20140704 Late CorrespondenceTO: Rancho Plos Verdes City Council
FROM:Robert A.Nelson
SUBJECT: Coastal Commission Hearing 7/9 on Trump National Flag Pole to Reduce Height
Date: July 4, 2014
Coastal Commission: Item W12a, July 9, 2014
TRUMP NATIONAL GOLF COURSE FLAG POLE AND OTHERS FOR COMPARISION
·• ~I'
TRUM P NATIONAL : FLAG POLE FROM ACROSS PVDS
STAND ING· NO T ELEPHOTO 7/3/14 14 :30 HRS
TRUMP FLAG FROM PRIME VIEW AREA
ACROSS PVDS ON NAUTILUS: NO TELE
RPV'S GOLDEN COVE
FLAGPOLE AND FLAG
7/3/2014@17.10
NOTE SIZE vs. CAR & LAMPPOST
RPV'S GOLDEN COVE SHOPPING CENTER
FLAG 7/3/14 @1300 HRS. NOTE SIZE OF
LAMPPOST AT BASE OF POLE.
RE CEIVED FROM ?g \') Ne\sen
AND MADE A PART OF THE RECOR D AT THE
CO UNCIL MEETING OF 7/ it! I f
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK~
CARLA MORREALE , CITY CLERK
PORT OF ENSENADA, MEXICO
NATIONAL FLAG AND POLE
FEBRUARY, 2006
(FROM: M.S. ISLAND PRINCESS)
Ensenada .jpg
NOW THIS IS A REAL FLAG I FLAGPOLE !
SIZE: NOTE PEOPLE AT BASE
03 /06/2006 13 :46:7 GMT
Plll0719.JPG
RPV'S GOLDEN COVE
FLAGPOLE AND FLAG
7/3/2014@17.10
NOTE SIZE vs. CAR & LAMPPOST
07 /03/2014 15:54:5 GMT
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
July 4, 2014
Dear RPV Council,
Lenee Bilski <leneebilski@hotmail.com>
Friday, July 04, 2014 12:35 AM
cc
Kit Fox; Joel Rojas
Trump Flagpole
Please do not send a letter of support for the Trump flagpole structure at it's current location and
height. Please today honor the RPV Coastal Specific Plan which complies with the State Coastal Act as
explained in the CA Coastal Commission staff report.
In 2007, the CC vote was a close 3-2 to permit the "after-the-fact" flagpole as built.
Please vote No on this staff recommendation to transmit a letter of support to the Coastal Commission .
Thank you.
Lenee Bilski
1
From: Joel Rojas
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Monday, July 07, 2014 10:06 AM
Carla Morreale; Teresa Takaoka
Carolynn Petru
Subject: FW: July 4th RPV CC Meeting
Carla
I just saw that I received this email related to the Trump item on last Friday's Council agenda.
Joel
From: Chip Zelt [mailto:chipzelt@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 5:13 PM
To: Joel Rojas; Susan Brooks; Anthony Misetich; Brian Campbell; Jim Knight; Jerry Duhovic
Subject: July 4th RPV CC Meeting
Dear Council Members and Joel Rojas:
Unfortunately I will not be able to attend the July 4th 1 O:OOam City Council meeting.
1. Would like to voice my approval of the current flag pole location and it's current height at Trump
National.
2. I disagree with the Coastal Commission on considering adding a 6-foot high lattice wood fencing on the
berm at the southwest comer of the existing Driving Range which the RPV City Council has
not previously approved. The fence at this location would block views. Would like to ask the City
Council to reinstated the safety measures that Trump and RPV City Council previously approved and
agreed on to satisfy the safety concerns of the Coastal Commission.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Chip Zelt
4100 Sea Horse Lane
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
p 310-377-8000
c 310-422-6826
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Swank Lynn < lynn.swank@cox.net>
Friday, July 04, 2014 7:08 AM
Carolynn Petru
cc
Subject: Re: 7 /4/14 Meeting -Inappropriateness of Meeting
Carolynn,
Thanks for the response. I have always been bothered by the flagpole issue and remember that there was a great
deal of public discussion about whether it was appropriate to allow one business to violate standing codes and in
so doing , wrapping the issue in an American flag. I recall that the man who built a windfall in his backyard,
supposedly because the city was encouraging residents to conserve energy, also placed an American flag on the
windmill. He was told to remove the windmill. Apples and oranges maybe, but the example is remembered by
me even after all these years. I would have liked to see the current council discuss this and the consistency of
treatment in our city, or if exceptions will be made for some people or businesses. If this is the case, just let the
residents know. It is a shame that this issue is raised on the 4th of July because those opposed to the height of
the flagpole, such as myself, will be labeled unpatriotic.
Lynn
On Jul 3, 2014, at 8:45 PM, Carolynn Petru <Carolynn@rpv.com> wrote:
Hi Lynn -
Thanks for your email. I'd like to address the concerns you have raised .
Although unconventional, July 4th was selected because it was the date when all five Council members
were available to meet regarding two time sensitive items.
The purpose of Item No. 1 is to provide the Council with the opportunity to schedule the issue for
discussion at a regular meeting. The timing is critical because July 15th is the Council's only opportunity
to have a public discussion of the pros and cons of a potential 2014 ballot measure, and to make a
decision on whether or not to proceed, before missing the County's filing deadline. Staff is in agreement
with you that this discussion needs to take place at a regular Council meeting. Our recommendation
supports that outcome.
Regarding Item No. 2, you raise a very good point. Another alternative the Council can consider is to
request a continuance of the matter to a later date. It's somewhat risky, as we don't know if the Coastal
Commission will grant the request, but it is certainly an option. Staff will present this alternative to the
Council at tomorrow's meeting.
I'd also like to point out that Item No. 2 could not have been addressed earlier. Although the appeal has
been on hold since 2007, the City Council and City staff only became aware of the Coastal Commission
staff's recommendation late last week, when the CCC staff report was issued on Thursday, June
26 1h. Therefore, because the Council's next regular meeting isn't until July 15th, our only option to
1
provide the Council with an opportunity to talk about the matter before the July gth hearing was to add
it to this special meeting agenda.
Staff's duty is always to provide the City Council with maximum amount of opportunity and choice to
address issues that affect, and are of importance, to the City. If staff had not suggested the tomorrow's
special meeting, the Council would have been precluded from taking timely action on both items. I
believe that outcome would be a disservice to the Council, and the public at large.
Best regards,
Carolynn
From: Swank Lynn [mailto:lynn.swank@cox.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 5:27 PM
To: CC
Subject: 7 /4/14 Meeting -lnapprropriateness of Meeting
Council Members:
I was very disturbed to see that a Special Meeting of the RPV City Council was called on July 4,
2104 to consider a closed session item and 2 regular business items. Consideration and/or action
taken on either of these regular business items is totally inappropriate on a National Holiday,
July 4. In fact, this could leave residents with the impression that the City Council is trying "to
hide" actions from residents or even prevent discussion.
Points to Consider:
• July 4th is a National Holiday that all Americans celebrate. RPV acknowledges the
importance of this date by hosting a special July 4 celebration that is funded by residents.
• Notification of this meeting was sent by RPV ListServe on Wednesday, July 2 at 6:21
p.m. I am writing this on Wednesday, July 3 at 4:37 p.m. The Meeting is scheduled for
July 4 at 10:00 a.m., after the closed session so there is no time certain for regular
business. Do you expect residents to attend your meeting and wait to comment on
regular business items while the July 4th celebrations are in process?
• There is not enough time for a resident to thoughtfully respond to an agenda item given
the restrictions of the time frame above. The Coastal Commission staff gave their
recommendation in June 2014, that has not been reviewed by council or residents. I
assume some will argue that the Trump issue must be decided immediately because of the
Coastal Commission Meeting next week. The RPV staff and/or City Council must be
held accountable for the lack of anticipation and preparation for this item, which has been
on hold since 2007. Surely this item could have been addressed in the years preceding
the Coastal Commission and the RPV could have taken action earlier.
2
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Continue both regular business items to a normally scheduled city council meeting
2. Request that the Coastal Commission continue the decision of the Trump flagpole to a
date certain.
Lynn Swank
RPV Resident
3
CITY OF Ri\NCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
CITY CLERK
JULY 3, 2014
ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO
AGENDA
Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received
through Thursday afternoon for the Friday, July 4, 2014 City Council meeting:
Item No. Description of Materials
2 Email from Jabe Kahnke
Respectfully submitted,
r!MfL SWda/z__,
Carla Morreale
W :\AGENDA\2014 Additions Revisions to agendas\20140703 additions revisions to agenda through Thursday afternoon .doc
Carla Morreale
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
jabekahnke@cox.net
Wednesday, July 02, 2014 10:57 PM
jduhovic@hotmail.com; CC
Council Agenda Item for 7 /4/14 to write California Coastal Commission in Support of
Trump Flagpole As It Exists
Mayor Duhovic and RPV City Council,
I write as a Seaview neighbor to urge you to oppose sending a letter to the CCC from RPV in support of the Trump
flagpole as it exists. I do so not because I'm offended by its presence. I in fact use it as a windsock to know when we
have offshore winds. I urge you to do so because I believe the Trump organization is not to be trusted in preserving
public and private views across its broad swath of the RPV coastline.
I purchased my Seaview home in 1997 after consulting with RPV acting City Manager Petru and being assured by her
that the view from PV Drive South would not be impaired by the Ocean Trails development. As the project progressed,
it became apparent that the view impact analysis that had been conducted was naive at best. It was clearly deceptive in
presenting 1500 square foot homes on the lots in front of Seaview.
Prior to the construction of the Trump flagpole, unlawful signs began appearing on LA freeway ramps with directions to
Trump's Golfcourse. The construction of the flagpole was a cynical move by the Trump organization to create a giant
signpost for the golf course. It had nothing to do with real patriotism, but was rather a craven exploitation of patriotism
for commercial gain.
Please do not endorse that behavior. I do not think a Council letter will alter the decision of the CCC, but it will say
something about the integrity of the RPV City Council.
Jabe Kahnke
1
fJ .