* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.
          [Call to Order]
          [00:00:04]
          WE'D NOW LIKE TO CALL THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TO ORDER. 
          AND AT THIS TIME, WE'LL STAND FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT MEDITATION, FOLLOWED BY THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGION. 
          THAT'LL BE LED BY COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          PLEASE FACE THE FLAG. 
          READY? BEGIN. 
          I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. 
          JOANNE, WILL YOU PLEASE DO THE ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER BECERRA. 
          HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER, HANG HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          HERE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          HERE. 
          CHAIR WILLIAMS. PRESENT. 
          LET THE RECORD SHOW ALL PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT. 
          SO NOW WE 
          [APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
HAVE BEFORE US THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM OUR MEETING ON MAY 28TH, 2024. 
          DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY CORRECTIONS OR AMENDMENTS? SEEING NONE. 
          OKAY. 
          SEEING NO, UM, CHANGES, THEN WE'LL RECOMMEND THAT THE MINUTES BE ADOPTED AT THIS TIME. 
          [ORAL COMMUNICATIONS]
NOW IT'S, WE WOULD ALLOW FOR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. 
          WE DO HAVE ONE CARD. 
          WE HAVE A RESIDENT, BRIAN CALDERON, TO BOT TO BUY. 
          PLEASE COME FORWARD, MR. LEWIS. 
          UH, FIRST OFF, UH, UH, THANK YOU FOR, FOR ALL THE WORK THAT YOU DO. 
          UH, I AM HERE, UH, TO SPEAK ON, UH, THE FIVE STAR INN, UH, AND THE PATHWAY HOME, UH, POSSIBLE PROJECT. 
          UM, AS, UH, MANY MAY KNOW, UH, THE FIVE STAR INN, UM, FOR A LONG TIME, UH, HAS HAD A TROUBLED HISTORY IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. 
          UH, AS, UH, RESIDENTS HAVE SPOKEN OUT AND, UH, HAVE SHARED THE FACT THAT HUMAN EXPLOITATION HAD HAPPENED THERE FOR A VERY, VERY LONG TIME. 
          UH, AND NOW, UM, UNDER NEW OWNERSHIP, WE ARE SEEING THE POSSIBILITY OF TRANSFORMATION FOR THAT FACILITY. 
          UM, OVER, UH, THE LAST YEAR, UH, HALF OF THE FIVE STAR HAS BEEN RENOVATED AND, AND NOW IT LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO BE CONTRACTING WITH LA COUNTY TO TAKE IT FROM A SPACE THAT HAD LONG BEEN A SPACE WHERE THERE WAS PROSTITUTION, THERE WAS DRUG ABUSE, THERE WAS HUMAN TRAUMA, AND CREATE A SPACE OF HOPE, UH, A SPACE OF HEALING. 
          UH, A SPACE OF 24 HOUR SECURITY, UH, SPACE TO BRING PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS OF WEST COVINA, UH, AND INTO A SPACE WHERE THEY'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO GET FULL SERVICES, MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT, DRUG SUPPORT, ONSITE JOB TRAINING, AND EVENTUALLY BE MOVED INTO PERMANENT HOUSING. 
          UH, I FELT, UH, IT IS IMPORTANT AS A RESIDENT OF WEST COVINA, UH, TO SPEAK TO THIS COMMISSION. 
          UH, SO YOU COULD UNDERSTAND, UH, WHAT A TRANSFORMATION, UH, IS ABOUT TO OCCUR IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UH, AND, UH, WHY, UH, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT NOT ONLY SHOULD THE RESIDENTS OF WEST COVINA SUPPORT, BUT REALLY GOES TO THE VALUES, UH, THAT WE HAVE AS A CITY. 
          UH, AND SO, UH, I JUST WANTED TO COME OUT HERE AS, AS A RESIDENT, UH, AND, AND TO SPEAK, UH, ON THIS ISSUE, UM, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO, TO SPEAK ON IT, UH, AND AS MANY AVENUES, UH, AS POSSIBLE, UH, TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND, UH, NOT ONLY THE NEED, UH, BUT WHY, UH, IT WILL BE, UH, A VALUE ADDED, UH, TO US AS A COMMUNITY. 
          UH, BECAUSE IT FITS OUR MORALS, IT FITS OUR ETHICS, IT FITS OUR PRIORITIES AS A COMMUNITY, UH, HAVING TO DEAL WITH THIS VERY REAL CRISIS. 
          [00:05:01]
UH, SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE WHAT HAD LONG BEEN A STAIN. 
          UH, AND AGAIN, I JUST WANNA ACKNOWLEDGE THAT NEW OWNERSHIP AT THE FIVE STAR, UH, THAT HAS TAKEN A FACILITY THAT, THAT WAS A LONG TIME STAIN ON WEST COVINA AND HAS BEGUN TO TRANSFORM IT, UH, AND MAKE IT INTO A PLACE OF, OF HEALING AND SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER CARDS OR ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? I SEE NONE AT THIS TIME. 
          THIS WOULD CONCLUDE OUR ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. 
          DO WE HAVE ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR THIS EVENING? WE DO NOT HAVE ANY ITEMS THIS EVENING ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR CHAIR. 
          OKAY. 
          SO WE'LL BE STARTING WITH PUBLIC 
          [1. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24-01 (TTM 74976)]
HEARINGS. 
          OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IS TENTATIVE TRACK MAP NUMBER 24 DASH OH ONE. 
          IT'S THE TENTATIVE TRACK MAP, 7 4 9 7 6. 
          THE LOCATION IS 6 42 AND 7 0 4 EAST FRANCIS AVENUE, AND THE APPLICANT IS KEVIN LAME, WHO WILL BE GIVING THE REPORT THIS EVENING. 
          CHAIR LI WILL BE GIVING THE STAFF REPORT THIS EVENING FOR THIS PROJECT. 
          OKAY, FIRST AND FOREMOST, UM, GOOD EVENING CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, THIS ITEM WAS LAST, WAS INITIALLY REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          IT'S FOR A SUBDIVISION OF TWO LOTS INTO SIX LOTS. 
          UM, IT WAS INITIALLY REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVED ON AUGUST 24TH, 2021. 
          UM, AT THAT TIME, THE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEWED AND ADOPTED A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE SUBDIVISION. 
          UH, HOWEVER, WHILE THE APPLICANT WAS, WAS, UM, WORKING ON THE BUILDING PERMITS TO, TO DEMOLISH AND TO DEMOLISH A PORTION OF THE EXISTING HOUSE AND TO DEMOLISH AND RE RECONSTRUCT A GARAGE IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. 
          BECAUSE, BECAUSE THE EXISTING A PORTION OF THE EXISTING HOMES AND THE GARAGE WOULD CROSS THE PROPERTY LINES, THE, THE ENTITLEMENT FOR THE TENTATIVE, UM, TRACK MAP HAD EXPIRED AND EXTENSIONS WERE NOT REQUESTED. 
          SO THE APPLICANT HAD TO RESUBMIT IN, IN ORDER TO HAVE THE MAP SUBMITTED FOR PLAN CHECK AND A FINAL MAP, UM, BE TAKEN TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          SO THIS ITEM IS GOING BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION ON THE PROJECTOR IS THIS, UH, AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SITE. 
          UM, IT IS CURRENTLY TWO TWO SEPARATE LOTS IN BETWEEN ON, ON FRANCIS AVENUE IN BETWEEN SOUTHDALE AVENUE AND CRAIG DRIVE. 
          THE, THE TWO LOTS ARE CURRENTLY APPROVED WITH EXISTING HOMES. 
          AGAIN, THE PORTION OF THE EXISTING HOMES, UM, WERE DEMOLISHED AND REMODELED IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF THE ORIGINAL TENTATIVE, UM, PAR TRACK MAP THAT WAS APPROVED. 
          AND WHILE THAT WAS TAKING PLACE, THE UM, ENTITLEMENT HAD EXPIRED. 
          HOWEVER, THE PERMITS FOR THOSE PARTICULAR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE HOMES WERE WERE FINALED. 
          UM, AND THE CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND WAS COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION THAT DOCUMENT THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAD ADOPTED, UM, AND COMPLIED WITH THE, THE MITIGATION AND MONITOR MONITORING PROGRAM THAT WAS REQUIRED WITHIN THAT PARTICULAR DOCUMENT. 
          UM, ON THE PROJECTOR IS THE PROPOSED SUB SUBDIVISION. 
          ALL THE, UM, ALL PROPOSED LOTS WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION WOULD COMPLY TO DEVELOPMENT CODE STANDARDS IN RELATION TO THE WIDTH, UM, LOT DEPTH AND SIZE OF EACH OF THE LOTS. 
          UM, LOT SIX AND FIVE ARE THE LOTS THAT ARE, THAT ARE CURRENTLY IMPROVED WITH THE EXISTING HOMES, 
          [00:10:01]
WHILE LOTS 1, 2, 3, AND FOUR. 
          UM, WHEN THE MAP IS RECORDED, IT WOULD BE VACANT. 
          THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT FOR O UM, OTHER PLANNING APPLICATIONS IN ORDER TO DEVELOP THE HOMES ON THOSE PARTICULAR PROPERTIES. 
          IF THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO APPROVE THE TENTATIVE TRACK MAP TODAY, UM, AND THAT WHAT THAT IS INCLUDED IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BUILDING A HOME SINGLE STORY HOME, UM, AT THE VERY LEAST, WOULD REQUIRE DES SUBCOMMITTEE DESIGN REVIEW BECAUSE ANY HOUSE BUILT ON A VACANT LOT WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM, FROM PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. 
          SO THAT THAT AUTOMATIC REQUIRES A DESIGN DESIGN REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE APPLICATION. 
          UM, AND DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE HOUSE AND WHETHER OR NOT AS A TWO, TWO STORY WOULD DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S GONNA REQUIRE AN AD ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT OR POTENTIALLY A HIGHER LEVEL OF REVIEW. 
          UM, ON THE PROJECTOR ARE THE CODE, UM, STANDARDS AS IT RELATES TO THE EXISTING, UH, SITE, UM, SITE AND DEVELOPMENT. 
          THE EXISTING SITE, UM, WITH THE TWO LOTS COMBINED IS APPROXIMATELY 1.87 ACRES, WHICH IS 81,495 SQUARE FEET. 
          UM, THE, THE, UM, THE PROPOSED, UH, THE PROPOSED OF LOTS LOT AREA WOULD BE, UM, 10,560 SQUARE FEET FOR LOT ONE, AND THEN FOR TWO, THREE, AND FOUR, I'M SORRY, FOR, FOR TWO AND THREE, IT, IT'S NINE TH 9,460, AND THEN FOUR 9,680. 
          AND THEN FIVE, UM, OH AND SIX OVER 21,000 SQUARE FEET. 
          AND BASED ON THE AREA, THE, THE MAN, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA IS 9,450 SQUARE FEET. 
          SO ALL OF THOSE PROPOSED LOTS EXCEEDS THE, THE MINIMUM STANDARD, UM, THAT IS THE SAME FOR THE MINIMUM WIDTH AND DEPTH, 70 FEET WIDTH MINIMUM, AND 7,110 FEET DEEP. 
          UM, ALL LOTS COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM DEPTH AND WIDTH AND ARE EXCEEDING IT WITH THIS STAFF. 
          UM, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVE TENTATIVE TRACK MAP NUMBER 24 DASH ZERO ONE, WHICH IS THE SAME TENTATIVE PAR, UM, TRACK MAP NUMBER 74 7 4 9 76, ADOPTING RESOLUTION NUMBER 24 DASH 6 1 48. 
          AND I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT DID SUBMIT A WRITTEN STATEMENT THAT, THAT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ON THE SITE HAVE NOT CHANGED SINCE THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS APPROVED OR ADOPTED THE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT. 
          UM, PREVIOUSLY STAFF IS AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY PLANNING COMMISSION QUESTIONS. 
          THE APPLICANT IS ALSO PRESENT HERE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER. 
          OKAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THE REPORT. 
          AT THIS TIME, WE'RE GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          UH, I HAVE ONE CARD. 
          IT IS THE, UM, APPLICANT, KEVIN LAMB. 
          YOU'RE WELCOME TO COME FORWARD. 
          UH, GOOD EVENING, UH, UH, PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          I'M GLAD TO SEE YOU TODAY. 
          UH, I'VE BEEN SICK FOR THE LAST THREE DAYS AND, UH, BECAUSE MY KID WANT TO GO TO DISNEYLAND. 
          OH, . 
          SO I, I, I WENT THERE WITH THEM. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW, UH, I GOT COLD OR SOMETHING, BUT, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING COMING OUT LIKE, LIKE A FAUCET. 
          BUT, UH, UH, UH, THIS, UH, THIS SUBDIVISION BEEN A WHILE. 
          IT TAKE LIKE ALMOST 10 YEARS. 
          AND, UM, FIRST WE HIRE A LOT OF ARCHITECT. 
          WE HIRE A LOT OF ENGINEER TO HELP US. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, THERE, UH, THERE, THERE WAS SOME PROBLEM AND, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY QUIT. 
          EITHER THEY QUIT OR THEY, THEY DON'T DO THE WORK. 
          SO FINALLY I TOOK OVER AND DURING 2021, I GOT THE APPROVAL OF YOUR, 
          [00:15:01]
UH, YOUR, UH, AND, UH, WE WERE, UH, TRYING TO DO ALL THE CONDITIONS, UM, UH, THAT SET FORWARD IN THE, IN THE, THE APPROVAL. 
          AND, UH, WE WERE WORKING ON THAT AND DIDN'T REALIZE HOW LONG IT TAKE. 
          AND IT TOOK A WHILE BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MANY PROBLEMS AND DURING THE PANDEMIC AND ALL KIND OF THINGS. 
          SO, UM, UH, I'M HERE TODAY TO ANSWER AN, ANY OF YOUR QUESTION IF YOU HAVE, AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL APPROVE THIS AGAIN, UH, FOR, YEAH, BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE, UM, THE, THE PLACE A BETTER PLACE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT'S A BIG LOT AND JUST FOR TO MAINTAIN THAT IS, UH, QUITE, UH, QUITE A LOT OF WORKS. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO DIVIDE INTO A SMALLER LOT, IT WOULD BE EASY FOR PEOPLE AND EASY FOR, UM, PEOPLE TO MOVE IN WEST COVINA AND, YOU KNOW, LIVE, LIVE HERE. 
          OKAY. 
          DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY, UM, QUESTIONS FOR MR. LAMB? I, I HAVE SORT OF A, AN OVERALL PROCEDURAL, UH, THING THAT I, I THINK THE, I THINK THE COMMISSION OUGHT TO ADDRESS. 
          UM, AND IT JUST HAS TO DO, IT'S A PROCEDURAL ISSUE THAT I SEE, UH, WITH THE APPLICATION, UH, PERTAINING TO THE, UH, THE LETTER WRITTEN BY THE APPLICANT, UM, TO, UH, TO JOANNE BURNS, UH, AFFIRMING THAT THE, UH, ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS HAVEN'T CHANGED, UM, IN REGARD TO THE ORIGINAL MITIGATED, UH, NEGATIVE DECLARATION. 
          THE ONLY PROBLEM WITH IT IS THAT, UM, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT WE REQUIRE A SWORN AFFIDAVIT, WHICH IS, UH, WHICH IS NOTARIZED. 
          THE, THE ISSUE IS, IS THAT THIS IS JUST AN AFFIRMATION. 
          IT DOESN'T CONTAIN THE GIRA LANGUAGE THAT'S REQUIRED, UM, FOR A SWORN STATEMENT. 
          SO, UM, SO THAT WE CAN JUST HAVE A COMPLETE APPLICATION. 
          AND, UH, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN HERE, I'M, I'M PERFECTLY, UH, AMENABLE TO THAT, BUT I WAS GONNA SUGGEST, UM, IF WE COULD JUST QUICKLY, POTENTIALLY SWEAR IN THE APPLICANT SO THAT HE CAN AFFIRM THAT THIS IS, THAT THIS IS ALL TRUE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 
          I THINK WE CAN GET PAST THAT AND MOVE ON. 
          'CAUSE IT'S A SMALL THING AND, AND IT'S, AND I, AND I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND, PROBABLY HAD NO IDEA THAT IT WAS EVEN AN ISSUE, BUT I, I WENT THROUGH THE APPLICATION AND, AND I SAW THAT I HAVE A QUESTION, UH, BEFORE ONE. 
          OKAY, SURE. 
          IF YOU DON'T MIND, COMMISSIONER . 
          SO WE CAN ADDRESS THIS ONE ITEM AND GO FORWARD. 
          YES. 
          UM, TWO CONSTITUTE AN ACTUAL SWORN AFFIDAVIT. 
          THIS REQUIRES YOU TO SWEAR UNDER PENALTY OF LAW AND PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT YOU ARE TELLING THE TRUTH. 
          AND THE COMMISSION HERE IS INSTEAD OF RESUBMITTING, THEY ARE ASKING IF YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO TAKE THE OATH NOW AND SWEAR THAT WHAT IS IN HERE IS ACTUALLY TRUE AND YOU ARE SWEARING UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. 
          WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO TAKE AN OATH AS TO THAT? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, CAN YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND? DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? YES, I DO. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, IF THE COMMISSION IS AMENABLE, UM, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH TAKING THE VERBAL, UM, VERBAL OATH, UH, FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THE LETTER AND THE CONTENTS THEREOF THAT WERE NOTARIZED BUT NOT SWORN UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY? IF WE COULD DO THAT NOW VERBALLY, WOULD THAT SATISFY THIS COMMISSION? COMMISSIONERS? WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE YOU CONTINUE. 
          CITY ATTORNEY. 
          I HAD A QUESTION. 
          YES. 
          CAN I ASK MY QUESTION BEFORE SHE CONTINUES? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          UH, JUST SO YOU COULD EXPLAIN TO THE AUDIENCE, WHAT DOES AFFIRM MEAN ON A NOTARY DOCUMENT? AFFIRM MEANS, JUST TO CONFIRM, IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY SAY THAT IT IS TELLING THE TRUTH UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WHERE YOU ARE REQUIRED TO TELL THE TRUTH. 
          AND IF THERE IS A LIE, THEN A CRIMINAL CHARGE CAN BE BROUGHT WHERE IT IS FALSELY STATED UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY. 
          SO THIS IS JUST TO CONFIRM, THE OATH THAT HE JUST TOOK IS THE OATH TO TELL THE TRUTH AND CONFIRM THAT EVERYTHING THAT IS IN THIS DOCUMENT, IF THERE IS A LIE, THAT THERE CAN BE LEGAL ACTION IF THERE IS FOUND TO BE DECEIT OR FRAUD. 
          SOUNDS GOOD. 
          I'M, I'M ACTUALLY A NOTARY PUBLIC, SO I JUST WANTED THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT. 
          THANK YOU, . 
          THANK YOU. 
          ANY OTHER 
          [00:20:01]
QUESTIONS? I, I WAS GONNA SAY, MADAME CITY ATTORNEY, YOU, DO YOU WANT ME TO JUST ASK HIM THE QUESTION OR DO YOU SURE. 
          OR DO YOU WANT TO DO IT? SURE. 
          UM, OKAY. 
          MI MR. LAMB, UM, IF, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, UM, UH, UH, DO YOU, UH, DO YOU AFFIRM THAT ALL OF THE STATEMENTS IN THE LETTER THAT YOU SUBMITTED, WHICH IS DATED APRIL 6TH, 2022 TO DEPUTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JOANNE BURNS, UM, WHICH IS, UH, SIGNED BY YOU, UM, IS, UH, IS, IS TRUE AND ACCURATE IN ITS ENTIRETY? YES, I DO. 
          PERFECT. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          YOU MEAN THE LETTER THAT'S DATED APRIL 6TH, 2024 OR 2022, YOU MENTIONED? EXCUSE ME, I MAY HAVE MISSTATED THAT. 
          I WANT TO, I WANT TO CONFIRM. 
          I APOLOGIZE. 
          IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY. 
          UH, MS. , LET, LET ME, LET ME RESTATE THAT, MR. LAMB, AND I APOLOGIZE. 
          UH, MR. LAMB, DO YOU, UH, DO YOU AFFIRM THAT, UH, UH, THAT EVERYTHING IN YOUR LETTER DATED APRIL 6TH, 2024, UH, TO JOANNE BURNS, DEPUTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, UH, WHICH IS, UH, SIGNED BY YOU, UM, UH, THEN KEVIN LAMB, UM, ON THAT SAME DATE, IS, UH, IS, UH, TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE? YES. 
          APRIL 6TH, 2024? YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          THAT WAS MY ONLY QUESTION, AND I APPRECIATE IT. 
          NO PROBLEM. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH, UHHUH. 
          THANK YOU MR. LAMB. 
          I DON'T SEE ANY MORE CARDS, UM, ANYONE WANTING TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION. 
          I SEE NONE. 
          UM, AT THIS TIME I'LL TAKE, UM, QUESTIONS FROM ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS ON THIS ITEM. 
          VOTE OF ORDER. 
          MADAM CHAIR, ARE YOU CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING? YES. 
          I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. 
          , IS THERE A REASON WHY IT TOOK, YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, UH, IS THERE A REASON WHY IT EXPIRED OR, OR WHY IT TOOK 10 YEARS? THE, THE APPLICANT WAS, THEY WERE WORKING ON THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL REQUIRING THE, THE HOMES TO BE MODIFIED, UM, A PORTION OF IT TO BE DEMOLISHED AND IN THE GARAGE TO BE RECONSTRUCTED. 
          AND THEY, UM, DID IT, I GUESS THEY LOST TRACK OF THE TIMING. 
          AND SO AN EXTENSION WAS NOT, WAS NOT REQUESTED. 
          THE CITY DOES NOT, DOES NOT, UM, REMIND OR SEND THE APPLICANT'S REMINDER ON ON WHEN THEIR PERMITS ARE GONNA BE EXPIRING. 
          AS FAR AS ENTITLEMENTS ARE CONCERNED, UM, THAT IS UP TO THE APPLICANT, AND THAT IS TYPICALLY WRITTEN IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OR THAT APPROVAL LETTER THAT'S PROVIDED TO THE APPLICANT. 
          UM, SO IN THIS CASE, THEY, UM, OVERSAW, THERE WAS AN, UM, IT, IT WAS FORGOTTEN ABOUT. 
          I THINK I REMEMBER A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THIS PROJECT THAT WAS APPROVED ABOUT, UM, 2021 OR SO. 
          UM, I BELIEVED IT WAS APPROVED, AND I THINK THEY HAVE TWO YEARS TO FINISH THE, SOME OF THE CONDITIONS AND TO DO THE EXTENSION. 
          AND THEY PASSED THE TWO YEARS, IS THAT CORRECT? BECAUSE AUGUST WAS THE TWO YEARS IN 2023. 
          THAT'S WHY WE ARE SEEING THIS AGAIN. 
          UM, THAT IS CORRECT. 
          AND ALSO NOTE THAT WITH THE, THE CITY COUNCIL RECENTLY APPROVED THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE IN, IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT CODE. 
          THE EXPIRATION FOR TENTATIVE TRACK MAP IS THREE YEARS. 
          HOWEVER, THIS PROJECT HAS EXPIRED BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE TOOK INTO EFFECT. 
          SO THEY REALLY HAD TO APPLY FOR, REAPPLY FOR THIS APPROVAL SINCE IT WAS, UM, AN EX, AN EXPIRED PROJECT CAN'T BE EXTENDED. 
          OKAY. 
          THANK YOU. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? DO WE NOW, UM, CAN I ASK FOR, UM, A MOTION ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM AND DO WE NEED TO DO IT SEPARATE ONE FOR THE MITIGATED NECK DECK AND THEN FOR THE, UH, RESOLUTION FOR THE TENTATIVE TRACK MAP? OR CAN THEY BE DONE TOGETHER IF THIS COMMISSION IS RELYING ON THE SAME, UM, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FROM BEFORE? UM, I BELIEVE WITH NO CHANGES, IF THE COMMISSION IS SATISFIED WITH THAT, CAN WRAP THAT 
          [00:25:01]
INTO THE MOTION. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE SEPARATE IF YOU'RE RELYING ON THE SAME FACTS AND THE SAME EVERYTHING, BUT IF FOR CLARITY OF THE RECORD, IF YOU SHOULD PREFER TO SEPARATE THEM OUT, YOU CAN. 
          SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE TENANT TRACK MAP NUMBER 24 DASH ZERO ONE TTM 7 4 9 7 6, SECTION 15 1 6 2 EXEMPTION FOR APPLICANT KEVIN LAMB AT THE LOCATION AT 6 4 2 AND 7 0 4 EAST FRANCIS AVENUE. 
          I'LL SECOND THAT AND I THINK, UH, WE'RE GOING THROUGH IT VERY QUICKLY WAS BECAUSE TWO YEARS AGO IT WAS APPROVED ALREADY AND THE FACT THAT THEY OVER FORGOT ABOUT IT WITHIN A FEW MONTHS, THAT'S WHY WE'RE APPROVING IT VERY QUICKLY. 
          SO I'LL SECOND THAT. 
          OKAY. 
          I HAVE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THIS, AND IT'S BEEN SECOND ONE, UM, CEREMONIAL CHANGE IN THE RESOLUTION FOR THE TENTATIVE TRACK MAP. 
          WE WANTED TO HAVE IT AMENDED SO THAT IT INCLUDES THE ORIGINAL DATE WHEN THE MATTER WAS CONSIDERED BY THIS PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          THAT WAS AUGUST 24TH, 2021, AND THIS EVENING, JUNE 25TH, 2024. 
          OKAY. 
          WITH THAT, UM, MAY WE HAVE THE ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER ERRA? AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ AYE. 
          VICE CHAIR HANG. 
          AYE. 
          CHAIR WILLIAMS. AYE. 
          LET THE MOTION SHOW THAT RESOLUTION NUMBER 24 DASH 6 1 4 8 HAS BEEN APPROVED. 
          FIVE ZERO THANKS. 
          OKAY. 
          [2. STUDY SESSION - PLANNING COMMISSION STANDING MEETING RULES]
NOW, AT THIS TIME WE WILL BE MOVING ON TO A NON-HEARING ITEM. 
          THIS ITEM IS A STUDY SESSION PLANNING COMMISSION STANDING RULES. 
          UM, OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, MS. BURNS, THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY SESSION IS TO DISCUSS A, UM, THE ADOPTED ROLES WITH THE REVISIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. 
          UM, THAT HAS IN THAT HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS ATTACHMENT ONE. 
          THE PLANNING COMMISSION INITIALLY DISCUSSED THIS ISSUE, UM, THIS ITEM ON AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, AND HAD CONTINUED THIS ITEM FOR THIS STUDY SESSION TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING, WHICH IS TODAY'S DATE. 
          AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, THE PLANNING COMMISSION CLARIFIED THAT, UM, THE DESIRED ORDER OF THE AGENDA, UM, AND HOW THE MEETING IS RAN, UM, WOULD NOT FOLLOW, WOULD NOT FOLLOW THE, THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER EXACTLY, AND IT WOULD BE, UM, WHICH IS UP ON THE PROJECTOR, THE STAFF PRESENTATION FIRST FOR PUBLIC HEARING, UM, FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS, PUBLIC HEARING ITEM IS OPENED. 
          UM, THE APPLICANT SPEAKS FIRST. 
          UM, THOSE IN FAVOR, THOSE AGAINST A REBUTTAL AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT AND STAFF, UM, FOLLOWED BY THE CLOSE OF PUBLIC HEARING, COMMISSIONER, UH, COMMISSIONER DISCUSSION AND DELIBERATION IN A MOTION FOR A VOTE WHERE THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES A ROLL CALL VOTE, WHICH IS SET DIFFERENT FROM THE, UM, EXACT WAY THAT ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, UM, IS HANDLED. 
          UM, AT, AT THE LAST PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, WHEN THE STUDY SESSION WAS HELD, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UM, PROVIDED ALSO DIRECTION TO, UM, FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE SOME TYPE OF PRESENTATION OR DISCUSS, UM, CERTAIN ISSUES RELATED TO, TO MEETING DISRUPTION IN THE CHAIR'S ROLE. 
          THE CITY ATTORNEY IS HERE, IS PRESENT, AND SHE WILL BE PROVIDING A VERBAL PRESENTATION ON THIS. 
          UH, THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO DIRECTED STAFF TO PROVIDE, UM, SOME, A SUMMARY, UM, OR A PROVIDE A HANDOUT, AN OFFICIAL HANDOUT, UM, IN REGARDS TO ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. 
          AND THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED WITHIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S PACKET. 
          UM, STAFF PROVIDED 
          [00:30:01]
TWO ITEMS, UM, TWO REFERENCE ITEMS. ONE IS THE CHEAT SHEET FOR ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, AND THAT WAS OBTAINED FROM OR CREATED BY BOARD EFFECTS. 
          AND THE OTHER, THE OTHER HANDOUT IS FOR THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER SIMPLIFIED THAT WAS PREPARED BY CORNELL UNIVERSITY. 
          UM, WITH THIS, I'LL GO AHEAD AND TURN IT OVER TO THE DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY. 
          SHE WILL BE DISCUSSING THE CHAIR ROLE AND ALSO THE, UH, MEETING DIS DISRUPTIONS. 
          GOOD EVENING CHAIR PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, NOW THAT WE ARE IN THIS POST COVID ERA, I THINK A LOT OF US ARE FAMILIAR WITH VIDEO SCREAMING AND, UM, INTERACTIVE PLATFORMS FOR THESE MEETINGS. 
          AND ONE OF THE SPECIFIC, UM, SECTIONS WITHIN THE BROWN ACT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSING TELECONFERENCING IS IF THERE'S A DISRUPTION IN BROADCASTING, UM, THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC GETS CUT OFF TO INTERACT WITH THE COMMISSION AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK AND COMMENT. 
          SO ONE OF THE RULES, UM, IN THE BROWN ACT IS THAT IF THERE IS A DISRUPTION THAT PREVENTS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY FROM BROADCASTING THE MEETING TO THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, USING THE CALL-IN OPTION OR AN INTERNET BASED SERVICE OPTION, OR IN THE EVENT OF A DISRUPTION IN WITHIN THE LOCAL AGENCY'S CONTROL THAT PREVENTS MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC FROM OFFERING PUBLIC COMMENT, UM, USING THE CALL-IN OPTION OR THE INTERNET BASED SERVICE OPTION, THE LEG LEGISLATIVE BODY SHALL TAKE NO FURTHER ACTION ON THOSE ITEMS APPEARING ON THE AGENDA UNTIL THE PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE MEETING VIA CALL-IN OR INTERNET-BASED SERVICE IS RESTORED. 
          UM, ANY ACTIONS ON THE AGENDA THAT ARE TAKEN, ANY VOTES THAT ARE TAKEN DURING THE, UM, DISRUPTION, AND IT COULD ALSO BE DELIBERATIONS, WHICH IS ALSO PART OF IT, BUT ESPECIALLY A VOTE IF THAT HAPPENS DURING A DISRUPTION OF BROADCASTING, UM, THE BROWN ACT SAYS THAT MAY BE CHALLENGED. 
          SO IT, WE ARE MONITORING, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOMEONE ON STAFF TO KEEP US ONLINE, AND IF WE HAPPEN TO HAVE A DISRUPTION, THEY WOULD LET THE CHAIR KNOW. 
          AND IN THAT CASE, WE WOULD PAUSE THE PROCEEDINGS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE COULD RESTORE IF IT IS SOMETHING WITHIN CITY CONTROL, UM, TO RESTORE THAT CONNECTION SO THE PUBLIC CAN OFFER, COMMENT AND INTERACT AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON AN ITEM BEFORE IT IS VOTED UPON. 
          SO THAT, UM, WE WOULD TAKE A RECESS AT THAT POINT. 
          IF THERE IS A, A BROADCASTING DISRUPTION, TAKE A PAUSE, SEE IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT CAN BE RESTORED. 
          IF NOT, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS, UM, ADJOURN OR RECESS UNTIL IT IS RESTORED. 
          AND IF IT CANNOT BE, IT'S A BIGGER PROBLEM AND IT CANNOT BE RESTORED AT THAT POINT, WE WOULD, UM, CONTINUE THE MEETING TO ANOTHER SET, UH, DATE CERTAIN, UM, TIME IF POSSIBLE. 
          SO WHAT, UH, THIS ENCOURAGES IS THE PUBLIC'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK AS IF THEY WERE HERE. 
          SO THAT'S ONE OF THE BROWN ACT REQUIREMENTS REGARDING DISRUPTIONS IN BROADCASTING. 
          NOW, THERE ARE OTHER BROAD, UH, OTHER, UH, DISRUPTIONS, AND THOSE WOULD BE PHYSICAL DISRUPTIONS. 
          LET'S SAY, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S AN EMERGENCY, THERE'S A FIRE IN THE BUILDING, OR IF THERE'S AN EARTHQUAKE AND WE ARE UNABLE TO CONTINUE, UM, THAT IT WOULD BE INCUMBENT ON THE CHAIR TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S AN EMERGENCY GOING ON OR A MED, SOME, A MEDICAL EMERGENCY OR SOMETHING TO CALL THAT RECESS, UH, UNTIL THE SITUATION CAN BE ASSESSED. 
          UM, AND, AND DETERMINE WHETHER IT CAN PROCEED AFTER A RECESS OR IF IT CANNOT. 
          IF IT CANNOT, THEN AGAIN, WE WOULD HAVE THE MEETING CONTINUED TO ANOTHER DATE AND TIME, UM, SO THAT THE, THE PUBLIC CAN GET NOTICE OF THE DATE AND TIME OF THE CONTINUED MEETING AND THEN THE BUSINESS WOULD BE CONDUCTED AT THAT MEETING. 
          SO THAT'S ANOTHER PHYSICAL DISRUPTION. 
          UM, ANOTHER TYPE OF DISRUPTION IS WILLFUL DISRUPTIONS. 
          GIMME ONE SECOND. 
          OKAY. 
          WILLFUL DISTURBANCES OR BREAKING UP OF A LAWFUL ASSEMBLY, WHICH THIS WOULD BE A LAWFUL GATHERING OF THE COMMISSION TO CONDUCT OFFICIAL BUSINESS. 
          UM, THERE ARE, THERE ARE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THE CHAIR AS PRESIDER OF THE MEETINGS WOULD BE ON WATCH FOUR, AND THAT WOULD BE TO SEE IF THERE IS A DISRUPTION TO THE LEVEL WHERE THE MEETING AND THE BUSINESS OF THIS COMMISSION CANNOT GO FORWARD. 
          IF IT CANNOT CONTINUE AT THAT POINT, YOU DO HAVE A DISRUPTION OF THE MEETING AND YOU CAN CALL FOR A RECESS. 
          AND IF IT'S 
          [00:35:01]
JUST A MATTER OF EVERYONE NEEDING TO CALM DOWN OR IF IT'S A TEMPORARY THING, A RECESS WOULD PROBABLY BE, BE SUFFICIENT. 
          UM, YOU CAN READ ADJOURN AFTER THE RECESS AND COMMENCE THE MEETING AGAIN. 
          AND IF THE DISRUPTION OCCURS AGAIN, IF IT HAPPENS TO BE A SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL WHO IS WILLFULLY DISRUPTING THE MEETING, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO CONTINUE THE BUSINESS OF THIS BODY, UM, THEN AT THAT POINT THE PERSON CAN BE ASKED TO BE REMOVED BY THE OFFICER HERE. 
          UM, IF THERE HAPPENS TO BE A CRIME COMMITTED, SUCH AS A DISRUPTION OF THE PEACE, UM, A DISTURBANCE OF THE PEACE OR UNDER PENAL CODE SECTION 4 0 3, WHICH IS A, UM, SOMEONE, SOMEONE WHO WILLFULLY DISTURBS OR BREAKS UP A LAWFUL ASSEMBLY OR MEETING UNLESS THE PERSON HAS A LEGAL AUTHORITY TO DO SO, UM, IS DEEMED TO HAVE COMMITTED A MISDEMEANOR UNDER THE STATUTE. 
          SO THAT IS ONE WAY THAT SOMEONE WHO IS ACTUALLY PREVENTING A LAWFUL ASSEMBLY HERE CAN BE REMOVED, AND THEY WOULD BE CITED FOR PENAL CODE 4 0 3 FOR DISRUPTING A MEETING. 
          THERE ARE OTHER, OTHER SECTIONS THAT COULD APPLY DEPENDING ON THE SITUATION, OBVIOUSLY, AND ARE OFFICERS ARE, ARE WELL-VERSED IN WHAT OTHER DISTURBANCES OF THE PIECE THERE MIGHT BE. 
          UM, BUT THAT IS ONE WAY THAT A DISTURBANCE MAY BE STOPPED. 
          AND THEN THE MEETING CAN BE CONTINUED. 
          OF COURSE, IF NEED BE, THE RECESS CAN BE TAKEN TO SEE IF IT NEEDS TO GO THAT FAR. 
          UM, AND THAT'S UP TO THE CHAIR TO KIND OF KEEP AN EYE ON THAT AND SEE WHAT THE SITUATION IS AS IT EVOLVES. 
          IF EVER THERE IS A NEED TO CONSULT WITH COUNSEL OR TO, WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT, A RECESS WOULD BE PROPER FOR THAT. 
          IF THERE IS A DIRECT AND IMMEDIATE THREAT, YOU CAN CALL A RECESS IMMEDIATELY TO PRESERVE THE SECURITY AND SAFETY OF EVERYONE IN THE IMMEDIATE. 
          SO AT THAT POINT, YOU CAN CALL AN IMMEDIATE RECESS IF NEED BE. 
          UM, WHILE MANY, UM, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, YOU KNOW, SCHOOL BOARDS, ET CETERA, HAVE HAD RULES OF CONDUCT AND CIVIL AND, UM, DECORUM TYPE RULES, UM, IN SO FAR AS THE FIRST AMENDMENT IS SUCH A PROTECTED RIGHT, UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK AND COME UP TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT, UM, IF THEY ARE NOT PREVENTING THE MEETING FROM CONTINUING AT THAT POINT, UM, IT IS NOT DEEMED A DISRUPTION SUFFICIENT ENOUGH TO STOP THE MEETING. 
          IF THEY HAVE THE FLOOR AND THEY HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT TIME ALLOTTED TO THEM, THEY GET THAT TIME. 
          SO LONG AS IT'S NOT PERSONAL THREATS, INCITING VIOLENCE, NOT CAUSING A RIOT, NOT HARASSING INDIVIDUALS ON THE COMMISSION OR STAFF AT THAT POINT, IT IS THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO SPEAK UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT. 
          AND, UM, IN SO FAR AS IT'S NOT FALLING INTO THOSE SPECIFIC CATEGORIES OR CAUSING A DISRUPTION WHERE THE MEETING CANNOT CONTINUE, THEY ARE GIVEN THOSE FIVE MINUTES. 
          AND ONCE THEY'RE DONE, IF THEY DO NOT YIELD THE PODIUM AND PREVENT THE BODY FROM CONTINUING, AT THAT POINT, I THINK YOU DO HAVE A DISRUPTION. 
          AND AT THAT POINT, UM, THE CHAIR CAN CALL A RECESS AND CALL THE CALL FOR ORDER. 
          UM, TO THE EXTENT THAT UNPLEASANT LANGUAGE IS USED, UM, THE SPEAKERS GENERALLY HAVE A FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTED RIGHT TO USE LANGUAGE. 
          SO AS LONG AS THEY DON'T CROSS THAT LINE AGAIN INTO HARASSMENT AS INCITING VIOLENCE THREATENING INDIVIDUALS, UM, OR, UM, CAUSING ANARCHY, IMMEDIATE UP UPRISING, THOSE KINDS OF THINGS, IF IT DOESN'T CROSS THAT LINE, THEY DO HAVE THAT FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT TO SPEAK. 
          AND WE DO, WE TREAT THAT VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, IF THERE IS EVER A NEED WHERE IT CROSSES THAT LINE, PERHAPS A RECESSES IN ORDER AND TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE CAN CALM DOWN, AND IF THAT DOES NOT RESOLVE, THEN WE CAN SEE WHAT THE NEXT STEPS ARE. 
          BUT JUST, UM, USAGE OF EXPLETIVES DURING A PUBLIC COMMENT MAY NOT NECESSARILY FALL OUTSIDE OF THAT FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION. 
          AND MOST OF THE DECORUM TYPE, UM, RULES OF MEETINGS WHERE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PHYSICALLY REMOVED OR CUT OFF FROM PUBLIC COMMENT, HAVE ENDED UP IN LITIGATION THAT DOES NOT FAREWELL FOR THE, UH, FOR THE GOVERNMENT ENTITIES. 
          SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTION IS VERY POWERFUL, WE WANT TO BE VERY COGNIZANT OF THAT. 
          OKAY? AGAIN, THIS DOES NOT CONTEMPLATE EVERY SINGLE TYPE OF POTENTIAL DISRUPTION. 
          SO, UM, AND AGAIN, AS PRESIDER OF THE MEETING, THE CHAIR, UH, WOULD HAVE THAT DISCRETION TO SAY WHEN A RECESS IS NEEDED OR IF THERE IS AN EMERGENCY TO BE ABLE TO CALL THAT RECESS. 
          SO THAT IS WITHIN THE AUTHORITY OF THE CHAIR. 
          AND IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, UM, DISRUPTIONS IN BROADCASTING, 
          [00:40:01]
DISRUPTIONS IN, UM, MEETING PROCE, YOU KNOW, PROCEEDINGS, UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. 
          IT'S JUST ONE COMPONENT OF THE RULES THAT YOU'RE REVIEWING TONIGHT, RIGHT? SO ANYONE CAN SAY ANYTHING THEY WANT. 
          I'M SORRY, AM I ALLOWED TO TALK OR ARE YOU STILL TALKING? OH, OKAY. 
          SO ANYONE CAN SAY ANYTHING THEY WANT AS LONG AS THEY'RE, THEY HAVE THEIR FIVE MINUTES UP THERE, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO IT IS, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO IT, WHO IS SPEAKING, THE PERSON DELIVERING THE, THE COMMENT DOES NOT MATTER. 
          THE, THEY CAN SAY WHATEVER THEY WANT WITHIN CERTAIN LIMITS. 
          AGAIN, THEY CANNOT PERSONALLY THREATEN HARM TO A PARTICULAR COMMISSIONER OR TO STAFF. 
          THEY CANNOT, UM, THEY CANNOT HARASS INDIVIDUAL, UM, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION OR STAFF. 
          THEY CANNOT HARASS OTHER MEMBERS IN THE AUDIENCE. 
          IT WOULD, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE, UM, MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC BUSINESS, RIGHT? SO WHETHER, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY GET VERY PASSIONATE AND CERTAIN WORDS ARE USED AS LONG AS IT IS NOT THREATENING, IT IS NOT A, YOU KNOW, HARASSING, IT'S NOT ATTACKING SOMEONE, IT'S NOT CAUSING AN IMMEDIATE CALL FOR VIOLENCE OR RIOT THAT IS STILL PROTECTED SPEECH UNDER THE FI FIRST AMENDMENT, RIGHT? SO MY SURPR TO MY SURPRISE, WHEN I WAS CHAIR THE FIRST TIME I CAME ACROSS ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN WHO COMES IN HERE OFTEN, HE, UH, THE LANGUAGE, I, I WAS PRETTY SHOCKED THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IS NORMAL AND WE'RE TO ACCEPT IT. 
          UM, THE WILLFUL DISRUPTION TO ME THAT THAT'S, YOU KNOW, RIGHT THERE AT THE TOP OF THE, YOU KNOW, THE LIST RIGHT THERE, EVERYTHING, AND, AND IT, THEY WERE DIRECTED AT, I'VE SEEN THEM DIRECTED AT, UH, ALMOST EVERY ONE OF US. 
          AND I MEAN, TO WHERE THEY, YOU KNOW, TELL US, YOU KNOW, THE F WORD DIRECTLY TO US OR, UH, TALK ABOUT OUR ETHNICITY. 
          I THINK THOSE ARE ATTACKS ON US. 
          AND I MEAN, THAT'S JUST HOW I FEEL. 
          I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THEY SHOULD BE, UM, ACCEPTED AS SUCH AS JUST THE FIRST AMENDMENT. 
          I THINK AT THAT POINT, THE, THE SPEAKER CAN BE REMINDED THAT WE WOULD, UM, WANT TO MAINTAIN DECORUM AND MAINTAIN, UM, CIVIL, BUT AGAIN, IT IS STILL WITHIN THAT FIRST A AMEND AMENDMENT PROTECTED SPEECH ZONE. 
          IT HASN'T CROSSED OVER. 
          IF IT HASN'T BEEN A DI DIRECT THREAT OF I KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE, I'M GONNA COME AFTER YOU, OR I KNOW WHAT YOU DRIVE. 
          YOU KNOW, UH, THOSE RISE TO A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF THREAT VERSUS USING UNPLEASANT, UM, RACIALLY CHARGED OR DISCRIMINATORY LANGUAGE. 
          UM, WHILE WE DON'T, WE DON'T LIKE IT, UM, WE DON'T PREFER TO USE THAT, WE PREFER NOT TO HEAR IT HERE. 
          UM, IT IS STILL PROTECTED SPEECH UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT. 
          CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT THE MUTE BUTTON IS HERE? IF SOMEONE'S USING PROFANITY, WHAT'S THE MUTE BUTTON USED FOR AT CONSOLE MEETINGS? I CANNOT SPEAK TO THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF. 
          SO CAN YOU MUTE THE SPEAKER OF THE CASTING OUT? NO. 
          MM-HMM. 
          YOU, IF SOMEONE'S USING PROFANITY ON THAT MIC LIVE, YOU CAN'T, THEY COULD CONTINUE TO SPEAK TO THIS, TO THIS BODY AND EVERYONE IN THIS, IN THIS HOUSE, BUT YOU COULD MUTE THEM FROM, YOU CAN MUTE THAT MIC THAT'S BEING LIVE ROCK, LIVE FEEDED, THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS THEIR ABILITY TO SPEAK, EVEN IF THEY'RE USING UNPLEASANT WORDS. 
          SO USING THE F WORD, UNFORTUNATELY IS NOT CAUSED TO CUT OFF PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          SO I'M GONNA ENCOURAGE, UH, I'M GONNA ENCOURAGE YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET BACK TO ME TODAY, BUT ENCOURAGE YOU TO REACH OUT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TOM TH AND GET CLARIFICATION ON THAT. 
          BECAUSE AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL, THEY DO IT VERY OFTEN. 
          AND I BELIEVE THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS TAKEN A DIFFERENT STANCE ON THAT ISSUE. 
          JUST AT THE LAST CONS MEETING ON JUNE 18TH, THE MAYOR MUTED, UH, PROFANITY FROM THE, FROM THAT MIC. 
          SO WE, ANY CLARIFICATION ON THAT? I WILL LOOK INTO IT. 
          I HAVE A, A FOLLOW UP QUESTION AND I, I, UH, AS, AS AN ATTORNEY MYSELF, I I, I LOOK AT THE, THE, THE ISSUES ON, UH, OR I, I, I LOOK AT SOME OF THE STATEMENTS THAT WERE, THAT WERE MADE WITH REGARD TO WHAT IS PERMISSIBLE VERSUS IMPERMISSIBLE SPEECH, AND PARTICULARLY IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT IS, IS ACTUALLY STILL AN OPEN QUESTION OF LAW AS TO HOW EXPANSIVE THE LEGISLATIVE PRIVILEGE IS. 
          BECAUSE WHEN YOU STAND BEFORE THIS DAES, YOU HAVE SOME SEMBLANCE OF LEGISLATIVE PRIVILEGE, AND CONCEIVABLY YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT. 
          THE, AND NO ONE HAS ACTUALLY MADE ANY RULE. 
          THE SUPREME COURT HAS NOT MADE ANY RULING AS TO WHETHER OR NOT 
          [00:45:01]
A THREAT OF VIOLENCE IN THAT CONTEXT IS EVEN, IS EVEN A CRIME. 
          WE, WE DON'T HAVE CASE LAW ON THAT. 
          AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I, WHEN, WHEN THE CITY ATTORNEY STATES, UM, STATES THAT HARASSMENT WOULD BE GROUNDS FOR POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, CUTTING SOMEONE OFF. 
          I'M VERY, I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HAVING THAT KIND OF VAGUE LANGUAGE. 
          AND I, AND I, AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHAT HARASSMENT MEANS, AND I THINK HARASSMENT MEANS DIFFERENT THINGS TO ALL FIVE OF US UP HERE. 
          UM, VAGUE LANGUAGE MEANS IMPLICITLY AND, AND I, AND, AND I KNOW MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, YOU KNOW THIS. 
          IF IT'S, IF IT'S A, IF IT'S A CONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE STATUTE, IT'S BEING STRUCK DOWN IF IT'S A, IF IT'S, UH, IF IT INVOLVES THE FIRST AMENDMENT. 
          AND SO MY, MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS I, AS, AS MUCH AS I UNDERSTAND, I, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE, YOU'RE MAKING A PRESENTATION FOR US. 
          UM, MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT CERTAIN WORDS MEAN CERTAIN THINGS TO YOU. 
          AND I THAT MIGHT BE A LOT DIFFERENT TO A LAY PERSON WHO DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE LEGAL NUANCES, BECAUSE TRUST ME, FIRST AMENDMENT LAW IS, I MEAN, IT CAN TAKE YEARS TO REALLY LEARN THE NUANCES OF THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE SO MANY DIFFERENT SUBCATEGORIES THAT YOU HAVE TO CONCERN YOURSELF WITH. 
          AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I, YOU KNOW, DIRECT THREATS ARE, OR DIRECT INCITEMENT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT, THAT I, I THINK WE ALL OUGHT TO BE MINDFUL OF. 
          UM, AND, AND I MEAN, DIRECT CALL FOR VIOLENCE, IT CAN'T BE VAGUE. 
          THAT'S THE OTHER THING. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF SOMEBODY SAYS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T LIKE, THAT WE COULD CAUSE, CAUSE SOMEBODY TO, TO, TO, UH, YOU KNOW, STIR THEMSELVES UP AND DO SOMETHING HARMFUL, THAT'S NOT CROSSING THE LINE. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL OF BECAUSE THESE, THESE WORDS HAVE LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE. 
          AND I, I'M VERY PROTECTIVE OF ANYONE'S RIGHT TO SPEAK UP HERE. 
          AND, AND I WILL TELL YOU IF I THINK YOU'RE WRONG, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU, UM, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S, I THINK IT'S CONCERNING THAT UNFORTUNATELY THE, THE AVERAGE PERSON DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE ALL OF THE, THE, THE BACKGROUND LEGAL KNOWLEDGE FOR ALL OF THIS. 
          AND I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE. 
          I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE, UM, I JUST ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO BE AS EDUCATED AS POSSIBLE ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT BECAUSE IT IS, IT, IT IS A RIGHT THAT I THINK EVERYONE UP HERE, UM, REALLY, REALLY OUGHT TO, UM, TAKE THE TIME TO, TO FULLY UNDERSTAND AND, AND FULLY APPRECIATE THOSE RIGHTS. 
          BECAUSE AGAIN, WHEN WE HAVE A SOCIETY WHERE PEOPLE THINK THAT, UM, THINGS COULD, OR WHERE, WHERE PEOPLE START VALUING THINGS LIKE THIS LESS, UM, YOU CAN HAVE SORT OF A BACKWARD SLOPE. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE VERY DANGEROUS FOR, FOR OUR, OUR SOCIETY. 
          AND, AND THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN. 
          LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY COMING UP HERE CUSSING US ALL OUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IS, IS THAT ALL THAT HELPFUL TO, TO MOVING FORWARD ON, YOU KNOW, SOME ORDINANCE OR, OR SOME PROJECT THAT WE'RE, THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING? THE ANSWER IS NO. 
          BUT I, I STILL THINK THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY, PROTECTING, PROTECTING FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO SAY WHATEVER CRAZY THING THAT THEY MIGHT WANNA SAY IS, IS, IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SOME DEGREE. 
          AND SO THAT, THAT'S MY ONLY SORT OF TWO SECOND SOAP BOX THING. 
          I, AND, AND, AND LIKE I SAID, I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S COMING FROM, BUT I REALLY WANT TO, UH, REALLY WANT TO IMPRESS THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S, IT'S OUR JOB TO BE MORE PERMISSIBLE RATHER THAN LESS. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, IIII, I WANT TO SORT OF LEAVE OFF WITH ONE COMMENT THAT COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ SAID. 
          I THINK THE ONLY REASON THERE'S A MUTE BUTTON THERE IS SO THAT ONCE SOMEBODY, WHEN WHEN SOMEBODY IS DONE WITH THEIR FIVE MINUTES OR WHATEVER THE ALLOTTED TIME IS, WE CAN CUT THEM OFF AT THAT POINT IN TIME. 
          THAT IS A VALID TIME, PLACE, AND MANNER RESTRICTION THAT WE, THAT WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE. 
          BECAUSE AT THAT POINT IN TIME, THAT PERSON, THEY'RE CUT OFF, THEY GET FIVE MINUTES IN FRONT OF US, RIGHT? THAT'S, THAT'S THEIR TIME TO, TO REDRESS THEIR GRIEVANCES WITH THE GOVERNMENT. 
          AND WE SHOULD BE VERY MINDFUL OF THAT. 
          THAT'S THE ONLY REASON THAT MUTE BUTTON EXISTS. 
          IT DOESN'T EXIST FOR ANY OTHER REASON, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. 
          WELL, IF YOU CAN ALSO ASK, UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT I HAVE HEARD THE CITY COUNCIL, UM, 
          [00:50:01]
AT VARIOUS TIMES TO SAY, PLEASE KEEP YOUR LANGUAGE RESPECTFUL. 
          I MEAN, THEY DON'T STOP THEM, THEY'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT TO THEM, YOU KNOW, AND, AND YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT, YOU KNOW, HOW FAR WE'VE, WE'VE JUST, YOU KNOW, THIS WHOLE SYSTEM HAS GONE WHERE, UM, FIRST AMENDMENT NOW ALLOWS YOU TO MAKE A MOCKERY OF, OF A GOVERNMENT MEETING. 
          IT JUST, IT'S VERY DISAPPOINTING. 
          UNFORTUNATELY, WE ARE SEEING A LOT MORE OF THAT. 
          BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC TO VOICE PASSIONATE AS IT MIGHT BE, VOICE, THEIR DIS CONCERNS, UH, OR THEIR, THEIR, THEIR DISSATISFACTION WITH THEIR LOCAL GOVERNMENT IS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MOST PROTECTED FORMS OF SPEECH OUT THERE. 
          AND MOST OF THE CASES THAT ACTUALLY GO TO LITIGATION, THE, THE AGENCIES OFTEN LOSE. 
          UM, AND, AND THAT IS ONE OF THE CONCERNS OF AIRING, UNLESS IT IS CLEARLY RIGHT. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          BUT EVEN ON TELEVISION, THEY'LL BEEP YOU OUT, BEEP, BEEP, BEEP. 
          WE ALLOW THEM, 'CAUSE I WENT HOME LATER THAT NIGHT AND I SAW IT JUST, I WANTED TO SEE IF IT HAD BEEN DELETED. 
          NO, THE WHOLE THING WAS THERE FOR EVERYONE TO HEAR EVERY BAD WORD, EVERY FILTHY WORD, AND IT WAS ALL THERE. 
          AND THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO HEAR IT AS WELL. 
          SO THAT IS THE, THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC SPEAKER TO SPEAK, WHETHER THEY'RE UNSATISFIED OR DISSATISFIED WITH THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, IT IS THEIR PROTECTED RIGHT TO SPEAK OUT THOSE DISSATISFACTIONS. 
          I GET IT. 
          I, THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, I'LL SAY THAT PERMISSION, THEY DON'T ALLOW IT, BUT WE, WE DO . 
          YEAH. 
          SO, UH, SO I'LL SAY WE NEED TO REACH OUT TO THE CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE HE ABSOLUTELY HAS A DIFFERENT BELIEF ON THAT. 
          SO I THINK WE'RE OVERSTEPPING ON BOUNDARIES. 
          IF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S MADE A RECOMMENDATION ON THE, ON THIS ISSUE, WE SHOULD BE FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE HE IS THE ONE SELECTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND HIRED, UH, BY THE, THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE THOSE LEGAL DECISIONS. 
          AND I WILL LOOK INTO THAT, BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE EXPRESSION OF DISSATISFACTION WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT IS ONE OF THE HIGHEST PROTECTIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE FOR FREE SPEECH. 
          AND AGAIN, ONE OF THE DISTANT DIFFERENCES WITH PUBLICLY TELEVISED, UH, MEETINGS VERSUS OURS HERE IS THAT THE FCC GOVERNS THE PUBLICLY BROADCASTED TV BROADCASTS VERSUS OUR MEETINGS HERE, THEY ARE DIFFERENT. 
          SO WITH THAT, THE FEDERAL RULES DO APPLY, AND THEY ARE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE HAVE. 
          SO THAT IS ANOTHER FACTOR THAT PLAYS INTO THIS. 
          YEAH. 
          YOU KNOW, UM, I JUST WANNA ADD THAT FOR THE NINE YEARS I THINK I'VE BEEN HERE, UM, FIRST THERE ARE NOT THAT MANY PUBLICS THAT ACTUALLY ATTEND ALL MEETINGS. 
          AND IF WE DO GET THEM, I THINK OUT OF THE NINE YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE, I'VE ONLY HEARD MAYBE ONE OR TWO. 
          AND, AND THEN ALSO AT THE SAME TIME AS COMMISSIONERS, WE HAVE A RESPONSIBLE IN A JOB, BASICALLY A VOLUNTEER JOB, WHICH TAKES A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT ULTIMATELY AFFECT THE ENTIRE CITY. 
          AND TO DO THAT, WE ALSO HAVE TO LISTEN TO EVERYONE, WHETHER IT'S FROM THE APPLICANTS, WHETHER IT'S FROM WHO ARE IN FAVORS, ANYONE WHO ARE NOT IN FAVORS IN ALL THE LANGUAGES THAT THEY COME, THANK GOODNESS THAT THEY DON'T SPEAK A DIFFERENT TYPE OF LANGUAGE. 
          UH, I WOULDN'T UNDERSTAND. 
          BUT YOU KNOW, FOR THE MOST PART, WHEN WE TAKE ALL THAT, AND THEN WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS, WE HAVE A DISCUSSIONS AND BASED ON THAT, AND THEN ALSO WITH YOUR OWN INPUT AND YOUR OWN EXPERIENCE, AND TO COME, COME UP WITH A SOLUTION. 
          AND SOMETIME DURING THAT PERIOD, WE MAY HEAR THINGS THAT WE'RE NOT GONNA LIKE, BUT I KIND OF HAVE TO FILTER ALL THAT AND THEN TRY TO GRAB ANYTHING THAT IS USEFUL. 
          SO FOR THOSE WHO COMES UP HERE AND, YOU KNOW, YOU WANNA MUTE THEM OR YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR THEM, THEY DO HAVE THEIR FIVE MINUTES. 
          I THINK IT MIGHT BE A WASTE OF MY TIME, BUT I STILL HAVE TO LISTEN TO THEM SO THAT I CAN MAKE AND INFORM OR NOT INCLUDE THEIR DIS, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY'RE, THEY'RE TELLING US. 
          BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE ALL DO HAVE TO LISTEN. 
          UM, EVERYONE AND ALSO OUR COMMISSIONER TOO, WE HAVE TO LISTEN TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT'S BEING DEBATED UPON, AND YOU WILL LEARN A GREAT DEAL. 
          MAYBE THAT ONE PERSON OR THAT TWO PERSON, WE'RE NOT GONNA LEARN FROM IT AND JUST MUTE THEM OUT YOURSELF. 
          UM, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IF THE AUDIENCE OR THE RESIDENTS OR APPLICANTS, IF THEY ARE HERE, THEY CAN ACTUALLY FOR THEMSELVES, ACTUALLY LISTEN TO IT AND MAKE 
          [00:55:01]
A, MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL FOR THEMSELVES AS WELL. 
          SO IF THEY'RE NOT HERE SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE, THEN OBVIOUSLY THEY HAVE TO LISTEN TO US IN THE, WHAT IS IT, YOUTUBE BROADCAST? I DON'T KNOW. 
          I ONLY SAW IT ON YOUTUBE. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHERE ELSE IT'S BEING BROADCAST, BUT . 
          UM, SO WITH ALL THAT, AND, AND IT, IT'S A LOT OF DECISIONS SOMETIME. 
          I MEAN, THERE ARE DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO READ THROUGH, UM, DECISIONS ALL THAT WE HAVE TO GATHER TOGETHER AND MAKE A DECISIONS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT AFFECT THE ENTIRE CITY. 
          SO IT TAKES A LOT, AND THERE WILL BE THOSE ONE OR TWO. 
          IT'S DISAPPOINTING. 
          UM, EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW THAT IT'S DISAPPOINTING IN THE SENSE THAT THIS IS A VOLUNTEER, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S AN APPOINTED, BUT ALSO MAINLY VOLUNTEER TIMES FOR US AS WELL. 
          AND DO WE WANNA BE HERE AND GET YELLED AT? NO, BUT DO WE WANNA BE HERE AND, AND LISTEN TO EVERYONE AND MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE ALL THE INFORMATIONS AND FILTER OUT THOSE THAT ARE NOT USEFUL TO US? YES, WE, WE DO HAVE TO DO THAT. 
          AND SOMETIME IT'S LONG, IT'S GO OVER 10, 11 O'CLOCK ON CERTAIN TOPICS, BUT, UM, HOPEFULLY, YOU KNOW, THEY KNOW WHO THEY ARE, THE ONE THAT ALWAYS, YOU KNOW, NOT ALWAYS, SO KNOCK ON WOOD THAT THEY DON'T COME THAT OFTEN. 
          SO THAT'S MY 2 CENTS SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE. 
          THIS, I JUST WONDER, DID ALL THOSE WORDS GO IN THE MINUTES AS WELL? , I BELIEVE THIS COMMISSION'S, UH, MINUTES ARE ACTION MINUTES. 
          MINUTES VERSUS YES. 
          ENOUGH VERBATIM. 
          SO I IT'S ACTION  TRUE. 
          NO, I, I, I APPRECIATE, UM, THE DEPUTY, UM, CITY ATTORNEY COMING TO SPEAK TO US ABOUT, UM, AT LEAST, UM, MAKING CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC THAT WE DO WANNA HEAR WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE WOULD APPRECIATE DECORUM AND STABILITY BECAUSE WE'RE HERE TO TRY TO IMPROVE EVERYONE'S LIFE HERE IN THE CITY. 
          AND SO, UM, I I, I UNDERSTAND WHAT, UH, SHE WAS EXPLAINING TO US AND HAVING US BE MINDFUL OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT. 
          I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT'S GOOD THAT WE ALL SUPPORT THE FIRST AMENDMENT. 
          AND THEN, UH, CITY ASSISTANT, CITY ATTORNEY, WILL YOU GET US AN ANSWER FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY AT THE NEXT MEETING? SURE. 
          TO THE EXTENT THAT IT IS NOT VIOLATED OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, I, I CERTAINLY WILL BE ABLE TO, UH, EXPOUND ON THAT. 
          WELL, WE JUST TOLD THE PUBLIC THAT WE, WE WON'T MUTE, MUTE THEM, BUT THEN THE, THE CITY ATTORNEY GAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION, SO, SO I DON'T THINK IT'S ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. 
          I THINK IT'S A PUBLIC RECORD, BUT I'M JUST NOT AWARE OF, OF WHAT WAS DONE BEFORE. 
          OH, OKAY. 
          FOR ME, YEAH. 
          OH, BEFORE ME, ME GETTING HERE. 
          YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          , DID ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR DID YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE, UM, CHANGES THAT ARE BEING RECOMMENDED IN OUR RULES? YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THAT. 
          UH, I WAS GONNA SAY FOR UNDER THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE QUORUM SECTION, I WAS, UH, THE WESTERN OREGON, I WAS THINKING OF, UH, IF THE COMMISSION'S OKAY WITH IT, ADDING A SECTION F TO THAT, UH, THE, UH, THAT, UM, SECTION THAT'S, THAT WILL INDICATE THAT A MAJORITY BODY CAN OVERRULE A CHAIRPERSON, OVERRULE THE CHAIRPERSON'S DECISION IF WARRANTED. 
          AND THE, THE REASON I'LL SAY TO ADD IT, OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT AFFECTING OUR CURRENT CHAT AT ALL. 
          IT'S JUST FOR FU THE FUTURE YEARS TO COME. 
          UM, IT'S JUST TO, UM, I GUESS GIVE THE COMMISSION THE ABILITY THAT, LET'S JUST SAY ONE DAY, ONE FROM YEARS TO COME, WE, WE HAVE A CHAIRPERSON WHO WANTS TO, LET'S JUST SAY SILENCE FREE SPEECH OR, OR, UH, GET SOMEONE KICKED OUT RIGHT AWAY WITHOUT, UH, WITHOUT FOLLOWING THESE RULES OR WHATEVER. 
          THE MATTER MAY BE THAT THERE COULD BE, THAT THE MAJORITY BODY OF THE COMMISSION THREE VOTES, THE MAJORITY A THREE VOTE BODY, UH, CAN OVERRULE THE CHAIRPERSON'S DECISION IF WARRANTED TO, UH, GET SOMEONE KICKED OUT OF THE CHAMBER OR, OR, UH, POSSIBLE ARRESTED BY, BY SERGEANT OF ARMS. BUT IF IT COMES TO THAT POINT, WOULDN'T THE CHAIR ASK THE CITY ATTORNEYS TO SEE IF IT, WHAT'S THE BEST ADVICE FOR WHETHER IT'S, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THEY'RE VIOLATING THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH OR, OR PUTTING THE CITY? I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT ATTORNEYS, SO I'M NOT SURE. 
          NO, NO. 
          YEAH, SO I'M JUST GIVING EXAMPLES OF 
          [01:00:01]
DIFFERENT CASES. 
          BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS SPECIFICALLY THAT THERE'S A, THERE IS A, UH, THERE'S DIFFERENT OUTLINES ON THIS, ON THIS SUBSCRIPTION OF ACTIONS THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN FOR EN ENFORCEMENT OF THE QUORUM. 
          NOW, IF THE MAJORITY BODY DETERMINES THAT, THEY DON'T AGREE WITH THAT, AND IT COULD BE, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS , BUT IF THEY DON'T AGREE WITH THAT, THEN THEY DO HAVE THE ABILITY AS AN APPOINTING MEMBER OF THIS COMMISSION TO SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, THAT'S NOT RIGHT. 
          UH, UH, WE HA I WANT TO OVERRULE THE CHAIRPERSON'S DECISION ON GETTING THAT PERSON KICKED OUT. 
          UH, I WAS GONNA SAY, UM, UH, COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ, IF, UM, IF, IF, UH, IF YOU WOULD CLARIFY ON THIS, I JUST WANNA, I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I'M, I'M CLEAR ON ON WHAT YOU'RE ASKING. 
          SO UNDER SECTION SEVEN ON RULES OF DEBATE, UM, IT STATES IN, UH, IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH IT SAYS, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED HEREIN, THE COMMISSION WILL ADHERE TO, AND ALL QUESTIONS OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES SHALL BE RESOLVED BY THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER, CURRENT ADDITION FOR MEETING PROCEDURE. 
          AND THEN WE GO TO ATTACHMENT TWO, UM, AND WE GO TO THE BO THE BOTTOM OF THE FIRST PAGE. 
          UM, THERE IS ALREADY A, UH, A, A, A MOTION TO OVERRULE THE CHAIR'S RULING IN THE ROBERTS RULES. 
          ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT WE, THAT WE CODIFY THAT PARTICULAR MOTION, OR, OH, YOU KNOW WHAT, EVEN, YEAH. 
          WELL, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          I THINK BETTER YET, IF WE COULD SOMEHOW REFERENCE THAT ABILITY INTO WHAT I'M SAYING. 
          SO IN ACCORDANCE TO ROBERT RULES OF ORDERS, A MOTION TO OVERRULE THE CHAIR'S RULING CAN OCCUR. 
          I GUESS IT'S JUST PUTTING IT IN WRITING, BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THIS, BUT IN YEARS TO COME, THE FUTURE COMMISSION MAY NOT HAVE THIS DOCUMENT, BUT THE, UH, FUTURE COMMISSIONER ALSO NEEDS TO LEARN , UM, ABOUT THE ROBERT RULES OF AWARD. 
          YEAH, YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          IF, IF IT IS HERE ALREADY, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK WE NEEDED TO SEE IN THERE, WE HAVE TO, I WOULD BE, I, I, I THINK IT'S SORT OF A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD. 
          IT'S KIND OF ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE IT'S LIKE, IT'S, IT'S POSITIVE IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S EXPRESSED, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I CAN, I CAN SEE AN ARGUMENT, UM, ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT, THAT, WELL, IF, IF PEOPLE JUST INHERENTLY RELY UPON THE RULES OF DECORUM, THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO LOSE. 
          THEY'RE NEVER GOING TO SPEND THE TIME LEARNING THE ROBERTS RULES. 
          UM, WHOEVER SUCCEEDS US IN THE FUTURE, THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN. 
          MM-HMM. 
          , UM, SORT OF AS A COUNTER TO THAT, YEAH. 
          UM, I MEAN, I GUESS TO MAKE IT MORE SIMPLIFI, WE COULD EVEN PUT, I MEAN, MAYBE THE CITY ASSISTANT, CITY ATTORNEY COULD, UH, HELP, BUT, UM, DESPITE THESE, DESPITE THESE RUSE, UM, IS THERE SOMEHOW IS SOME WAY TO PUT SOME SORT OF LANGUAGE THAT SAYS IN THE, I MEAN THESE, I MEAN THESE RULES ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ROBERT RULES OF ORDERS. 
          I THINK IT'S ALREADY SAID SOMEWHERE, BUT YEAH, AT THE BEGINNING, YEAH. 
          SO WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT, UH, JUST WANNA CLARIFY, WE'RE NOT BROADENING, I MEAN, WE'RE NOT MAKING IT MORE, THERE'S NOWHERE IN THIS LANGUAGE THAT WILL PREVENT SOMEONE FROM MAKING THAT MOTION IN THE FUTURE. 
          CORRECT. 
          IT'S ALREADY EMBEDDED WITH THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER. 
          THERE'S A PROCESS IN THEREFORE APPEALING OR OVERRULING THE, THE CHAIR. 
          SO BY PICKING AND CHOOSING WHAT YOU DO WANNA PUT INTO YOUR DECORUM, IT KIND OF GIVES A CONFLICTING MESSAGE OF WHAT YOU WANT TO INCLUDE IN WHAT YOU DON'T WANT TO MM-HMM, . 
          SO TO THE EXTENT THAT THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER IS THE ORDERS ARE THE DEFAULT, WHAT THIS COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE FROM THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER ARE THE SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT ARE RECOMMENDED TO BE INCLUDED IN YOUR RULES OF ORDER. 
          SO THAT AT YOU CAN HIGHLIGHT WHAT IS DIFFERENT FROM THE RULES OF ORDER, ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER VERSUS REITERATING PORTIONS THAT ARE ALREADY PROVIDED FOR. 
          CAN, CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT I THINK WOULD BE SOMEWHAT HELPFUL? UM, PERHAPS INSTEAD OF CODIFYING THIS, WE SORT OF INCORPORATE BY REFERENCE THIS ATTACHMENT TO THAT WAS GIVEN TO US. 
          AND, AND, AND WE, AND WE STATE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE MOST RECENT KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY SAID THE ORDER OF, OF THE, UH, OF THE CHAIRPERSON THAT THAT'S DELETED IN SECTION TWO, WE'RE JUST SAYING, WELL, THIS IS A, THIS IS A CHEAT SHEET THAT WAS IN EXISTENCE IN 2024 WHEN WE ALL AGREED TO THIS. 
          UM, HOWEVER, IT CAN BE MODIFIED AND AMENDED AS TIME GOES ON BASED UPON, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER, UH, WHATEVER NEW RULES YEAH. 
          COME ABOUT. 
          I MEAN, I, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE 
          [01:05:01]
SOMEWHAT HELPFUL. 
          AND IT WOULD ENSURE THAT AT THE, AT THE VERY, AT A VERY BASIC LEVEL, A COMMISSIONER WHO IS GIVEN THESE RULES OF DECORUM UPON APPOINTMENT GETS AT LEAST A SMALL LITTLE TASTE OF A CRASH COURSE INTO ROBERT'S RULES. 
          EVEN IF THEY, AND LET'S PRETEND HYPOTHETICALLY SOMEBODY'S APPOINTED NEXT WEEK TO TAKE OVER FOR ONE OF US, HYPOTHETICALLY, LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER IT IS HAS THE ABILITY TO, TO PICK UP AND RUN WITH IT. 
          I THINK THAT'S KIND OF MY 2 CENTS ON IT. 
          YEAH, THAT'S A, THAT'S A SMART IDEA. 
          YEAH. 
          WE SHOULD SOMEHOW, SOMEWHERE ON THIS MAYBE ADD, ADD IT AS IN MAYBE ITEM NUMBER 23 THAT ALL NEW COMMISSIONERS SHOULD RECEIVE, UH, A COPY OF THE ROBERT RU OF ORDERS CHEAT SHEET AS MAYBE AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME. 
          YEAH. 
          SOMETHING LIKE THAT. 
          THAT'S SMART. 
          YEP. 
          THAT'S GOOD. 
          . 
          SO COMMISSIONER LEWIS, IF I HAVE YOUR, UH, SUGGESTION CORRECT, IT IS UNDER, UH, PARAGRAPH SEVEN THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE A REFERENCE TO THE CHEAT SHEETS OR THE QUICK REFERENCE, CALL IT A QUICK REFERENCE. 
          YEAH. 
          AND INCLUDE THE QUICK REFERENCE TO THE RULES OF, UM, THIS BODY, THE PLANNING COMMISSION RULES, AND REFERENCE THAT SPECIFICALLY IN THE RULES, PARAGRAPH SEVEN TO SAY, HEY, REFER TO THIS AND, AND WE CAN INCORPORATE IT BY REFERENCE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, HOWEVER, YEAH. 
          YEAH. 
          AND, AND I'LL ADD ON TO IT IF POSSIBLE, THAT ANY NEW COMMISSIONER SHOULD GET A COPY OF A CHEAT SHEET LIKE THIS. 
          NOW, READING THIS, I, I DON'T SEE THAT THERE'S ANY, I, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENCE OF HOW WE ARE ALREADY CONDUCTING THE HEARINGS OR MEETINGS. 
          SO IS CAN YOU, CAN YOU EXPAND ON WHAT ARE THE BIG DIFFERENCES THAT WE'LL BE SEEING IN THESE ROLES? UM, IT IS UP TO THIS PERMISSION OF COURSE TO ADOPT AND SPECIFICALLY CARVE OUT THINGS, BUT UNDER ROBERT'S RULES, IT REQUIRES A MOTION TO BEGIN AN ITEM. 
          AND IT WAS EXPRESSED AT THE PRIOR STUDY SESSION THAT THIS BODY WOULD PREFER NOT TO REQUIRE A MOTION TO BRING AN ISSUE TO THE TABLE TO BEGIN THAT, YOU KNOW, ITEM PRESENTATION AND THE QUESTIONS AND THE DISCUSSION AND THE VOTE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE IT OUT OF ORDER OR RELY ON THE CHAIR TO MOVE THE ITEM AND MOVE THE, UH, PARTICULAR ISSUE TO THE NEXT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, IN ROBERT'S RULES, THE DEFAULT IS THERE MUST BE A MOTION TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING. 
          SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE THAT MOTION OUT THERE TO EVEN START TALKING OR GET A PRESENTATION OR ASK QUESTIONS OR DISCUSS IT. 
          SO THAT'S THE DEFAULT. 
          AND IF YOU, AS THE BODY WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT AND SAY, INSTEAD OF, RATHER THAN HAVING THE MOTION UPFRONT TO BRING AN ITEM TO THE TABLE, THAT THE CHAIR MAY RAISE THE NEXT ITEM FOR DISCUSSION AND THE CHAIR MAY GUIDE THE, THE ORDER OF DISCUSSION AND OPEN DISCUSSION ON AN ITEM WITHOUT A MOTION. 
          RIGHT. 
          AND I THINK IT'S SORT OF TRADITION FOR THIS BODY ANYWAY, YOU KNOW, SO IT'S SORT OF LIKE WE HAVE OUR OWN COMMON LAW  APPLICATION OF ALL OF THIS AS SORT OF SILLY AS THAT MIGHT SOUND IT. 
          WE, WE HAVE A, WE HAVE A HISTORY OF, OF MOVING FORWARD ON AGENDA ITEMS WITHOUT CALLING A MOTION. 
          I THINK EVERY SINGLE COMMISSION UP, UP, IN, UP TO AND INCLUDING THE CITY COUNCIL FOLLOWS THAT. 
          SO IS THAT A MOTION COMMISSIONER LEWIS? I THINK IT MIGHT BE. 
          I DON'T KNOW. 
          I WOULD, I WOULD SECOND IT JUST 'CAUSE THIS IS A STUDY SESSION. 
          I, I, I THINK, UM, STAFF WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF YOU DO HAVE SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET IN THERE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T MISS ANYTHING. 
          UM, AS THIS DRAFT RULES EVOLVE AND AS THEY CONTINUE IN THE DISCUSSION THAT YOU WOULD SUBMIT 'EM TO, TO STAFF, UM, IN WRITING THE SPECIFIC ONES THAT YOU HAD POINTED OUT TODAY, BUT ALSO IN, PERHAPS YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME WORDING THAT YOU MIGHT WANT IN THERE SPECIFICALLY, AND STAFF WOULD, IT WOULD HAVE AN EASIER TIME TRACKING AND MAKING SURE THAT EACH OF THEM ARE INCORPORATED ON THE NEXT DRAFT THAT IS DISCUSSED. 
          UM, IF IT DOES COME UP FOR AN ACTION ITEM, TODAY IS A STUDY SESSION, SO I WOULD SAY HOLD YOUR MOTIONS TILL NEXT TIME . 
          SO, SO PERHAPS, UM, AND, AND MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, IF THIS IS AT ALL POSSIBLE, WOULD, WOULD IT MAKE SENSE? I AND I, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU, YOU WANT THIS HYPOTHETICALLY DIRECTLY FROM ME WITH REGARD TO THE, THE ADD-ON OF THE SORT OF INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE OF ATTACHMENT TWO TO THIS ITEM? UM, IF, IF YOU WANT THAT DIRECTLY FROM ME IN WRITING OR IF YOU'RE, OR IF YOU'RE, OR IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE DOING THAT ON YOUR OWN, UM, THE PREFERENCE IS 
          [01:10:01]
IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE YOU WOULD LIKE, PLEASE PRESENT THEM TO STAFF SO THAT THEY CAN ALL BE INCLUDED. 
          SO EACH COMMISSIONER, EVERY CONCERN THAT YOU HAVE AS FAR AS THE EDITS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE ARE, UM, DOCUMENTED. 
          THEY'RE, THEY'RE SUBMITTED AND WE CAN INCORPORATE AND MAKE SURE WE DON'T MISS ANY ALSO. 
          OKAY. 
          YES. 
          I THINK FOR THE ONE, THINK THAT ONE, THE ONE WE WERE BOTH SPEAKING ABOUT, I THINK JOANNE OR STAFF TOOK THAT DOWN ALREADY, RIGHT? YOU GUYS WROTE IT DOWN ALREADY. 
          , WE TOOK NOTES ON IT, BUT IF AGAIN, UM, AS A CITY, A DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY STATED, IF, IF YOU WANT, UM, SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, MY LAWYER, CAN YOU WRITE IT UP  THEN, UM, AND WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT IF WE WERE PROVIDED THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE THAT, THAT THE, THE COMMISSION WOULD LIKE, UM, IN WRITING. 
          BUT IF, BUT WE DID TAKE NOTES ON IT AND WE INTEND ON INCORPORATING THAT INTO NUMBER SEVEN OR PARAGRAPH SEVEN. 
          I ALSO WANNA ADD THAT IN THE PAST, THE COMMISSIONS, UM, THE TURNOVER WAS NOT THAT QUICK. 
          UM, AND I GUESS THEY'VE BEEN AROUND FOR SO LONG THAT THEY KIND OF GOT USED TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT WAS DONE IN THE PAST. 
          BUT I THINK THE SESSIONS FOR THE PAST, UM, SESSIONS, WE HAVE LITERALLY BRAND NEW COMMISSIONERS. 
          AND EVEN MYSELF I CAN CONSIDER NEW AS WELL. 
          SO, AND, AND I'VE BEEN HERE MAYBE ONE OF THE LONGEST. 
          BUT, UM, THE CHEAT SHEETS WOULD PROBABLY HELP IN THE FUTURE IF THE COMMISSION KEEP ROTATING PRETTY FAST. 
          SO THIS WAY IT HELPS, YOU KNOW, BRING THEM UP TO SPEED A LOT FASTER. 
          AND ALSO, UM, I, UM, I WANNA ADD THAT THE, WHAT IS THE CITY'S LEAK? IT'S VERY HELPFUL AS WELL. 
          UM, IT'S, IT'S OUT THERE ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR. 
          THERE'S A MEETING OUT THERE THAT IS A THREE DAYS MEETING THAT ACTUALLY HELPED THE NEW COMMISSIONERS. 
          UM, WHEN I FIRST JOINED, I WAS ABLE TO GO THE FIRST TIME, BUT THEN AFTER THAT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GO 'CAUSE THERE'S NO BUDGET. 
          BUT RECENTLY WE DO HAVE A BUDGET FOR NEW COMMISSIONERS OR OLD COMMISSIONERS TO ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS. 
          AND I THINK THEY CAN BE VERY HELPFUL AS WELL. 
          AND HOPEFULLY STAFF CAN GO TOO RIGHT NOW. 
          SO DO WE NEED TO CONTINUE IT TO A DATE CERTAIN? YES. 
          I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION FOR THE NEXT MEETING. 
          DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. 
          THIS BEEN PROPERLY MOVED. 
          SECOND. 
          WE HAVE A ROLL CALL. 
          COMMISSIONER BERA. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE. 
          VICE CHAIR HANG. 
          AYE. 
          CHAIR WILLIAMS. AYE. 
          LET THE MOTION SHOW 5 0 2. 
          CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 
          OKAY. 
          AT 
          [COMMISSION REPORTS/COMMENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS ]
THIS TIME, UM, COMMISSION REPORTS, COMMENTS OR MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS? DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANYTHING? YES. 
          YEAH, I WOULD LIKE TO, UM, ASK THE COMMISSION TO IZE, UM, TO ASK FOR A REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND POSSIBLE EV OF CUP FOR FIVE STAR INN LOCATED IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA ON THE JUNE 18TH. 
          CONS MEETING, UH, THE MAYOR EX UH, EXPLAINED THAT THERE WAS EXPLOITATION GOING ON, PROSTITUTION, DRUGS, OVERDOSES, UH, OF OVERDOSES OCCURRING ON THIS PROPERTY. 
          AND SPECIFICALLY IT WAS INDICATED THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHO IS AT THIS PROPERTY. 
          UH, SO IN ADDITION TO THIS REQUEST, UH, I AM ALSO REQUESTING A, A RECORD OF SERVICE CALLS BE PROVIDED TO THIS COMMISSION, UH, TO DETERMINE IF VIOLATIONS OF THE CUP OCCURRED. 
          WAIT, IS THIS FIVE STAR THING? HAS IT HASN'T COME TO US YET. 
          NO, IT HASN'T. 
          UM, QUESTION. 
          UM, THERE'S GOING TO BE A PUBLIC, UM, DISCUSSION ON THIS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON JULY 2ND, WHICH I THINK ALL THE PUBLIC ARE INVITED TO ATTEND. 
          SO, UH, AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING, MAYOR PROAM, TONY W UH, ASKED THE CITY TO ALSO INVESTIGATE THE CLOSURE, UH, CLOSING DOWN THIS MOTEL. 
          AND IT WAS, AND THAT DECISION WAS SUPPORTED BY, UH, COUNCILWOMAN, UH, COUNCILWOMAN, UH, UM, 
          [01:15:01]
DIAZ, UH, COUNCILWOMAN LETTI LOPEZ REALDO AND COUNCIL MEMBER, UH, OLI CONTOS. 
          UM, AND SO, UH, WITH THAT, WITH THAT THING BEING SAID, IT IS THIS COMMISSION'S RESPONSIBILITY. 
          I WAS TOLD THAT WE ARE TO REVIEW CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, AND IF DRUGS AND VIOLENT CRIMES ARE OCCURRING ON THIS PROPERTY, THEN IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY. 
          I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT WE NEED TO TAKE IT UP AND FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON AT THIS PROPERTY. 
          UH, SO THAT'S WHY I'M MAKING THAT THE ITEM GENERALIZED. 
          YEAH, IT MIGHT, IT MIGHT BE PRUDENT, UM, IF THE, EACH OF THE COMMISSIONERS THEMSELVES AS RESIDENTS HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME TO THE COUNCIL MEETING ON JULY 2ND. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT LOS ANGELES COUNTY, UM, WILL BE PROVIDING INFORMATION TO OUR RESIDENTS AS WELL AS COUNCIL PEOPLE. 
          MM-HMM. 
           AND THOSE WHO MAY HAVE SOME CONCERNS. 
          YEAH. 
          AND I'LL SAY THAT BY AGENDA ID AGENDA ING THIS ITEM, THE PUBLIC WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME SPEAK TO THIS COMMISSION. 
          AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, IF WE'RE HAVING PEOPLE DIE THERE OVERDOSES. 
          IF WE'RE HAVING PEOPLE DOING PROSTITUTION THERE, IF WE'RE HAVING PEOPLE, UH, EXPLOITED, UH, EXPLOITATION IS, IS A VERY HORRIBLE CRIMES OF FEDERAL VIOLATION OF CRIME. 
          AND IF THAT'S GOING ON, WE NEED TO HEAR WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          WE NEED THE CALLS AND SERVICE RECORDS TO FIND OUT IF, IF THE SAME ISSUE IS OCCURRING, JUST LIKE AT THE RESTAURANT LAST TIME, WE FIND OUT, NOW WE'VE BEEN TOLD SOMETHING IS GOING ON, AND NOW IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY TO LEAD THAT EFFORT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS GOING ON AND WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF SERVICE. 
          SO WE CAN, AS A COMMISSION, INVESTIGATE THAT AS OUR JOB, AS, AS OUR, AS, AS ONE OF OUR RESPONSIBILITIES TO, IS TO INVESTIGATE THAT. 
          IF, IF, IF THERE IS EXPORT EXPLOITATION OF GOING ON PROSTITUTION DRUG USE AND ALL THAT MATTERS, WELL, WE'LL FIND OUT FROM OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE IT'S PUTTING A, A BURDEN ON OUR POLICE AND THE MEN AND WOMEN OF OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT WHO HAVE TO RESPOND TO THOSE CALLS. 
          AND IF THAT'S OCCURRING, UH, WE HAVE TO HAVE A, I'M NOT SAYING, I'M NOT MENTIONING ANYTHING ABOUT, UH, THE PROGRAM THAT WANTS TO GO OVER THERE. 
          I'M MENTIONING THAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT A LOCATION IS COMMITTING CRIMES THAT ARE VIOLATING THEIR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 
          AND THAT WE NEED TO TAKE IT UP AND, AND REVIEW WHAT IS HAPPENING AT THAT BLOCK LOCATION. 
          HAS SOMEONE SUBMITTED A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST OR A LETTER TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE ALLEGING THIS? UM, IT WAS ACTUALLY AT THE JUNE 18TH, 2024 COUNCIL MEETING, UM, MAYOR BRIAN TABBA SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT THERE WAS EXPLOITATION, PROSTITUTION, OVERDOSES. 
          AND I QUOTE, WE DON'T KNOW WHO IS AT THIS PROPERTY. 
          SO, UM, BASED UPON THE MAYOR'S COMMENT AS, UH, THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF WEST COVINA, I AM CALLING THAT I, I'M NOW TAKING THE RESPONSIBILITY AS THE COMMISSION, AS, AS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION SIDE, THAT WE'VE BEEN TOLD NOW THAT THERE'S MAJOR CRIMES OCCURRING ON THIS PROPERTY, AND NOW WE NEED TO, WE NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          'CAUSE WE CANNOT ALLOW A SECOND TIME, A SECOND TI UH, A RESTAURANT. 
          EARLIER THIS YEAR, THE COMMISSION HAD TO MAKE DECISIONS ON A RESTAURANT THAT WAS COMMITTING MAJOR CRIMES AND VIOLATING THEIR CUP. 
          NOW, WE'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THIS IS OCCURRING AGAIN. 
          AND NOW, UH, WE NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT IS OCCURRING. 
          AND, AND IF, IF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT COMES BACK AND SAYS, NO, THERE'S NO EXPLOITATION GOING ON. 
          THERE'S NO PROSTITUTION, THERE'S NO OVERDOSES OCCURRING, UH, NO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE FOLLOWING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, THEN WE HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT. 
          BUT WE NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT, WHAT IS HAPPENING. 
          AND, AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT. 
          THAT'S, I THINK THAT'S ONE OF OUR RESPONSIBILITIES. 
          UM, IT'S TO FIND OUT IF THOSE TERMS ARE BEING VIOLATED BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN TOLD, UH, THAT THEY ARE. 
          AND, UH, AND I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THAT VERY SERIOUSLY. 
          BUT EVEN IF WE SCHEDULE SOMETHING, ISN'T JULY 2ND, THERE'S SOMETHING GOING ON WITH THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          CORRECT. 
          IT'S NEXT WEEK. 
          SO THAT, THAT IS IN REGARDS TO A SPECIFIC PROGRAM THAT I'M NOT REFERRING TO, UH, THAT IS A, UH, PATHWAY, PATHWAY HOMES PROGRAM, ALLI COUNTY MEASURE H PROGRAM THAT, UH, THAT THE MAYOR SERVES ON THE MEASURE H UH, BOARD THAT HE HASN'T TOLD THE PUBLIC ABOUT. 
          BUT, BUT HE SERVES ON THAT, UH, ON A SEPARATE NOTE. 
          BUT THAT'S A SEPARATE MATTER. 
          THAT'S THE ONLY A DIFFERENT PROGRAM. 
          I'M TALKING ABOUT A MOTEL OPERATION AND, AND ONLY THE MOTEL, MOTEL OPERATION. 
          I'M NOT REFERRING TO, UM, A MATTER OF THE HOMELESS ISSUE. 
          I AM REFERRING TO BEING TOLD THAT THERE'S EXPLOITATION, PROSTITUTION, OVERDOSES OCCURRING 
          [01:20:01]
AND, AND DRUG SALES OCCURRING ON THIS PROPERTY. 
          I GUESS THE QUESTION IS, IF THEY HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, I THOUGHT IF A USE UNDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT SUNSET WERE SAY THEY DON'T CONTINUE, THEY DON'T HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE OR SO FORTH, THAT AFTER SIX MONTHS, THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT GOES AWAY. 
          SO NOW MY QUESTION IS, ARE YOU ASKING STAFF TO FIND OUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A VIOLET, A VIOLET, UM, VIOLET, UM, VIOLATION USE PERMIT STILL FOR THAT PROPERTY? SO I, UH, THERE IS A, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THAT PROPERTY, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. 
          UM, AND WHAT I'M ASKING FOR IS, UH, FOR THE REVIEW OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, UH, FOR POSSIBLE VIOLATIONS AND, UH, POSSIBLE EV OF THEIR CUP IF IT IS FOUND THAT THEY ARE ALLOWING MAJOR CRIMES TO OCCUR ON THEIR PROPERTY BASED UPON TESTIMONY, UH, FROM CITY STAFF AND TESTIMONY, WE'LL HEAR FROM POSSIBLY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ON CALLS OF SERVICE. 
          HAVING GROWN UP HERE, IT'S BEEN A PROBLEM FOR A LONG TIME. 
          A VERY LONG TIME. 
          MM-HMM, , THE, THE RESIDENTS ARE AWARE OF IT. 
          EVERYONE'S AWARE OF IT. 
          YEAH. 
          WYATT HASN'T COME TO THE COMMISSION PRIOR TO THIS STATE IS BEYOND ME. 
          YEP. 
          YEAH. 
          AND THAT'S, AND I THINK, UH, AT THE LAST MEETING AND LAST COUNCIL MEETING, WE HEARD A LOT FROM THE PUBLIC. 
          THEY HEARD A LOT FROM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THOSE WHAT'S VI WHAT VISUALLY PEOPLE PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC IS SEEING. 
          AND, AND THEN NOW WE'RE HEARING FROM THE MAYOR, AND NOW WE'RE HEARING FROM, UH, CITY STAFF SAYING THE SAME THING. 
          AND, AND SO NOW AS A PLANNING COMMISSION LEVEL, WE NEED TO, WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT RESPONSIBILITY AND SAY, WAIT A MINUTE, IF THAT'S OCCURRING, WE, WE CAN'T ALLOW THAT TO CONTINUE TO HAPPEN. 
          WELL, AGAIN, I WANT TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND, ARE YOU ASKING STAFF ONE TO FIND OUT IF THE PROPERTY THAT YOU'RE SPEAKING OF, THE FIVE STAR INN, IF IT ACTUALLY, UM, STILL HAS A, A LEGITIMATE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT? BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW THAT IT MAY HAVE CLOSED OR WHAT MIGHT BE THE SITUATION OF THE BUSINESS LICENSE. 
          YEAH, SO I, ANYTHING ELSE? YEAH, SO I, I ATTACHED WITH IT. 
          I, I DID MY HOMEWORK AND I, I ASKED CITY STAFF IF THERE WAS AN ACTIVE, UH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ON THAT LOCATION. 
          AND I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WERE IS. 
          SO, UH, AND SO NOW I'M BRINGING THIS TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COMMISSION, UH, TO GET CONSENSUS, UH, A MAJORITY CONSENSUS TO BRING THIS AS AN AGENDA ITEM. 
          UH, AND I BELIEVE THE CITY STAFF TOLD ME THAT THERE IS A LEGAL REQUIREMENT ON GIVING NOTICE TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. 
          AND MAYBE, UH, IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR CITY STAFF TO ANSWER THAT RIGHT NOW? OR NO, CITY ASSISTANT, CITY ATTORNEY? UM, THERE WOULD BE NOTICE PROVISIONS AND IF YOU'RE REQUESTING THAT IT BE PUT ON THE VERY NEXT MEETING AND IT DOES NOT SATISFY NOTICE REQUIREMENTS, THAT WOULD NOT BE A POSSIBILITY. 
          YEAH. 
          AND AGAIN, IF AN INVESTIGATION IS NOT YET COMPLETED, IT MAY BE PREMATURE TO BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION UNTIL AN INVESTIGATION IS DONE. 
          I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATUS IS OF THAT. 
          SO IF THE REQUEST IS TO, FOR, FOR STAFF TO PUT IT ON A FUTURE AGENDA, UM, AND TO LOOK INTO COMPLIANCE AS TO THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED ON THE PROPERTY PURSUANT TO THE CUP AND TO BRING IT FORWARD, FORWARD AGAIN WITH PROPER NOTICE WITH DUE PROCESS AND ALL OF THAT, YEAH. 
          MM-HMM, , THEN THAT COULD BE A FUTURE ITEM THAT COMES FORWARD IN THE FUTURE WITH THE TIMING CONSIDERATIONS IN MIND. 
          UM, BECAUSE IF YOU WANT IT AT THE VERY NEXT MEETING, IT MIGHT YEAH. 
          OR MIGHT NOT COME. 
          YEAH, IT WON'T, IT WON'T MEET THE WEEKLY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE NEXT MEETING. 
          YEAH. 
          ACTUALLY, WHAT THE REAL CONCERN IS, IS WHY WE'RE NOT AWARE OF IT, OF HOW MANY ACTUALLY THERE ARE. 
          I MEAN, THERE'S A LACK OF COMMUNICATION. 
          THERE SHOULD BE A REPORT GIVING TO THE CITY EVERY MONTH AT THE END OF THE MONTH WITH, IN REGARDS TO WHAT HAS HAPPENED, WHAT'S TRANSPIRED WITH CERTAIN BUSINESSES, WHAT HAVE BEEN THE DISRUPTIONS OR CRIMES BEING COMMITTED. 
          AND NONE OF THAT INFORMATION IS BEING, UH, SENT TO, TO, UH, THAT WE CAN EVEN, UH, LOOK TO REVOKE ANY CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS OR TO FIND ANY BUSINESSES. 
          THERE'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, WE'RE BLIND. 
          I JUST WANNA KEEP EVERYBODY ON TRACK. 
          THIS IS THE COMMUNICATIONS AND AND COM COMMISSION REPORT. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO KEEP IT ON TRACK RATHER THAN GOING INTO DISCUSSION. 
          IF YOU WOULD LIKE THAT TO BE AN ITEM THAT IS ADDED TO AN AGENDA FOR THE FUTURE TO GET REPORTS. 
          THAT AGAIN, IS SOMETHING YOU CAN REQUEST. 
          I JUST DON'T WANT IT TO VEER INTO BROWN ACT WHERE WE DON'T HAVE IT ON THE AGENDA, AND I DON'T WANT IT TO GO INTO A DISCUSSION. 
          SO IF THE REQUEST IS TO FROM, UH, FIRST FROM COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ TO PLACE ON A FUTURE AGENDA, UM, YEAH, I THINK SHE SHOULD REPORT BACK ON THE CONDITIONAL USE COMPLIANCE AS TO, UH, FIVE STAR, THEN THAT IS, THAT'S SPECIFIC ENOUGH THAT THEY CAN ACT ON IT. 
          AND 
          [01:25:01]
THEN YEAH. 
          I, I THINK, I THINK SHE WAS JUST MAKING A COMMENT. 
          SHE WASN'T, UH, NO, I WASN'T. 
          I WAS RIGHT. 
          AND, AND IF, IF COMMISSIONER BI BISER WANTS TO HAVE ANOTHER, UH, REQUEST TO REQUEST THE STAFF TO PRESENT PROBLEMATIC, UM, BUSINESSES THAT ARE HIGH PRIORITY OR WHATEVER, UH, HOWEVER YOU WANT TO PHRASE IT, YOU CAN, UM, STATE THAT AS YOUR, UM, YOUR COMMUNICATION AND REQUEST TO STAFF. 
          SO, SO I, I WOULD SAY THAT THO THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS YEAH. 
          AND TWO SEPARATE REQUESTS. 
          SO I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION 'CAUSE IT SAYS, UH, MAIN VOTE TO GENERALIZE THE MATTER FOR A FUTURE MEETING. 
          SO I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION, UM, UH, TO PUT FIVE STAR IN, UH, AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR THIS, UH, TO, UH, AND I'M ASKING CITY STAFF TO START, UH, TO START THE LEGAL PROCESS, UH, IN NOTIFICATION AND DUE PROCESS THAT'S REQUIRED IN THIS PROCESS. 
          I'M REQUESTING FOR THE REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND FOR POSSIBLE REV OF THE CUPE, UH, AND ALSO REQUEST THE CALLS OF SERVICE, UH, FOR THAT LOCATION. 
          UM, AND I GUESS, UH, TO BE MORE SPECIFIC, I'LL SAY THE CALLS OF SERVICE FOR THE LAST YEAR, FOR THAT LOCATION, I WOULD GO LONGER, LONG. 
          OKAY. 
          UM, WE'LL EXPAND IT TO THE LAST FIVE YEARS. 
          AND, UM, AND THAT'S MY MOTION. 
          UM, AND AGAIN, UH, I MAKE THIS MOTION BECAUSE, UH, BECAUSE IT'S, I BELIEVE A MATTER THAT THIS COMMISSION HAS RESPONSIBILITY ON. 
          BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE'RE PUTTING A BURDEN ON THE MEN AND WOMAN OF OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. 
          AND WE NEED TO MAKE SURE OUR POLICE OFFICERS HAVE THE RESOURCES THEY NEED TO, UH, SERVE THE WHOLE COMMUNITY. 
          AND IF THIS IS TRULY HAPPENING NOW, WE'LL HAVE THE, NOW WE'LL HAVE THE ABILITY TO FIND OUT WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON IN THIS LOCATION. 
          SO THAT'S MY MOTION. 
          DO WE NEED A SECOND? YES. 
          YOU NEED A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. 
          IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED. 
          AND SECOND, JOANNE, WILL YOU DO THE ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER BECERRA. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS PRESENT? COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE. 
          VICE CHAIR. 
          HANG. 
          UM, I'M GOING TO, NO, DUE TO THE FACT THAT I WANNA WAIT UNTIL AFTER JULY 2ND, MAYBE BRING THIS BACK COMMISSIONER, UM, I'M SORRY. 
          VICE CHAIR WILLIAMS? NO. 
          SO THE MOTION HAS FAILED. 
          I'D LIKE TO MOTION, MAKE A MOTION FOR THE, UH, TO AGENDA AS THE, UM, FIND OUT WHAT THE PROTOCOL IS FOR STAFF TO, AS THEIR COMMUNICATION WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT TO SEE, UM, UH, IF, IF THERE IS, UH, SOMETHING IN PLACE, WHICH WOULD GIVE US THE PROPER NOTIFICATION AS TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS GOING ON WITH, UH, THE BUSINESSES OR NEGLIGENT BUSINESS OWNERS. 
          MAY I CLARIFY THE MOTION? IS YOUR MOTION TO ASK STAFF TO COME BACK WITH A REPORT ON HOW THE, UH, MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT OCCURS BETWEEN CITY WITHIN CITY DEPARTMENTS? YES. 
          IT'S A DETAILED, UH, EXPLANATION OF HOW IT IS BEING HANDLED, NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, WAITING FOR A PHONE CALL. 
          I MEAN, WE SHOULD BE GETTING REPORTS FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT. 
          IT SHOULD BE ACTUALLY PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE. 
          I, IS THERE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. 
          IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED. 
          AND SECOND, JOANNE, WILL YOU DO THE ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER BECERRA. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE. 
          COMM, UM, VICE CHAIR. 
          HANG CHAIR WILLIAMS? NO. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION, AND MY MOTION IS, ONE MOMENT PLEASE. 
          MAY WE HAVE THE RESULTS OF THE VOTE, ONE AGAINST FOUR IN FAVOR AND ONE AGAINST . 
          OKAY. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO, UH, MAKE ANOTHER MOTION. 
          AND BEFORE I MAKE THAT MOTION, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT TO SAY SPECIFICALLY, APRIL 2ND IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT PATHWAY 
          [01:30:02]
HOMES AND HOUSING. 
          80, I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE IT HAS 80 ROOMS, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, 80 HOMELESS PEOPLE IN THE CITY OF WEST COVINA. 
          SO IT'S THE AGENDA ITEM ON, UH, JULY 2ND, UH, IS JULY 2ND. 
          THE CONS MEETING, RIGHT? YEAH. 
          SO JULY 2ND IS ABOUT PATHWAY HOMES, NOT ABOUT IF, UH, FIVE STAR INN IS HAVING DRUG USE OR VIOLATING THE LAW OR, OR VIOLATING THEIR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND, AND SO FORTH. 
          IT HAS NOTHING TO DO, UH, WITH, WITH JULY 2ND. 
          EARLIER TO EARLIER, THIS MEAN YOU HAD A PUBLIC SPEAKER TO DISTRACT THIS COMMISSION ON THE FACTS. 
          AND THE FAX IS ON JULY 2ND. 
          IT'S ABOUT PATHWAY HOMES HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REVIEWING, UM, UH, WHAT CRIMES HAVE BEEN OCCURRING ON THIS LOCATION. 
          AND SO I'LL MAKE TO MAKE A UTTER, UH, MOTION, UH, AND I'LL TAKE OUT THE PART THAT SAYS REVOKING. 
          AND I'M GONNA ASK THAT THE COMMISSION, UH, PLEASE SUPPORT ME ON THIS, WHICH IS A REQUEST FOR REVIEW, REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, UM, FOR FIVE STAR N UM, AND TO GET A COPY, UH, I MEAN TO, AND ALSO TO BE INFORMED ABOUT CALLS FOR SERVICE AT THIS LOCATION. 
          SO WHAT I'M REQUESTING IS TO GET A, FOR THIS COMMISSION TO BE GIVEN A COPY OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND FOR US TO BE GIVEN A COPY OF CALLS FOR SERVICE. 
          AND SO THERE'S, I'M NOT ADDING THE LANGUAGE FOR REVOKING ON THIS MATTER. 
          IT'S MORE BROADER NOW, UH, TO SEE IF, IF ANYTHING WAS TO DEVELOP BETWEEN NOW AND THEN, UH, THEN THEY COULD ALWAYS, UH, BE THEN IT COULD ALWAYS BE AMENDED AND SO FORTH. 
          BUT THIS IS JUST OUT OF SOLE DUE DILIGENCE JUST TO GET A COPY OF POSSIBLE, UH, SORRY, SOLELY TO GET A CO COPY OF REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THIS LOCATION AND A COPY OF CALLS FOR SERVICE AT THIS LOCATION. 
          UM, AND THE CITY STAFF COULD INFORM THE PROPERTY OWNER THAT IF THEY WANT TO COME SPEAK ON THE MATTER, THEY COULD, BUT AT LEAST THE COMMISSION WILL NOW HAVE A COPY OF THOSE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND WILL NOW HAVE A COPY OF THE CALLS FOR SERVICE. 
          AND SO THAT'S MY MOTION. 
          IT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING IT'S NOT BEEN APPROVED YET. 
          RIGHT? IS THAT CORRECT? WHAT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED? ARE YOU, ARE YOU REFERRING, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE PATHWAY HOME COMMISSIONER? UH, YEAH. 
          SO IT'S ACTUALLY 90 ROOMS AND, UM, AND IT'S, UH, PAT HOLMES ACCORDING TO THE LAST, ACCORDING TO OUR CITY MANAGER, PAULINA MORALES, EXCUSE ME, THE, UH, DEPUTY. 
          OKAY, SO I'M GONNA, OKAY, GO AHEAD. 
          I THINK THE, THE, AS TO THE CLARIFICATION OF WHAT IS BEING ASKED IS, IS OKAY, BUT WE'RE VEERING INTO DISCUSSION ON AN ITEM WITHOUT IT BEING ON THE AGENDA. 
          WE'RE GETTING REALLY CLOSE TO A BROWNOUT VIOLATION. 
          SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I CAN WARN YOU OF THAT BEFORE IT GOES. 
          SO I'LL, I'M GONNA EXPLAIN MY MOTION 'CAUSE SHE'S ASKING ME ABOUT MY MOTION. 
          SO, YES, THANK YOU. 
          UH, PATHWAY. 
          SO THE, THE A, SORRY. 
          SO ACCORDING TO MY KNOWLEDGE, UH, THERE'S BEEN NO AGREEMENT, NO EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT, BECAUSE WE HAD, WE HAD A MEMBER OF MEASURE H UH, AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING ON JUNE 18, A MEMBER OF MEASURE H APPEARED SAYING NO CONTRACT HAS BEEN SIGNED FOR THAT LOCATION YET FOR PATHWAY HOMES. 
          AND AGAIN, PAULINA, OUR CITY MANAGER, PAULINA MORALES, ALSO CONFIRMED ACCORDING TO HER KNOWLEDGE, THAT THERE WAS NO CONTRACT EXECUTED AT THAT TIME, AND THAT THERE WAS NO INTENTION OF HAVING A CONTRACT SIGNED ANYTIME SOON. 
          POINT OF ORDER. 
          ONE OF OTHER, I I, MM-HMM. 
           I THINK WE'RE VEERING, VEERING INTO YES. 
          DANGEROUSLY. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. 
          SURROUND ACT VIOLATION AND MAKE YOUR MOTION. 
          AND I AM VERY UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS. 
          MM-HMM, . 
          I DON'T, I I THINK IF YOU'RE GONNA MAKE YOUR REQUEST, MAKE YOUR REQUEST , UM, SO THAT'S MY MOTION GOES TO THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          CORRECT. 
          I DON'T THINK THAT IT'S COMING TO US, BUT I ACTUALLY, I THINK IT SHOULD GO TO THE RESIDENTS OF WEST COVIN IF ON A VOTE FOR SOMETHING AS THAT'S PRETTY, PRETTY, UM, IT COULD BE A PRETTY COMPLICATED SITUATION AFTER, UM, I'VE BEEN HEARING DIFFERENT, UH, OPINIONS AND, UM, MOSTLY FROM RESIDENTS AND THERE'S A VERY, VERY HIGH CONCERN RIGHT NOW ABOUT THAT. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          SO, SO I'LL REPEAT MY MOTION. 
          MY MOTION IS TO REQUEST SOLELY, 
          [01:35:01]
UH, TO, TO, UH, GIVE THE APPLICANT GIVE FIVE STAR AND PROPER NOTIFICATION THAT THE COMMISSION WILL BE REVIEWING, UH, THEIR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND ALSO SOLELY REVIEWING CALLS FOR SERVICE FOR THE LOCATION AT THIS TIME. 
          SO NO OTHER, I'M NOT, I'M NOT ASKING FOR ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT REV OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          I'M JUST SAYING LET'S DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE AND LET'S FIND OUT WHAT'S HAPPENING AT THIS LOCATION BECAUSE THE PUBLIC HAS, THE PUBLIC HAS VOICED THEIR CONCERNS. 
          AND, UH, AND SO THAT'S MY MOTION. 
          I, I'D JUST LIKE TO INTRODUCE A, A COUNTER REQUEST AND POTENTIALLY WE CAN, UH, POTENTIALLY THIS CAN BE A MOTION AS WELL. 
          UM, I, I, I THINK THAT, UH, I, I, I, I THINK I'D LIKE TO SEE A REQUEST, UH, FOR A RESOLUTION, UH, FROM THIS COMMISSION THAT COMES BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING, WHICH, UM, EXPRESSES A DESIRE FROM THIS COMMISSION, UH, FOR DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS US TO TAKE UP ANY CONSIDERATION OF, UH, POTENTIAL REVOCATION AND OR MODIFICATION OF, UH, CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, UH, IF ANY PERTAINING TO, UH, FIVE STAR INN. 
          AND, UH, AND, AND IF SO, PROVIDE US ADDITIONAL DIRECTION, UH, THEREIN, UH, SUCH THAT WE ARE NOT NECESSARILY INFRINGING UPON THEIR POLICE POWER AUTHORITY. 
          AND THAT WOULD BE MY REQUEST AND MY MOTION. 
          I'D LIKE TO SECOND THAT PARTICULAR MOTION. 
          DO YOU HAVE A SECOND ON THE ALTERNATE MOTION? YES. 
          THANK YOU. 
          CHAIR. 
          I'M NOT SURE, CAN I ASK A QUESTION EXACTLY WHAT YOU MOTION WAS? CERTAINLY. 
          SO, UM, I'M REQUESTING THAT, UH, THAT STAFF BRING BACK A RESOLUTION, UM, THAT EXPRESSES THE, UM, COLLECTIVE WILL OF THIS BODY, UM, TO, TO HAVE DIRECTION FROM CITY COUNCIL AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD LOOK INTO POTENTIAL REVOCATION AND OR MODIFICATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR PERMITS, IF ANY, FOR FIVE STAR IN, UM, SUCH THAT WE ARE NOT OVERSTEPPING, UH, OUR AUTHORITY AND INADVERTENTLY, UH, IMPINGING UPON THE CITY COUNCIL'S DECISION ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, TO EXERCISE THEIR POLICE POWER, WHICH THEY HAVE. 
          AND WE DO NOT, WELL WE DO OVER OTHER BUSINESSES. 
          WHY WOULDN'T THIS ONE APPLY AS WELL? GETTING INTO DISCUSSION, WHICH WE CANNOT DO? WELL, YOU, YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO A MATTER THAT, UH, I THINK THE CITY COUNCIL DID ACT ON POINT OF ORDER ON SPEAKING. 
          SO, CAN I SPEAK? I THINK WE NEED TO LISTEN TO OUR DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY. 
          I THINK WE NEED TO, THIS IS OUR CITY ATTORNEY, BUT OKAY, GO AHEAD. 
          POINT OF ORDER. 
          WE DO HAVE AN ALTERNATE MOTION. 
          WE HAVE A SECOND. 
          AND IT SHOULD, IT SHOULD GO TO, UH, VOTE IF THERE IS, AND WE CANNOT HAVE DISCUSSION ON THIS BECAUSE IT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA. 
          SO IF YOU DO WANT TO DISCUSS IT, IT DOES NEED TO BE AGENDIZED FOR A FUTURE AGENDA SO THAT IT CAN BE PROPERLY FLESHED OUT, DISCUSSED, AND YOU CAN FULLY DISCUSS IT AT THAT NEXT MEETING. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COUNTER MOTION AND, UH, I'LL JUST SAY BEFORE I MAKE THAT COUNTER MOTION FOR, FOR US TO TELL THE CITY COUNCIL WHAT WE'RE ASKING IS, YOU CAN'T DO YOUR JOB, SO SEND IT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          THAT MAKES NO SENSE AT ALL. 
          'CAUSE THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE THEIR OWN LEADERSHIP AND THEY MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS. 
          I'M NOT GONNA SEND IT BACK TO US. 
          WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT? THEY, THEY HAVE THE POWER TO DO THE SAME DECISION. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE ASKING TO BE DONE TODAY. 
          SO, UH, I'LL MAKE, UH, COUNTER, UH, A COUNTER, UH, MOTION. 
          AND THAT COUNTER IS, UM, TO REQUEST, UM, TO RECA OR TO REQUEST SPECIFICALLY A COPY OF THE REVIEW, UH, TO A CONDITION, SORRY, TO REQUEST SPECIFICALLY A COPY OF THE FIVE STAR AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. 
          AND TO ALSO BE PROVIDED, UH, FOR THIS COMMISSION TO BE PROVIDED A, UH, A PRESENTATION ON CALLS OF SERVICE FOR THIS FIVE STAR LOCATION INN. 
          UM, AND, UH, YEP. 
          AND THIS ALTERNATE MOTION YOU HAVE JUST PROPOSED, 
          [01:40:01]
IS THAT A REPETITION OF YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION OR IS THIS AN ACTUAL CHANGE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE, THAT IT'S A PRESENTATION ON THE CALLS FOR SERVICE RATHER THAN THE ACTUAL REPORTS. 
          BECAUSE YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION, AND THIS ONE IS VERY SIMILAR, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE WORDING CORRECTLY. 
          UM, YEAH, SO IT'S, IT'S A LITTLE, IT'S DIFFERENT A LITTLE BIT. 
          I AM NOT SURE IF THIS IS ALREADY A MOOT POINT BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY THINKING IN THE TRANSITION, SO THEY'RE GONNA BRUSH IT UNDER THE RUG AND SAY, WELL, WE'RE CHANGING IT ANYWAYS. 
          YEAH. 
          SO IS THERE A SECOND ON THAT LAST MOTION? SO TO CLARIFY, I'M REQUESTING THIS COMMISSION BE PROVIDED A COPY OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND A PRESENTATION ON CAUSE OF SERVICE FOR THIS LOCATION. 
          THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THE MOTION. 
          DO WE HAVE A SECOND? THE INFORMATION WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO HAVE. 
          NOT SURE THAT IT WOULD MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT I'LL SECOND. 
          IT'S BEEN PROPERLY MOVED. 
          AND SECOND, I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THE ROLL CALL. 
          COMMISSIONER BERA HERE. 
          I MEAN, I, COMMISSIONER LEWIS? NO, COMMISSIONER, VICE CHAIR. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE, VICE CHAIR HANG. 
          WHICH MOTION ARE WE, UM, VOTING ON? 'CAUSE THERE ARE TWO MOTIONS THAT BOTH GOT SECONDS. 
          IT IS THE MOST RECENT ONE, WHICH IS COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ'S. 
          SO, WHICH WAS TO REQUEST SOLELY A COPY OF THE, OF JUST A COPY OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. 
          AND THEN FOR STAFF JUST TO, UH, PRESENT TO US, UH, ANY, UH, CALLS FOR SERVICE FOR THIS LOCATION. 
          I WANNA KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON OVER THERE. 
          YEAH, NO, I'M SORRY. 
          UM, YOUR VOTE WAS NO. 
          YES. 
          OKAY. 
          NO. 
          UM, CHAIR WILLIAMS? NO. 
          OKAY. 
          MOTION FAILED. 
          NEXT VOTE WILL BE THE ALTERNATE MOTION PROVIDED BY COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          COMMISSIONER ERRA? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ, WHAT'S THE MOTION? OH, IT'S ALL THE CITY COUNCIL TO BRING IT BACK TO US. 
          NO, 'CAUSE IT'S OUR JOB. 
          THEY'RE NOT GONNA SEND IT BACK TO US. 
          THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT BEING A LEADER IF THEY WERE TO DO THAT. 
          VICE CHAIR HING. 
          SO THE MOTION WAS TO ASK CITY COUNCIL, THE MOTION WAS FOR CITY COUNCIL TO BRING A RESOLUTION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, UH, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CP FOR THE FIVE STAR BE REVIEWED. 
          IS THAT, I THINK THAT'S, UH, AN, I THINK THAT'S THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT I WAS REQUESTING. 
          SO, UM, SPECIFICALLY I WAS REQUESTING THAT, UH, WE BRING BACK AN AGENDA ITEM, UM, TO CONSIDER A RESOLUTION OF THIS BODY TO COME UP WITH A, A MAJORITY RESOLUTION THAT WOULD REQUEST THAT CITY COUNCIL, UM, EITHER TAKE THE OR THEMSELVES OR SEND BACK WHAT THEY WANT US TO LOOK INTO AND OR INVESTIGATE, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. 
          UM, SUCH THAT WE ARE NOT INADVERTENTLY STEPPING ON ANY OF THEIR TOES FROM A LAW ENFORCEMENT ASPECT OF THIS. 
          I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. 
          I I JUST ONLY THINK THAT IT'S ONLY BECAUSE OF THIS BUSINESS, BECAUSE OF THE FUTURE OF IT WITH THE, WITH THE COUNTY POINT OF ORDER. 
          RIGHT. 
          CAN'T WE ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF A VOTE. 
          SO, YEAH. 
          SO POINT OF ORDER. 
          SO POINT OF ORDER, UH, SINCE WE DON'T, SINCE PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE VOTING ON, UH, I'M ASKING THAT THE MOTION BE REPEATED AND, UH, RESTARTED BECAUSE COMMISSIONER LEWIS JUST RE-EXPLAINED WHAT HIS MOTION WAS AND CITY STAFF DID NOT REAFFIRM WHAT THEY WERE WRITING DOWN EITHER. 
          SO, OKAY. 
          IT WOULD BE TO AGENDIZE, UM, ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA, A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION PERTAINING TO 
          [01:45:01]
FIVE STAR THIS, THE FIVE STAR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IT WHETHER THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REVOKE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR MODIFY IT IN ONE IN SOME WAY. 
          SO, POINT OF ORDER. 
          MY QUESTION, SORRY. 
          SO ARE WE, ARE WE GONNA RESTART THAT MOTION SINCE PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE VOTING ON? UM, WELL, I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THE ROLL CALL AGAIN. 
          OKAY. 
          I'M STILL NOT QUITE SURE ON, SO WE'RE ASKING, INSTEAD OF IT COMING TO US, WE'RE GONNA THROW IT TO CITY COUNCIL TO THROW IT BACK TO US. 
          YEAH. 
          IT WILL STILL GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, FOR DISCUSSION IN THE IT, IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION THAT YOU WOULD BE PRESENTED WITH A DRAFT RESOLUTION THAT YOU WILL BE CONSIDERING, UM, IN VOTING ON. 
          AND THAT DRAFT RESOLUTION WOULD BE TO A, UM, TO ASK THE CITY COUNCIL IF THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER, UM, THE REVIEW OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR POTENTIAL REVOCATION OR MODIFICATION. 
          SO IT WOULD BE A PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM. 
          SO WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO REQUEST THAT OURSELVES. 
          WE HAVE TO ASK CITY COUNCIL TO GIVE IT TO US. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? UM, THAT WAS, THAT'S WHAT THIS MOTION, PARTICULAR MOTION PERTAINS TO. 
          IS THAT HOW IT WENT WITH REBEL YELL? THEY GAVE IT TO US, NO, WITH, UM, THAT PARTICULAR ITEM'S, NOT IN TONIGHT'S AGENDA. 
          HOWEVER, UM, FOR THAT PARTICULAR CASE, IT WAS A REQUEST BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY OF THAT REQUEST. 
          THIS REQUEST, THIS MOTION IS DIRECTLY FOR COMING FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT THIS TIME. 
          SO IS THAT THE POINT OF ORDER TO REQUEST IT FROM THE, THE CITY COUNCIL TO GIVE TO US? THAT IS THE, THE MOTION THAT COMMISSIONER LEWIS HAD, JUST, IS THAT THE NORMAL POINT OF ORDER HOW IT HAPPENS OR SOMEBODY HAS TO REQUEST IT, CORRECT? UM, YES. 
          SO IT HAP IT CAN, THE ITEM CAN BE BROUGHT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          UM, MANY DIFFERENT WAYS IN THIS MOTION THAT WE'RE, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING IS THE MOTION THAT COMMISSIONER LEWIS HAD JUST MADE, SIR. 
          AND THEN I HAVE A LEGAL QUESTION. 
          UH, AT THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING ON JUNE 18, MAYOR PRO TEM TONY WU, UH, REQUESTED, UH, THE CLOSURE OF THAT LOCATION, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. 
          CAN YOU, CAN WE CLARIFY ON WHAT THAT MEANT? THERE WAS NOT AN ATTENDANCE AT THAT TIME, BUT I CAN LOOK INTO IT. 
          WE'RE VOTING ON SOMETHING AND WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT IT. 
          OKAY. 
          . 
          SO, UM, SO AGAIN, SO WHAT ARE THE OTHER AVENUES OF HAVING IT DIRECTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION? IT WOULD BE PLANNING COMMISSIONS, REQUEST REQUEST, UM, FROM THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OR, OR STAFF FROM BY, UM, BASED ON EITHER, EITHER, UM, CALLS FOR SERVICE LIKE WHAT REEL OR, OR, UM, COMPLAINTS FROM THE PUB, FROM THE PUBLIC. 
          SO, I'M SORRY. 
          SO WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY OF THOSE. 
          WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY REQUEST. 
          UM, THIS IS, TONIGHT IS THE FIRST TIME THAT A MOTION WAS MADE PERTAINING TO THIS PARTICULAR, SO OUR ONLY AVENUE RIGHT NOW IS TO REQUEST IT FROM CITY COUNCIL SO WE CAN BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION. 
          ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW WHAT I LIKE TO, UM, I LIKE TO VO WHAT I DID EARLIER. 
          IF WE CAN MAKE A CHANGE ON A, ON A MY VOTE. 
          IS IT THE PENDING MOTION? 'CAUSE PAST MOTIONS ARE DONE. 
          THIS PENDING MOTION WAS PAUSED. 
          MID VOTE. 
          WELL, I'LL BRING, I'LL BRING MY, I'LL BRING, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO BRING BACK MY MOTION. 
          RIGHT. 
          WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A VOTE. 
          SO IF, IF WE CAN GET THROUGH THE VOTE FIRST, WE CAN CLARIFY THE MOTION. 
          THE MOTION AS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS BY COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          AND IT IS TO REQUEST CLARIFICATION OR GUIDANCE FROM CITY COUNCIL, UM, TO GET INSTRUCTION AS TO WHETHER THEY WANT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REVIEW THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COMPLIANCE MODIFICATION OR REV REV REVOCATION. 
          UM, AND TO CONFIRM THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS ASKING FOR THIS BODY TO DO THAT. 
          AND IT'S JUST THE RESOLUTION TO BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA. 
          AND SO FAR WE HAVE A VOTE MIDWAY, SO I DON'T WANNA GET INTO DISCUSSIONS IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. 
          WELL, I HAVE A POINT OF ORDER QUESTION. 
          I WE JUST HEARD 
          [01:50:01]
FROM JOANNA, WE'RE GONNA RESTART THAT VOTE. 
          SO CORRECT. 
          WE WOULD PICK UP FROM WHERE WE ARE. 
          YES. 
          WHICH WAS THE FIRST VOTE FOR COMMISSIONER, OR WAS FOR WITH, UM, COMMISSIONER SARAH. 
          I, WELL ACTUALLY YOU NEVER ANSWERED FINISH ANSWERING MY QUESTION, QUESTION BECAUSE I GOT INTERRUPTED OR YOU GOT INTERRUPTED. 
          SO I DON'T EVEN, YOU KNOW, CAN RECALL WHAT IT WAS, BUT I DID ASK YOU SOMETHING. 
          SO THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY, BUT IT WOULD COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION. 
          IS THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU WERE SAYING, CORRECT. 
          FOR FOR THIS MOTION? YES. 
          OKAY. 
          THAT'S NOT THE ONLY WAY. 
          NO, FOR THIS MOTION, THE, THE ITEM WILL GO BACK. 
          WE WILL GO TO THE COMMISSION AT, AT THE, AT AN, AT AN AGENDIZED. 
          BUT LIKE WHAT I SAID EARLIER, THERE ARE MANY DIFFERENT WAYS THE, UM, UH, CON, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CAN BE RE-REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND RECONSIDERED. 
          BUT THIS MOTION, THE MOTION IS TO BRING THIS AGENDIZE THIS ITEM TO THE, TO A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. 
          WE'RE, OKAY. 
          SO HOW DO I WAIT ONE QUESTION. 
          , HOW DO I, IF I WANNA CHANGE MY VOTE FROM THE LAST ONE, HOW DO I GO ABOUT DOING THAT? FOR THE LAST MOTION THAT HAS BEEN VOTED AND RESOLVED? YES. 
          DONE. 
          UNLESS THERE IS A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. 
          AND I'M GONNA, THAT IS A COMPLETELY SEPARATE, SO IT'S, I'M GONNA BE MAKING A MOTION TO RECONSIDER, BUT SINCE THERE IS AN ACTIVE, UH, VOTE GOING ON THE FLOOR, GO AHEAD AND YEAH. 
          PROCEED. 
          BUT THEN I WILL BE MAKING A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AFTER THAT ONE. 
          WELL, I, I THINK I WOULD LIKE TO HOLD MY VOTE TO FIND OUT WHAT THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. 
          JUST CONTINUE THE VOTE. 
          JUST A MOMENT. 
          WE DON'T HAVE A RESULT. 
          SO THERE'S NOTHING TO RECONSIDER AT THE, OR RE-CONSIDER UNTIL THE VOTE IS COMPLETED. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I JUST NEED TO PROCEED WITH THE VOTE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A RESULT. 
          OKAY, GO AHEAD. 
          OKAY, I'LL GO AHEAD AND START OVER. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER BECERRA. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ? NO. 
          VICE CHAIR HANG. 
          NO. 
          COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES. 
          THREE, TWO. 
          OKAY. 
          SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND ALSO TO VOID OUT THE CURRENT, THE, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO VOID OUT THE CURRENT MATTER THAT WAS JUST VOTED ON, AND THEN MAKE A MOTION TO REVIEW THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FIVE STAR N AND FOR, UH, STAFF TO PRESENT CALLS FOR SERVICE AND POSSIBLE, SORRY, REQUEST FOR THE REVIEW CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND POSSIBLE REVOKE OF THE CUP, UH, BASED UPON STAFF'S PRESENTATION OF CALLS FOR SERVICE. 
          A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION MAY ONLY BE BROUGHT BY SOMEONE WHO VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION THAT, UM, PASSED AND YOU VOTED AGAINST IT. 
          SO YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER IT WAS MY MOTION. 
          WHATCHA TALKING ABOUT THE LAST MOTION WE VOTED THAT, THAT THE BODY VOTED ON WAS COMMISSIONER LEWIS'S MOTION. 
          I WILL MOTION THAT FOR HIM. 
          POINT OF ORDER. 
          MADAM CHAIR, I, I THINK WE'RE GETTING SORT OF DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO A BROWN ACT VIOLATION. 
          AND THE REASON THAT WE ARE GETTING DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO A BROWN ACT VIOLATION IS BECAUSE EACH OF THESE INDIVIDUAL REQUESTS STAND ON THEIR OWN MERITS. 
          WHEN YOU START GETTING INTO A DISCUSSION ABOUT RECONSIDERING A REQUEST TO AGENDIZE AN ITEM, YOU ARE IN EFFECT IZING THAT ITEM WITHOUT NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC. 
          AND THAT IS MY CONCERN. 
          IF, IF EVERYONE WANTS TO PUT ON THEIR OWN REQUEST AND WE ALL VOTE ON IT, FINE. 
          WONDERFUL. 
          HOWEVER, WHEN YOU START GETTING INTO MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION ON REQUEST TO IZING ITEMS, YOU ARE IN EFFECT HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE, THE UNDERLYING SUBSTANCE AND WHY SOMETHING SHOULD BE REVOKED OR NOT REVOKED. 
          AND I, I THINK THAT THAT'S VERY PROBLEMATIC AND I THINK IT'S SORT OF DANGEROUSLY CLOSE TO A BROWN ACT VIOLATION. 
          AND IF IT CONTINUES, I'M GONNA WALK. 
          OKAY. 
          WELL, I DON'T THINK THERE'S NO VIOLATION OF THE LAW OCCURRING POINT OF ORDER. 
          THERE'S NO VIOLATION OF THE LAW OCCURRING BECAUSE IT SPECIFICALLY SAYS, UH, THE COMMISSION MAY VOTE TO IZE THE MATTER FOR A FUTURE MEETING. 
          SO, 
          [01:55:02]
SO WE HAVE YES, BUT NOT IZED MATTERS THAT IT HAS ALREADY VOTED TO IZE. 
          SO WE HAVE A MOTION THERE. 
          I'LL, I GUESS I'LL SECOND IT. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER BECERRA. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER. 
          GOOD. 
          GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE. 
          VICE-CHAIR HANG. 
          AYE. 
          CHAIR WILLIAMS? NO. 
          THREE, TWO. 
          PASS THIS. 
          SO NOW YOU MAY RECONSIDER WHETHER YOU WANT THIS ON THE NEXT AGENDA OR A FUTURE AGENDA. 
          IT IS NOT A DISCUSSION OF THE ITEM, IT'S JUST TO SIMPLY DIS WHETHER THIS SHOULD GO ON AN AGENDA. 
          SO, SO THEN AFTER I CAN MAKE, I COULD DO MY MOTION. 
          CITY, CITY ATTORNEY. 
          CORRECT. 
          YOU COULD MAKE YOUR MOTION. 
          AT THIS TIME. 
          I'M GONNA MOTION TO ADJOURN AND I'M GONNA MAKE A MOTION, UH, TO REQUEST, UH, TO, UH, STRIKE OUT, I MEAN TO VOID OUT THE LAST, UH, VOTE THAT OCCURRED ON THE MATTER THAT WAS BROUGHT BY COMMISSIONER LEWIS AND TO REQUEST THE REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, UH, FOR, UH, CONDITION REVIEW. 
          THE FOR FI REVIEW. 
          THE REVIEW, SORRY, REQUEST FOR THE REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FIVE STAR AND FOR POSSIBLE REVOKE OF THE CUP, UH, AND BASED UPON STAFF'S POINT OF ORDER. 
          POINT OF ORDER. 
          UM, I THINK IT'S PROBABLY TIME THAT WE GO AHEAD. 
          MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          SECOND. 
          SO IS SHE MAKING A NEW MOTION? CURRENTLY? WE HAD ONE MOTION THAT DIDN'T HAVE A SECOND. 
          ONE. 
          MOTION THAT WAS NOT COMPLETE. 
          AND ONE MOTION TO ADJOURN, WHICH HAS A SECOND. 
          WELL, I, I WAS NOT ABLE TO COMPLETE MY, MY SPEAKING, I DIDN'T FINISH SPEAKING. 
          AND SO MOTION, MOTION SOJOURN IS A NON DEBATABLE ITEM. 
          MUST GO TO A VOTE. 
          OKAY, LET'S GO TO A VOTE. 
          LET'S GO TO THE ROBERTS RULES OF ORDER. 
          NOT A DEBATABLE ITEM MUST. 
          OKAY. 
          I KNOW YOU'RE GETTING MAD, NICK, SO LET'S GO FOR A VOTE SO WE COULD DO OUR JOB AND, AND GET TO THIS COMMISSIONER BECERRA . 
          I'M GONNA HIT PAUSE FOR A SECOND. 
          OKAY. 
          ACCORDING TO THE ROBERT'S RULES OF ORDER, THERE ARE CERTAIN MOTIONS THAT ARE IMMEDIATE AND ARE NOT DEBATABLE OR AMENDABLE. 
          AND IF PRESENTED HAS TO BE VOTED ON RIGHT AWAY. 
          AND THAT IS ONE OF MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          OKAY. 
          BY COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS? SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          AND THAT IS NOT A DEBATABLE. 
          AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE COMM, IF THE COMMISSION WAS TO VOTE NO, THEN THE MEETING WAS ABLE TO CONTINUE TO ADDRESS THE MATTER THAT I BROUGHT, RIGHT? CORRECT. 
          THIS IS A, A MOTION TO ADJOURN AND RIGHT. 
          WE GO TO A VOTE IMMEDIATELY. 
          OKAY, GREAT. 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER BECERRA? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER. 
          HANG. 
          COMMISSIONER. 
          COMMISSIONER. 
          I'M SORRY. 
          CHAIR WILLIAMS. AYE, SO MOTION PASSES. 
          MOTION. 
          THANKS. 
          MOTION FAILED. 
          SORRY. 
          THREE, TWO. 
          SO I'LL MAKE A MOTION, UH, TO REQUEST A REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR FIVE STAR IN, FOR THE POSSIBLE REV OF A CUP AFTER, UH, BASED UPON STAFF'S PRESENTATION OF CALLS FOR SERVICE FOR THE LOCATION. 
          AND IS THERE A SECOND? WAS THAT TO IZE IT OR WAS THAT AGENDA? ISAAC. 
          OKAY, SECOND. 
          OKAY, I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THE ROLL CALL VOTE. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER BERA AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE. 
          VICE CHAIR HANG. 
          AYE. 
          CHAIR WILLIAMS? NO. 
          WISHING PASSES. 
          THREE, TWO. 
          I HAD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO AGENDIZE, UH, UH, AN ITEM PERTAINING TO, UH, THE, UH, LOCATION AT, AT I GUESS FIVE STAR INN. 
          UM, I'D LIKE TO AGENDIZE, UM, A RESOLUTION, UM, TO BE CONSIDERED TO THE CITY COUNCIL 
          [02:00:01]
REQUESTING, UH, REQUESTING SPECIFIC GUIDANCE, UH, PERTAINING TO WHETHER OR NOT THE CITY COUNCIL WISHES US TO TAKE ANY ACTION ON FIVE STAR IN AT ALL. 
          I SECOND THAT MOTION POINT OF ORDER. 
          ISN'T THAT YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION EARLIER? THAT WAS, IS NOT, THAT WAS BROUGHT BACK AND VOID IT. 
          I, I, I DIDN'T HIT THE, THE, THIS PARTICULAR MOTION IS DIFFERENT FROM THE ORIGINAL MOTION. 
          THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS FOR, WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR POTENTIAL REVOCATION OR RECONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 
          AND THIS MOTION IS TO TAKE ANY ACTION AT ALL. 
          SO JUST FOR JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. 
          SO POINT OF ORDER IN ORDER FOR THAT TO HAPPEN IS ALREADY A ITEM THAT WAS APPROVED BY THIS COMMISSION. 
          SO HE'LL HAVE TO REQUEST RECONSIDERATION AND HE DIDN'T VOTE ON IT. 
          SO THE MOTION THAT HAD HAPPENED THAT, THAT PASSED WAS TO PRESENT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH, UM, WITH ITEMS INCLUDING THE, THE CALLS FOR SERVICE IN THE CONDITIONAL, THE CON, UH, COPY OF THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USED PERMIT. 
          THIS PARTICULAR ITEM IS FOR A, AN ACTUAL RES, A DRAFT RESOLUTION FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER TO DO WHAT? TAKE NO ACTION, NO TO, UM, PRESENT TO THE REQUEST, UM, OF MOST REQUESTS, AN ITEM TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WHETHER THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO, THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER, UM, REVIEWING THIS PARTICULAR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT OR THE FIVE STAR MOTEL LOCATION AT ALL. 
          SO WE HAVE A, MY ITEM ADDRESSES A A ACTION PLAN. 
          SO YOU HAVE TO, YOU, YOU'LL BE LEAVING OUT THAT ITEM THAT'S ALREADY VOTED ON. 
          RIGHT? ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. 
          IF IT, IF I, IF I REQUESTED ACTION TO BE TAKEN, THEN NOW YOU'RE SAYING YOU, YOU DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN 'CAUSE YOU'RE ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL WHAT, WHEN YOU'RE ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL IF WE SHOULD TAKE ACTION. 
          WELL, WE ALREADY VOTED ON TO TAKE ACTION. 
          SO AS A POINT OF ORDER HE HAS TO CALL BACK. 
          HE'LL HAVE TO REQUEST RECONSIDERATION OF MY MOTION TO TAKE ACTION. 
          I THINK THE, THE, THE REQUESTS OR THE MOTION WERE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS AND THE, THE ITEM THAT WAS IMMEDIATELY PREVIOUSLY VOTED ON WAS TO CONSIDER THE, OR REVIEW, UM, THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND COMPLIANCE OF THAT AND RECEIVE THE REPORTS AND REVIEW THE CALLS FOR SERVICE AT THAT LOCATION AND FOR REVOCATION. 
          MM-HMM. 
           OF THAT CUP. 
          NOW THE MOTION HERE IS A VERY DIFFERENT ONE THAT ASKS FOR CONFIRMATION FROM CITY COUNCIL ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION AND REQUESTING GUIDANCE THAT THEY DO WANT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THIS ITEM, UM, AT ALL WITH, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE ACTION IS. 
          WOW. 
          WELL, I MEAN, AS, AS A POINT OF ORDER LEGAL CLARIFICATION ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION MADE A DECISION BECAUSE THEY'RE A APPOINT, WE'RE APPOINTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL. 
          AND SO NOW YOU'RE SAYING THE CITY COUNCIL IS GONNA TELL THE PLANNING COMMISSION HOW TO VOTE OR TAKE UP AN ACTION THAT SOUNDS, UH, VIOLATION OF THE BROWN ACT. 
           I THINK, I THINK COMMISSIONER LEWIS IS ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION. 
          AND, AND FROM WHAT I HEARD FROM YOU EARLIER IS THAT CITY COUNCIL MADE SOME COMMENTS OR STATEMENTS AS TO FIVE STAR AT A PRIOR MEETING. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WAS AN ACTUAL, UM, REQUEST OR DIRECTIVE. 
          AND I THINK IF I, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS TO BE A CLARIFICATION OF THAT INSTRUCTION FROM COUNSEL TO ACT ON IT VERSUS A COMMENT, UM, THAT WAS MADE. 
          AND I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S THE, THE GROUNDS FOR THIS MOTION, BUT I THINK THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. AND AGAIN, GIVEN THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS AND SUCH, THE TIMING MAY BE DIFFERENT. 
          I I DO THINK THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT MOTIONS. 
          SO HOW DOES THAT AFFECT MY CURRENT MODE? HOW, HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE APPROVE, THE APPROVE ITEM THAT'S ON THAT WAS JUST APPROVED. 
          BOTH ITEMS CAN BE IN THE AGENDA IF THIS MOTION PASSES AND IT MAY NOT BE ON THE SAME, UM, AGENDA DATE BECAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL DUE PROCESS NOTIFICATIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE. 
          YEAH. 
          SO THOSE ARE THE TWO DIFFERENT DISTINCT ISSUES AND THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE ITEMS, UM, THAT MAY APPEAR AT DIFFERENT TIMES BECAUSE OF THE DUE PROCESS REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION. 
          YEAH, AND I'LL JUST MAKE A COMMENT THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MADE IT CLEAR LAST TIME AT THEIR MEETING ON JUNE 18 WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. 
          AND IT'S FOR 
          [02:05:01]
US TO GO BACK, IT WILL BE A WASTE OF TAXPAYER MONEY, BUT THAT'S MY COMMENT. 
          OKAY. 
          WE DO HAVE A MOTION, UM, ON HAND, SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE, UH, WAS THERE A SECOND? YEAH, WILLIAMS. OKAY. 
          SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND GO AHEAD AND START THE MOTION. 
          UM, TAKING THE ROLL CALL VOTE COMMISSIONER BERA NO COM. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER LEWIS? AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER HANG. 
          NO VICE CHAIR. 
          HANG. 
          SORRY. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ? NO, CHAIR WILLIAMS. AYE. 
          MOTION FAILED. 
          I'M GONNA MAKE ANOTHER REQUEST. 
          OH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE, UH, I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND . 
          OKAY. 
          COMMISSIONER ER FOR THE MOTION TO ADJOURN? YES. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? NO. 
          CO COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE. 
          VICE CHAIR HANG. 
          NO CHAIR WILLIAMS. NO MOTION FAILED. 
          CAN WE GET SOME COFFEE?  WE'LL TAKE A RECESS NOW. 
          FIVE MINUTES. 
          SO WE GO TO PORTO'S. 
          IS THIS STILL OPEN? OKAY. 
          READY TO CALL OUR MEETING BACK TO ORDER. 
          ALL RIGHT. 
          UNLESS THERE'S A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, UM, I'M GONNA GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION, UH, FOR, UH, UH, TO DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION, UM, FOR THE NEXT MEETING, SUCH THAT CITY COUNCIL, UH, THAT WE REQUEST, UH, CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION, UH, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, UH, WE SHOULD INVESTIGATE THE POTENTIAL MODIFICATION AND OR REVOCATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR, UH, FIVE STAR INN. 
          AND, UH, AND SPECIFICALLY, UM, AS, AS TO AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, UM, WE NEED TO LOOK INTO THE CREATION OF, UH, ADDITIONAL ORDINANCES, UH, FROM A PLANNING STANDPOINT TO ADDRESS, UM, POTENTIAL ISSUES, UH, PERTAINING TO, UH, SITES SUCH AS, UH, SUCH AS THE FIVE STAR INN. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION. 
          OKAY. 
          I'LL GO AHEAD AND START THE ROLL CALL VOTE. 
          UM, CAN YOU CLARIFY IT SO I UNDERSTAND THAT CLERK? IT WOULD BE TO BRING A RESOLUTION, UM, RESOLUTION TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, UM, TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE ON WHETHER THE, THE CITY COUNCIL DESIRES, THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE, UM, THE FIVE, UM, THE, TO INVESTIGATE THE SITUATION AT THE, UM, THAT SECURING A FIVE STAR AND ALSO TO S TO POTEN TO POTENTIALLY, UM, PROVIDE DIRECTION ON A POSSIBLE ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ADDRESS, UM, SIMILAR SITUATIONS. 
          IS THAT THE CORRECT? UM, IT'S CLOSE. 
          CLOSE. 
          OKAY. 
          WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLARIFY FURTHER SO THAT EVERYONE IS CLEAR ON WHAT THE VOTE IS FOR SURE. 
          SO, UM, IT'S TO BRING BACK A RESOLUTION, UM, THAT WE CAN ALL WORK ON IN CRAFTING, UH, TO THE CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING, UH, DIRECTION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD BE THE BODY THAT INVESTIGATES THE POTENTIAL REVOCATION AND OR MODIFICATION OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT FIVE STAR IN. 
          [02:10:01]
AND, UM, AS TO WHETHER OR NOT, UH, CITY COUNCIL WOULD LIKE US TO, UH, INVESTIGATE AND POTENTIALLY LOOK TO STUDY AND IMPLEMENT POSSIBLE ORDINANCES TO ADDRESS THE SITUATION ON THAT SITE IN THE FUTURE. 
          IS THAT DIFFERENT POINT OF WORD, IS THAT DIFFERENT FROM YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION OR IS THIS A NOPE, SOUNDS THE SAME. 
          SAME, SAME MOTION. 
          IT'S THE SAME MOTION FROM BEFORE. 
          IT'S THE SAME MOTION THAT I, THAT I JUST MADE. 
          I WAS JUST REPEATING IT FOR CLARIFICATION. 
          IT'S A DIFFERENT MOTION FROM THE PREVIOUS MOTIONS THAT WERE VOTED ON AND WERE NOT, UM, WERE AND DID NOT PASS. 
          SO THIS IS A DIFFERENT MOTION FROM, FROM THOSE. 
          SO AGAIN, WE'RE ALREADY ON SOMETHING THAT I JUST, WE JUST HAD SOMETHING PASSED TO TAKE ACTION. 
          NOW WE'RE SAYING DON'T TAKE ACTION AGAIN, BUT, OKAY. 
          SO IT'S VERY, IT'S LIKE THE SAME THING. 
          THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          I'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE ROLL CALL VOTE. 
          COMMISSIONER BECERRA? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ, BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME MOTION THAT MR. SINCE IT'S THE SAME THING THAT WE JUST VOTED ON, AGAIN, IT'S OUR RESPONSIBILITY AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO TAKE ACTION. 
          UH, AGAIN, MAYOR PRO TONY WU. 
          UM, POINT OF ORDER. 
          POINT OF ORDER TO THIS MOTION. 
          I'M, I AM I AM. 
          POINT OF ORDER. 
          I'M MAKING A COMMENT REGARDING WHAT I'M ABOUT TO VOTE ON. 
          POINT OF ORDER. 
          OKAY. 
          WHAT'S YOUR POINT OF ORDER? WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND THE CLERK IS GETTING READY TO NOW TAKE THE VOTE. 
          YEAH, IT'S MY VOTE. 
          IT'S MY TURN. 
          YES. 
          COMMISSIONER. 
          SO THE MAJORITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL FOUR MEMBERS, UH, HAVE ALREADY VOICED THEIR CONCERNS. 
          AND AGAIN, SINCE THIS IS A CO A COPY OF WHAT WAS JUST FAILED, I'M GONNA HAVE TO SAY NO VICE CHAIR HANG, NO CHAIR WILLIAMS. AYE. 
          SO MOTION FAILED. 
          I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. 
          IS THERE A SECOND? UNLESS THERE'S NONE OR MOTIONS, BUT OKAY, GO AHEAD. 
          I I TAKE THAT BACK. 
          I'M, I'M GONNA MAKE AN ADDITIONAL MOTION. 
          UM, SO IS THERE A SECOND TO THE MOTION? OKAY. 
          WELL SINCE, SINCE WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE ON MAKING MOTIONS, THEN I, I'M GONNA HAVE TO BE FORCED TO MAKE A MOTION TO A JURY. 
          I'LL SECOND. 
          OKAY. 
          I'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE ROLL CALLS. 
          THERE IS A SECOND. 
          UM, COMMISSIONER BERA. 
          COMMISSIONER BERA AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER LEWIS? NO. 
          COMMISSIONER GUTIERREZ. 
          AYE. 
          COMMISSIONER HANG. 
          COMMISSIONER WILLIAMS. NO. 
          MOTION PASSES. 
          THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.