and we understand that the pool project is estimated to be much more than the $9 million, So we would need to seek additional partnerships and funding sources to meet the rest of those project needs. As part of the grant application for this grant, a resolution must be adopted by City Council.

And the resolution authorizes City staff to apply for the grant.

And we anticipate hearing results from the grant committee sometime in the beginning of 2026. So tonight, staff is recommending that City Council authorize staff by adopting a resolution allowing us to apply for the Land, Water, and Conservation Fund grant. That completes my staff report, and I'm available for any questions.

Before I get to questions, I want to just reiterate, Dylan, I know you said you were not around in 1984, before, but I know for a fact that your mom was around during that time because we were running around in elementary school. We do, and you're right, we do charge a fee for Elder and Barnes when it was open, and I just wanted to point that out because I think the last speaker before, like three before you had mentioned we should start charging just user fees at the pool, and we have.

So I just wanted to point that out. Okay.

Questions, comments?

Actually, can we open up to any public comments?

No comments. Okay.

Well, I just want to note, since there are swimmers here as well, I want to say personally, I think this council does want to see a pool happen. It's just a matter of how it's going to happen. I'd encourage folks, as Robert noted, the Park System Master Plan is coming to Council next month. I believe there was a special session workshop for feedback specifically for pool, around the pool, and I know a few members in the audience were part of that session as well. I appreciate and very much appreciate not only tonight but the continued and consistent engagement by many members of the audience tonight around this pool issue in particular. I know some of you are very frustrated with the pace and the timeline for action. I want to say, I think not just on this, but on a lot of things, I think I and many others, including those on the council, would love to see things move a lot faster than they actually happen. But there is a certain process to doing things, and there's a certain way to do things responsibly. And as we've noted in the past, the pool is not the only public works and capital improvement project THAT THE CITY HAS TO THAT IS A NEED FOR THIS CITY AND FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE AT OUR PREVIOUS MEETINGS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE BUDGET AND THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT A NUMBER OF BIG TICKET ITEMS THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO MAKE INVESTMENTS ON NOT JUST THE POOL IT'S A MATTER OF HOW DO WE PAY FOR ALL OF THESE THINGS AND HOW DO WE PRIORITIZE WHAT WE CAN DO WITH limited resources now and into the future but i want to assure people that that doesn't mean because i've seen some some information people posting out there about how this council is not committed to a pool has said no to a pool is shutting down the pool uh i just want to be clear barns park pool has been closed for several years now i think since 2021 and so we have an existing pool at elder that continues to operate i know it's not ideal i swim there i'm a lap swimmer there on the weekends. I know it's not ideal, personally. And I'll be frank too, Barnes Park was not an ideal pool either. It was not 25 yards by 50 meters. And so there's a lot that needs to happen and a lot that we need to do. And I welcome, I very welcome and am very encouraged by the level of vacation we've seen from the community around this. There's still a lot more for us to do. And I welcome the offers of assistance and help that have been Made today and in past meetings as well if there are community members that are interested in fundraising for Rebuilding the pool we will or happy to work with you To see how we can help on the city side any of these efforts We're happy to work with anyone who's interested in donating any services for design I believe we've reached out to one person that was already mentioned as a potential help on this effort Anyone who's willing and interested in helping on this we're happy I think the city staff this is the city council the city is happy to work with anyone and talk more in detail about what we can do together because we're gonna need to work together to get this done because even if we get this grant which we'll see but even if we get this grant there's a huge gap to make up in terms of the financing and even if we got the money tomorrow which we right realistically not gonna get tomorrow it would still be many months at least of design to make sure we have the right design working with many of you who are interested in the pool the swimmers the school people the manta rays and others who use the pool on what we actually want in the design of a pool and right breaking ground and construction is going to take more it's not going to happen overnight right this is something that's at least a few years away if even if we decided to do it tonight and had all the money and so i just want to right set the the foundational kind of understanding there a little bit really appreciate everyone engaging in this process and i welcome and encourage you to continue to engage there's a lot more discussion to have i hope you'll be here for our parks master plan uh as that draft plan is presented to the city council in a few weeks um and encourage you to participate in that process and to work with us if any of you are interested in in supporting in other ways uh the pool we got to work together to make this make this happen. And frankly, there's a lot of other things I would love to work with all of you on making sure the pool and other parks assets are invested and maintained properly. There's been some, I just want to note this really quickly.

I know Carl's going to stop me if I need to be stopped.

But there's been talk about historic designation for the pool i will just know and a quick question to the city manager uh we have currently at my understanding we have one california national historic monument or designation in the city which is el incanto is that right yes that's correct how much funding do we receive from any outside funding source to maintain or improve that property the city does not receive

any funding specifically for historical sites so we don't get any funds from the state or federal

government to support al encanto as a historic landmark have we ever received any funding in the

last 15 20 years um i believe that there was a a grant uh but that was for maintenance around the

fountain i believe yeah that was to address the cascades and it wasn't it wasn't for al encanto

and it was not in relation to being it wasn't a historical grant it was just for for the

maintenance it was for the maintenance of the stairway and so my point being right but we just

because you declare something a historic give it historic designation doesn't mean money automatically flows in to maintain or restore or build something up uh other kind of follow-on to that do we if right elencanto if things are declared a historic designation or given a historic designation that means there are even more restrictions in terms of if you want to rebuild it or make something better

it's even harder to do that is that right that is correct the point of that historical destination

is for preservation so definitely sourcing materials that were similar from the period definitely it creates difficulties in maintaining a facility like Alencanto correct

I see Carl's I'm done with that one thanks I see Carl about to step in but I just wanted to make that point but again want to welcome those in this new nonprofit SGV power-up beacon if you're interested in helping to raise money the man arrays other other folks who are interested in doing this we're going to need that help if we move forward on this grant and we if we receive this grant or any other grant it's very unlikely that we will receive a full allocation to build out the entire pool and complex that we need to do and so there will be a gap no matter what and that was the same case for the library when we there was local matching funds that we had to fundraise this community fundraise to meet the state grant that helped to build rebuild the library across the street very will likely be a similar case here for the the pool at some point so we're going to need all your help i welcome all your help and i hope that you'll keep engaged as we move forward on this process hopefully and I hope they'll continue to show up with that I also I just say I support this item and let's let's apply for it if there are other opportunities other potential funding opportunities I understand Robert you went to a another grant opportunity for

potential funding for parks yeah there's another grant coming up in October that we'll be applying

for as well so I just want to note for the audience those who are here that we are actively looking at other any kinds of funding opportunities if there if you if anyone in the audience sees other funding opportunities that you think we may not be aware of just forward them on we will take a look at them and we do have grant writers on on board as consultants for the city not only for this but for everything that we're looking for grant money for to pursue opportunities like that for funding and so we're constantly on the lookout but if you think there's something else we should

look at, send it our way.

We're happy to take a look and we're happy to pursue that, but I'm in support of this and love to see us win this grant.

Mr. Mayor? Yes, thank you. Robert, again,

thank you so much for bringing this to staff.

You know, again, we appreciate this opportunity. I do want to ask you if you could maybe walk through kind of, you know,

the application process for this grant,

you know, especially for our information. And also, I want to take the time to also

thank our Assemblymember, Mike Fong,

office because uh you know when i saw it's on the agenda i reached out to his office and uh their office was kind to give us a contact at the state parks department i understand that you had a chance to speak to that person at state parks department was that correct yeah i spoke

with her uh in depth about the project trying to understand if there's additional things that we can do to kind of strengthen our application understanding that we did apply for the same grant back in 2016. I also wanted to see if having been that we've closed the pool since 2021 and

that the pool now has been backfilled I wanted to see if it would qualify as a completely new build

or if it would be considered a renovation. They informed me it would still be considered a

renovation however we will still try to make the case that it is a new build since it's been closed

so long um and then uh just chatting through also additional things to strengthen the

application as far as other outdoor amenities um unfortunately things with the facility don't

qualify because it is the grant is focused on outdoor recreation uh so adding features to the

building don't exactly strengthen application but any facility that is supportive of the

project does qualify. So locker room facility and

the restrooms do qualify as part of the grant.

And if I'm not mistaken, that current locker room restroom,

it's not ADA? We would need some ADA upgrades to be done.

But that would also be a positive to the application though, correct?

Yes, absolutely. And then we would be serving disadvantaged communities.

So we do have, there are definitely some pluses to our application. So in meeting

with Townsend, you know, we definitely

First of all, I wanted to thank all of the supporters of the Barnes Park Pool for consistently coming out to our City Council meetings. I think your commitment really shows a lot of support for our pool. And I myself am in support for adopting this resolution as well. I think it would be great for a city to apply for this Land and Water Conservation Fund grant, as well as the October grant when it comes out and any other grants that we could possibly get to come up with the money for the pool. Piggybacking on Council Member Wong's question about the historical designation, if we do get a historical designation on Barnes Park Pool, does that mean we have to stick with the current design or can we still make changes to the design? because I know a lot of residents have voiced their ideas for different designs. I know the Manta Ray competitive swimmers want a competitive pool, Olympic size, which Elder Park doesn't have. I know a lot of the families with younger children and the senior citizens, they want a warmer pool, whereas the competitive swimmers, they have to have a colder temperature pool. And then also we heard some desire for a splash pad as well. So if we do a historical designation will we still be able to entertain all of these requests? Or will it have to stay exactly the same design?

Again, Mr. Mayor members of the council sorry

We don't want to get too far off topic because we're on the grant topic so I'll address quickly so the historical designation again

it's

preservation of the historical site to its original condition right the that's usually in general what the historical designation does is preservation so hope that answers your question but we don't want to get too far into it yes okay let

me just kind of get some facts out since we're on this subject and these are all stuff that we've heard now since April this has been an issue since 2015 2017 2017, 2019, where's the pool, why didn't it get built? Again, that was way before this group here. And I want to thank the audience for coming out and speaking about this because I was not here to listen to it in 15, 17, 19, nor 21. But I've been here since April and we've done something about it. We've got at least a couple of discussions moving forward. And that's where we have this item here for discussion. and if I, I think we've been applying for this, right Robert? In terms of the last few years, we've applied every time this has come up.

Well, we've applied for other grants and the last time we applied for this grant was in

2016. We applied for different grants in 2019

which are actually a little bit less competitive for this type of

project and we applied in 2019, 2021.

We're waiting on the next cycle for that grant. Unfortunately

they haven't released that cycle yet but as soon as they do best believe we'll be applying for that

one as well and then i i heard a speaker mention about a couple of ideas which i think are their ideas uh their ideas but let me just kind of give some background on this the california development

block grant or is it california or it's a community block grant that's a federal grant

uh based on what we know about what's going on with the federal government and local cities

Good luck applying, but that's only a couple hundred thousand.

So we'll even look into that, but I don't think that's even a match here. AUSD, as I remember correctly, they pledged 100,000 back a few years ago. Hopefully they'll keep that 100,000 to pledge, but we're going to work with the school board members as well as the superintendent to say what more they can add to help us finance this pool. So I think we talked about general fund.

You know what, I look at the audience here, I'm thinking general fund.

The next item that's gonna come up

is gonna be about a $3.50, call it tax or additional tax to the refuse fee,

and we're gonna have that discussion.

So I don't know where we're gonna get money

at the general fund. Question, we'll follow up separately, but looks like

SGV Pub is starting a fundraising. There was

a Facebook page that started

fundraising. Let's figure it out.

We'll have a discussion, figure out how much that money has been raised so we can kind of get this process going.

Yeah, absolutely.

I've already reached out to one of the members and looking forward to speaking with

them and learning more about the organization, their goals, and how we can work together.

again even if we get the six million we still have to come up with six million and then we have to fundraise my recollection that the pool cost is way more than the 12 probably way more than the 15 so there's gonna be a lot of work done here which you know we're working on it we're glad you guys are here staying late nights with us to figure it out but whilst we're working out doing of the day, that's staff's time.

Actually, I have a question. One more comment?

Regarding the application.

So given that because we already have a pool, Elder Park, how does that, I guess, influence,

impact the application?

In other words, is that something that State Park would say, well, you already have a pool? I know, again, you spoke to someone at State Park, so I'm just curious.

Yeah, so that's one of the questions I did ask because part of an application can sometimes

be unmet need.

But I did explain, and what we will explain in the narrative, is that George Elder Pool is also in dire need.

And so the essential, if we were to get this grant, we'd be looking at, by the time the Barnes Park Pool was built, we would be closing George Elder Pool.

And so essentially the community would be left with one good pool.

So we're basically utilizing our narrative to let them know that their community is in need of one good pool.

And that's something we have to include in the package that we submit.

Yeah, that'll be included in the narrative to help us score higher as well.

I see.

And I'm curious, again, we all know that this is a partial match, but I'm just curious, and I know we're still working on the application, and I realize we don't have a design yet, But nonetheless, I mean, I'm just curious, did they give any advice as far as, like, are they going to look at the overall cost and say, wow, that's a lot? Or do we need to also then package in a way that also looks financially viable? Does that also add points to the application?

The city does have to commit to basically funding the entire project.

So outside of the $6 million, we're committing to being able to seek whatever funding needed to complete the project.

But do they require that we provide an estimate of what our project?

Yes, which will be over the requested amount, yes.

I see.

Sir, just real quick on the when would we hear back about the grant in terms of when the...

They say six months from August, so I respectfully say early 2026,

because if you've ever applied for a grant, sometimes that pushes a little longer for review,

depending on how many applications they receive.

So I would say we expect to hear sometime February, March of next year. Thanks.

I have a question. I have a follow-up question.

Again, so this calendar, will we be in the application or will we be given updates?

In other words, like, you know, it's month one, received submitted, month two, under review.

I'm just curious, is there a calendar?

And the reason I ask is because I think it would be helpful if we knew. And, again, as I mentioned earlier, you know, that I had reached out to our Assembly Member and State Senator's Office. And I feel like if there's any time, if perhaps we should enlist or aid to push it through, it would be helpful for us to know where we are in the process in this application.

Yeah, I'll take a closer look.

But I do recall from previous applications, there is some updates throughout the product review process.

And so as it gets closer to the end, if you are going to potentially be awarded,

And I say potentially because we've also had this happen where we had grant representatives come out to visit the site.

And so, of course, you start feeling very optimistic and kind of good about you think you're going to get,

there's a high potential you're going to get the grant. And then, you know, someone else gets it.

Out of curiosity, because this is coming from the Department of State Parks, is the application process, is that online?

It's all online. I see.

When we get to the date where they're coming out to visit,

make sure you let us know.

We'll make sure we take them to the best dim sum in town.

I'll go ahead and make a motion to approve item 9G.

Did you really make the motion?

I'll make the second. You'll make the second?

Okay, so Pro Tem Yang with the motion and second by Council Member Wang.

Please take a vote.

Approved unanimously.

I'll just I just know there's a volunteer to drive the

evaluators around as well.

So I'm looking at Angie.

Okay. All right. Let's go up to public hearing.

Do I open public hearing now?

I'm going to open up public hearing.

This is item 10A.

We have speakers.

Yes, we have speakers.

First speaker, Vanessa Young.

Hello, everybody. I'm so sorry my English is broken because I'm still so surprised.

Can we have folks quietly walk out, please? I mean, there's still a council being going on, please. walk out quietly, please?

Why don't we take like 30 seconds and let people walk out before we start her time?

I don't care. We can't hear.

Can we have folks walk out quietly, please?

I was so surprised because in a city

nobody no translate in English in Chinese or in Spanish. Before I went to the Rose Meek hearing, they have Vietnamese, Chinese and Spanish.

Today I'm

very surprised. In our city suppose we have

a list of half people is Chinese.

I don't check a record.

Yeah. Okay. I think 30% is Spanish. Right. Okay. My problem My problem is, let me, my problem is Montreux Park is not the increased garbage garbage free, but the lack of the maintenance and additional to many facilities.

First, they are not enough pickleball cocks, so instead of making new cocks, and they redry the tennis cocks to make the pickleball cocks.

Second, the lights on the car are always dim, while Rosemead, Temple City and Alhambra are well light.

The third one, the swimming pool is broken but has never been fixed.

The fourth one, the roof of the Garvey Park barbecue area was miffed. But before five minutes ago, I think I came here before, there's still only four holes in here, nothing in the top.

I don't understand why. Okay.

Our library is open on Saturday. Before, they close on Friday. But right now, they only Saturday and Sunday no more. Okay.

I don't understand why. Because Saturday, Sunday is very important for our family. But they close on Sunday. Yeah.

Okay. Is our city more than Rosemead and Alhambra? Where does our funding go?

Where does the property tax, cost code, and business profit tax go? Beside the cost code, we have a free hotel and a lot of restaurants and plaza. So where's the money? So why should I pay more for trust if our facility costs less money compared to facility in our other city?

Okay. so

I think we should set up a resident council to care about our city because nobody to monitor our money our city's money so if somebody can we need to make up we need to set up a resident council to care about our city okay

yeah okay let me I think Chinese is

既然我们都不花钱 在我们的设备上面

我们的设备 永远是破破烂烂 坏了不修

那为什么 我们要付了设费

我们肯定是政府 肯定剩下很多钱

而且这个钱呢 我们从来没有人监管

我们不知道 你的钱花在哪里 是怎么花

是找人来维修 找了好哪几家厂商来 我们都不知道

Chinese translate and Spanish translate.

Yeah, we need to care about a city. Everybody have light to speech.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. I believe you guys all understood the Chinese part of the conversation.

So we did understand you.

And we do have, I think you were talking about residential councils. So it's the equivalent

of community commissions. We have 11 volunteer community commissions

within the city.

Robert or someone, can you please identify her and talk to her, make her one of our council volunteers so you can help work with the city in terms of what needs to be planning

and what needs to be done?

Sorry, does the council, is anyone to vote?

Eleven is volunteer?

Is our city to vote them for us to announce?

Those are not only the council members.

Yeah, that one is volunteer, right?

Those are all volunteers.

Only the council members, the clerk, and the treasurer are voted by the city.

Yeah, it's not our voice.

They don't do anything for us.

The problem is they don't do anything for us. Mr. Mayor.

It's not our voice.

Mr. Mayor, kind of question on process.

Do we have interpreters available tonight?

The request must be made in advance. There was no request made in advance in order for us to schedule and coordinate the translators.

Are there, I mean, just based off of our first speaker there, I don't know if there are any speakers that have put in requests to speak tonight already on this item that would like to have or need interpreters.

I think that's something maybe we can try to accommodate if we can. Okay.

Should we say that in Chinese?

Is there another speaker in Chinese?

Well, there's a staff who can do that.

Yeah, do we have a staff who can translate in Mandarin tonight?

She can translate, so you can have her stand up and translate for you if you need in Mandarin. How about, is there a Cantonese speaker tonight on the thing?

That requires Cantonese.

All right. How about Spanish?

Is there a need for Spanish?

We have Spanish here.

And just know there are translators available.

They just have to be requested ahead of time. Yeah, we have翻譯.

Just to tell us, we can prepare.

We don't have every time we have翻譯. We don't have every time we have to request. Yeah, I think people, they need to know the public comment.

There's a service, like, provided, but it needs to be requested. Yeah, some people can go to.

Okay, we can continue with the public comment.

We're going to go to the next speaker. We can do that on the side.

Go to the next speaker.

Prior to that, I just wanted to inform you there was a request for the staff report prior to public comment.

Do we do?

Can we do a staff report?

Yeah, let's do the staff report first. And do we have how many speakers?

Eleven.

Eleven. Okay.

Well, let's do the staff report first then.

Good evening, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and members of the City Council. Xochitlipan, Public Works Manager. The item before you is consideration of franchise fee rates for our solid weight services.

At the May 7th City Council meeting, City Council directed staff to initiate the Proposition 218 process and to set a public hearing to consider solid waste adjustments. The rate changes are a result of updated franchise fees for solid waste services. The City completed a study to identify costs that may be recovered through the franchise fees to sustain the City's refuse enterprise. The franchise fee study looked at different costs that could be recovered by the city. These costs include city costs for the management and administration of the agreements, charges for the use of the public right-of-way, and costs associated with pavement impacts. Since the May 7th Council meeting and the proposed rate adjustments, there has been new case law that associated with pavement impacts. Therefore, the costs that were originally included for pavement impacts are excluded from the proposed rates tonight. That results in Lor rates than what we had originally presented at the May 7th meeting and also included in the original protest ballots that were mailed out.

The city is required to follow the Prop 218 process for consideration of changes in the solid waste rates. As an overview, the City Council approved the notice and start of Prop 218 process at the May 7th City Council meeting. The City mailed out over 17,000 notices, which included the protest ballot 45 days in advance of the hearing as required by applicable law in the City's resolution. The City also published a notice of the July 16th public hearing on the June 26th and July 3rd issues of the Monterey Park Press newspaper. Based on the majority protest process, the city would need to have received over 8,000 valid protests to reject the proposed rate adjustments. As of our latest count prior to this council meeting, the city had received 1,455 mailings. Since the majority protest needed was not reached, if passed, the updated rates would become effective September 1, 2025.

As mentioned, the rates considered tonight exclude costs associated with pavement impacts. Based on the franchise fees of 11.97%, rate adjustments would result in approximately a $4.70 increase for the standard service level for residential customers, setting the 96-gallon, three-cart system monthly rate to $34.69. This updated rate also includes the annual consumer price index increase of 3.3% which is already incorporated in the city's franchise agreements with haulers. The tables in the slides include the change in rates for all residential cart service which our standard service level is the 96 gallon for trash recycling and organics and also provides rates for multifamily residential services that have been serviced.

This concludes my presentation.

I'm available for comments or questions.

We're going to get the speakers first.

Next speaker, Brian Chen.

Good evening, Mayor Ngo and Mayor Pro Tem, Yang, and City Council members.

and the staff.

Thank you for allowing me to speak. Although I just heard the presentation, so maybe my speech here is epidemic.

But I just heard earlier, the gentleman mentioned a trash fee hike of 18%.

And I want to talk about our trash bill problems problems that residents are facing in this city. Last year, I think it's about September, the city decided to change the trash service company from Athens to currently WARE.

That increase, I have a three-unit property, McFerrin. that increase the $35 per month from August to September. At least from my perspective, it was a change from August to September, $35 hike. I mean, that is a 24% hike. Combined with today's proposed 18% hike. To the residents, we're looking at from within one year, it went from 24% increase to 42% increase for this coming year. I brought with me the actual bills to prove my numbers. And I just think this is preposterous for a trash service to be increased 42% within a 12-month period. I urge the council members to vote this down. I just heard the number of proposed objections was not met. that doesn't mean the majority of people is not feeling the hurt. I think I'm part of the I think I'm part of the silent majority as you can hear from the audience tonight. Everybody is feeling the hurt. 41% in 12 months is ludicrous and And I wish the City Council take consideration of your citizens' financial ability. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, actually, before we continue, I have a question for staff, which you can look at. But again, I know there's a lot of people there who are confused about parts about the switch from Athens to where. But is it possible, maybe when we go back to discussion, to revisit the proposals that were put forward, including what was put forward by Athens during that bidding last year.

Can we pull up that information?

I remember that here, so I can bring that back up later when we have a discussion. Okay, my apologies.

Please continue the hearing.

Next speaker, Larry LaCrosse. Or Carrie, sorry. Larry?

Evening, Mayor. City Council. I'm probably going to say the same thing that some other people have said, but I'll try and say it a little differently. I've lived in Monterey Park for close to 12 years. At that time, I think I was paying $22 a month for the service through Athens. And that was over about a 10-year period. I understand your hands are tied with what Sacramento does. so obviously there needed to be a change probably from Athens to where based on the discussions that I've had with some of the people that pick up the trash where provides a service so you end up with three cans but you signed a seven-year contract from what I understood and you're told everybody there was going to be $29.99 a month then you change we changed the billing which is fine I understand that as well. But now, what, 10 months into the beginning of getting contact from September of last year, you want to raise it another 20%. All the years that I was in business, every time I signed a contract with a client,

I never went back in six months, 10 months, or one year and changed and asked for any more money. I never did it because I know what they would have told me, where I could take my business and where I could put it.

So, I'm probably one of the people that will say this to you, the increase doesn't really affect me. I can pay the increase. Hell, I can probably pay the increase for everybody that's in here.

You're welcome. But I don't like the way it was done.

I don't like the fact that you signed a contract with a company and got rid of a

company to bring on another company and then 10 months later you want to change it again that

doesn't make any sense to me that's all i have to say but i think i think the increase is uh

exorbitant i don't think it's necessary i think 29.99 that we're paying now is more than enough for the citizens of monterey park thank you

Thank you Larry.

can we were charged the highest fee regardless we had the small one medium or whatever before for at least four months except some senior citizen they can get it sooner to change it but what i'm saying is we didn't ask for a larger can but we were forced to pay more money for the

people who are younger they had to wait until january to ask for the change of course during

those four months and five months everyone had to pay more money because they want the small

medium or what so i think the f uh the rare disposal should give the people some credit

or we fund the money to them the next one the last one i have is seeing the information we have we see from the letter is so little and

Next speaker, Vivian.

Hello, everyone again. It's me.

Firstly, as the City Council members, you might be aware why have so many people out here today for two topics, swimming pool and trash fees increase. They are, everyone here today, they are all the most concerned residents in Montreux Park. Even that we're not sitting at your seat, but we do care about our city. We do care about our children, and we care about our city's future too. You know, so I know the people left earlier, maybe here, about the swimming pool. Can I ask the audience a question here? Can I get permission to do that?

You can ask. You have five minutes.

I want to ask the audience, are you all here to against the fee increase? Yes. Can you raise your hand, please?

I think you can see they are representing majority of the city. But, you know, as you might aware, a lot of people are very quiet. I don't even recall I received a proposal. I've never seen that. So if it's possible, since there's so many people here against the idea, either you get extended for another proposal round or, like, send a letter again. even if you still don't get the 8,000 more, then we have no concern. So, I mean, even if we don't care, then you can go for it. So I think we deserve another chance to do it.

And per my understanding, they already mentioned about the trash can company.

We just gave them the contract. They was granted contract for just about a year or two. And I think the contract term is more than that. If that is the case, and when they negotiate a contract, they must already have a negotiated price and everything in the contract. How can they increase the price in such a short time? I don't get it. So as a city, I think we should review the contract and try to find a low-po about it. And they already promised for the contract term, they should be honored.

And then for future, we always have this kind of contracts going on every other couple years. So I suggest the city council should work with the city managers and the clerks together and try to get a term good for those years.

We don't want that kind of increase in between. After they get the contract and they coming out say, oh, we need more money. That's not right. And this is not the way to do business. So I think as a county, like a city, you know, we, again, so we count on you to help the city's residents to get the best for the city. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

I thought you were going to ask two questions, but you only asked one.

Okay.

Next speaker.

That's what I thought.

Too nervous.

Sorry. I was thinking about the, what is that called?

The POTUS ballot.

So can the city send a POTUS ballot or make that available at the city clerk office or any office so we can get it?

I'm not sure if she has it right now.

Most likely, maybe not, right?

So if she has it, that would be nice. Then we can get a copy.

So I believe every one of you here, even we work together, everyone make some copies to collect those signatures.

We should be able to do it.

I hope the protest ballot has very clear instruction how to sign and what is the qualified signature or something. I think those information should be in the protest battery.

Should be, right?

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah, thank you. Next speaker, Teresa.

Thank you.

to Teresa, so she has seven minutes.

Thank you, and thank you, City Council members. First of all, I want to thank the Speaker, Vivian. I believe that's her name, ma'am. There was a lot of confusion about this protest vote because people think that it's where that's asking for this additional increase, and it's not. It's the city that wants additional funding. None of this money is going to go to where, so number one. Number two, I am one of those that misplaced my ballot, So I called the city, spoke to the clerk, and I requested a ballot. And they told me one was not available. I said, so what do I do if I misplaced it? And they're like, I don't know. So I know other folks also lost their ballots, and they called the city. And the reason I bring this up is because there's a resolution that was mentioned, resolution 11647 that outlines what you need to do for a prop 218 procedure and specifically on

there it says section 7f in the event a property owner loses or misplaces a protest ballot upon request by the property owner the city will provide a replacement protest ballot i never got a

replacement one. No one did. Instead, what they told us is to go to the previous agenda on May, whatever it was, May 6th, I think it was, and go to page 541, because the protest ballot is there. So we did, and a bunch of us started circulating it until one of my neighbors said, what is this? because on that ballot, which was on your May meeting, it doesn't talk about trash. It talks about water rates. Somebody wasn't paying attention.

And it specifically says protests should contain the following information. Property assessor's parcel number.

Two, your water account number. Three, whether you are the owner or tenant that is billed directly by the city. for, and this is where I want you to look really closely, for a statement that you are protesting the water rate adjustments. That's what the city clerk directed us to, and that's what was being circulated. So there is mass confusion. And if you want to be known as a council that passed a Prop 218, this is not being transparent. And these protest ballots should be provided to us. This is something important. You guys have expended a lot of money. I also want to talk about, I don't know if you were able to listen to the news today, but Governor Newsom was talking about how these ICE raids have caused a tremendous financial impact, not only to businesses, but also to residents. As you know, many people are now working from home. They are not going grocery shopping. They are not tending to their medical needs, et cetera, et cetera, because they're afraid of these ICE raids. It's just the way it is right now, unfortunately. I spoke to the managers at our Home Depot. I said, how is this affecting you? First of all, they said the tariffs took a big toll on their sales because prices escalated, as we all know. But now people are afraid to go shopping. So that means people are watching their panties. Look, I understand that there may be a need to increase this, but you also have to understand there needs to be a time and a place for it. As a previous speaker mentioned, why don't you put a pin on it or postpone it? Postpone it to maybe October, you know, so that you can make the decision there based on the economic reasons. But also, more so, if you want to talk about transparency, this wasn't transparent. This caused so much chaos and convolution. so I just want to remind you all you are by the people for the people and Henry, Council Member Lo you've always been one that advocates for people and when there's a wrong you make it right perhaps this was an inadvertent wrong city clerk didn't know that there was this language in here but it happened and it caused confusion so please I am asking you to do what is right today And if you are going to approve this, well, first of all, you don't have to approve it. If they received 8,000 votes, that means you must deny it. You must. The threshold isn't there, but you can still say no. You can still modify what staff proposed or proposing 17 or whatever the percentage is. You can say 5%. You can say let's do it for five years and at the end of five years bring it back. You, the four council members, and as I recall, it takes four votes to pass this, if my memory serves me correct. But you four have the ability to tailor something here that really helps the businesses and helps the residents. So I hope you all will do what we elected you to do, and you will be for the people. Thank you. Thank you, Teresa.

Next speaker, John Lim.

Thank you for sticking out, John. You went from first to last.

Mayor, City Council,

it's a privilege to be able to speak tonight, some thoughts.

and speaking about this garbage,

I think if we look at the big picture, there's a lot of people that don't want any raises in costs. And if you look at your constituency, they're not political either.

they're not going to come out to city council to to listen or to speak

they're not that kind of people here in Monterey Park but you can be sure that most of them are not very pleased with a rate hike even if it's a little one like Ware says because it's not that high but if you think about all the people that are going to have to pay this rate hike, it's a lot. But then why a rate hike so soon? Don't let wear pull the wool over your eyes because it's not like we have to listen to them. We can go back to Athens. So we understand, though, that we have to have three trash bins, and I can guarantee it's not easy to fill up those three trash bins anymore. It was easy to fill up two, but three? We have to pay for three, and it's not easy to fill up three. So, like, we're trying our best is all I can say, and I'm sure Monterey Park is trying to do their best to comply as well. So you can hear how the people do feel, and I hope you can understand that it's not a necessity, and I hope that we can really put it off to some later point in time, just not right away. This doesn't make sense right away, and I think that's what everyone is complaining about. Thank you. Thank you, John.

Next speaker is Sen Chang.

Can you repeat the name again?

Sen Chang.

Sen Chang. I'm here.

Good evening. Everyone. OK.

I speak Chinese, can I speak Chinese? Yeah, yeah.

Can we get a translator up here so that because it's being recorded, you can just verbatim translate?

I speak Chinese, it's more complicated.

You speak Chinese, he can you翻譯 in English.

He will translate for you and we'll give the matching time.

Okay. Okay. Okay. So good evening, everyone. I live in Monterey Park. 30 years. 30 years. And then my business is to 30 years in Monterey Park. I do the business different. Okay. Now today I have three questions. Three questions. Let everybody know. First question.

The trash fee increased so quickly. It's a 10-year contract.

A seven-year contract, but increase in 10 months.

That's not reasonable. It's not right. You said four months. Four months.

It's actually one year.

If I rent a house to someone else, I cannot increase the rental so quickly in such a short time.

We get the point, okay.

Yes.

Why does trash company can increase such kind of unreasonable increase? That's not reasonable at all.

Okay. Some solar company meet the deal 20 years.

like every year up to 2.5 percent right everybody know solar company meet the

20 years lease every year up to 2.5 percent side the country why this trust company and multiple city hall side the country 10 year how many up up to maybe 10% 50% right yeah very very no good this country okay my campaign okay okay I

campaign second one the water very very expensive okay

Okay, we use the money for two months, one hundred sixty pay.

Now I pay one month, two hundred twenty to two hundred sixty for months.

Okay, why? I have other house, my family,

and San Gabriel Temple City, every month you still return.

Those Temple City pay $99, San Gabriel pay $89. Why? How many? I talked to you, 240 per month.

Very, very expensive. Yeah. 240, 733. Okay. Now, I do the business, like Montreux Park, Rosemead, St. Gabriel, Alhambra, Temple City. I come to City Hall to put the permit for the electrical. It is a code upgrade the panel. Everybody want to upgrade the panel. OK, I let you know the price. Sam, upgrade panel, install the EV charge. OK. Rosimi, 180. Like Ahemba, 190.

OK. like San Gabriel no no no no like all the I am like a temple city San Gabriel maybe like a 180 to 210 for permit like a boring part three hundred ten dollar

Why Monchi Park charge how many? Everybody know? 520.

I showed that every paperwork to city for the country, the lady shifts me.

I say, why your Monchi Park charge 520?

This area the city charge like 180, 210.

Why your city charges $520? Double-double.

Right? I say, maybe you'll suddenly double to other city workers?

He asks if the multiple city salary is higher than other cities. Why they charge so much double?

Yeah, everyone's water double. Pour the permit double.

Okay, mayor, you pay how many per year? I don't know.

Maybe you'll see Mr. Mayor.

$100,000? You pay $200,000? No? Okay.

Why you charge the fee? Is everyone double?

Huh? I have a problem. Just like that.

I don't want to add the trash.

Because the contract is a problem.

It's so fast.

And then, you said that all the tests were not to do.

So he's not agreed for the city to charge, to increase the charge fee.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Cham Kimdo. Just one more.

Hi, good evening. I don't agree with the increased rates because I don't even agree with paying $29.99.

I have two homes on my property, and I don't even use the six cans. On top of that, Ware has been charging me for a third home that doesn't even exist on my property. Like I've been disputing with them since February, and they're refusing to refund me for the overcharges.

What kind of business doesn't pay the customer back when they overcharge? That's their mistake. They should validate that they're charging correctly.

And they make it like I'm the one that made the mistake, that I didn't inquire about it on time. I feel like I'm being scammed by where? I feel like I'm being scammed by the city.

I go, this is just all ridiculous. We shouldn't be paying more for, like, terrible service. They have a customer service line. They can't customer service. They tell you to send an email. Nobody ever responds to the email.

And I have to make multiple calls, and nothing gets resolved.

So I don't even understand why you guys are doing business with them.

Yeah, it's just terrible.

Thank you.

Can we get her information, and then we can make sure we get her information if she has a dispute because maybe you can line her up with one of the managers that we have connections with at WIR

to help resolve that. Will do.

Next speaker, Lucia Roybal.

Hi there. I'm actually going to shake it up and I'm going to start where I was going to with my ending.

Proposition 218 passed in 1996

Requiring local government to either hold a ballot vote Or use a protest ballot before increasing property-related fees

But it wasn't until 2014 that the city of Monterey Park Formally adopted this into the municipal code

By resolution, conveniently leaving out the ballot vote option And only including the silent protest method

I'm here to express my opposition to the proposed rate increase and the process behind it. The current setup is designed to benefit council, not its residents. The city failed to meet Proposition 218 requirements.

Prop 218 requires a clear explanation of how fees are calculated. The rate sheet that we received only lists current and proposed rates. The public hearing notice only says the proposal will be presented to the city council for approval at a public hearing on July 16th. If approved, the proposed rates outlined in this chart included in this notice will become effective September 1st.

While I'm not clear if the public notice is legally required to be included in today's hearing, it would be in good faith to do so. I say it because the mailed notice lists conflicting rates and information that was in the agenda packet.

City must explain what factors are driving the increase and why the only explanation provided was increased cost of service with no itemized breakdown or supporting documents. The notice failed to provide online resources where to find information or how to even locate our parcel number. Instead, the public is directed to call Public Works Department. The proposed rate hike is unjustified. It has not been a full year since the service started, and both city and ware have failed to meet basic service standards. The rollout phase was delayed for over two weeks. No trash was collected for my street by either Ware or Athens for the week of August 26th and the week of September 2nd. Ware's first pickup was September 12th. Others waited longer, yet residents were billed for August, September by Ware and the city. The overlap does not justify missing two weeks of service in charging us twice for it. These are not clerical errors. They're billing violations, and I request staff looking to a refund to all of those affected. We are collected recyclables and organics in the same truck, violating state law and their own contract. I brought pictures I wasn't able to bring in a video. Why do we pay for three bins if they collect them all together? The trash bins are not equipped with tight-fitting lids, allowing odors to escape and attract pests and create unsanitary conditions, violating state law.

the silent ballot format is unreliable and easily overlooked even when submitted there's no

confirmation no receipt audit trail or public tabulation the outcome is predetermined before

the hearing even started the staff report already states staff is recommending that the council find

that less than 51 percent protests were submitted this makes the public hearing meaningless other

Other cities like Sierra Madre and Azusa publicly count ballots and provide tabulation logs.

I submitted various public records requests in search for this process, and none was provided. City documents only say city follows the Prop 218 process.

There's no mention of handling, counting, or verifying ballots. There is legal precedence for validating rate hikes. Using vague or misleading language and lack of cost disclosure, to name a few. This isn't about trash rates. It's about the erosion of public trust. The city continues to drown its residents in process and legal language.

Residents can't possibly attend every public meeting or dissect every agenda.

We elected you to represent us, and I urge council to reject this rate increase until compliant, transparent process is in place,

stop the silent ballot system that only benefits council, and give us the option for a real vote as alLod by state law. Thank you. Thank you.

Next speaker, Serena Chen.

Thank you.

I received a letter in June. In that letter, it said that we need 8,000 votes in order to pass the against for the increase.

And I would like to ask, we received more than 1,000 against votes.

How many supported votes have we received so far? you did not issue any support vote and only issued against no, I understand that in Wanchi Park there is 26,000 households and I just find that the 8,000 that we require to pass this increase I just learned today I already asked my labors to participate then they said nobody against will support that increase then we are going to win the case anyway. So people kind of understand

All the years, less than 5%. Last year, it's only 2.9%, just like the other gentleman said.

And I also did a calculation.

Right now, the increase is 18%.

I think if we increase every year,

this year, increase 3.5%, or 4%, or 5%,

Even the highest for 5%, only by the fourth year, 2029, is still not enough for the right increase.

I did the calculation.

If we increase 3.5%, so for example, I use 27 three bins. The middle size for three bins is $27 a month right now.

But they asked for $31.83.

So I did the calculation.

If we increase by 3.5%, so the first year is only $29.97. The second year is $30.12.

The third year is $30.41.

So we all increased by that. by the fourth year, still not reach the increase we have now. So I don't know what is justification to increase immediately for 18%. I don't think any salary people can have that increase.

And also, as you know, the SSA for retirement people, they estimate the increase for SSA for 2026 is only 2% for God's sakes.

So how could in the world, and you ask for increase 18% immediately for five years, that's not fair. I also just learned that we signed a contract for seven years. Now we signed a contract not only for one year, then we signed a contract for another five years. So I would like to kind of like study all the numbers. I also went through the COSO, CO and CO, CO, the CPI, for the Los Angeles, Anaheim, and Long Beach CPI for last year is only 4.2%.

How in the whole world can you increase it to 18% immediately?

And then only for the people, so, you know, only 1,000 you receive,

then you decide, oh, so the majority is silent. So they're assuming they agree with that. So I don't think this is fair and I don't think this is going to respect the residents of the Mount Jipak people. So thank you for hearing from me.

Thank you.

Next speaker, Kathy Baum.

Good evening, Mayor. and council member, staff, and multiple residents. I do have a comment to make that I work from District 4, and I didn't receive any letter at all. I don't read the paper from whatever city sent it, but I didn't receive any proposal for the paper. I downloaded it on the Internet today because I was on the Monterey Park Life. A lot of people in my blog, the whole Alhambra, They don't know. And I gave them the information today, basically 10.30 today, and they don't even know that the due date was supposed to be today either. So for me, a lot of information that you get requirement for 8,000 people that to be passed the bill, I don't know where you get that number from and how you vote for it. Like, is a person in my family for one vote or her family? That's a lot of not clear in the paper. and then when we would sit down and look at the paper,

they were exactly what she said, it was water. And then a lot of times for the homeowner, it's a concern for them. But for the tenant, they don't care because they don't pay for water.

So they're not going to respond to those kind of increasements. So if you get based on the residential living in there, it's not going to be working out because they're not the owner who pays for it. They should be increased for the residential who pay for it, who really affect it to them. Now, go back to the where.

When I found out that we switched from A10 to where, we were taught that they're too high.

They increased it. That's why we went to the cheaper one. And the contract was like seven years.

So they're changing the rate on us, not even one year yet. Also, I don't know if the city council or any of your staff members even going to work and checking their work, see if they're working properly or not. Because from what I know, on my block, the check-in will be now. We follow exactly what procedure was sent to us. But we have a nasty neighbor, and they always show on whatever in the track. They don't even know what color for. and we got the yellow tape on our track bin and our track won't be picked up until next week because of somebody else put on the track can. When I stopped the driver and they told us that because of that, we cannot sit down there on there just to guard our track can. And before agents don't require to do that, we just throw track. Their job to select it, collect it, and they are doing their own work for whatever item supposed to be.

We don't have to do the work for them. And then now they get increased the money just for not doing their job. We did it. So why they increased their job?

Also, if you noted that, the track can, that big container, we own Alhambra. If Penny Low, you are my counsel. If you ever drove by there, get me to the residence over there, you will see.

The track can, every Wednesday, they put the same plate. and then the truck that who whippen the trees, they won't be able to. That location for months and months not be whipping clean. We have to do that ourselves. We have to go out there and clean it just because there are arrows to put the track can in the same spot every single day. And they put the track can too early before 12.

So the track can for whipping from 8th not even go through yet. So that whole block for the track can work in front of the house, it's dirty, it's nasty,

it's smelly because of that reason.

So a lot of times the LCD or the staff, it fails for not supervising their work when you are selecting the new company, you support supervising them, see how they do the good job or not. We don't want to change in the perfect company who do the good job to the really bad service

that we have to pay and now the increase on that. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Can we get the constituents information and especially if there is issues about the

where staff being sloppy in collecting the refuse? Yes Mr. Mayor, members of the

council, I'll confirm that we have the contact information. Yes, okay, it looks

like we have the contact information so we can follow up with that resident. In

In addition to the speakers, we also received two written communications. One is from Melinda Bell, who writes regarding the same concerns regarding the increase exceeding the CPI. She is extremely concerned. Why is it five to six times larger than anticipated by the city's contract? The citizens of Monterey Park deserve to know why the increase is so

much larger than anticipated.

how much of the shortfall is due to unanticipated costs by the city and why, and how much of the increase is being requested by the contractor franchisee and why. She'd also like to know what assurances will be provided that no further refuse service rate increases may be sought for in the second through fifth years of service as provided by the city's contract. She signs off respectfully. In addition to Ms. Bell, there was another written communication from Stuart Hiromi Phillips. He wrote regarding serious concerns regarding the notice of the public hearing for proposed refuse rate adjustments. He spoke to several residents, and it appears that many have not received this notice, raising questions about proper distribution of the notice. Proposition 218 mandates of 45-day review period. Yet he states that he received the ballot only 16 days ago on June 25th, which is insufficient notice. This lack of transparency and inadequate time to organize a majority protest required to reject the proposals undermines public trust and due process.

He urges you to investigate the distribution process, extend the review period to comply with Proposition 218, and ensure all affected property owners receive proper notice.

Please address this matter urgently before this hearing.

No other comments.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Mr. Mayor, oh, sorry.

Go ahead and add your comment if you have a quick one.

it's really quick and it was brought up in the former agenda item G with the general fund in the pool

I believe you said something about the rate increase that could probably fund help fund the pool and the general fund isn't that strictly prohibited to use

rate hikes from these kind of utilities to for the general fund I think I don't think that was brought up but yeah it'd be good to not mislead the public

Mr. Mayor, members of the council

I just wanted to follow up staff was able to pull up the slide if you're interested in seeing

the council member Lo's request

to see the I believe it was the rate differences when we were awarding the contract to where

as that's brought up if I can ask let me do this

let me lead this discussion because we can be here all night Mr. Mayor do you want to close the public hearing let me close the public hearing

Okay, so let me kind of just throw out, I heard a lot of things, and that's great.

That means you guys are involved.

Let me just kind of level set here, big picture level standpoint, and then we can have more

discussion on this, okay?

First one is about Proposition 218, the questions about that process. The second one is the background on how we got into the work contract, which is the Athens

contract.

The third one, let me just share with you some of the costs from the other cities so you have an idea of where we are. And then the fourth one, that $35, is it $34?

I'm going to round it to $35.

I know it's $34.69, but for my sake, let's round that to $35.

This is $30.

First one, let me ask our city attorney about this real quick. Proposition 218, what is the California law requirement?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. So there are two parts of the law. One is the addition to the California Constitution, which is Article 13D, Section 6,

which talks about how water, wastewater, and solid waste fees may be adopted.

And I've heard the commentators talk about basically a proactive vote, and that's what we're all used to, is having a proactive vote.

Those three fee structures, however,

However, pursuant to the California Constitution do not require a proactive vote, meaning that you do not need a majority approval to have those fees go into effect. The Constitution actually provides that it's a protest vote, which is why we're talking tonight about whether or not there is a majority protest against those fees going into effect. And what that means is 50 plus 1 is what is needed in terms of percentages is what is needed to defeat the adoption of those fees. So one of the reasons that the ballots haven't actually been counted, we've only counted pieces of mail that have come in, is because in order to even start counting the ballots to make sure that they aren't duplicative, that the property owners are actually represented on those ballots, is because, I'm sorry, we haven't counted the ballots because we haven't

even opened the envelopes.

If we haven't had enough pieces of mail to even get to the 8,000-plus threshold that's needed to approach having a majority vote from a public resources standpoint it doesn't make sense

to invest the time to actually count those ballots. The state legislature also implemented

the Prop 218 omnibus implementation bill and that was that occurred in order to help facilitate the implementation of Prop 218. What happened in this city in 2014 was the city council adopted a

resolution that actually adds an additional layer to help with implementing these types of fee

structures. Amongst other things, for example, there's no legal requirement that we send out a ballot. Neither the Constitution nor state law require us to send out a ballot. We send out a ballot for two reasons. One is it helps, it doubles as both the notice for the protest hearing and also it helps facilitate counting of those ballots if we need to. Only property owners get notices of the ballot. That's all that's required under state law. We can go back and verify what date all those notices were sent out. I have previously done so. It was on or about May 29th,

I think is what it was.

Monterey Park. Mayor St. May 30th. Mayor St. May 30th. We mailed on notices in three languages. Mayor St. Right. So, all of those were mailed out in accordance with California law. There was some discussion about what the ballot wording actually was. Again, I note that there's no requirement that we send out a ballot. I also note that the ballot that was actually sent out is not the one that was presented on this blue piece of paper tonight. It actually has the notification with regard to the franchise fee proposal. I will also finally note and please correct me if I've missed anything that the council had an extensive discussion about the franchise fee amounts before the notices were sent out whether to send out what they should be whether or not those should be sent out and set the date for the public hearing back in May. the final observation I make on this is that there have been changes to the law that are noted in the staff report with regard to why there is a recommendation that the fees actually be reduced a component of the study was rendered invalid by an appellate court during the time period that the notices were sent out into the United States so that calculation has been taken out of the study for purposes of reducing the fee And I also note that there have been changes to state law effective at the beginning of this year.

So we will actually be bringing back a revised resolution for Prop 218 for the future on a future agenda item.

Obviously not tonight.

Happy to answer your question.

Okay, so second question to that is, did we comply to the Prop 218 laws?

We complied with California Constitution and state law, yes.

Okay, so I'm going to summarize that because there was a lot of legal lease terms. In layman's terms, my understanding from what you just said is there's a California law for Proposition 218. The city of Mario Park with the council, and I think there's a member here who actually sat on that council in 2014. The council here went above and beyond the state law and said, in the city of Mario Park, we are going to make it harder for these things to happen, which we did.

and even the mailing out of these refuse fees have met the required,

not only the state law, but also the city resolution

that was blessed by city council back in 2014. Did I get that clear?

So the notices that were sent out were sent out to all property owners in accordance with California law.

Okay.

Okay, so that's the first one.

Can we show the chart real quick about, I want to kind of walk through the background of where we were.

Remember, the trash contract is for seven years. This actually went into effect last September, but the discussion for the trash contract went back 18 months before last September. This is what we got in terms of a bid. From a simple standpoint, the city council that was sitting here in 2017 voted based on Measure BB, which is a measure ballot by the city of Mario Park resident who said, we will change our trash contract every seven years or so. That's voted by the residents, by all of you, myself included. When that contract came up in 2024, because initially this was approved in 2017, the rates that we were paying, again, I'm going to keep it simple. I was paying $24.99 or $25 for a single family home. If I went with where I was paying $29.99, again, instead of $25, $30. If I went with Athens, who actually bid, Athens was going to charge me about $38.69, $39. By default, by our Measure BB, the city had to take the Lor one at $25 versus $38.

If we kept the same contract with Athens, the two bin, that would have been $58.

So you can imagine the city's position in terms of where we needed to go. We had, by Measure BB, we had to take the contract of the Lor rate, assuming everything was the same, which is the three-card system.

So instead of paying $38, or I'm going to round it to $39,

we were all paying $29 or $30. okay the contract will wear had a cpi every year of three percent or so i'm again i'm just

estimating even if you built in the three percent over the seven years it was still going to be less

than the 38 so by default we had to take that because again voter initiated we did this to

ourselves. We ask for this. So that's the background. The third item here is cost of other

cities. And this is, I got a report. Where's that report? And I'm going to tell you all these cities

and you tell me where. So I know South Pasadena just updated their new trash, monthly trash rate because they just got a new, every few years you have to sign a new contract.

The city of South Pasadena just signed a new trash contract, $71 a month.

There's escalations every month. I'm not going to get into that, but that's going to be another $10 more. So first month, $70. The city of San Marino just signed a trash contract, $58 a month.

Again, escalations all the way up 75, 85, 95 in future months.

Sierra Madre, Temple City, Pasadena, Monrovia, West Covina, Azusa, San Dimas, Montebello, Arcadia, La Prenta, Duarte, El Monte, Den Monterey Park. Guys, out of 17 cities, we are on the bottom three. And we just signed a new contract. The two cities that's slightly below us, and I'm going to give them props, right?

Alhambra is paying $30 a month.

Rosemead is paying $26 a month.

But guess what?

Their contract is up soon, in a year or two. Guess what that rate's going to be?

It is not going to be $35 or $40. We will see that number, and then we will report that number if you guys come to the next meeting. So that's kind of where we are with the refuse contract. That was my third point. I just want to, again, be factual and set up where we are today. The rubbish fee of $34.69, not all of that is going to where? Where is charging us $29.99 plus another, is it $1.10 for the escalation, right? The $3.50 actually comes back to the city so that the city can put that into general fund. It's really for roads and streets to make sure we maintain the city. So I just want to make sure we understand all of that, okay? No one wants to pay more, but I understand that because I also work a full-time job. Somebody asked, well, you must be making a lot of money. The city council gets paid $500 a month. Most, if not all of us, donate more than that amount of money back into our libraries and our schools. We're doing this because we care for the city.

That's the bottom line.

And I'm going to actually open this up for comments from the rest of my city council members so that they get a chance to kind of walk in here and have the discussion.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

For the staff, I'm wondering if we can take a quick step back in terms of, I think there is a lot of lack of understanding and misconceptions about what we're talking about specifically tonight in terms of the franchise fee. Can you just talk high level what a franchise fee is and what the purpose of charging that is?

Sure. Can you put it on the first slide?

So the city completed a franchise fee study that looked at costs that the city could recover for administering a solid waste franchise or solid waste services. So the study looked at three different categories. That includes the city's cost for the management and administration of the franchise agreements. So that includes salary and benefits for city staff that are overseeing solid waste programs. It also included charges for the use of the public right-of-way, so for setting out carts and containers out into the street. The study also looked at costs associated with pavement impacts, the use of the roads for the collection of trash. But as we previously stated, those costs, because of recent case law, were excluded from the rates that are being considered today.

So the franchise fees that are being proposed are fees to recover city costs for solid waste programs.

It's not going to wear disposal. And it would go back, it would be deposited to our refuse enterprise fund, not general fund, to be clear.

So just to be clear, go ahead.

I was going to tag team on those comments, all of which are correct. I should point out that there have been, in addition to the appellate case that just came down in the past 45 days, there's also been a California Supreme Court case decision that has changed the way that all franchise fees in the state of California have to be calculated. One of the reasons that we've performed the study and have gone through this process is precisely because in reaction to that California Supreme Court case, historically, most public entities have simply applied a 10% franchise fee to all gross revenue received from solid waste. People have been paying that for years for all jurisdictions that have solid waste, or most, I should say, I shouldn't say all, those with franchise fees. And that, as the California Supreme Court properly recognized, is simply unsupportable based upon Prop 218 case law and the original intent of the voters. There needs to be a reasonable relationship between the cost being collected from the rate payers and, I'm sorry, the amount being collected from rate payers as opposed to the cost being incurred by public entities. And so that is one of the reasons that we are going through this exercise. Again, it used to be most of my career, it was simply each franchise agreement would state that the franchisee would pay the public entity 10% of its gross revenue, and that was the franchise fee for the privilege of operating within the jurisdiction.

And just so in plain English, correct me if I'm wrong in characterizing it this way, franchise fees in this case and in most cases right is to cover the costs of managing and providing these trash services in this case this service to residents and businesses in the city this cost these costs exist whether they're through the franchise whether they're paid for one way or another they have to happen and the city has to incur these costs to have trash

happen, traffic pick-up happen. Correct. The costs are paid for either through the general fund,

through taxpayers in general, or they're paid for by the rate payers that specifically pay for

these services. So these are costs that are borne either, if we don't charge this franchise fee, that means the general fund essentially subsidizes the costs of every customer that

has trash pickup in the city.

That's residents and businesses. Everyone else, we socialize that cost among our general fund instead of by people that actually use the service. Is that right?

That's correct. I mean, I will even throw in there that we actually had a right to charge the fee

back last September.

But because you didn't want that heavy load, another $5 or $3.50 into the 29 you kind of held it back for a year and now here we are I mean at the end of the day the way I look at this from a number standpoint is you know we have about 18,000 homes who are going through this contract and if you increase it by three dollars and fifty cents that's about sixty three thousand a year you round it off times twelve that's about seven hundred fifty thousand dollars that the city is paying for the people who are actually paying the trash bill, if we increase this rate, you get to use that $750,000 with the city's general fund to use it for other purposes.

Yes, I agree.

My next question is, and the city attorney already alluded to this, just about everyone that provides trash service, every city in California has a franchise fee.

Is that fair to say?

That's fair to say except for those jurisdictions that provide solid waste services.

Directly, yeah.

In which case they would probably recover those costs directly through rates.

In which case, correct.

The costs would be collected through the actual rates.

And then just to confirm, Carl, I know you've already said it, but I know it's come up a lot. It came up a lot during the comment just to confirm yes or no. we folLod the Prop 218 and the state requirements in terms of this Prop 218 process and the ballot process.

Based upon the information I have sitting here today, yes.

And then just in terms of how this is implemented, if we approve, well, one,

appreciate staff taking our direction by the council out of our discussion in May

around this alternative franchise fees that's proposed here. one I would not support anything beyond the alternative franchise fee which is the Lor amount that's proposed in the staff report so I'll just make that clear but appreciate staff putting the calculation together and putting that forward in front of us for for consideration if we approve the franchise fee as proposed the alternative franchise fee is there

One of the speakers is completely accurate from the standpoint of you don't have to adopt any fee. If you choose to adopt a fee, you may adopt an even Lor fee. If you want to implement it through a phased procedure, that's up to you as well. It's completely within your discretion as long as you don't go above the maximum cap that the study has identified as being the maximum cost.

Thank you.

And the mayor answered actually a lot of the other questions I had. I just want to, again, appreciate everyone that showed up. I know folks had a few folks had to take off as well. I know it's getting a little late but I just want to emphasize how we are also sensitive. I'm very sensitive to these cost increases. We're human beings and we're residents of the city as well. We all pay these same rates and these fees not only for trash for water for everything. I is not going to notice how much my bill as well has gone up. I pay this stuff too and there's at least one member of the council that pays for business as well and so pays more than double duty in that sense. This is not something I take lightly. I don't think anyone on this council takes lightly in terms of increasing costs to residents and to businesses in the city. We don't, if it were up to me, of course I don't want to do this. I don't want to make things more expensive. I don't want to make, I don't, I'd love to give everyone a break and cut, cut fees and taxes if we could, but we're balancing THIS WITH THE NEED TO PROVIDE SERVICES IN THE COMMUNITY FOR THE COMMUNITY. WE HEARD TODAY FROM PEOPLE ABOUT RECREATION FACILITIES IN THE CITY THAT ARE IN DIRE NEED OF INVESTMENT. THERE ARE SO MANY OTHER NEEDS AS WELL. THIS IS NOT THE ONLY 218 PROCESS WE'VE GONE THROUGH IN THE CITY BECAUSE WE'VE HAD TO CATCH UP AND MAKE A LOT OF INVESTMENTS IN OUR STREETS AND I HOPE PEOPLE HAVE NOTICED, RESIDENTS HAVE NOTICED THE CONTINUING IMPROVEMENT IN THE STATE OF SOME OF OUR STREETS. THERE'S STILL A long ways to go but our streets our water infrastructure a lot of public infrastructure that needs investment and a lot of community and public services that also need right we got to pay our people City Hall our facilities need to be upgraded and brought to code and brought to a point of being able to continue to serve the community so I just want to be clear that that's what we're balancing here on the council and includes what we're talking about here in terms of the cost for trash pickup, right? And I think I would characterize trash pickup as an essential utility. If the trash does not get picked up for a long enough time, we're going to be in a lot of trouble in the city. It's to make sure this service continues and that the city is allocating the costs of trash pickup and recycling and refuse services in the city properly. And in my mind, the most fair and effective and efficient way to allocate those costs, including these costs that the city has to bear to manage this contract with Ware and Athens, who are our two incumbent trash haulers for the city, and to make sure that these services are provided at a level of service that the community desires and expects from the city and from our trash providers, these costs have to happen it's a matter of how we charge them and it's not fair to me that it would fall on the general fund to and for everyone right that pays into the general fund to pay that and to subsidize that cost for customers I think it belongs and I believe the responsibility is on the customers directly so the ratepayers and so the fairest way to do that is through a franchise fee and the way to do that is through this 218 process which by my accounts and what I understand and through the staff report in the staff's work which I appreciate has gotten us to this point so I would I understand and I don't want to anyone to think we don't take this like that we don't take this seriously and we're if we increase these fees all of us as residents on this council and the city staff as well that live in the city have to pay these increases as well and I guarantee you we're not getting a raise from the city

to pay for these increased costs so it's it's not something I take lightly it's

something I would love not to have to do but the reality is for me and the way that I see it these costs are happening and do happen and need to happen to make sure that the service in terms of trash pickup and refuse and recycling need to happen for state law and by the expectations of all of us in the community and this is the fairest way to do it and the most responsible way to go about it but so i would support the alternative franchise fees uh at that level at the level proposed under our under the alternative franchise fees uh in the staff report but also ask staff to bring back maybe at the next council meeting or as soon as reasonably uh as soon as it is reasonable for potential options to phase in the full cost or if there are options at least bring in some options for us the council consider in terms of phasing in i also know that there are potential constitutional issues about this but for other private utility services there are opportunities to institute

right low income and need-based assistance programs if we can look and explore if there opportunities to do that locally to or even negotiate with where I know we already have existing payment payment systems to be able to or payment right pay that bill assistance programs that where can and does manage for customers and and Republic or right in Athens I believe but if there are ways to offer subsidies for low-income and other households in the city let's explore THAT I ALSO ASK FOR US TO LOOK AT WAYS TO ADVOCATE AT THE STATE LEVEL FOR POTENTIAL PROGRAMS TO OFFSET COSTS FOR LOW-INCOME AND NEEDY HOUSEHOLDS JUST AS WE HAVE DONE AND I THINK WE'LL CONTINUE TO DO ON THE WATER SIDE TO SEE WHERE WE CAN OFFER SOME RELIEF FOR THOSE IN OUR COMMUNITY THAT REALLY DO NEED IT AND THAT ARE HAVING A HARD TIME PARTICULARLY THOSE ON FIXED INCOMES AND SENIORS AND LOW-INCOME FAMILIES TO BE ABLE TO HAVE PROGRAMS THAT THEY CAN GO TO AND WE CAN DO A better job on the city and as well to help promote these programs that might exist to offer bill assistance in bill forgiveness and payment programs that can help them spread out cost of payments where they can so wherever we can I'm sensitive and want to be cognizant and to the extent we can on the city side provide assistance to those in need we're gonna have a hard time affording not only trash bills going forward and already having hard time but also water and other utility bills whatever we can do to redouble our efforts to help connect well have advocate for more of those resources to help families and households in need but also connect them to services that are existing would would ask that we and the staff look at opportunities and and bring some of those resources back into our community and help make that

information available yes actually I want to thank my colleague for asking a a lot of good questions and responding to all the comments and questions during the hearing. Actually, I'm going to be very brief, you know, but again, just for the audience, again, walk us again through the process in which we informed the public about this process. I mean, again, besides mail, I mean, it was also posted, right, in Cascades, email, right, and different languages, right, like in Spanish, Chinese. Walk us through the process again, please.

Sure. So the notice, which includes a protest ballot, was mailed out to all properties. And we also included a notice of the public hearing, of today's public hearing date, in our Monterey Press newspaper, both on June 26th, thank you, and July 3rd issues. We also, like we always do, post our agendas with detailed information regarding the staff report and the proposed rates that are being presented tonight.

And again, this was also in a different language, correct?

Yes.

The notice that has the ballot went out in three different languages.

Two different languages? Three. Three, okay.

English, Spanish, and Chinese.

Okay, English, Spanish, and Chinese, okay.

And again, I know Carl already, you know, commented,

but again, what was sent out specifically did refer to refuse rates, right? I mean, I know those comments that ballots were confusing, but...

Is that correct?

That is correct, Mr. Mayor, members of the council, what was mailed out?

This was not correct.

The attachment to the May 7th meeting notice, the blue page, yes, the blue page was attached to the May 7th agenda. What was mailed out was the refuse notice with the ballot, and that had all the correct information.

Correct. Sure.

I do want, though, I would like actually just to follow up as well is that, again, I, so if there are questions, were they all directed to the clerk's office? If there were questions about the balloting or were they all directed to the clerk's office?

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, I believe that when we received questions, some of them were handled by the clerk's office. Some of them might have been handled by public works staff, depending on, you know, where the caller called or emailed. But, yes, a combination of staff had responded to some of the questions.

It's only because, again, given that whoever picks up the phone, I mean, certainly they represent the city, and I would hope that staff did not mislead or give false information. And if they did, then I think that speaks to, you know, whoever answers the phone, especially when we have processes like this, I would expect and hope that, you know, there's a walkthrough of how to respond and how to direct constituents. Because, again, if there's any misinformation, at the end of the day, we hear it, you know, because we are the elected representatives. Further, I, you know, some of the folks who came up and spoke, you know, did speak about, and I realize tonight's discussion is about the refugees, but they did bring up some, I think, important issues regarding the transition to wear and also customer service. And I think that I would even like at some point perhaps even have wear come back and just give us an update so that we can also talk. Because, I mean, well, again, in my own district, I've had constituents who live, and I'll give anecdotally, that give examples where apparently, and again, maybe the first few months, and maybe it's been fixed, but nonetheless, it speaks to, I think, where people's frustration is that we've had people who reached out to me saying that they live in a condo, and apparently that wear person didn't have the right remote, so left, didn't pick up the canister over the weekend, or made some comment that, well, the trash bin is empty,

and I guess I don't have to pick it up.

I mean, I don't care if there's only one gallon of milk.

If it's trash, it's trash day.

And so, and again, there's less of it now, perhaps as part of the transition. However, you know, I do want to make sure that, number one, that that is not the attitude of where staff, and number two, that, you know, I would also like an update as far as how are they, if someone does email or makes a phone call, what is the turnaround time? Is it one day? Is it 10 days? And is it in language? I would like to make sure that that is addressed as well.

Noted, Mr. Mayor, members of the Council will definitely follow up with Ware on some of the current concerns that we heard tonight. I do know that our City staff meets with Ware regularly and provides the comments that we receive from the public and feedback. We can definitely ask where to be at a future council meeting to provide an update to council and the community directly.

Thank you.

All right.

So I wanted to appreciate everyone for coming out and expressing their opinions and concerns today and also acknowledge my colleagues for answering a lot of the questions already. So like presented, you know, I think it was a very difficult decision last year regarding where in Athens. I wasn't on council yet, but I watched the council meeting. And when I was canvassing the city, a lot of residents were complaining to me about how difficult the transition from Athens to where was the changes. But there was not a single resident who, when I asked, would you prefer to pay the increased price or go through these changes, that they told me they wanted to pay increased pricing. So I think despite everyone's complaints about changes, because change is always difficult, I think the council last year did make the correct decision in representing the residents, you know, what they would have preferred, because no one would have wanted to pay more than what they're currently paying. In regards to the two blue papers that one of the speakers gave us, which one is the incorrect one? They're both incorrect? So this one that says water customers, this was not given to the residents.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, the blue page that has the water customers,

that was attached to the staff report in May as a draft notice for the Prop 218 process, but that was not the copy that was mailed out. The copy that was mailed out was corrected. It had the refuse information on it.

Okay, and then what about the second page, resolution number 11647, page 4 of 6, section 7F, which has an arrow to it?

This is a reference to the staff report. Oh, sorry, this is a reference to the resolution that was adopted in 2014.

Okay, so the one that says in the event a property owner loses or misplaces a protest ballot, the city needs to provide a replacement.

And so I believe staff has already confirmed that all of the pieces of mail on the ballots were sent out to all the property owners May 30th with 45 days notice. But since there are residents here claiming either they accidentally threw it away or didn't receive it, even though we have proof of providing it and mailing it to them. and I heard some of our residents like Vivian and Mike say if we extended it for another period of time to give more opportunities for objection even though I really don't think that $8,000 is a lot. So we can extend it for a few weeks, but it's going to be very difficult to get $8,000. But just to appease the residents and give more time for those

who might want to send them in, I would be okay extending it to provide more time for protests.

I don't think, I mean, I personally don't think it's necessary to extend.

I'm ready to support the staff recommendation for the alternative rate that's been proposed tonight, and then I think bring back for staff can bring back options in terms of potentially phasing in these costs what I've heard tonight from residents is I think the core concern is really about affording the rate increase I understand there are some I think relatively minor concerns around the process and the ballots and right whether we're supposed to have replacement ballots ready and and all that stuff, I hope that I would expect staff to look into that and to our process in general around Prop 218 and how we administer the process

for 218 going forward.

And I think very clear to staff, we need to, if there are things we need to clean up about this process, I know we don't do them necessarily every year, but let's make sure that we clean up any of these processes and any updates to state law that we need to integrate into our resolutions and our process for administering Prop 218. Let's do that and bring that to council. I'm ready to go on this.

I don't know how I do anticipate, right,

given concerns that were laid out tonight and by written communication that we're hearing today and that we've seen in our emails. I don't see the core concern I'm seeing is around approving these rate increases at all,

and that's just not,

that will not change unless we get to 8,000 votes, which I don't see, right?

These, I think this needs to happen.

These costs are being borne by the city and by everyone right now through the general fund.

I don't think that's the right allocation.

I think we need to move forward with the franchise fee sooner than later so that we can make sure we're allocating those costs in the right way to customers directly who are benefiting from the service, not the general fund subsidizing that.

Again, just for my edification, again, everything was sent out on May 30th, correct?

Yes.

Mailings were sent out on May 30th.

And Mr. Mayor, members of the Council noted, I understand the direction from Council on Prop 218 for future processes to ensure that there's replacement ballots and requests, and we can definitely make adjustments as needed.

My understanding is that the rates are not going to be increased until after September 1st, right? So if we did extend it for two weeks, that wouldn't make a difference

in terms of us getting the money to pay by September 1st?

That is correct.

the fee is in is scheduled to be in place September 1st I guess then the

question is administratively can they change the bills in time if we push this out for if we do it two weeks or three weeks or four weeks will they administrative administratively have enough time to change the building cycle I guess that's the part where I think that's where you're going yeah we can

definitely check in with where on that question if the fee is adopted tonight and we're bringing back as council member wong mentioned a phased in approach when we come back with the percentages of adoption for year one if it's phased in year two and so on and so on if that's the council's direction we could look into that as well

just so I'm clear so

what I think I'm hearing is that a discussion of a phased approach the alternative rate as proposed on the staff as well as a extension of the common period

is that what I'm hearing an extension of time for them to mail

those are your two options right now the two options being floated right now

and you guys need to decide I'm waiting for motions.

I'm happy to make a motion to adopt staff recommendation around the alternative alternate franchise fee as proposed in the staff report and for staff to bring back options in terms of phasing in up to that maximum alternative proposed franchise fee for whenever that's reasonable to bring back to council before in the next whatever couple council meetings.

I would make an alternative motion to give the residents two more weeks to send back the protests.

So those are two different motions.

Is there a difference if it's two weeks or four weeks?

Is it a difference?

In terms of whether we can implement it if we don't get enough protest votes.

But if you get enough protest votes then this thing goes away.

Yeah, yeah. If you don't get enough. If you go forward. Then we'll get enough to protest.

So let me do it this way because we got to go through the procedure. What is the, do I have a motion?

What is the motion? Do I have a second? Then we'll vote on that.

And then if we don't have that process, then we'll go to a second motion and then we'll

vote on that.

So I'm going to start over here to my left, furthest left.

Do I have a motion? And I think I heard something.

IF YOU REPEAT THAT MOTION.

I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO ADOPT STAFF FOR THE ALTERNATE

PROPOSED FRANCHISE FEE. THE LoR AMOUNT THAT'S BEEN

DETAILED BY STAFF WITH THE

ADDITIONAL DIRECTION FOR STAFF TO BRING BACK OPTIONS FOR

PHASING IN UP TO THAT MAXIMUM ALTERNATIVE OVER A PERIOD OF

TIME.

THAT'S A MOTION. DO I HEAR A SECOND?

Okay, so I do not hear a second.

So that motion is...

Quailed? Yeah, so there's no second.

I'd also note that, Carl, quick question.

This requirement would, ordinance requires how many votes to pass?

This one is a regular ordinance, so it's a simple majority.

Well, actually, I'm sorry.

It's three affirmative votes.

Okay. So do I have a different motion? I heard a different motion, so if you can go ahead and make that motion.

So actually, before I make my motion, I just wanted to ask staff if there's a difference if we do two weeks or four weeks, if that's going to affect the administrative process.

I think from a practical matter, the four weeks puts us closer to the September 1st new rate, potentially new rate, right? So we're giving less time for where also to prep their billing. So practically speaking, I think the next council meeting is probably more practical for us to still ensure that the rate is increased September 1st.

So if it's four weeks, it would be August 20th, right?

And that would be 10 days before September 1st. So that's not enough time.

okay so i'll make a motion for two weeks extension okay so we have a motion for uh from pro tem yang

for a i'm sorry just for clarification mr may and members of the council

uh i understand most of the time we are here every other week um but in this situation if you say two

weeks it we're not here that week so august 6 is is is that we're asking for clarification do you

I mean at the August 6th meeting.

Correct, August 6th.

Yeah, and that would give 36 days. That would be giving 80 days, approximately 80 days notice, not 45 days.

From May 30th.

It's still two weeks because we...

No, from May 30th.

Original 40th.

Yeah, because the requirement is 45 days, which we've already met, but now we're giving 80 days for the protest, if I'm doing my math correctly.

You mean from May 30th.

May 30th until August 6th.

Until August.

Well, okay, if our meeting is August 6th, we need to close it out by July 30th because don't we have to do that?

This was going to be my question for matters of clarification. So as I understand the motion, the desire is to leave the protest period open until August 6th, which means that we need to reopen the public hearing that you've closed and continue it to August 6th, which is a date certain, so that we can continue receiving protest votes.

I think that's the motion.

Yes. To continue the protest hearing.

Which is to allow it to extend it for three more weeks, not two more.

It's to August 6th, just a date certain. Okay.

So that's the motion.

Do I hear a second?

I'll second it.

Seconded by Councilmember Lo.

Okay. Any other discussions?

Then let's take a vote.

Sorry. Mayor Ngo approved.

Mayor Pro Tem Yang approved.

Councilmember Lo approved. Councilmember Wong Epstein. Did he do that right?

Okay, so we have a three. Is that enough for this? It is a majority.

Okay, so we have pushed this out for three weeks.

Do I have to open the? Yes, please.

Okay, I'm going to open back up the discussion on 10A. The public hearing. The public hearing on 10A,

and we're going to continue this to August 6th.

Yes, and just a point of clarification. There were many speakers here tonight. Is it the council's will to hear the same speakers

or only to hear new speakers?

This is a public hearing, which ordinarily under your rules, you have one bite at the apple in terms of speaking during a public hearing.

And it's totally up to you. If you want to change those rules, you're able to do that.

But just so that folks in the audience know what the rules are moving forward

and we're not surprised on August 6th? So we have to keep the rule of law,

which is if they spoke one bite at the apple, that's it.

What I can do is maybe do my clarification up front

so they understand factually how we got here. Just those four comments, I have my notes here. We'll repeat that so people understand how we got here so we don't have the same questions and we don't have the same comments in terms of why the rate hike, why you sign a contract we just stick with the facts and then we'll see where

we are with the ballot votes is that okay I have a question but the other part of

my my failed motion was to ask staff to do an analysis on potentially phasing in the franchise fee if that's still possible I don't know if that's doable by August 6 but if there if that's an opportunity to be able to have a couple

weeks to do that. Maybe we can include that analysis part of the staff report for that.

Mr. Mayor, members of the council, if the council is, I think if the majority of council is interested in us looking in and phasing in the fee over time, I think if we could hear that back from council, get feedback so that we understand that that's a request from the majority of council so that we could work on that, we will do our best to try to bring back the phased-in approach, I think I heard from Council Member Wong, potentially like, and I know you might have just been chatting, but 75% of the fee being implemented like year one and then the year two would be the remaining 25%.

So let me just make sure I understand this. So you're saying instead of $35 a month, $33 this year, $35 next year 37 dollars the other year however the city is still picking up a portion of the cost for the

administrative fee i don't fully trust even your bank i don't trust math but yes generally that

concept in terms of we're not going to go to the full franchise fee whatever we cover up a portion of that okay to allow because i know i do acknowledge it's a large increase in one year So if there's if we can look at potential options to

Spread that over your two years

I was agreeable with that because it's not really a motion. We're just having staff kind of take a look at it to see

Give us

So we're looking at like a one to two year phase in, like two year phase in, correct?

$3 and $35. Okay.

Thank you. Okay. That's helpful for staff to prepare. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay.

Let's move on to the next item.

We're almost home, guys.

What are you talking about? It's only 945.