The URL can be used to link to this page

20120501 Late CorrespondencePETITION TO HAVE FROM BANK THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK: NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS RPV Z IOC clb Z-7- fk�m ry -2-0 0-) Z'0 V, �0 6f KD, -r/1.,4 10145 zSTWSpQU«62aU-6 Lilly 41 "c�r`Qovr�C1 Z Ow S, V1�fPftvA;�0�k`TZS C'� V -,g 5(A `j U1J� F 70 OC c.�� Psb G � �� Re a C'r'e d 1 is-�5,� 2y�11r,�,,� ��4vgL 6 e T.614-1 A -e 0e ov SIGNATURES COLLECTED BY OCCUPY PV '0 1 iE LU t Y Q its W F LL LL = 1 oox ac' z O a oar LL Q W o O U. 0 �. > Q U V J m 10 t 7,6 21 It ,1 so 31 4.4 '41 92 43 47 -7s 0 S< PETITION TO HAVE FROM BANK THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS Ou N. ,4r Ti,A,� F340i,,,v//per t �e—dlert,'c fit -7,Q Csr ays lake W, A el. 1 > e, r ��-+A r i ��-��V oaj ? .s2tz-I 7� (4 -ft 2r'a �-7I 23 J�/L1 N�Cr L7C CA f c f d;-2 r r COp��lij �WMy C� (�7C�i9� ��20 (!/ ,P -V �/ ,� fA ars o c 2 2 �. ! Cts kp )<ei-1& {�7i RS ��'✓ , 1 oY �1 o&c% coj C. . 'P�,�) Qv 0 L -,p v\ 5 n ('t QAP�- S\(-� 0Q 0 IX 4 �, �, �D G✓ A Z X30 z cer^ �.4 Ao, A f v SiIvkrS�J(F/x Ln- ej4E-i IG,,,� 4-- a RPV i 2j f- vCA SI NATURES COLLECTED BY OCCUPY PV �H IF 711 Qpv ?a It •fr vR PETITION TO H VE THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY FROM BANK OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS IN RPV s tip, - 6 681 Is LUQ c%- /?.°v dla^j acu7 R?l c4 X r , " l L ivact- vyxssez ro 9to Los v AMW� � j /(S a m ✓7 �'ZJ LA) l 0&co—q 5,z,2,3 (� L Ziv4' Z� %10 71�G 1. S 20 'ev. 6e.,4e /�� u Z 2011yd' ')✓ UA / G r2 -IQ ASS u*, Kii C - SH ES COLLECTED BY OCCUPY PV 3 oo/� r (217q ?pV Z.4. �f t I PETITION TO HAVE THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY FROM BANK OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK' N ME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS IN RPV Y�' Cc�r2yvM Q s'C 1 e Ar,9 7� CUA-�ctf%- ! �v ctiv 5 1-�Q Q I� ✓ "7 Z6 S, d 5Ct l( RPVit s�-�'-DIZ• 9—p/ ��"l ;'000'I a(ne /`�00�t1 DIE 2P keel 1-�C'Shey 03 /3-o, � "kA 6 �afViz �tor✓le°i �r6ly SKnmisl be, kpv V/ S S4V'A' a <kL 6 <I (.Z 0 PIP yds �� 6 7 ed G z y37 /•Ir-/� �e Sh�.cr� r � �7 -SA ��f ; J�R RP MC �1 �-c�usG/�1f17�n ��p�� 2$6�� Cecl�4�(� iSi sem- q Dv,�'.cstY �. � /' ✓ 2 �t AGA 2� ry► I�� ca, s 14) e'l/ V&4) � JP Pyii,iek eo-Kifew NApAc, (?P SI NATO - COLLECTED BY OCCUPY PV Fj 69t L" - QW w 7 PETITION TO HAVE FROM BANK THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS IN RPV A gyp_ P (;c� rtilJ pip r -e (mat t � - �`i�oa? 3 0 3 0 Cu U v C.0 LA a Rev V6 J -1s I z � m+,eAntom• rev J-ar, t a O PW H .6\rCa-ov &0 tf-2v-Z Pv1b c d/o2-:'7 S rymdA C'annihC a," 7 712 ifavenspAr fir. p p .�� .) v G�RS� ��d 2-7407-r wavDg voK Rd /gyp ✓ J ebhoZ 1 Or tic t, W. =2•Lnt� #�Qws�t 1�.RY �Pv CC, fh �» t, -� 30AI-7 vq r r In V7Aviv c GL jtr SIGNATURES COLLECTED BY OCCUPY PV 9 of -3 Y3 -a OZI 5 cjoz75r,�- YOz-7S 7r" �6 PETITION TO HAVE THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY FROM BANK OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK: NAME SIGNATURE STREET ADDRESS IN RPV � r A ove rr- �'-ice<. G 3 C f`' � . Vie, IJ 3 6,.0 104,4 c 6r,si� rw- seh cv-\ (OS12- Cuagn Crps t--X-:�. C-WZ ( V -P. {41\(Q, `�V �'aooado: 11�� 1f Nvwib- 'Fr�k ,, , 2 M, ,,,,,, Of fPv �V 7-6723 J�areWa4A �Nb 3 5k ,4 r? -W '�l l �5 "P -a wp- . Lp v ✓ x"VA4A*- 7AN" 4�-gr uw R Poriqpe S TA ►2 �lv N by w fir til o�v. � r'lL,�,r I � z ('�'7c.�-r► � SI NATURES C LLECTED BY OCCUPY PV 0 DJ liepU C4 9 o7K gc�15- '7CZ75 QOz-7 -6 yam �s PETITION TO HAWE THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY FROM BANK OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK'. NAME _ URE STREET ADDRESS IN RPV jc 604P7 227!/Ui VYsrc� _ ptier�o�ra�s�' 22Zo 2L/OOJej w - 9OZ7s �� v� �� Sc� � r✓yrl�-7�ac .:D�: �U Z� SF D 902-7 a. dA /ire /Pvss cJ L�, X26&3s Nyr ,ep RRv Wa ICI a�� ` S 6 �� SC'�'fc✓%ao c� (-� r_ v -"ate -VA T7" '► C 9U4olYl ,��✓ N .ver w S Y <` C' 490 gdm,C�g O Se a wi a,(p�.,'A �� tosM2;,e SIN ES C CTED BY OCCUPY PV - (:P- 7 ,?o Z7z— a . wl tox7g, v3-) S- r6� PETITION TO HAVE FROM BANK THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY OF AMERICA TO A SMALLER BANK NAME ATURE STREET ADD ESS IN RPV I1tn� S 121 b o q ale. tin vv-%- J LJ) ik � aX fir. Q. P✓ APS �,- �- U y �� ✓E /� S%Ccrcg,-- A `fcL • � ��ta &Leleeyrti o CUh I 15 —C,�J k'r- c0 O �w� ��7 C,&, C, C �Q S- 7 2 ? �8a� 1✓ ,04k d 5/L� r�%�f ,Iwh vn %l,o iy 5%key SI NATURES COLLECTED BY OCCUPY PV 0 PETITION TO KWE FROM BANK THE CITY OF RPV MOVE ITS MONEY OF AMRICA TO A SMALLER BANK NAME ATURE ATURE STREET ADDRESS IN RPV IlVkO. 2-19 5-7 V �A kk&Ae- E7-Maw SI NATURES COLLECTED BY OCCUPY PV 921- EIVED FROM Ma IPdIP. C -jt MADE A PART OF THE RECORD NCIL MEETING OF MA4-- I, o OFFICE OF THE CARLA MORREALE, CITY CLERK joym 4-- 1 a3SO-13N3 1Nnowv r £976 9L£ (OTC) iO3ul a03 IIVD n2i00Z$ Ajuo,xa3 sasuad$ auog a SaQ auaueur ad a ausoaag isluautuz03 u103•3Iaed20(jgV AtAiM ae a3!S gae-. sno 3!S!A £6£T6"s6# (iI xey pa3 ..3Ised 9oa gg aql ;o spuaia3 aiu, oI algvAed "3ag3 23lem aseald diz Alia SS3tlaaV 3NOHd 3WVN -djaq anoA jo3 ui01u s3juuq,L •3japd z)ql 01 AP33.np of Ipm uo!juuop anoA os 'saaalunjoe am jjms �,spuau�„ nd asnua sigl aoj /iauow asiva 01 pauuo3 uoilwodaoa lyoad•uou u si )iaed VOU gg a[j; 3o spuaul aql *spun} pmop!ppu a nbaj sivamanoadun pup aouuuaju!vjX •uapag opuopag 3o Ali3 au; Aq pagaaem suoi;puop 31unud UIOaj pa;uaaa spm 3I•Tud NoQ aqj lmo" Auux no C sV •3jJpd to(I ano 3o ;uauidojanap aqa of tupnquluoa aoj s3juugs "Fud aql 3o puaul Ma inoA )IuegjL •uopruop anod giiA& asolaua pue urao; 3331dwo3 luoi;eao3aad 9uole 33o aeaa aseaid [ ED FROM D MADE A PART OF THE R CORD AT TH ,UNCIL MEETING OF OFFICE OF THE CIT CL RK CARLA MORREALE, CITY CLERK Fj?. Ds OF Tim REDONDO BMACH II)OG FAIFLK P.O. Box 7000.612 Redondo Beach CA 90277 RB Dog Park Sponsorship Opportunities Bench Sponsor Each bench sponsor will have a bone plaque engraved and mounted on a bench in the Dog Park. Bench Sponsor .......... $ 2,000 or more Bone Sponsors Each bone sponsor will have a bone plaque engraved and mounted on the arch at the entrance to the Dog Park in Dominguez Park. Bone sponsorships represent cumulative total donations and can be upgraded when a higher donation level is achieved. Gold Bone Sponsor ........ $ 2,000 or more Silver Bone Sponsor ....... $ 1,000 or more Bronze Bone Sponsor ....... $ 500 or more Rawhide Bone Sponsor ..... $ 200 or more Donation Envelopes Donation envelopes are available in the Park on the bone -shaped sign by the entrance. All donations to the Friends are tax-deductible! Plastic Bags There are various bag dispensers around the Park that are filled with plastic bags for cleaning up after your dog. Although the Friends have regular volunteers that keep these dispensers filled with bags, extra help is always appreciated. If everyone brings a few extra bags each time they come to the Park, the dispensers will remain filled for the times that a bag is forgotten. Special Events Throughout the year, the Friends hold fiend -raising events and dog -related fw1 days. Prize donations are always needed for these efforts. Important Phone Numbers The Friends of the RB Dog Park General Information ( 310) 376-9263 P.O. Box 7000-612 Redondo Beach, CA 90277 RB Animal Control ( 310) 318-0611 LA County Carson Animal Shelter 216 Victoria, Carson (310) 523-9566 RB Dept. of Community & Recreation Services ( 310) 318-0610 The Water Fotintains You can also help the Park by keeping us informed about the water facilities. The water faucets, drinking fountains and the irrigation system in the Park get constant use and frequently need to be repaired. If you notice broken faucets or sprinkler heads, please call RBDP General Information and let us know! If you would like to volunteer to help with RBDP projects or you have questions or suggestions, please contact the Friends at the General Information number above. &DoNDo BU__C_H Doc Past Southeast Corner of 190th St. and Flagler Lane, Redondo Beach www.rbdogpark.com ftENDS OF THE IKEDoNDo BEACH Ili.IM if; I, Redondo Beach Dog Park Sponsorship Guide Ilse Dog Park is self-supporting! if you and your dog enjoy the park, please N support it with your donations. You are the reason the Park remains a success. — The Friends o f the RO Dog Part, The Redondo ]Beach Dog Park The Redondo Beach Dog Park is one of the most -used park facilities in the South Bay. Opened in 1993, the Park remains die only place in the South Bay area where dogs can run off -leash legally. In addition to providing an exercise area for dogs, the Park has become a favorite place for social interaction in the community. Visit the Park on any afternoon and you will see people of all ages and various cultural and economic backgrounds mingling and getting to know one another. On average, the Park is used by over 1000 dogs and their humans each week. The regular maintenance of the Park is performed by the RB Parks Department stat Special needs such as refurbishing the grass, additional ame- nities and liability insurance fall under the jurisdiction of the fund managed by die Friends of the Redondo Beach Dog Park. The Friends are the non-profit corporation formed in 1992 to raise funds for the construction of the Park and to oversee its development and on-going management. Since its inception, the Friends have contributed over $60,000 toward these needs as well as working with the City to utilize environmental grants and work study programs to gain improvements to the land. The Friends provide a liaison between the City staff and Park patrons. The official RBDP newsletter "0fftbe Leasb" is pub- lished quarterly to keep park users up to date on happenings at the Park, as well as to communicate changes in P a r k rules or offer suggestions for current dog - related , ; issues of concern in the area. The Friends also promote dog adoption events, low-cost vac- , cination cl"cs, park beautification days +' and other activities that benefit dogs in the community. I RB Dog Park 4ise� Sponsorship Application The History... Since 1987, dogs have been (and still are) prohibited in RB city parks and public spaces. As a result of in- creasing population and urbanization, leash laws were being more strictly enforced. Dog owners wanting an area where their pets could legally run acid get exercise first approached the City of Redondo Beach in 1992. The original group made a formal presentation to City Council and in September of 1993, the City agreed to an off -lease dog park for a trial period of six months. The one -acre site was the then undeveloped northwest end of Dominguez Park, land that had been use( previously as a trash dump and was leased to the city by Edison Company. The conditions of the trial were that the group was to raise funds to cover the cost of a private liability policy. Additionally, it had to be proven that dog owners would take responsibility for controlling their pets and cleaning up after them. The group of caring dog owners formalized their union and mission and the Friend,, of the Redondo Beach Dog Park filed and received non-profit status. The temporary park was an immediate success. It became apparent that people who cared enougl to want to exercise their dogs regularly, were also willing t make a personal investment of time and money to ensure use of a facility that allowed this. Permanent status was unanimously granted by City Council and the Dog Park became an integral part of the Dominguez Park redevelopment plan. In November of 1996, the official 3 -acre Dog Park was opened. Since then, the design and administration of the Park has been a model for other communities mid groups interested in establishing a dog park. The Dog Park is an ongoing example of citizens working within local government guidelines to participate in the improvement of community recreational facilities. Name: Address: city: State: Zip: Telephone: Fax: EmA Sponsorship Level: U Bench Sponsor ....... $2,000 or more Gold Bone Sponsor .... $2,000 or more J Silver Bone Sponsor .... $1,000 or more FJ Bronze Bone Sponsor .... $500 or more J Rawhide Bone Sponsor ... $200 or more Engraved Dedication: 1 ( 00 characte7s or less, plecue!) Please make checks payable to: The Friends of the Redondo Beach Dog Park (a California non-profit corporation) Mail check and application to: P.O. Box 7000-612, Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Your donation is tax-deductible, and you will receive a receipt within 4 weeks. It lakes 2-4 3 weeks for plaques to be ordered and placed. V Q, Thanks for supporting the RB Dog Park! I� PREVENT A DOG FIGHT BEFORE IT HAPPENS Learn the 3P Warning signs: • Posture: A dog's body language can communi- cate fear, hostility or submission. Learn to read and respond to your own dog's body language. Be alert to others. • Packing: More than 2 or 3 dogs packed together can lead to trouble. Break it up before it starts. • Possession: Whether it's you, a ball, or a treat, most dogs will protect what is theirs. Remain aware. What You Can Do To Prevent a Fight: • Pay attention to your dog, even when chatting with a friend. • Stay close enough to prevent a fight or to pro- tect your dog if it becomes frightened. • Keep a collar on your dog at all times so you have something to hold on to, if needed. • Leave the Park. Some days it's just a bad mix. Go for a walk or come back later. Your dog will be better off. What You Can Do If a Fight Occurs: • Never reach your hands into the middle of a dog fight. You will get bit, and often by your own dog. • Distract the dogs and divert their attention away from the fight. A loud whistle, a pocket air horn or a blast of water (from a waler bottle or hose) can work. • With one person behind each dog (yell for help, if you need it); quickly pull the dogs apart by their hind legs. Keep them apart until everyone calms down. • If your dog is not in the fight, make sure he doesn't join in. IT'S THE LAW! The following rules are part of Redondo Beacb City ordinance #2701 and may carry penalties of $50.00 or more. They are for your safety and the safety of the dogs. Please abide by allposted rules. • Park is open from dawn until dusk. Note: Sound travels in the early bours. Be considerate of sleeping neigbbors. • Dogs must be leashed outside of the fenced Dog Park. • Owners are legally required to pick-up and dispose of their dog's feces. • Children under 12 must be closely supervised by an adult. Note: It is strongly urged that young children not be brought to the Park for their own health and safety. If they are, they must remain close enough to hold your hand at all times! • Owners are solely liable for injuries or damage caused by their dogs. • Aggressive dogs must be removed from the Park immediately. And without debate. • Female dogs in heat are not permitted in the Park. • All dogs must be currently licensed (with tags and collar on) and vaccinated. • No smoking or alcoholic beverages allowed in the Park. • Professional dog trainers may not conduct business in the Park. No strollers, carriages, bicycles, children's toys, food or treats allowed in the Dog Park! WHAT To Do IF YOU OR YOUR DOG ARE INJURED IN A FIGHT A Dog Fight Can Be Violent and Is Upsetting To Everyone Who Is Present. • Attitude: Even the calmest, most pleasant, well -adjusted person can become upset, angry or belligerent if they or their dog are injured in a fight. Emotional behavior is automatic; try to remain calm and as objective as possible. • Your Legal Responsibility: Owners are solely liable for injuries or damage caused by their dogs. This includes all damage to another dog or to a person, no matter who said what, no matter who started the fight. In other words, you are responsible for the vet/ doctor bills if your dog inflicted the wounds! • Exchange Information: All involved parties must provide pertinent information; names, addresses, phone numbers, and vaccination information to each other. • If a dog owner refuses to be responsible for his dog's damages, ask witnesses to help you, and try to get his name, the dog's name, a license plate number or whatever information you can. • Call the police or animal control and report the incident. REDONDO BEACH DOG PARK Southeast Corner of 190th St. and Hagler Lane in Redondo Beach www.rbdogpark.com Dor. Pmm SUIRVIVU SKILLS & EnQUIEM FOR Docs & THEIR PEOPLE A common-sense guide created by fellow dog lovers responsible for the creation and day- to-day operations of the Dog Park. You are the ones that make the Park a success. — The Friends of the RD Dog Park Your Dog Is Your Personal Property. You Are Legally Responsible For Damage or Injury Caused By Your Dog! Remain In Control and In Sight of Your Dog at All Times. • Pay attention! owners must clean up after their dogs.There are plastic bags in dispensers along the fences and in the green wooden boxes in each Park. Shovels can be found on the fence. Please return them after use. • All dogs must have current licenses and vaccinations.While city regulations require only rabies immunization, it is strongly advised that your dog be vaccinated for Bordatella (kennel cough), DHLPP, and Corona. • Puppies under six months of age are at risk of infection even when vaccinated.Younger dog's immune systems are not fully mature. • Your dog must be on -leash at all time outside the Park. This means walking to and from the Park ` and the parking lot. How to Enter the Park: • Do not open outside gate if the inside gate is open. Be patient. Remove your dog's leash inside the double gated holding pen. Be sure the gate area is not congested with excited dogs ready to pounce on your pup. Enter the Park, close gate and move your dog away from the entrance. 1�1 • Do not leave your dog's leash on in the Park. This puts your dog at a disadvantage and increases fear It may actually cause an altercation. • A dog wearing a muzzle may not be able to defend itself. If your dog must be muzzled, perhaps it shouldn't be in the Park when i others are present. Correct Dog Park Etiquette: • Do not bring food - people food, dog food or dog treats - into the park. Many owners do not feed treats. Some dogs may be allergic. Food may make a docile dog aggressive. Never give treats or food to a strange dog witbout specific permisssion from the owner. • We suggest that you remove your dog's choke collar while in the Park, but leave his regular collar and tags on. • The water facilities were designed to reduce risk of communicative diseases between dogs first, and for convenience, second. Do not leave water bowls at the Park.You may feel it's a good deed, but it is really not! Community water or bowls not allowed to dry out are a breeding ground for many viruses and bacteria. • Do not plug the sink. If your dog will not drink from running water, bring your own bowl or cup. If you do plug the sink, renove the plug once your dog is through, allowing the water to drain away. • Bring your own balls or toys. A damp tennis ball or rope is often the source of contamination in the passing of disease. • The small dog park is for small dogs and puppies only. • All dogs benefit from guidance and structure. Basic obedience training is a !�) must for a safe, well -socialized ,.w and happy dog. .A The Dog Park Is Not a Healthy Place For Your Child The Health Risks: • Children are more susceptible to contracting intestinal worms and other infections from playing on grass where feces and urine are present. That's one major reason why dogs are prohibited from children's playgrounds and schools. • Be sure your children (and you) always wear shoes in the Dog Park. • Children can pick up fleas, lice or skin mites from infected dogs. The Dangers: • This is the dogs' park! 'MPF_ v Not all dogs are child - friendly. Never allow your child to approach or pet a dog without the owner's presence and approval. • Young children are easily knocked over or trampled by dogs running. • Herding dogs may nip at children while attempting to round them up. • A running, squealing or screaming child attracts attention and becomes a target for many dogs (because the child resembles an injured animal or prey.) • Direct eye contact is confrontational to dogs. An interested child staring at a dog is at just the right height to provoke a dog unintentionally. • Never let your child have toys or food in the Park. A friendly dog might maul your child to get at a bright ball or cookie. • One adult to supervise several children or an infant and the family dog is not sufficient. Be sure you can take care of everyone you bring to the Park. Parents: If you do bring your children into the Dog Park, please teach them how to behave with animals and what to do in an emergency: Never Run. Hide your face. ruck your arms and legs into your body. Curl up in a ball, face down on your hands and knees. Be as still and quiet as possible. Wait for help or until the dog has left. If You Find a Stray Dog Call the RB Animal Control or IA County Animal Shelter on Victoria in Carson, eyen if you are willing to keep the dog. This is where anyone who has a lost dog in our neighhorhood will be directed to look or call. Always let them know you have found a dog. It's owners may be frantic trying to locate their pet. Important Phone Numbers The Friends of the RB Dog Park General Information (310) 376-9263 P.O. Box 7000-612 Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Redondo Beach Animal Control (310) 318-0611 LA County Carson Animal Shelter 216 Victoria, Carson (310) 523-9566 Redondo Beach Department of Community & Recreation Services (310) 318-0610 LI aqk,. RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: MAY 1, 2012 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA" Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting: Item No. Description of Material City Manager Email from Don Richardson D Email from Ken Dyda 2 Emails from Gary Randall; Lia Oprea; William and Marianne Hunter; James Dibbo; Anne Ingalls and Victor Pietrantoni; Merry An and Jeff Sybilrud Respectfully submitted, &4Carla Morreale ** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, April 30, 2012**. MAGENDA\2012 Additions Revisions to agendas120120501 additions revisions to agenda.doc 0 From: M and D Richardson [medon@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 1:15 PM To: webcomments@palosverdes.com Cc: cc@rpv.com Subject: New design No improvement from its predecessor. Is unbelievably slow. By far the slowest web site I visit on the internet. No easier to navigate once past the landing page. Still using the microscopic font on most pages. In all, a total waste of time and resources so far. Please transfer authority and responsibility for this project from whoever created this mess to parties with actual skills. As an example, the company that hosts (and designed, I assume) PVE's website. You appear to have taken much of your landing page ideas from them anyway. PVE's site, however, actually loads quickly and functions better all around. Don Richardson RPV 1 C 17Y iAh1AGE.v tecpOel— (1) Kenneth J. Dyda. April 28, 2012 Mr. Tom Odom, Director Public Works Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Dear Mr. Odom, RECEIVED City of Rancho Palos Verdes APR 3 0 200 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Pursuant to city approval, the sidewalk at 5715 Capeswood Drive has #3 rebar included. The sidewalk is marked "DO NOT GRIND". Since, per state law, the property owner is responsible for the maintenance of the sidewalk, DO NOT damage the integrity of this sidewalk in the upcoming city sidewalk repair program. Any repair must be accomplished in the adjoining sidewalks. Thank you for your cooperation. Kenneth J. Dyda 5715 Capeswood Drive Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-1725 Home - (310) 375-3932 Cell — (310) 386-0285 Email Cprotem73@verizon.net T From: Gary Randall [grapecon@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 8:38 AM To: cc@rpv.com Cc: parks@rpv.com Subject: Dog Park Project Input Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council: My name is Gary Randall, I have lived in RPV for 40 years. I understand you will be discussing the Dog Park Project at the council meeting this evening. I am in agreement with staff recommendations #1 and #2, as I tentatively support an off leash dog park at the former Palos Verdes Landfill site. I indicate "tentative support" as it would still be important to be sure all aspects of the site, or at least a vast majority of them, comply with the previous dog park requirements and criteria developed by the city, and that support for such a park is indeed high amongst residents of all the Palos Verdes cities, especially those living closest to the site. In regards to staff recommendation #3, 1 have two comments: I do not believe the general taxpayer population should be burdened with the cost of sponsoring "dog days" at local parks, and therefore I respectfully disagree with staff recommendation #3. The costs associated with any such "dog day" events should be mitigated by those attending, perhaps through a nominal admission fee. Of course, it goes without saying that a full set of rules and expectations of attendees be in place prior to any such event, and that proper notification to residents who do not wish to be near these events take place. 2. If you disagree with the above statements, and feel that valuable taxpayer monies should be used to sponsor such events, then I would urge that participation in these events be limited to verified RPV residents only. The City of RPV has no duty, obligation, or extra funds to provide free "dog day" events to non-residents. We have far too many other projects that would directly benefit RPV residents that deserve priority and funding. Thank you for your time and consideration. Gary Randall Ladera Linda resident 5/1/2012 a Page 1 of 1 From: Lia Oprea [loprea@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:51 AM To: Lia Subject: Rpv City Council to discuss Off -Leash Dog Park - Tonight May 1 - 7 pm Hesse Park RPV City Council to discuss Off -Leash Dog Park Leash Off L.A. (LOLA) invites all to attend and speak at the RPV City Council Meeting this evening in support of an off -leash fenced dog park project on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. This is a very important chance to push forward plans for an off -leash space in our area. When: Tonight Tuesday May 1, 2012. Tonight's meeting is scheduled for 7pm. Where: Hesse Park, 29301 Hawthorne Blvd. LOLA also urges you to continue to write to the RPV City Council (CCa.RPV.com) to encourage an off leash dog beach environmental and monitoring study at Rancho Palos Verdes Beach. We have received hundreds of letters of support to put this study back on the agenda. Excerpts below from article on PV Patch: Dogs Back On Agenda in RPV The council tonight will also consider funding temporary "dog days" at city park sites in the coming months for off -leash use. Rancho Palos Verdes City Council members tonight will consider a partnership with other Peninsula cities to push forward plans for a regional dog park at the former Palos Verdes Landfill. Members will weigh different off -leash dog park ideas, including a staff recommendation to join with other Peninsula cities to reconfirm interest in a dog park at the landfill, first expressed to the county years ago. Besides the staff recommendation to pursue a dog park at the landfill, council members will also consider a joint effort with Palos Verdes cities to find other locations on the Peninsula for a dog park, in addition to limiting the search to Rancho Palos Verdes. The city currently has a contract with Mia Lehrer and Associates for dog and skate park site analysis. If council members vote to pursue a park at the former landfill, the dog park analysis would be dropped from the contract. The former landfill would be a "promising location" according to a city report that cited support from neighboring cities, in addition to the size and location of the proposed park. "A regional dog park would be able to accommodate the pent up demand for off -leash dog recreation in the community, which would lessen the burden on individual neighborhoods should Peninsula cities decide to develop additional, but likely smaller, dog park(s) at other locations," the report said. Lia Oprea Leash Off L.A. (LOLA) www.LeashOffLA.com Loprea@earthlink.net To see continuing comments regarding our off leash dog beach proposal go to these links. Doq Beach Ban Not So Popular Should RPV Official rescind Off leash Dog Beach? 5/1/2012 � , Support for off leash park From: Marianne Hunter [2hunter@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 9:57 AM To: CC@RPV.com Subject: Support for off leash park Dear City Council and Staff, Page 1 of 1 We do support an off -leash area for dogs and their owners in RPV. It's important for dogs to get enough exercise and socialization for their physical and mental health and to learn to be non aggressive towards people and other animals. It's also an opportunity for people to get together while their pets play. Thank you, William and Marianne Hunter 5/1/2012 From: James Dibbo Dames.dibbo@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:28 PM To: brian.campbell@rpv.com; parks@rpv.com; cc@rpv.com Subject: Fwd: RPV City Council to discuss Off -Leash Dog Park - Tonight May 1 - 7 pm Hesse Park Dear RPV City I am writing once again to express my support, as an RPV resident for allowing dogs to use the RPV beach and the provision of other facilities. Closing the RPV beach has not solved the problem. It has caused a profound loss approaching bereavement for those of us and our families who enjoyed it so much for such a long time. One of the truly great joys of living in RPV has been lost. The Council has an obligation to address this loss of amenity and seek ways of reinstating or replacing it. I would say however that I am not sure the approach proposed below by LOLA is the right one. A lot of dogs in one place at the same time should not be the objective nor should RPV be setting itself up as the dog walking capital of the South Bay. The objective should be to enable all local residents to enjoy an amenity which they had enjoyed for decades and which has been lost due to mismanagement of the situation. With hindsight it is clear that if nobody had said anything, no signs were posted and no studies proposed, life would have happily continued as before. The Council created this mess and now they need to fix it. Unless the matter of dog access is addressed it will simply cause other problems. For example, I often walk my dog on the trails at Terranea and it does seem that unfortunately there is now more 'dog' traffic there probably as a result of people being pushed out of the beach. I certainly use it more now since the beach has been closed. Sadly the level of dog mess has increased as well and I'd happily support heavy fines on people who do not clean up after their pets. I think it's very important that other options be provided before the Terranea management lose patience and adopt a similar argument to Trump that dogs are bad for business and so responsible local dog owners find themselves gradually excluded from yet more places. I do not see one large dog park as the answer either. Instead there should be several locations, including the RPV beach, that are accessible to dog owners. Also I have no problem with restricting access to Peninsula residents only. The idea should be to allow access but spread things out so as to avoid lots of dogs and people together at the same time. I don't think 'dog days' are a good idea. They will attract too many people and lead to problems. The lack of accessibility of the beach is not a draw back, it is actually an advantage in terms of discouraging over use. If that was combined with restrictions to residents only with licensed dogs and parking permits that would keep use down. Non-residents could obtain a permit for a higher fee with numbers restricted. Permit and parking fees would fund enforcement. If there were several other park areas on the Peninsula that were similarly restricted that would help further spread people around and prevent the problem of heavy concentrations of people and dogs I referred to. I would very much support charging for parking permits and relatively high charges for non- residents/non-permit holders. Over time the whole situation would then quite down and relative calm be restored for everyone. This is an important issue and one which the Council needs to address thoughtfully and carefully. But they must address it and solve it. Regards 5/1/2012 James Dibbo 30379 Camino Porvenir Rancho Palos Verdes ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Lia Oprea <loprea ,earthlink.net> Date: Tue, May 1, 2012 at 9:49 AM Subject: RPV City Council to discuss Off -Leash Dog Park - Tonight May 1 - 7 pm Hesse Park To: Lia Oprea <loprea@earthlink.net> RPV City Council to discuss Off -Leash Dog Park Leash Off L.A. (LOLA) invites all to attend and speak at the RPV City Council Meeting this evening in support of an off -leash fenced dog park project on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. This is a very important chance to push forward plans for an off -leash space in our area. When: Tonight Tuesday May 1, 2012. Tonight's meeting is scheduled for 7pm. Where: Hesse Park, 29301 Hawthorne Blvd. LOLA also urges you to continue to write to the RPV City Council (CC(&-RPV.com) to encourage an off leash dog beach environmental and monitoring study at Rancho Palos Verdes Beach. We have received hundreds of letters of support to put this study back on the agenda. Excerpts below from article on PV Patch: Dogs Back On Agenda in RPV The council tonight will also consider funding temporary "dog days" at city park sites in the coming months for off -leash use. Rancho Palos Verdes City Council members tonight will consider a partnership with other Peninsula cities to push forward plans for a regional dog park at the former Palos Verdes Landfill. Members will weigh different off -leash dog park ideas, including a staff recommendation to join with other Peninsula cities to reconfirm interest in a dog park at the landfill, first expressed to the county years ago. Besides the staff recommendation to pursue a dog park at the landfill, council members will also consider a joint effort with Palos Verdes cities to find other locations on the Peninsula for a dog park, in addition to limiting the search to Rancho Palos Verdes. The city currently has a contract with Mia Lehrer and Associates for dog and skate park site analysis. If council 5/1/2012 a of 3 members vote to pursue a park at the former landfill, the dog park analysis would be dropped from the contract. The former landfill would be a "promising location" according to a city report that cited support from neighboring cities, in addition to the size and location of the proposed park. "A regional dog park would be able to accommodate the pent up demand for off -leash dog recreation in the community, which would lessen the burden on individual neighborhoods should Peninsula cities decide to develop additional, but likely smaller, dog park(s) at other locations," the report said. Lia Oprea Leash Off L.A. (LOLA) www.LeashOffLA.com LopreaOa)earthlink. net To see continuing comments regarding our off leash dog beach proposal go to these links. Dog Beach Ban Not So Popular Should RPV Official rescind Off leash Dog Beach? 5/1/2012 3 0� 3 From: anne ingalls [aingalls55@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:25 PM To: cc@rpv.com Subject: OR Leash Dog Beach Plz do a study on whether this is feasible or not. Thank you. Anne INgalls Victor Pietrantoni a 5/1/2012 From: Stcpro7827@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11:24 AM To: CC@RPV.com Subject: off leash dog park An off leash dog beach environmental and monitoring study at Rancho Palos Verdes Beach is something that should be done. We would also hope you also continue studying the feasibility of a dog and skate park as well at the land fill location. We can have two dog parks, you understand. What kind of a city will we become if we aren't open to different adventures? Thank you for your time, Merry An and Jeff Sybilrud #5 Stallion Rd PS: yes, we vote. QO 5/1/2012 MW LAMk-, RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: APRIL 30, 2012 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, May 1, 2012 City Council meeting: Item No. Description of Material 5 Emails from: Tom Long; Sharon Yarber 6 Email from Madeline Ryan Respectfully submitted, Carla Morreale W:WGENDA12012 Additions Revisions to agendas120120430 additions revisions to agenda through Monday afternoon.doc From: Long, Thomas D. [tlong@nossaman.comj Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 1:04 PM To: cc@rpv.com Subject: Proposed Revisions to the Rules May 1, 2012 Agenda Item No. 5 Dear Councilmembers, The revised proposal provided in redline (I think by Councilmember Duhovic) and attached to the staff report represents a very significant improvement over previous proposals the city circulated. I think it should be the starting point of your discussion. I have the following comments on it: (1) Section 3.7 at page 5-12. 1 see no reason to limit the maintenance of records of meetings to 30 years. There may be some historical or other value to older meeting records that we cannot now anticipate. (2) Section 3.10 at page 5-12 should not be necessary. The obligations of the Brown Act are what they are and the council should be able to abide by them without their having to be restated in the council's own rules. (3) Section 4.1 at page 5-12 seems to make it impossible for the Mayor to participate in a meeting telephonically. This seems to have been an inadvertent mistake in wording. It would be unfair to the Mayor. The Mayor should be allowed to participate in meetings telephonically as long as another member presides over the meeting. (4) Section 5. Implicitly the revisions to this section appear to set aside the policy that staff should always provide its best professional advice to the council. Since we are paying staff for its judgment it would seem to be best to at least listen to that judgment even if we as residents through our elected representatives elect not to follow that advice. In general I agree with the council taking control of its agenda but also allowing two members to place an item on the agenda even if not supported by the other three. I respect the council's judgment that allowing one member to place an item on the agenda with no support from other members may not be productive if that proves to be your judgment. (5) Section 5.2 While I agree that the Wednesday deadline for distribution of agenda packets was often not met in the past, I felt that a change to a Thursday deadline would lower the bar and would also not be met. Ironically that seems to have been the case for this very agenda item which was not available until Friday. I think it is good to leave the deadline at Wednesday. (6) Section 8.3(3) at page 5-19. In the past the practice of allowing members of the public to assign their time to others has been abused. This proposal may strike a good balance by allowing it but limiting it. Time will tell. Section 8.4(4) same page. I recall suggesting time limits on councilmembers at one point to shorten meetings. It may be difficult to implement. It would be more possible if agendas were received earlier and councilmembers could make written statements before the meeting. On a related matter good luck with Section 8.5(1). By making that mandatory as opposed to discretionary the proposal could surrender the council's own control over its meeting. You may want to make it optional at the discretion of the mayor or council majority. (7) Section 9.3 page 5-21 is very important. It already seems that some members of the current council may not understand that committees should gather information and 4/30/2012 / c F 5, formulate proposals for the council as a whole to decide upon but should not themselves be setting policy or negotiating with developers, etc. I encourage you to adopt and enforce Section 9.3. Most of the Mayor Pro Tern's comments appear similar to those of Councilmember Duhovic so I do not comment separately on them with one exception as follows: (8) At page 5-5 the report suggests "The City Manager is not allowed to develop any policy with the intent to place it on an upcoming agenda without the prior written approval of the city council." In other words, even if the manager's best judgment is that there should be a change in policy, he or she is not to spend time trying to persuade the council of the same. This seems very unwise for reasons that should be apparent. Councilmembers are simply part time volunteers for the city and do not know its day to day workings. This would be like suggesting that all initiatives in a corporation must come from its board of directors and not its CEO. I don't think we should hamstring the city manager. She is realistic enough to know what has or might get council support and if she is suggesting something it is probably worth listening to even if you elect not to adopt it. I have a similar thought as to "lobbying" by staff. Staff should always be encouraged to advocate vigorously for whatever they think is best for the city without fear of retribution by councilmembers. Creating an open atmosphere is your greatest challenge as councilmembers. The prior council had that open atmosphere. You don't --yet. Remember the only way staff can help you avoid making mistakes is by disagreeing with you when you are about to make a mistake. You do yourself and your constituents a terrible disservice if you force the staff to become your yes men (or yes persons) and stifle dissent as prior versions of these rules quite obviously sought to do. Tom Long 4/30/2012 J c f o? From: Yarber, Sharon [SYarber@firstam.com] Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 11:31 AM To: cc@rpv.com Subject: Rules and Procedures Attachments: Agenda Bullet points.docx Dear Mayor Misetich and Members of the Council, Attached please find some bullet points for discussion tomorrow evening. Thankyou Sharon Yarber This message may contain confidential or proprietary information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above or may contain information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing or copying this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please immediately notify us by replying to the message and delete the original message and any copies immediately thereafter. Thank you.— FAFLD /a f d` 4/30/2012 .W- A couple of bullet points for discussion Tuesday re: Rules & Procedures, since I will be out of town and unable to attend the meeting. 1. We need to distinguish between items that must be put on the agenda, and those that are discretionary. Government Code already governs what must be so placed, and the City Manager should control Consent Calendar items, which should never include new business that is beyond routine, ordinary course of business matters (e.g. approval of minutes of prior meetings, second reading of ordinances previously approved by Council, approval of payments to vendors, etc.), plus City Manager also has to have authority to place on the agenda those matters of new business that Council must address within specified timelines (e.g. appeals of Planning Commission and Traffic Commission decisions, emergency matters, salary adjustments, etc.). 2. Any individual council member can put an item on the agenda for new or regular business. A second is not required. If Council elects to proceed with requiring a second, then that applies to everyone, including the Mayor. The Mayor cannot unilaterally put an item on the agenda. We do not have a "Strong Mayor" form of government. Approval of City Manager of agenda items is not required. Further, if you elect to require that every suggestion be seconded, then ALL agenda items should be added in the "Future Agenda Items" section of the meeting. A legitimate concern that has been expressed is the situation where one member requests of the Mayor that an item be added, the Mayor says "No", then the suggesting member is not free to discuss the issue with any other council member in an effort to gain support for a second vote prior to the meeting, as such discussion would violate of the Brown Act. The public is entitled to see who is putting what items on the agenda, so we can evaluate the performance of the Council members and gain insight into their individual concerns and priorities. 3. All agenda items should identify the council member who has proposed the particular item, and if a second is required, which council member seconded the request. 4. There should be a mechanism for residents to place items on the agenda. Perhaps a petition process, with a minimum number of residents signing the petition, should be considered. Clearly we cannot have every resident putting things on the agenda, but if 10 or 20 people sign a petition, that should warrant placing an item on the agenda. 5. Members of the public who are in attendance and have signed a speaker slip can give their time to another present speaker. This is a more efficient use of time as it avoids redundancy and increases the odds of a more comprehensive and cohesive presentation. 6. We need to start getting more organized with respect to advance preparation of agendas and agenda packets. Shortening the time is absolutely the wrong way to go. The public and council members need adequate time to investigate an issue, review the staff report, comment on the matter and plan to attend the meeting. Last minute changes to previously listed agenda items must be discouraged absent exigent circumstances. If we have longer lead times, "late correspondence" can and should be regularly posted to the City website in advance of the meeting, and multiple copies of late correspondence should be available at the meeting. All late correspondence needs to become a part of the permanent record and be available for view on the website, even if added after the meeting. a O/ 1:P1 From: Madeline Ryan [pat.ryan431@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2012 4:27 PM To: Teri Takaoka Cc: City Council Subject: CC Meeting - May 1, Agenda Item 6 Honorable Mayor and City Councihnembers I believe RPV has some of the finest, brightest and most sincere residents serving on all its Commissions and Committees. So, how do you choose which Commission or Committee should receive a stipend for their service? I am concerned that the 'salary', as miniscule as it is, could have unintended consequences entitling recipients to future pensions and health care. Is that possible? In most firms, organizations and social clubs, out-of-pocket, job/club related expenses including gas mileage are submitted by the employee or member for reimbursement through an Accounting/Treasurer process. Perhaps establishing this type of reimbursement policy for all employees and volunteers would be a better plan. Madeline Ryan Rancho Palos Verdes 4/30/2012 %