Return to Index of 2015 Minutes


Voting Members in Attendance:  Chris Spitz, Maryam Zar, Jennifer Malaret, Richard Cohen, Barbara Kohn, Nancy Niles, Donna Vaccarino, Richard Wulliger, Stuart Muller, Gilbert Dembo, George Wolfberg, Sarah Conner, Reza Akef, Rick Lemmo, Cathy Russell, Sue Kohl, Rick Mills, Gilbert Dembo, George Wolfberg,

Voting Alternates:  Doug McCormick, Alan Goldsmith, Barbara Marinacci.

Non-voting Advisors and Alternates:  Eric Dugdale, Schuyler Dietz, Linda Lefkowitz, David Kaplan, Carol Bruch, Rick McGeagh, Quentin Fleming, Kevin Niles, Jessica Simon, Michael Soneff, Ted Mackie.

Start of Business Meeting

1.    Reading of Community Council’s Mission.  Chris Spitz read the Mission Statement.

2.    Call to Order and Introduction of the Board and Audience.  Chris Spitz called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Introduction of the Board and audience.

3.    Certification of Quorum.  Chris certified that a quorum was present at 7:06 pm.

4.    Adoption of Minutes/Upcoming Meetings.  Chris deemed the August 27, 2015 minutes approved as corrected. Upcoming meetings: 9/24, (tentative) discussion re Mike Bonin Motion/Short Term Residential Vacation Rentals. Task Force on Homelessness presentation on their fundraising efforts. 10/8, presentation/discussion re Village Shell Station proposed plans, CUB/CUP.

5.    Consideration of Agenda.  The President considered the agenda.

6.    Treasurer’s Report.  Richard Cohen reported the financial status as of September 10, 2015. The total account balances equal $31,744.97. There were no monetarily significant transactions; however a number of dues payments had been received.

7.    Reports, Announcements and Concerns.

7.1.    Announcements from the President, Chris Spitz.

7.1.1.    Meeting Ground Rules.  1) Due to library rules, the meeting must end promptly at 9:00 p.m.; as needed, the President will stay after the meeting to answer questions. 2) The President conducts meeting order and may rearrange order of discussion at her discretion. 3) Board members and audience shall only speak when called upon by the President; there shall be no interruptions except to make a point of order. 4) The President’s role in maintaining meeting order shall be honored. 5) All discussion shall be civil, respectful and courteous. (PPCC Bylaws,

7.1.2.    Citizen of the Year/Sparkplug Awards Event – December 10, 2015, Gladstone’s.

Chris announced that board and community members are requested to begin considering nominations of qualified individuals for Citizen of the Year and Sparkplug honors. Further details will be provided on 9/24/15 and are available on the PPCC website. Chris announced members of the committee (listed below).

7.1.3.    Committee Membership – Awards Selection Committee, Awards Event Committee and Playing Fields Committee.  Chris announced the members of each committee (listed below).

7.1.4.    Welcome New Board Members.

Pacific Palisades Residents Association (PPRA), primary representative: Sarah Rena Conner; primary representative: Jessica Simon, alternate representative. Chris thanked past PPRA representative Brenda Theveny for her service.

7.1.5.    PPCC Website, Fundraising, Outreach Update.

Chris made the following announcements: (1) submit tax-deductible dues/donations (suggested amount: $25 individual/family, $50 business) to PPCC at P.O. Box 1131, Pacific Palisades 90272 or via Pay Pal Tab on PPCC website. (2) Like Us on Facebook at pacpalicc. Chris thanked Michael Soneff for his work on the website.

7.1.6.    Congress of Neighborhood Councils, Saturday, September 26, 2015. Registration deadline: September 15, 2015. Chris stated that all board members and interested residents are invited to participate. Parking is free for registered attendees.

7.1.7.    Sidewalk and Street Vending Update. See attached letter.
7.1.8.    Short-Term Residential Vacation Rentals.

Status Update. Chris reported that the Housing Committee on 9/2/15 approved recent PLUM Committee decision to direct Planning Dept. to seek further input from the community regarding proposals in Councilmember Bonin’s Motion to allow such rentals under certain conditions; “Listening sessions” at various locations are expected to be scheduled in September or October (dates TBD). PPCC will tentatively discuss on 9/24/15. Prior PPCC discussion on 5/14/15; (no position taken). Brentwood Homeowners Association will be sponsoring a meeting to take place on September 19, 2015 (Saturday).

7.1.9.    Beekeeping as a New Accessory Use in all Residential Zones.

Status update. Chris reported that the City Council on 9/1/15 directed the draft ordinance to be forwarded to the City Attorney for review and final drafting; following the City Attorney’s review the ordinance is expected to be waived in PLUM Committee and submitted to the full Council for a final vote (date TBD). PPCC discussion on 4/23/15; (no position taken).

7.1.10.    17000 Sunset Blvd. Apartment Project.

Status update. Chris reported that the developer is no longer expected to present revised plans to PPCC prior to the scheduled Coastal permit appeal hearing (12/2/15); PPCC has been told that any request for further rescheduling must be made to the West Los Angeles Area Planning Commission at the time of the hearing. PPCC position on current plans: a focused EIR is required before a permit is issued; see PPCC minutes of 1/8/15, item 7.1.3,

7.1.11.    909 Greentree/864 Brooktree (Beglari).

Status update. Chris stated that the owners are seeking permission from the City for a reduced front yard setback (ZA hearing 9/17/15 on Beglari application for adjustment in required setback). Background: litigation involving the issue of violation of LAMC front yard setback requirements at this property extended for over a 10 year period; a contempt order was issued at one point against the City; the City was ordered to revoke improperly issued building permits and a certificate of occupancy and to issue no more permits unless the property is brought into compliance with the Code; three appellate court decisions (most recently in 2013) were issued affirming lower court rulings against the owners and/or the City. The current ZIMAS property entry includes a prominent warning that no action is to be taken on any request without consultation with the City Attorney (as of agenda distribution the City Attorney’s position is unknown). Prior PPCC positions: supported enforcement of order requiring revocation of previously issued permits and opposed a subsequent variance request by the owners (minutes of various meetings in 2006-2009, summarized at:, p. 2, footnote 4). PPCC requested information for purposes of this meeting; however the City Attorney declined, stating attorney client privilege. Chris noted that Ronald Oster (resident) was in attendance to answer questions. (1) Are the owners living in the residence? Yes. Orders are not complied with and other application(s) are filed with different courts. The owners are not willing to answer questions. There are no new facts, just different courts and different administrative hearings. (2) Are the owners legally able to sell the home? No. The lender had initiated foreclosure yet has not followed through. (3) The new application is for 7,200 square feet but the earlier cases may have involved less square footage.

7.2.    Announcements from Governmental Representatives Representatives (Note: Contact information at:

7.2.1.    Los Angeles Police Department (“LAPD”) – SLO Officer Moore — Not in attendance.

7.2.2.    Los Angeles City Council, District 11, Councilmember Mike Bonin’s Office.  Sharon Shapiro, Field Deputy — Not in attendance.

7.2.3.    Office of Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti.  Daniel Tamm, Westside Area Representative, Mayor’s Interfaith Liaison — Not in attendance.

7.2.4.    California State Assembly, Office of Assemblymember Richard Bloom.  Stephanie Cohen, Field Representative — Not in attendance.

7.2.5.    California State Senate, Office of State Senator Ben Allen.  Lila Kalaf, District Representative — Not in attendance.

7.2.6.    United States Congress, Office of Congressman Ted Lieu.  Janet Turner, District Representative — Not in attendance.

7.3.    Announcements from Board Members and Advisors.

7.3.1.    Officers/Area Representatives.

(1) Richard Cohen reported that the West Los Angeles Police Advisory Board has been reconstituted with the officially new captain and dispatcher. Richard was in attendance along with Haldis Toppel and Amy Kalp. The Palisades Patrol car is intended to be dispatched every day 24/7 pending other obligations within the city. (2) Barbara Kohn is organizing a community “Shred-It” Day and asked if there was interest for such an event.

7.3.2.    Organizational Representatives – Report on Behalf of Organizations — None.

7.3.3.    PPCC Advisors — None.

7.3.4.    Board Members, Other Reports.

(1) Donna Vaccarino promoted the Water Wise Workshop at the Women’s Club on September 20, 2015 in the afternoon. There will be wonderful speakers, TreePeople, SurfRider Foundation, etc. Rain barrels are available for purchase and pick up at the meeting for anyone who preregisters. Donna stated that rebates are available through the LADWP rebate program. Residents can reference the title of the program, coordinated with DWP and not through LADBS, i.e., the SoCal Water Smart – Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. See also (2) Reza Akef suggested that before installing rain barrels residents should check with LADBS to see if their property qualifies for a rain barrel purchase and/or rebate.

8.    Reports from Committees.

8.1.    VPLUC (David Kaplan, Chair).

Village Project Public Committee Meeting to discuss plans.  David reported that there would be a public meeting on October 29, 2015, 6:00- 9:00 pm at the U.S. Bank Building on Sunset Boulevard. The application may be viewed at: Contact with any questions. Board members, residents and any interested parties are welcome to attend. Please bring your questions and comments. Barbara Kohn reiterated that DRB members could attend this meeting as long as no action could be taken. This meeting will be prior to presentations to the DRB. David reminded the audience that the committee was not empowered to make decisions but is authorized to review the matter and, if appropriate, make recommendations to the full PPCC board. Those recommendations may or may not be agendized and/or acted upon at a later date.

8.2.    Bylaws Committee (Richard Cohen and Jennifer Malaret, Co-Chairs).

MOTION TO AMEND BYLAWS ARTICLE VIII(1)(A), APPENDIX A AND RELATED PROVISIONS; SECOND READING of the motion and proposed bylaws changes (see Sec. B below); NOW REVISED ON THE ADVICE OF PPCC’S LEGAL COUNSEL THIS ITEM IS NOW THE FIRST READING. Presentation: Chris Spitz stated that this item will be deferred until later in the evening. Chris stated that we have learned that one or more persons may object to the process on the grounds that at the time of the First Reading we did not have a verbatim verbal (oral) reading of the proposed amendments. Although this has not been the custom or practice during this President’s time on the Council, PPCC’s legal advisor Ron Dean advises that out of an abundance of caution PPCC should have a verbatim verbal (oral) reading tonight, which will constitute the First verbal (oral) reading. There will be a Second verbal (oral) reading at the next meeting, at which point, time permitting, we will have formal introduction of the motion and discussion. Discussion will continue as long as it takes for Board and community members to weigh in. Richard Cohen, Bylaws Committee Co-Chair stated that for the past year our President has pushed forward an initiative to expand the reach and inclusiveness of the Community Council (Farmers Market, election candidates, and soliciting ideas for bylaws changes from anybody with ideas to share). He stated that today we deal with the outcome of this effort to inject new ideas into the bylaws. To be clear, the ideas that were proposed came from board members and others – not from the Executive Committee or the Bylaws Committee. Recognizing that the traditional process of referring proposed bylaws changes to the Bylaws Committee might result in rejection of these ideas, the leadership presented a list of proposed changes to the board for vetting by the entire board as a group. This happened on March 12, 2015 and, per the minutes:

*Should organizational members be eliminated altogether? NO.
*If organizations remain on the board should they become NON-VOTING members? NO.
*If organizations remain on the board, should the organizational membership list and categories be re-evaluated? YES
*If organizations remain on the board, should “standing seats” be eliminated such that all seats within a category rotate at least once? YES (to be determined/was included in the question above).
*If organizations remain on the board should membership become open to faith-based churches, temples and organizations? YES
*If organizations stay on the board should the bylaws contain an application process for interested organizations to seek membership on PPCC? YES

Richard reported that the bylaws committee went to work to draft changes to the bylaws to reflect these expressed wishes. Needless to say, these changes would adversely affect the representation of those organizations that currently enjoy standing seats. These are the Chamber, Historical Society, TCA and PPRA. Also, because the categories had to be adjusted to eliminate solo organizations and to accommodate a new Faith Based category the Cultural and Civic groups had members added, as did Environmental. These changes were necessary if the board’s desired changes were to be implemented and the total number of board seats to remain the same. Richard continued to explain about that latter issue. Currently there are 23 voting seats on the board. There are 9 elected area and at large reps plus 9 organizations plus 5 officers. Richard recalled that this balance of elected and organizational reps has been a tradition of the Council and the Bylaws Committee did not have a mandate to change this. In fact, changing the number of elected reps would require redefining the area map, a monumental task that would surely confuse the community. Richard stated that these changes are not about the value, history or wonderfulness of any organization. For the purpose of considering these changes Richard would like board members to concede that all of the organizations are wonderful and deserving and stated that this is no time to be arguing about which organizations are more worthy than others. Richard noted that if these changes are defeated – and if the board decides not to eliminate single seat categories – then he thought we should consider a few additional issues. In considering the application process for potential new organizations PPCC faces the issue of the worthiness of new applicants. Richard suggested that for this process PPCC should have objective requirements – a minimum number of members, perhaps openness of governance, nondiscrimination, evidence of registration status with governing authorities, and a scope of work that benefits the entire community. Richard asked the board to consider if PPCC had such standards for new applicants should the organization apply these same standards to allow existing organizations continuing standing on the board. If so then PPCC may have some difficult decisions about what current organization continue to be worthy. Finally, there has been some incoming criticism over the process they Bylaws Committee has followed. Richard assured the board that the process has been entirely done by the bylaws. More than that, Richard said he had met personally or spoken on the phone or corresponded with more than a dozen representatives of affected organizations. Chris and Jennifer have likewise answered all questions and explained the reasoning behind all of the changes to anyone who asked. The process has been open and proper. Richard stated nevertheless there are organizations who feel that they are harmed by this and oppose the changes. That’s understandable. But remember, if we keep the general outline of the balance of the elected and organizational reps then any attempt to redo this work will only surface a different group of aggrieved organizations. These changes cannot be made with unanimous consent because of the nature of the changes. Richard said that PPCC could not eliminate solo seats without the potential for those organizations objecting. The Bylaws Committee felt that these changes are in the best interest of the Council. But they are changes initiated by you, the board, not by us, the leadership. If the board doesn’t want the changes, so be it. If a board member does, understand that it will make some people unhappy. But that fact is not a reflection of any flaw in the work the Bylaws Committee has done for the Board’s consideration.

Finally, because certain organizations have claimed that every word of the motion and red-line document needed to be verbalized (orated) to constitute a first reading Richard stated that he would read every word of the motion and of the red-lined document. Richard proceeded to do so. The red-lined document was read as if it would be constituted if changed including references to and paraphrasing of the language being revised or omitted.

A. Background. On March 12, 2015, PPCC’s Board directed the Bylaws Committee to explore modifications to the Bylaws relative to Article VIII(1)(A) “Selection and Election of Representatives, Organization Representatives and Alternates” with reference to organizations eligible to send representatives as set forth on Appendix A. The Board directed three possible areas of amendment:

1. The four categories which currently have one organization (“standing seat”) should be reconstituted such that those categories have multiple organizations and rotate appointment as presently do the other five multiple organization categories.

2.Faith based organizations should be eligible to send representatives and have the opportunity for inclusion.

3. A process should be established whereby any organization not listed and that believes it is not adequately represented by an eligible organization, may submit an application for inclusion.

B. Motion. The Bylaws Committee unanimously agrees that modifications to the existing Bylaws as directed by the Board should be made to facilitate all three areas of amendments. Such modifications would be approved now and become effective for the organizational term beginning on October 1, 2016. Adoption of these modifications does not prevent further modification to the effected provisions as may be approved by the Board during the interim period, i.e., the 2015 date upon which this motion is approved and the 2016 effective date. The Bylaws Committee unanimously recommends that the Board vote to adopt the modifications as set forth in the draft revised bylaws (redlined) document distributed concurrently with this agenda (linked as “ProposedRevisedBylawsSept.2015” in PPCC email messages of September 7, 2015 and August 24, 2015) and further, to authorize the Bylaws Committee to correct any typos or informalities that may be discovered during conversion of the final draft.

9.    Old Business.

9.1.    Citywide Sign Ordinance – Digital Off-Site Signage Options.

CF 11-705, 08-2020, 08-3386-S1. (Jennifer Malaret).  A City Planning Commission (CPC) hearing was recently scheduled for 9/24/15 (Van Nuys City Hall) but the new staff report and most recent draft ordinance will be not be made available to the public before on or about September 17. Background: This complex ordinance has been in the legislative process for over 6 years and PPCC Board members, along with other stakeholders throughout the City (particularly in CD5 & CD11) have spent thousands of hours on this matter. The topic is the subject of several State court cases and heavy industry lobbying that has been well reported in the LA Times and other media sources. In sum, the Sign Ordinance proposes to amend the Los Angeles Municipal Code to enact new criteria for sign districts, deviations from sign regulations, administrative civil penalties and other measures to control the visual environment. PPCC Process/Concerns: Beginning in 2011, PPCC became a member of the Citywide Sign Ordinance Coalition. On 9/8/11 and 9/22/11, the Board passed two lengthy and detailed motions expressing the following concerns and objections to the then-drafted ordinance: (1) advertising in city parks and recreational facilities, (2) negative impacts on private and public school campuses, (3) spillover effects, traffic safety, energy use, and aggregate impacts of new digital displays, (4) negative impacts on scenic ridgelines and open space, (5) negative impacts on county beaches and the California coastline, (6) exceptions from regulation in specific plan areas, (7) allowances for adjustments permitted without a public hearing and appeals process, (8) exemption of signs in public rights of way (PROW), (9) the ability of property owners to retain their right of private action. During 2012, PPCC attended PLUM Committee hearings and in 2013 participated in the Planning Department’s Visioning Group workshops.,,
Proposed Motion – PPCC Seeks Delay in CPC Hearing Date to Allow for Public Participation In, and Comment On, the Current Citywide Sign Ordinance.
A. Background. The CPC’s standing rules with respect to responses to a staff report substantially limit responses to no more than ten pages, twenty copies of which must be delivered to the Commission no later than 48 hours prior to the meeting (see “City Planning Commission Policy for Submittal of Written Materials on Agendized Items” paragraph (b)). Under the currently proposed schedule, if the community is fortunate enough to have the staff report by September 17, community members will have only two working days to file their written responses, or will be limited to two-page letters. There is simply insufficient time for community members to review and address the many complexities contained within the ordinance and express those views to the CPC under the CPC’s rules and the net result will undoubtedly be that community input on the ordinance will be substantially burdened.
B. Motion. PPCC hereby requests that more time be provided between issuance of the staff report and the CPC hearing, i.e., were the Planning Department to release its staff report on or about September 17 as currently anticipated, then the ordinance should be scheduled for public hearing before the CPC on October 8, but in no event earlier than two weeks following eventual release of the report.

Jennifer Malaret sponsored the motion. Reza Akef seconded the motion. The motion passed with one abstention.

10.    New Business.

10.1.    Presentation/Q&A with Councilmember Mike Bonin, Council District 11.

Mike Bonin thanked the board and residents for being in attendance and their interest in community governance. Mike acknowledged that PPCC has been in existence longer than any other council in his district and that PPCC served as the NC model. Topics that Councilmember Bonin spoke on included: (1) Homelessness. Homelessness has grown dramatically throughout Los Angeles; statistics support that growth and Mike thanked Maryam Zar and the rest of the Task Force for their thoughtful and engaged effort on the matter of homelessness. Palisades for the first time conducted a census during the last homeless count. Mike said that the City has failed homeless persons who sleep on the sidewalks because that is difficult for everyone, i.e., the people who are not getting services and the people who don’t like those impacts on their neighborhoods. However the courts have tied the City’s hands by requiring storage, shelter and limiting efforts to break up homeless encampments. Mike is working with the Mayor to determine a broad framework to address homelessness (city, county and private sector needs). Mike is interested in the unsheltered homeless population (17,000-19,000 persons). Los Angeles has one of the highest percentages of unsheltered homeless in part because of the weather but also because the City has failed to provide adequate shelter. Mike is trying to change the civic dialogue to provide short term resources so that options are available between the sidewalks and permanent supportive housing. Mike is sponsoring a motion to open the winter shelter program one month earlier (November) in anticipation of El Nino. (2) Olympics. The City leadership and many individuals are very supportive of the Olympic Games coming back to Los Angeles. The City could benefit from revenues but Mike is concerned were the General Fund to run into a deficit. Last week the City agreed to make a bid and if the City gets the bid then the City Council gets to weigh in on the bid. Major issues are: (1) the security budget and whether the federal government would be paying for that, and (2) making sure the City of LA taxpayers don’t pay for costs if games are held in adjacent cities. (3) Sidewalks. The City of LA just settled a lawsuit with the lawyers representing the disabled and $31 million in funds are available for repair. The City will repair sidewalk damages caused by the City and by trees in the public rights of way. Once sidewalks are repaired then the obligation reverts back to property owners. The City is looking for input on what streets need attention or any recommendations for how the City should be prioritizing. (4) LAPD/LAFD. Mike has been concerned about the loss of resources at Station 69 and for LAFD to have greater resources over all. There have been increases in population since the 1970’s and the LAFD is smaller. While recruit classes have increased there are many LAFD fighters who are retiring. Mike hopes that CD11 is high on the list for restoration. The ambulance plan for the Palisades and additional staffing are being paid attention to. LAPD is a matter of concern in terms of how the Chief and Mayor are deploying. In the past deployment was based by “cops on dots”, i.e., deployment happens to where the crime is taking place. That means that the Palisades has been under-resourced. Several months ago there have been moves to take cops out of street patrol and putting them into elite large crime prevention. We don’t know if those folks are coming back onto patrol or going off into different areas. Questions: (1) Why can’t we have a thoughtful accountable approach on this issue? Make beekeepers insured, licensed and responsible. Without teeth in the ordinance it is dangerous. Mike talked about Rosendahl’s predecessor motion to legalize urban beekeeping in Los Angeles. That proposal recently came before the CPC and PLUM. There have been a handful of folks representing concern but overwhelmingly the testimony has been in favor of the ordinance as drafted, say 9-1 in favor. Testimony before the committee was in favor of the ordinance. The ordinance before the council is effectively modeled after Santa Monica and other cities. (2) What is the status of the 17000 Sunset Blvd. project from the Gabay development team? Mike’s understanding is that the project is being revised, the project as proposed meets the zoning, however Mike is aware of residents’ concerns such that the proposal is being revised and while the project is the same size but the number of units is being cut in half which also will reduce traffic. (3) Potrero Canyon Park – what is the status of the foot bridge across PCH? How can the community help make the bridge a reality? Mike said the bridge is in the plans but is not currently funded. Not all of the lot sales have gone through but even when they have there will be additional funding and many jurisdictional issues have to be addressed. (4) Is there any plan to better coordinate the efforts of county agencies to work with LAPD? Mike said that he is working with Supervisor Kuehl and efforts are being made to increase training on mental health issues. LAPD is being paired with county teams to interface with the homeless and resources for emergency response have been increased. (5) Overdevelopment in the Palisades and Brentwood including Caruso, Archer and Mount St. Mary’s is a concern particularly with regard to traffic caused by the overlapping construction schedules. Mike said that Archer is the only one of those projects that has been approved. Traffic impacts from the Caruso project are unknown until this fall when those plans are submitted. Currently Archer mitigates traffic more than any other institution along Sunset Boulevard. When that project is done there will be 70% carpooling and bussing and other conditions exist which are incredibly strict. Brentwood School has a proposal to revamp its campus as well and they have a bigger impact on Sunset traffic. Mike wants the school to collaborate on sharing bussing and carpooling. Mike would have preferred the construction window for Archer to be longer than it is however the community wanted a condensed three year time frame (rather than five). The biggest impact is the hauling so the performance art center was downsized and hauling will be done while school is not in session (so hauling won’t be added to usual school traffic). (6) Why do you continue to pursue a skating rink in Venice when it has been voted down four times? Mike said because Venice Beach needs upgrades and he wants good activity to drive out bad activity. There is ice skating in Santa Monica and at Pershing Square during the holiday. Mike has proposed putting an ice rink near Venice Beach during the holidays and he believes in trying something different. (7) When will Palisades Drive be repaved? Mike said it cannot be done in one year due to its length but is on the schedule for having one of the worst parts done. (8) What is your position on sanctuary cities? Mike said that LA deemed itself to be a sanctuary city in the 1980’s for Central Americans under religious prosecution. The City/LAPD does not want to be the arm for ICE enforcement. Mike strongly supports LAPD not becoming the enforcer against immigrants because were they to start doing so crime would increase and victims would not come forward. If a person is convicted of a felony then they can be deported. (9) There is no north/south access in areas surrounding Jefferson, Walgrove and Barrington. Has the City thought of ideas to alleviate that traffic much of which is generated by Santa Monica? Mike said that the question was good and the answer is complicated. Mike gave a narration of the job and housing situation in West Los Angeles. If there were more housing in WLA it would be closer to jobs and reduce traffic but there is an affordability issue in that. More affordable housing would help combat traffic. Neighborhoods need to be re-planned without major commercial centers and more walkable neighborhoods. Los Angeles needs more transportation options (not cars, but more bikes, shuttles, etc.). (10) There are community concerns with Paul Revere Charter School – increased enrollment, there are no conditional use permits for public schools, ambulance emergency tests failed, busses cannot get down the streets, parents park on yards and in private driveways and other problems that we need help addressing. Mike said that cities are not allowed to place zoning restrictions on public schools; they do their own environmental impact reports and make their own decisions. Since there is nothing the City can mandate there needs to be cooperative sessions. (11) When are the bicycle lanes and secured sidewalks going to be constructed in Pacific Palisades? The sidewalks start over the next year. The Mayor’s “Zero” Program (for zero traffic fatalities) is due to be phased in gradually. In terms of bicycle lanes the Mobility Plan for LA was just released and every project within it needs to be analyzed and vetted by the community. (12) What is your view on private persons arrests for the homeless? Mike stated that he was concerned were that to have been any advice given to the task force or residents. (13) Access to you is not available – why should residents have to go to meetings, email, call and reach out to never hear anything or hear back? Mike said that he does various outreach events and he goes through scheduling requests with Marietta and if after much effort a resident has not gotten through then that is an issue. (14) What is the status of the DWP Substation and there have been brown outs that have been occurring? Mike said the lack of reporting is not something the community should be concerned with. The DWP has a new general manager and there are other issues she has been dealing with. (15) Why are there no curbs to allow disabled persons to get up onto a sidewalk? Mike said the lawsuit was as a result of an ADA claim so part of the settlement is that the repairs have to be done to make the sidewalk ADA accessible.

11.    General Public Comment – None.

12.    Adjournment.  Chris Spitz adjourned the meeting at 9:01 PM.



Awards Selection Committee:
Jennifer Malaret, Chair
Gil Dembo
Rick Mills
Randy Young (past Citizen of the Year)
Andy Frew (past Community Service Award recipient)

Awards Event Committee:
Peter Culhane, Chair
Maryam Zar
Sue Kohl
Barbara Kohn
Brian Deming
Cathy Russell
Stuart Muller
Gil Dembo

Playing Fields Committee:
Janet Anderson, Chair
George Wolfberg
Barbara Marinacci
Stuart Muller


August 31, 2015

Hon. Eric Garcetti, Mayor
Hon. Curren D. Price, Jr.; Chair, Economic Development Committee
Hon. Gilbert Cedillo; Vice Chair, Economic Development Committee
Hon. Paul Krekorian, Member, Economic Development Committee
Hon. Nury Martinez, Member, Economic Development Committee
Hon. Marqueece Harris-Dawson, Member, Economic Development Committee
Los Angeles City Hall
200 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Via email

Re: CF 13-1493 – OPPOSE Amendments to LAMC Sec. 42.00 to Legalize Vending on City Sidewalks and Streets Including Public Rights of Way; SUPPORT ONLY WITH CONDITIONS the Establishment of Special Sidewalk Vending District Programs

Dear Mayor Garcetti and Councilmembers Price, Cedillo, Krekorian, Martinez and Harris-Dawson:

Pacific Palisades Community Council (PPCC) is the most broadly-based community organization and the voice of the Palisades since 1973. At its regular meeting on August 27, 2015, PPCC’s board discussed the proposed models for sidewalk and street vending and unanimously voted to approve the following motion:

“PPCC opposes legalization of vending on sidewalks and streets including within the public rights of way on a City-wide basis. PPCC supports the establishment of special sidewalk vending district programs only if opt-in procedures are written that allow Neighborhood Councils and Community Councils to approve within their affected areas any special district, the boundaries of such special district, and the number and concentration of vendors within that special district.”
(A) Vending on City Sidewalks and Streets, Including the Public Rights of Way, Should Remain Illegal.
PPCC’s opposition is based primarily on the following concerns:
negative impacts on existing “brick and mortar” businesses and commercial areas, such as sanitation, security, staining of streets and sidewalks, parking and loitering,
negative impacts on adjacent and surrounding residential neighborhoods, such as trash, noise, odors and spillover vending,
compromise/reduction of sidewalks and ADA access,
impacts on/increase of the growing homeless population,
conflicts with our Community and Specific Plans, and
lack of guidelines for enforcement by the Public Works Department/Street Services (licenses, permits, inspections, fines, removal).
(B) Special Sidewalk Vending District Programs Should Be Established Only with Special Conditions.

PPCC supports the establishment of special sidewalk vending district programs only if:

opt-in procedures are written that allow Neighborhood Councils and
Community Councils to approve within their affected areas any special district, the boundaries of such special district, and the number and concentration of vendors within that special district;
distance limits from residential areas or sensitive uses, such as parks, schools and church/religious properties, are incorporated; and
a detailed map displaying available areas for vending is incorporated into any legislative effort.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposals for legalization of sidewalk and street vending in Los Angeles.

Christina Spitz
Pacific Palisades Community Council

cc (via email):
Hon. Mike Bonin, Councilmember, 11th District
Sharon Gin, Legislative Assistant, Economic Development Committee (with request for filing in CF 13-1493)

Return to Index of 2015 Minutes