The URL can be used to link to this page

20160301 Late Correspondencerage i of ,+ Noel Weiss From: "Noel Weiss" <noelweiss@ca.rr.com> Date: Monday, February 29, 2016 3:32 PM To: "Dave Aleshire" <daleshire@awattorneys.com> Cc: "Doug Willmore" <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; "Anthony R. Taylor" <ataylor@awattorneys.com>; "Elena Gerli" <egerli@awattorneys.com> Attach: Discussion of Equitable Indemnity Doctrine - California Real Property Journal - 2011.pdf Subject: Re: Mediation Dave: This reminds me of the Vietnam War negotiations during 1968 where instead of the needed focus being exhibited on the true "needs" of the other side, needless time was spent discussing the shape of the negotiating table.... . .. The Nixon tapes is also a good analogy Dave..... call it the arrogance of power... call it what you will... But fashioning a false reality only postpones the inevitable.. . Let me be clear...... We are pursuing all claims against Green Hills. The objective of any mediation with the City is to resolve our claims against the City; thereby enabling the City to cut and cap its losses. The fact that the City Manager signed an Indemnity Agreement without first have the agreement approved by the Council is not my problem. If the City wishes to resolve and cap its exposure, the City needs to respect my needs..... Damages are continuing to accrue and mount at $4,938.61 per day..... . Dave, if the City is not careful, this case could "bankrupt" it given the relatively low cash balance of $60 Million... . I am not interested in doing business with Green Hills at this moment in time..... Our claims are with the City.. . . Green Hills has nothing to do with the resolution of those claims.... If the City wishes to put its financial future in the hands of Green Hills, only the City Council can authorize such a policy.... The citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes "get it"....as will a jury when the underlying causes of action against Green Hills are tried..... The citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes are not pleased.... The City Manager's decision to sign that indemnity agreement without first having the City Council pass on its content was a huge error ..... There is no question that the best interests of the City are not being served here.... Dave, my objective is to nail Green Hills.... and I will ...... I do not wish and my people do not wish the City to bear an undue financial hardship over this situation... . That is why I have asked you and have asked Doug Willmore to visit the Vista Verde complex; go into the units most impacted (or all the units for that matter) so you both can see and truly understand the burden my people bear as a result of Green Hills callous, calculated, cruel, and oppressive acts..... in "gaming" the system to profit off of the backs of my people in this manner.... . That is also why I have asked for a one-on-one mediation with the City.... This does two very important things: 1. It informs you, Doug Willmore, and the City Council, of the dynamics of the situation from an objective standpoint..... The standpoint of a competent, experienced former Superior Court Judge, Peter Lichtman..... with whom I have had the opportunity to deal with in connection with the Lincoln Place litigation.... which is exceedingly complex and extended over a number of years... Judge Lichtman did a marvelous job and I believe he will do so in this case.... . 2. Secondly, a one-on-one mediation informs me and my people as well.... RECEIVED FROM AND MADE A PART OF TN- E ORD AT THE )J COUNCIL MEETING OF .h OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK C-0 Y[�vc CARLA MORREALE, CITY CLERK Page 2 of 4 My objective is to reach a deal with the City (one-on-one) which will cap the City's exposure and best position me and my people to go after Green Hills with both barrels.... . The Citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes are firmly behind this effort...... Public support for this approach will continue to grow..... People are going to start to inquire why the Council seems to "married" to Green Hills and why the City Manager and the Council have chosen to put the City's financial resources at risk by declining our request.... . Green Hills is not going to pay $16 Million plus without our going all the way through a jury trial.... (excluding punitive damages.. and given the cruel, oppressive actions exhibited by Green Hills I expect the punitive damage component will be considerable).... and there is no question in my mind Dave that a jury will exhibit a great deal of sympathy for the plight to which my people have been exposed by Green Hills' calculated, cruel conduct..... . My intent and objective will be to find the best trial lawyer in the City willing to associate into the case on a contingency basis... finance the litigation, and nail Green Hills to the proverbial wall.... Mediation (one-on-one and non-binding ... simply informative) should offer the City a reasonable way out here.. . Why the City would not immediately embrace such an option is beyond me...... The City retains equitable indemnity rights against Green Hills outside of the agreement.... The findings of the City's own Investigation Report support that position. . ... (See also enclosed article from the California Real Property Journal). Dave: The City has a core decision to make here ..... Does it wish to embrace Green Hills or does it wish to embrace the values of its citizenry..... I do not know whether Doug Willmore lives in RPV, but the members of the Council do... and the citizens are going to hold this Council responsible for the errors of failing to administer this problem competently.... Whether the Council ultimately ends up holding the City Manager and the City Attorney responsible is a side issue at this point.... The bottom line is Dave that: 1. Mediation is merely informative... The City loses nothing by accepting my invitation to mediate this dispute: one-on-one; 2. A good mediator, such as Judge Lichtman, will be well positioned to adjust the relationship and the dialogue in a way which can open the door to a three-way mediation by persuading me and my people why it would be in their interests to do so; 3. By the same token, a good mediator, such as Judge Lichtman, is also well positioned to advise and inform the City of the reasons why it is in the City's interests to cap its exposure to my people and provide guidance going forward on the practical and legal options and alternatives which are available to the City.... If the City settles with us separately (and promptly) I assure you Green Hills will not be pleased.... Perhaps Jerry Duhovic will experience another verbal whipping from John Resich akin to what occurred on September 1 st of last year..... But all of that will come back to seriously haunt Green Hills in the later litigation...... Frankly Dave, if I were Green Hills lawyer, I would tell John Resich to keep his mouth shut going forward..... since there is nothing Green Hills can say which will aid its situation... In short, Green Hills has for all intents and purposes reached the functional equivalent of a "stock market high".... It has nowhere to go but down.... . There is an absolute conflict here between the City and Green Hills.... I am offering the City the opportunity to get out from under..... I have every expectation that this goal can be achieved.. . However, I need a willing partner in mediation...... Green Hills is not my partner.... The City can and should be...... But this is a choice the City needs to make..... Now.... . We will continue to show up at public comment to press our case.... I expect the local media to remain interested in the story... I have gone out of my way not to speak to the media as a show of good -faith toward the objective of attempting to generate a positive dialogue via this proposed mediation process..... where we can strive for a reasonable balance..... . I would expect a resolution can be reached between the City and my people within the span of 8 hours of Judge Lichtman's time. 3/1/2016 Page 3 of 4 The time for settlement discussions with Green Hills will take place after the case has been thoroughly worked-up and ready for trial...... a trial which does not have to involve the City... unless the City voluntarily backs into it by continuing to refuse my invitation.... Time is running.... . Noel (310) 822-0239 From: Dave Aleshire Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 5:41 PM To: 'Noel Weiss' Cc: Doug Willmore ; Anthony R. Taylor; Elena Gerli Subject: Mediation Noel—I wanted to let you know what happened at the closed session last night. I wanted to talk to you in person but I got rushed for time tonight and am in Calexico most of tomorrow, so email will have to do for now, but again I'd be happy to talk later in the week. I presented to the Council your request to have a two party mediation with excludes Green Hills. I conveyed your message that the City could cap it's liability this way. Of course they've seen some of your emails and heard your public comments, so they are well aware of your position. They are not interested in a 2 party mediation and wanted me to convey that to you. They remain very interested in mediation and trying to short stop the litigation. They think that Green Hills is critical to this mediation. They are the party which benefits from the operation of the mausoleum which you claim damages your clients. They should pay for any damages created. The City has compelled them through the conditions of approval to participate in such a mediation, compelled them to pay the appraised value of any depreciated property value, and the City itself has offered to contribute up to $200,000 it might spend in litigation to such a settlement. As we begin down the litigation road, the City offer diminishes in value, which I know you realize. So the Council wanted me to also convey to you that we believe we have the impacted parties poised to participate in a meaningful mediation—but of course there is no point our doing this without all involved parties. We hope you reconsider your refusal to participate with all three parties. Again, I'm more than happy to discuss the matter with you further to explain our position if that would be helpful. Best, Dave David J. Aleshire I Managing Partner Aleshire & Wynder, LLP 1 18881 Von Karman Ave., Suite 1700, Irvine, CA 92612 Tel: (949) 223-1170 1 Dir: (949) 250-5409 1 Fax: (949) 223-1180 1 daleshire@awattorneys.com awattorneys.com This email and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via email and delete the email you received. 3/1/2016 - • � � ~ �/�` - •' • r �. (mit • 1►.. ��`'�,�- * j - � �, � • - �' � .. •�!� s TM a p ..- -If .jib f ;;v: r 11.=,�..... elf► 't y .' `� 1� f- si r f77 ``� 111 Ilu{ ;•; '-; S-, •.� a b. _ .. Can the City of Rancho Palos Verdes simply refuse to allow any of these facilities within the public right-of-way? No. The City cannot prohibit the placement of personal wireless telecommunications facilities in the public right-of-way (ROW). As regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission, companies have the right to place their facilities in the Public ROW, subject to the City's reasonable time, place and manner rules. The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 also prohibits the City from discriminating against service providers or prohibiting such providers from providing wireless services within the City. A City cannot prevent a service provider from closing a significant gab in its service coverage using least intrusive means. Can Local and State Governmental Bodies Establish Limits For Radio Frequency (RF) Exposure? The Telecommunications Act of 1996 contained provisions relating to federal jurisdiction to regulate human exposure to RF emissions from certain transmitting devices. Section 704 of the Act states that, "No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions." Are cellular and other radio towers near homes or schools safe for residents and students? RF emissions from antennas used for cellular and PCS transmissions result in exposure levels on the ground that are typically thousands of times below safety limits. These safety limits were adopted by the FCC and endorsed by agencies of the Federal government responsible for health and safety. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that such towers could constitute a potential health hazard to nearby residents or students. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HOURS & CONTACT INFORMATION Phone 310.544.5252 Fax 310.544.5292 E-mail publicworks@rpvca.gov Address: 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Ho urs: Monday to Thursday - 7:30am to 5:30pm Friday - 7:30am to 4:30pm Saturday & Sunday - Closed PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT www.rpvca.gov/916/Cell-Sites �� Printed on 100% post—consumer waste paper ECEIVED FROM tLU_QII(, KIVEK` ND MADE A PART OF THE ji�RD AT OUNCIL MEETING OF 3 1 , A OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CARLA MORREALE, CITY CLERK =►i1AI. 105 Standard Definitions Antenna A device used for radiating or receiving radio waves. Co -Location The location of two or more wireless communication facilities on a single support structure or otherwise sharing a common location. Co -location shall also include the location of wireless communication facilities with other types of facilities including, but not limited to, light standards, outbuildings and other utility facilities and structures. FCC Federal Communications Commission, the government agency that regulates interstate communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. Mock -Up A model or replica of a structure, used for public display purposes. Public Right -of -Way Property that is owned and controlled by the City (typically streets and sidewalks where utility poles may be placed). Service Provider Any authorized provider of wireless communications services. Wireless Telecommunications Facility (WTF) An installation that sends and/or receives radio frequency signals, including, but not limited to, directional, omni -directional and parabolic antennas, structures or towers to support receiving and/or transmitting devices, cabinets, equipment accessory equipment and other structures, and the land or structure on which J,7 they are all situated. The term does not include mobile transmitting devices, such as vehicle or hand held radios/ telephones and their associated transmitting antennas. Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 Purpose "to provide for a pro -competitive, de- regulatory national policy framework designed to accelerate rapidly private sector deployment of advanced information technologies and services to all Americans by opening all telecommunications markets to competition..." Sample Mock -Up Sign THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES • Applicant's * Contact Into TII Existing Public Works site Inspector's !Proposed Site Contactlnfo Vicinity Map FOR INFORMATION CALL PUBLIC WORKS AT (310)544-5252 Public Notice Requirements: A) Mailed Notice is to be sent to property owners within 500 feet of the proposed installation, 5 business days prior to any installation of the Procedural Time Limits A City must act "within a reasonable period of time" when reviewing an application for a wireless telecommunications facility. The "Shot Clock" is: -- 60 days for Co -location or modifications that do not result in substantial change -- 90 days for Co -location or modifications that do result in 4: substantial change -- 150 days for all other applications Permissible Regulations Zoning and Building Regulations CAN: -- Impose a detailed application requirement reasonably related to the City's review of the project. -- Require public hearings on the application. -- Require review by Planning Commission that exercies discretionary decision-making (with certain exceptions). -- Impose requirements to meet aesthetic concerns, such as camouflage, setbacks. -- Impose Facility maintenance standards. mock-up. ,,,wua'"�"°� ♦ wuau B) If applicable, a public hearing and applicable notice requirements will commence per Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. City Map r As depicted in this map, there are currently over 140 WTF's installed throughout the City. r Many more installations are proposed by the ' various service providers. ..a. w.w.r3os, �:wuo93 N,- wu wines .. �Swusez � 3awas ws� ♦♦wUYli ♦ ._ � wov♦ wn xnw.nza� wuvsz ou �. =3 w�3 AHW08 ♦♦ Wr,.ry wo3 •r Plos ImRolling Wis Estates X M ANI. ♦.k. . wUF09 •3 ♦ wos Rolling Hills ID.� ♦ID.xsee7 i _,,,��AS➢33� ♦� uns wus3a wawa urea '" M ` Nnow..n Y �•.. UNK3R y . �R S 11035 wwzs �3e w=3 -3 .Me .3 N ♦ wu�. OfYWl ISV3J IDN:06 w. wu%3� �_ t♦wu�,ID� �„ SV.NO3 ♦ ♦ � �-� F Pzs CITY OF!RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: FEBRUARY 29, 2016 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, March 1, 2016 City Council meeting: Item No. Description of Material 2 Email from Connie Semos Respectfully bmitted, Carla Morreale W:WGENDA\2016 Additions Revisions to agendas\20160301 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.doc From: Connie Semos <bconmast@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 1:23 PM To: CC Subject: Wireless Ordinance concerns Connie Semos 6512 Monero Drive Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 February 23, 2016 Dear Council Members, I'm certain you have good reasons for allowing the Public Works Department to administer the city's new wireless ordinance. You must know that other like cities with similar and larger populations have the ordinance administered by Community Development, Zoning and Planning. These issues are aesthetic, neighborhood compatibility and zoning. Historically, RPV residents have had their protests heard by our Planning Commissioners who are all residents of RPV, and over the years have included attorneys, business leaders, engineers, architects, school teachers and other professionals. The Planning Commissions meetings are televised. Public Works employs mostly engineers. None of their meetings are televised. As thorough as the new ordinance may be, there is a flaw which could result in a tumultuous division and uproar from residents. Now is your opportunity to correct it and make it simple. Because all these sites negatively effect residential property values and businesses attracting patrons, all protests should be subject to the same policy and procedure. Presently, it is confusing and convoluted. Residents should not require attorney services to protest these structures and decipher the ordinance. Thank you for your service and I hope you will seriously consider these issues. Connie Semos FYI the government document regarding RF emissions from wireless cell antennas and other such devices was written 15 years ago. Me