Loading...
20211116 Late CorrespondenceTO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK NOVEMBER 16, 2021 ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting. Item No. H K 2 5 7 Description of Material Email from Mickey Radich Email from Herb Stark Email exchange between Senior Planner Seeraty and David Turner Emails from Jerry & Kinuko Hashimoto; Mark Karmelich; Paul Funk; Walt Goede; Richard Ishibashi; Yvette D'Elia; and James Hevener Email from Del Cerro HOA Board ** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, November 15, 2021**. Respectfully submitted, ciuacJ~~ Teresa Takaoka L:ILATE CORRESPONDENCE\2021I2021 Coversheets\20211116 additions revisions to agenda.docx Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Teresa Takaoka Monday, November 15, 2021 3:59 PM CityClerk Subject: FW: 11/16/21 City Council Meeting: Item H, "Race to Zero Pledge I MG_0809.J PG Attachments: LC From: Mickey Radich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 3:45 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Fwd: 11/16/21 City Council Meeting: Item H, "Race to Zero Pledge Staff rushed to get this item on the Consent Calendar before the COP 26 Summit was even completed, assuming that the COP 26 Summit would be an overwhelming success, however that was not the case. The biggest carbon dioxide generator, China, did not even attend the Summit. Ahead of the Glasgow talks, the United Nations had set 3 criteria for success, none of which were achieved. The United Nations criteria were: 1. Pledge to cut carbon dioxide emissions in half by 2030. 2. Pledge to fund $100 billion in financial aid from rich nations to poor nations. 3. Ensure that half of that money went to helping the developing world adapt to the worst effects of climate change. At the conclusion of the COP26 Summit, it was reported that the United Nations agreed that the COP26 Summit was a failure because none of the 3 criteria for success was achieved. India would not agree to phase out their coal powered generating plants to cut their carbon dioxide emissions. Whatever efforts we must make to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions in half by 2030 pales in comparison to the carbon 1 dioxide emissions generated by the coal fired power plants operated by India and China. China is starting up a new coal fired power plant every week. If the 3 criteria were agreed to at the COP26 Summit, it would have meant that the United States would provide most, if not all, of the $100 billion to fund the project and we would have been the only large nation obligated to follow all of the regulations to reduce carbon dioxide in half by 2030, while China and India continue to increase their carbon dioxide emissions. In the end it would increase our national debt and our taxes would be raised to cover the expenses. Attached below you will find the article that appeared in the Daily Breeze on Nov. 14,2021. 2 Nations compromise• on (·()ctl lt, slri ) c:tgrt'(~r11c.~11l lly s~th Bornru,t•ein ,:mu f'ra.nk lordanlil (;.LASGOW. SCO'J'l..!\ND P :\j" niost :100 1WJHHt,.; i}n·1.:ptcd con1nH1rni~;.(• deal Sanir dav all.twd df ktrt:pJng a key )d~b.i, w,u rning t1~rgc1 Jllvc, lilll. )1 \'OfltaitH>(i ,, lasl:,.minHII' i:{1angc ttrn.t w.att·n'd dnwn entci:-;l language ahont coaJ. sc~v!~nd ('Ouui'rie~:, in~ duding s1naI1 Jt;Jand ~tHtes, •:aid thev 11·,·rc' deeply disap, pomtel by rhe l'hange pro- n101t:d bv I mlia '10 "phast• dmn1." r;tllwr !han ·'pha,C' out" coal po,ver .. tht sint;lc bit;gt•.st s011rc:e of gTeenl1011se t~'il;., en1issions. Jor-1r; !\erry, i.Jnilcd Statt•::\ Spocial r.:1 resrdnnt!<ll Envoy fo, C/inwte, c:t·~1Jtn1 !Jail.'~Ps dunnq St11ur(jay-s sroc~taking p!(~nlHJ' ses~;:on :n ttie ~!,N. C!un,.-ne :.)tu1dni1 11i C:d<1:·::.go1_>,.: .. . "Uurh·<1gllc, pl:Ull't 1~ h,rng• in/, by :1 ihreacl," Cnikd Nit- rion;; Secmt:ary-Cleneml .i\.n .. ,onio Cuti,rre11 said ill :1 sta.h•- ment. ·'W<' are ~tm lmueking nn Uie dnor of' dimatr-,'.at!ls- trr,phl"." hon flwxidt · cmissioin. ,,. h:Lif !r, 20:m ;/;JOtl h11linn in fina,, .. clai ,tid from 1·ieh natiuns lo 11oor. and ensuring rhm half oftllm rnoncywcn! lu llclping il1P1i!,veloi>ing wurldmlaptto : he worst dfect:; of climate di:1ngt). nurnd~ 1:hat ?l'f'd.kent1d the ·fi .. nal agn~e:nt>nt. "lmlia·, last-minute ch,mge to the language to pha,e down but not phase ont coal is quite shoc.Mng.'.' said Austrnlian clinuite soi:• entisl Bil! llare, vvho tnu:lril, workl emi!-sion pledges fut the $dmwc-based Climate Nation after nation bad complai tlf<i after two \llt'tik, of UN, climiu·.., tallrn i 11 GlasgCJw. Scotland, ,tbrnn how the <foal did not go far or fos1 enough. 8111 they 8ttid it was hett1•r than nothing and "'Nr difl not ad1iew• these goals at this conference/' r;utelTe,, ,mid, Action Tra<:ktff provided incH0 ment11l prog. f~'SS, if llO! ~UC(~c.s. In tlle end. the ,;u,nmH brnkl" gmund br singling out ('.(Jal. how,:wr wealcly, hy ,,ettim;tht-rules for intcrnn .. lional t.ra.ding·ofcm·h/Jll er,'tl· its, ;md by telling big pollm- crn to come b1td, rn::xt year witJ1 improved pledgeh for cuttiur. emissions, ''But we b11v(' 1;1)m(• !mild, i tl,I'; blocks for pmg ress:' Swiis envirnnm,m1 min- i~ter t,imonen.n Somnun,ug,1 said rhe change will nrakt' it harde1 to limit wanning tn ·2,7 di:11::ree!> foltr<•nhert s.inee pre-inclustriai timt::'8 .... the mon, string,mt threshold set ill tlw W15 PariH Agniernent. L1.S. elimaiJ> envoy John Keny said griVH'umt•nt,; had no choicl' but. ·10 arcept Jn .. rlia'~ coal lanm1age diange: ''lf W(" l1ad1ft done tliat \VP ,,ouldn.'t have llad an agnw- nwnt." fhii' dome~tic Prloritie:, both politieul awl (:wnornh: again k.t'pt n.iliow, from com- mitting-tr, the fa;;(, big ,:ut,; amt ~dentist., say are ll(~ded to keqi wanning below dm,- gtrou~ levt>I:; whiclJ wonkl pl'OdllU' extreme w,1gt·rie1· and rising 1>eas (:apal'lle of erasmY, smw• iHland nations. Ahead of the Glasgow ta.lks, th(• Unitccl Nations had set tbn:1· criteria :or ,;uc · Celis, and j)()jl(: of llE'lll WtJl1' achievt•d. The UN:s Cl'iteria included pledge!:' lo cut car But hp insisted tlw deal wac, go()d new;; for tlw world, "We are in fact d!lserthan we lu1v., ever been bet'or(' to 11,voJding dimate dlao~ and seeu ring deu.nlng air, ,afor water ,md ht-althier plarn~t'' lw ,;ild later at a. HPWN c011, fcreiwe. 'lfany othtr nations an,J climate camµaigncra cl'lti· <'ized lndia for making de- ''lndilt !lac long bl':en a blocker 011 climate action. but I haw Hlwei-seen it dune ~o puhlkly:· OUwrs apprnached the- deal from a inure positive per:,pectlve. ln addition to the revised coal langmtgt. the Glasgow . Climate Pact inc!nded f.'rtough fi.nanciul ince11tives ; to almost satisfy r,oorer na-·• tions and SI.lived a long-stall({-· mg prubll:m '": pave the Wa)i, '. 1or earb(,n tra.olnK, .. The ,tg1'!cment also s,•tyli _' lng carbon polluting nations h<lV<• \o come hack dlld sub-' nnt ot1u11genm r,k•dgtis by the Nt'JWtiator,, prest',vt•d, albeit overarching goal of Earths Wat'mim: b,, of tbt: cent,ury to.LS The planet has warmed 2 degrees heit co1np11rc1l to trial times. Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Subject: Herb Stark <pt17stearman@gmail.com> Tuesday, November 16, 2021 9:15 AM CityClerk; CC Item K of the Consent Calendar The name of Ladera Linda should be consistent with the names of the other city parks and in particular with Hesse Park. Therefore the name should be changed to Ladera Linda Neighborhood Park or 2nd choice to Ladera Linda Community Park. Herb Stark Rancho Palos Verdes 1 From: To: Subjact1 Data: Attachment:,: ~ ~ Re:GreenHi!l$requettforrooftopburials Friday,November 12, 202112:22:06PM ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Thank you. Sounds like the roof top burial area is covered under the Area 4 and 2 rules. I won't be able to attend the meeting next Tuesday as it is my turn to be the net controller for the weekly Palos Verdes Amateur Radio Club meeting. Dave Turner -•-Original Message•-- From: Amy Seeraty <AmyS@rpvca.gov> To: David Turner <davewturn@aol.com> Sent:Fri, Nov 12,202111:35 am Subject: RE: Green HiHs request for rooftop burials Also, there is a noise condition that applies to the entire cemetery, but GH has also specific music conditions for several areas of the site, which include Areas 4 and 2. Thank you. Amy Seeraty Senior Planner amvs@rovca.gov Phone• (310) 544-5231 (ify Ho/! i:, ()pen tn /he public r.tur!Jla /'I.\Wlru l)u.w:.:·s~ h1)urs. ro h,~lv pr(•w-nl /he spre(ld tJ{COVI{) 19, v1~ilon ore requil'('d to 11,eor foe,, Ulvt•rina~ ond od/lere rn ph1,'s1(oi d1stanun9 aotdeiine, 5,;rnc ,:mp/c,vN!:i tJfl' \',·orkinq on rviotion oml mav LJ,_, wo1hniJ n .. ~moteiy, If vou need t,) i'tsli C:i}' f!a/!, pie.a:.;t~ :;d1edule on 1Jppo1ntmen1 in advome by co/iinq the opp1opnt1m depurlmc,nt ond j(,ilO\'.• oi'! p(>sieJ dirP1 lions cltJring vour v;::it. Wn/k-11p5 are !im,ted lo one Jk:1sim ot a tlfne. Pl,::ose nott' that out response t,) y,)ur inqwry could ht,' ddui/1.:d. /--oro i!st ,_1J dr:portment phone 111.mibt?rs, v1$;'t tf11:--:.J1IJ.JL ....11..ili:..r{:,n the f.'iiy ~i,ehsi!f'. From: David Turner <davewturn@aol.com> Sent: Friday, November 12, 202111:25 AM To: Amy Seeraty <AmyS@rpvca.gov> Subject: Re: Green Hills request for roof top burials Hi Amy, Sorry I did not get back to you right away. I think the noise restrictions on music and other activities apply to the entire cemetery, but just in case they apply only to localized areas, I am requesting that the Inspiration Slope Mausoleum be an area where music is not permitted. Dave ~~--Original Message--- From: Amy Seeraty <AmvS@mvca qov> To: 'David Turner' <davewtum@aol com>· vreher@cox net <vreher@cox net> Cc: Ken Rukavina <krukavioa@rovca gov>; Octavio Silva <Oc1avioS@rovca gov> Sent: Fri, Nov 5, 2021 4:24 pm Subject: RE: Green Hills request for roof top burials Also, one question regarding lhe noise. I know there are several conditions regarding noise in the attached CUP Resolution. Can you clarify a bit further whal you mean by "Mil'>e free 2one"? Thank you Amy Seeraty Senior Planner amvs@rpvrn gov Phone -(310) 544-5231 City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Websltei www rnvra gov Clry Uafi 1s open to the public c1ur1nq regular business 1ioi11s To help prevent tl1a spr&.ad of COV/0-W. visitors are required to wec;r face covt:mngs and adhere to phyJicaf distancing guidelines. Some employees m<~ wo1k1n9 on ro/;➔tion and may f)e wo1krn9 remota/y ff y<l11 need to visit City ha//, please .schectufe ,1n appomtmHnf in advance by c!lflmg the ;;ppr<)prhtta (iepartment and follow ;3./f posted direr;t1ons during your vmil. W$1IH;ps Hre f:rrulf,d lo 011e pi➔rson al IJ lime. Pfr:ase note llwl our respon,.:;e to yo11r inqu,ry could bH delayed. For a /1st or (/ep,utment phonf! numbers, v1s1l tne Sfaff Dtrectory on tf:e City Wfrbsite From: David Turner <davewturn@aol com> Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 3:20 PM To: Amy Seeraty <ArovS@rnvca c.mv>· vreher@cox: net Subject: Green Hills request for roof top burials Hi Amy, I live on Peninsula Verde Drive, next to the cemetery wall. Here is my input on Green Hill's request for permission to start roof.top burials. I don't object to the idea provided that: I) the rooftop is in a noise free zone, 2) that Green Hills maintain the same type of patrol activity as they do between the access road and our wall with the same rules they have posted for the lower area regarding noise, alcohol, drugs, sports, easy~ups, barbecues, etc. I reiterate my long held belief that the Inspiration Slope roof~top is a high platform that overlooks our neighborhood, and it is like a bandstand. Sounds emanating from there can easily be heard over in our neighborhood, and can impact the entire neighborhood, not just those ofus living along the wall. It is essential that consistent noise abatement procedures be implemented there. The track record of the handling of Inspiration Slope burials will be a big factor in determining whether a second mausoleum should be built in the same area. Thank you. Dave Turner Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: jhashimoto3@cox.net Tuesday, November 16, 2021 6:31 AM John Cruikshank; Eric Alegria; Barbara Ferraro; David Bradley; Ken Dyda CC; CityClerk Ladera Linda Park and Community Center Project Dear Members of the City Council, We want to thank the city planning staff, planning commission and city council for their efforts to make improvements to the Ladera Linda Park and the creation of a new Community Center. We continue to support this project. Much time, effort and city funds have already been spent since 2014 in carefully holding community workshops, obtaining community input, analyzing building size, site amenities, and addressing security and safety issues. We support the Finance Advisory Committee recommendation for the City to borrow a portion of the total cost, especially with the low interest rates currently available. The concerns of the nearby Ladera Linda and Seaview neighborhoods are real. We feel that the current design has addressed their concerns as long as the City enforces the building use, traffic and parking regulations to assure the safety and security of the nearby residents. Having an asset such as this available to residents on the east side of the city will greatly enhance our ability to participate in city sponsored activities such as exercise, art and other classes. Please approve the design and the advancement to the next phase so that this project can be finally completed, used and enjoyed. Thank you, Jerry and Kinuko Hashimoto Members of the Mediterrania HOA 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dear Council Members, Mark Karmelich <MKarmelich@pobox.com> Monday, November 15, 2021 10:18 PM cc CityClerk; Barbara Ferraro; David Bradley; Ken Dyda; John Cruikshank; Eric Alegria Support for borrowing part of cost of Ladera Linda Community Center & Park Project I would like to add my voice to my many neighbors who support borrowing some of the money needed for the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project, as recommended by the Finance Advisory Committee. We've been waiting for this project for a long time, and are excited to see it coming together. But we just can't delay it any further, and given how low the interest rates are it makes great sense to borrow now. My family and I love the current design, and are excited to have something like this for local use and enjoyment. I've heard and understand the concerns of Ladera Linda neighbors, but I really feel the designers have struck a great balance to between our community needs and the concerns of those living nearby, including parking enforcement and limiting use to ensure safety and security. Let's get this project going! Responsible borrowing is a great way to make it happen. Thanks! Mark Karmelich Rancho Palos Verdes 310-420-6549 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hello, City Council: Paul Funk <pfunky@dslextreme.com> Monday, November 15, 2021 9:44 PM cc CityClerk Support for the Ladera Linda Community Center project I want to express my support the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project. The Project has been in the works for many years and should not be delayed further. I support the recommendation of the Finance Advisory Committee for the City to borrow a portion of the total cost. While I am not a big fan of debt financing for City expenditures, given the ultra-low interest rates that are available financing up to 1/3 of the total makes sense and does not set a bad precedent for the future. I feel the current design strikes the right balance between the needs of the Community and the concerns of the neighbors, but the City must enforce parking and use restrictions and ensure the safety and security of the nearby residents. PAUL FUNK PAUL FUNK 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dear Council Members Walt Goede <waltgoede@cox.net> Monday, November 15, 2021 9:17 PM CC; David Bradley; Ken Dyda; John Cruikshank; Eric Alegria; Barbara Ferraro CityClerk Ladera Linda I am glad to see the Ladera Linda project is finally close to full implementation. I have attended almost all the meetings for the past several years and have been disappointed that members in the immediate vicinity of this project have worked so hard to defeat or reduce in scope this important project. Similar negative efforts have occurred every time they have tried to make improvements at Marymount University (I live across from this school). People seem to want to move into an area and then stop everyone else from enjoying the facilities. I am sure they would like to gate the whole community to keep everyone out if they could. My kids and grandkids as well as my wife and I have been going to and using the Ladera Linda facilities since we moved to this area in 1976. It essential that this facility gets the upgrades it deserves to enable our community to benefit from the new facility. In summary 1. I strongly support that this the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project be approved and implemented ASAP 2. I have heard and understand the concerns of those in the immediate area and believe the compromises and changes to the plans already made are sufficient. I do not support any further changes to the plans to accommodate the naysayers in our community who challenge and fight every planned project. You can't please everyone and there have been too many delays and concessions already. 3. I understand that there are some recommendations from the Finance Community to borrow a portion of total cost. From what I have seen these seem reasonable. Walt Goede Hawksmoor Drive waltgoede@cox.net 310-344-9100 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Richard Ishibashi <rtishibashi888@gmail.com> Monday, November 15, 2021 6:27 PM cc CityClerk Support for Ladera Linda CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Honorable City Council Members, I support the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park project. I also support the city's contemplated loan for the project under what appears to be favorable terms. While I understand the expressed sentiments of the project's surrounding community, the project size and scope appear to be no more intrusive than previous/existing facilities, which have served the community well. Also, I'm confident in the city's diligence to ensure security and safety for the area. Richard Ishibashi Resident, Rancho Palos Verdes rtishibashi888@gmail.com 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Yvette D'Elia <ygdelia@gmail.com> Tuesday, November 16, 2021 9:09 AM cc CityClerk; David Bradley; Ken Dyda; John Cruikshank; Eric Alegria; Barbara Ferraro Ladera Linda I'm writing in continued support of the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project. Let's not delay, let's move forward! I support the recommendation for the City to borrow a portion of the total cost. I support the legitimate concerns of the adjacent neighbors in Ladera Linda and Seaview. Concerns that the center will become a regional destination is over-reaching and unfounded. We need a center for the community if we want families to thrive and grow in Rancho Palos Verdes. Enrollment at the schools is down, the population is aging. We need more families to be attracted to our community. This is key. Thank you, Yvette D'Elia 1 6. Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Teresa Takaoka Tuesday, November 16, 2021 10:04 AM CityClerk Subject: FW: Final Approval Of Borrowing for Ladera Linda From: James Hevener <jhevener@cox.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 202110:03 AM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Cc: Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; David Bradley <david.bradley@rpvca.gov>; Barbara Ferraro <barbara.ferraro@rpvca.gov>; John Cruikshank <John.Cruikshank@rpvca.gov>; Eric Alegria <Eric.Alegria@rpvca.gov> Subject: Final Approval Of Borrowing for Ladera Linda Dear Mayor, Mayor Pro Tern, and Members of Council: I am writing this e-mail in support of the recommendation of the Financial Advisory Commission ("FAC") to finance up to $6 Million for the for the funding of the Ladera Linda Community Center and Park Project already approved by Council). 1. Doing nothing is not an option. The City has been on notice for years that the current facility is both an attractive nuisance and a health and safety hazard. It is time to move forward. 2. Waiting longer will only result in the City spending more money on the construction. This process started in 2011 and construction costs have increased tremendously during the past ten years (probably double). There is no indication that construction costs are going anywhere but higher in the next few years. There also is no doubt that going back to the drawing board and trying to come up with yet another new design would add hundreds of thousands of more dollars to the process. 3. Historically low interests rates provide an additional incentive to finance part of the cost. While I am not a big fan of debt financing, and personally feel that the City has sufficient funds available in its CIP Reserve to pay for the entire Project, interest rates are so low the City can hold back half of its CIP reserve for other City priorities (such as the Portuguese Bend Landslide mitigation project and Western Ave beautification) and amortize the rest over time. This opportunity will not be available when interest rates go up (which is inevitable). Financing only 1/3 of the total shows fiscal prudence and can be a good precedent for future projects. 1 5. 4. No plan is perfect, but don't forget the many compromises. I understand that a significant number of adjacent residents would still like a building that is smaller and have a different design aesthetic. Differences of option are inevitable for any significant public project but should not overshadow the benefits. Sadly, some appear to have forgotten the many compromises along the way. The building is less than half the size of the initial feasibility study. Proposals such as a skate park, gymnasium, public pool and even a tennis court (supported by significant numbers of residents) all were rejected to ensure that the Park remained a Community Park and not a Civic Center. The building was relocated away from the Southern-edge of the property (away from Seaview), all active components were moved to the far corner of the Park, and the size of the basketball courts and black top were cut in half, all to minimize the impact on the adjacent neighbors. The dedicated Discovery Room was converted to a hybrid room with less than half the total square footage and storage. More recently, significant changes were made to the lighting and security plans to minimize the impact while not sacrificing safety. And, the City not only earlier red striped large portions of Forrestal but more recently agreed to permit parking in the entire Ladera Linda neighborhood. 5. The City Needs to Vigorously Enforce Hours of Operation and Use Restrictions, and Address Parking and Other Issues Related to the Preserve. a. Nearby residents in Ladera Linda and Seaview have legitimate concerns, but it is important to separate out legitimate concerns from exaggerations. Keep in mind that the current exterior footprint of the group of building at Ladera Linda is over 50,000 square feet, while the new exterior footprint will be approximately 13,000 square feet with a building of only 7,000 square feet. I'm not a fan of mini-mansions, but this is a public Community Center which is no bigger than any number of the larger single family homes being built in the area. It is not a tourist welcome center, it does not have an amphitheater or a museum, and it is not a Taj Mahal. As former Councilwoman Susan Brooks said in 2019 and again this past summer when the Council approved the financing approach, this Project is entirely consistent with the "less is more" approach to development which guides our City. b. The City absolutely needs to address traffic, parking, trash and security for all entrances to the Preserve in a comprehensive City-wide manner. Enforcement is always difficult, but must be a priority. Moving the Del Cerro issues to Ladera Linda is not the solution. These issues are separate from this Project, though, and do not justify further delay. c. The Council should approve the current recommendations on a unanimous basis. Members of the Council have had different opinions on the Ladera Linda project, just like members of the public. But the project was approved twice, and the basic funding proposal was approved in May. Just as with the security and lighting plans, the Council should now speak with one voice. In my view, delays by Staff and a lack of unanimity earlier in the process encouraged infighting in the community and personal attacks. I have 2 a thick skin, but it has been disheartening to see multiple personal attacks on social media directed at me and others in my neighborhood. While our HOA representatives (including me) have advocated for the Project, we have always supported compromise and always have supported efforts to mitigate traffic and parking concerns, including the recent changes to the security and lighting plans, as well as the permit-parking. There are many issues such as the Housing Element where we need to work together and I for one am ready to do so. So, please, let's move forward! Thank you for your consideration of my comments. Jim Hevener 3 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Subject: LC Teresa Takaoka Tuesday, November 16, 2021 8:50 AM CityClerk FW: November 16, 2021, City Council Meeting Agenda Item #7: Installing Security Cameras at Popular Trailheads and Parking Lots From: Del Cerro HOA <De1Cerro_H0A@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 6:43 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: November 16, 2021, City Council Meeting Agenda Item #7: Installing Security Cameras at Popular Trail heads and Parking Lots Honorable Mayor and City Council Members, Del Cerro HOA supports installing security cameras at the Burma Rd. and Rattlesnake Trail gates -both as a means of identifying perpetrators of criminal activity that causes damage to the gates and surrounding areas and especially as a deterrent to such activities. The gate at Burma Rd. has been inoperable since early July when it was heavily damaged only 8 months after installation and, as a result, preserve visitors are again regularly entering the preserve during hours it is closed -well after dark and as early as 5 am. A security camera system could act as a deterrent to future vandalism as well as help to identify and hold accountable those who cause damage. As you are aware, a secure gate is of paramount importance to the safety and peaceful quality of life of the residents whose properties abut Burma Rd. In addition, if the Rattlesnake Trail gate is placed farther down the trail than originally anticipated, it will likely be out of sight from Crenshaw and may become a target for vandalism -particularly if the Burma Rd. gate area is secured by a camera, potentially motivating would-be vandals to find a more remote location to cause harm. Finally, we support a camera system on Crenshaw to discourage criminals from breaking into vehicles parked along the street. Numerous cars on Crenshaw were broken into earlier this year; however, vehicle burglaries diminished substantially when the parking system was implemented, and parking ambassadors/park rangers were stationed on Crenshaw on a full-time basis to educate visitors of the new parking rules. Unless this area is continuously patrolled, these cars become easy targets that will draw criminal elements into the area. In addition, it is not hard to imagine that those crimes might extend into surrounding neighborhoods - particularly homes that are adjacent to Crenshaw Blvd. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, The Del Cerro HOA Board 1 Kathy and Al Edgerton Miriam and Pete Varend Dion Hatch Megan and Bob Moore Gregory MacDonald Mark Kernen 2 CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: FROM: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2021 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, November 16, 2021 City Council meeting: Item No. Description of Material Public Comment Email from: Lynsey White (Humane Society) H Additional Information Email from: Mickey Radich 5 Emails from: Pam Allen; Nina Smith; and Mark & Barbara Scherba 6 Email from: Randy Harwood Respectfully submitted, L:\LA TE CORRESPONDENCE\2021 \2021 Coversheets\20211115 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.docx Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Lynsey White <lwhite@humanesociety.org> Monday, November 15, 2021 7:44 AM Eric Alegria; David Bradley; John Cruikshank; Ken Dyda; Barbara Ferraro; CityManager Ara Mihranian; CityClerk Effective solutions for coyote conflicts in Ranchos Palos Verdes HSUS Coyote Mgt Plan 2020.pdf Dear Mayor Alegria and Councilmembers, After having worked with the City of Ranchos Palos Verdes several years ago to develop a humane and effective coyote management plan for the city, we were very disappointed to hear that the city is now planning to trap and kill coyotes. We urge you to cancel this planned killing of coyotes and to use humane solutions for solving conflicts with coyotes instead. Coyote killing programs are neither effective for reducing coyote populations, nor for solving conflicts. Research has shown that coyote killing programs (including trapping, hunting, and bounty programs) often result in an increase in coyote populations, due to the social and breeding nature of coyotes. (Coyotes that are not killed have access to more resources, resulting in earlier breeding ages, larger litters of pups, and increased survival of pups -resulting in a reproduction boom in the population and allowing coyote populations to rebound quickly from lethal programs.) Additionally, any vacant territories left by killed coyotes will quickly be filled by transient coyotes looking for a new home range. Coyote removal programs have been used for 100s of years (our USDA Wildlife Services program kills more than 80,000 coyotes a year), yet coyote populations in the U.S. have only continued to grow and expand in territory. (Please see out attached "Coyote Control" fact sheet for more information about this.) More importantly, coyote killing programs do not solve the root causes of conflicts among coyotes, pets, and people. Human-coyote conflicts are not a factor of the size of coyote populations, but rather a result of a few problem coyotes. Trapping and hunting programs are generally very unsuccessful for selectively removing problem coyotes. Furthermore, any removed coyotes will be replaced by new coyotes, who may be very likely to become problem coyotes in the same conditions. Coyotes become problem coyotes for one reason: easy sources of food in urban/suburban areas with no negative consequences. Pet food left outside, the intentional feeding of coyotes by people, unsecured garbage, and free-roaming small pets can entice coyotes to come into neighborhoods and even approach people and pets. If these attractants are not removed and coyotes are not made to feel uncomfortable in the presence of people, problems will persist. The most effective way to solve problems with coyotes is to address the root causes of conflicts. This includes removing food attractants (such as pet food outside, unsecured garbage, fallen fruit, etc.), keeping pets inside and/or on leashes, and hazing away any coyotes that have lost their fear of people. Hazing involves scaring coyotes away by yelling and waving your arms, using noisemakers such as whistles and air horns, or throwing objects such as tennis balls at the coyote. These actions reinstill the natural fear of humans back into habituated coyotes, and teaches coyotes to avoid people and neighborhoods. Hazing works to change the behavior of resident coyote populations and prevents future problems from occurring. The HSUS would be happy to once again work with the City of Ranchos Palos Verdes to design a coyote program that effectively solves the coyote problems in your community for the long-term. Please see our attached template management plan for more information about our recommendations for effectively addressing conflicts and concerns with coyotes in your community. 1 Thank you and please let me know how The HSUS can best be of assistance. Sincerely, Lynsey White Director, Humane Wildlife Conflict Resolution Pronouns: she/her lwhite@humanesociety.org h uma nesociety. org Fight for all animals. The Humane Society of the United States is the nation's most effective animal protection organization, fighting for all animals for more than 60 years. To support our work, please make a mo-□thJy_do-□atJon, give in i:i_OOtbeLW_iaY or 'LOl!JDteer. 2 CONTENTS CONTENTS .............................................................................................................................................. 1 HOW TO USE THIS TEMPLATE COYOTE MANAGEMENT PLAN .................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION AND GOALS ............................................................................................................... 4 THE COYOTE .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Ecological importance ................................................................................................................................ 5 General biology, reproduction and behavior ........................................................................................ 6 COYOTE ATTRACTANTS IN URBAN AREAS ....................................................................................... 7 COYOTE COEXISTENCE STRATEGIES AND TECHNIQUES .............................................................. 9 Monitoring and collecting data ................................................................................................................. 9 Human-coyote conflict definitions .......................................................................................................... 9 Education and outreach ........................................................................................................................... 10 Hazing: an intervention technique ......................................................................................................... 10 Lethal control ............................................................................................................................................. 11 Local ordinances ........................................................................................................................................ 12 HUMAN-COYOTE CONFLICT CLASSIFICATION AND RECOMMENDED RESPONSES ............... 13 APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 15 Coyote incident report form ................................................................................................................... 15 Definitions: .................................................................................................................................................. 16 Guidelines for implementing a community-based hazing program ............................................... 17 Creating a volunteer hazing team .......................................................................................................... 17 Coyote hazing tips for success ............................................................................................................... 17 Coyote yard audit checklist ..................................................................................................................... 19 Example coyote resolution ...................................................................................................................... 20 How to use this template coyote management plan This coyote management and coexistence plan has been prepared by the Humane Society of the United States for use by communities (including, but not limited to, cities, villages, towns, counties, homeowners associations, etc.) in humanely and effectively preventing and solving conflicts among coyotes, people and companion animals. The information in this plan has been gathered from scientific and peer-reviewed articles, from experts in the field of human-coyote conflict resolution, and from successful coyote management plans across the U.S. We invite you to use this plan as your own or modify it as necessary to suit the needs of your community. Acknowledgements The HSUS would like to specially thank Paula-Marie Lewis, a Ph.D. student at Griffith University, Australia, for her work in the creation of this management plan. We would also like to acknowledge the following coyote management plans, which helped to influence the ideas and guidelines presented in this plan: ■ City and County of Broomfield (CO) Coexistence with Wildlife Policy ■ ■ ■ City of Calabasas (CA) Coyote Management Plan City of Centennial (CO) Coyote Management Plan City of Davis (CA) Coyote Management and Coexistence Plan ■ City and County of Denver (CO) Coyote Management Plan ■ Portland (OR)-Vancouver (BC) Model Coyote Management Policy ■ Village of Riverside (IL) Coyote Home Audit Checklist ■ City of Wheaton (IL) Coyote Policy Solving Problems with Coyotes 3 Introduction and goals The goal of this template coyote management and coexistence plan is to provide a program for reducing human-coyote conflicts while prioritizing human safety. The suggested actions outlined in this plan are designed to increase citizens' knowledge and understanding of how coyotes behave and make clear how such behavior can be managed to reduce or eliminate conflicts with coyotes. This coyote management and coexistence plan is based on scientific research, a thorough understanding of coyote ecology and biology in urban settings, and the best known management practices and management tools. This plan is guided by the following basic principles: 1. Human safety is a priority in managing human- coyote interactions. 4 Solving Problems with Coyotes 2. Coyotes serve an important role in ecosystems by helping to control the population of rodents, Canada geese, rabbits and other urban mammals. 3. Preventive practices such as reduction and removal of food attractants, habitat modification and responding appropriately when interacting with wildlife are key to minimizing potential interactions with coyotes. 4. Solutions for coyote conflicts must address both problematic coyote behaviors (such as aggression toward people and attacks on pets) and the problematic human behaviors (intentionally or unintentionally feeding coyotes and letting pets outside unattended) that contribute to conflicts. 5. Non-selective coyote removal programs are ineffective for reducing coyote population sizes or preventing human-coyote conflicts. 6. A community-wide program that involves residents is necessary for achieving coexistence among people, coyotes and pets. The coyote Due to their intelligence and adaptability-in addition to extensive urbanization and the subsequent decline of larger predators-coyotes have successfully expanded their range across North America. Coyotes are now found in all states in the U.S. except Hawaii and have become well established in nearly every ecosystem. They live in deserts, swamps, tundra and grasslands, brush, dense forests, cities and suburbs. People can live among coyotes yet never see them. Often it's only an evening chorus or group howling and yipping that alerts us to the presence of this wild can id in our neighborhoods. It is important to keep in mind that coyotes have been interacting with and adapting to people for at least the last 100 years. Coyotes are curious, smart and adaptable creatures and our urban areas provide the perfect balance of food, shelter and water for them. What you may not know is that even in fragmented and urbanized landscapes, coyotes can play an integral role in their environment by providing ecosystem services and helping to maintain species diversity. Coyotes in urban areas not only provide free rodent control by feeding on mice and rats, but also help to regulate the population size of other species that may cause conflicts with people in urban areas (such as voles, wild turkeys, white-tailed deer and Canada geese). Solving Problems with Coyotes 5 Appearance and signs: Most coyotes weigh approximately 25-35 pounds, although their long legs and thick fur make them appear larger. Coyote fur varies in color from gray-brown to yellow-gray. They have a black-tipped tail which helps to distinguish them from other can ids such as foxes. Coyotes also have yellow/amber eyes (which help to distinguish them from domestic dogs), large ears and narrow, pointed muzzles (which help to distinguish them from wolves). Since coyotes are naturally very skittish and afraid of humans, they are rarely seen. Thus, their signs (including prints, scat and vocalizations) may be a better indicator of their presence. Coyote prints are similar to those of a domestic dog's, but are usually observed in a straight line (as opposed to the meandering path of domestic dog tracks). More commonly, coyote howling or other vocalizations may be heard. Coyotes produce a variety of sounds (including howls, barks, whines and yips) to communicate with one another and defend their territory. Small groups of two or three coyotes can distort their voices and sound like a group of 20. Coyotes also use scat (feces) to communicate by depositing it in the middle of a trail or on the edge of their territory. Coyote scat is similar to dog scat in size and appearance, but unlike dog scat, it is rope-like and typically filled with hairs, seeds and bones. Diet: Coyotes are opportunistic omnivores with great flexibility in their diet. They generally hunt small mammals such as mice, rats, voles, rabbits and prairie dogs, but will also eat fruit and berries and will even scavenge road-killed animals. In urban areas, coyotes are also known to eat pet food, unsecured garbage and compost. They may also prey on unattended domestic pets such as cats and small dogs if given the opportunity. This does not indicate a danger to humans, but is rather a natural coyote behavior. This behavior can be prevented by reducing human-associated food attractants in urban areas and not letting pets outside unattended (unless protected by a coyote-proof enclosure or fence). 6 Solving Problems with Coyotes Social structure: Most coyotes (called resident coyotes) live in family groups with one breeding pair and three to four other related individuals. Coyotes do not hunt in packs, but work together to defend their territory from other coyote family groups. Other coyotes (called transient coyotes) live alone or as an isolated mated pair. Coyotes mate once per year during their breeding season (which occurs from January through March). During the pup season (April through August), the breeding pair will give birth to pups (typically in April or May). Litter size depends on available resources and the number of coyotes in the area. The average litter size is four to seven pups. Coyotes will place their pups in a den for the first 6 weeks, after which the pups will learn to hunt with their parents. Coyote dens are found in steep banks, rock crevices and underbrush, as well as in open areas. During dispersal season (September through December), the pups from the previous year (yearlings) will leave the family group and become transient coyotes in search of a new home range. Habitat: Coyotes are naturally diurnal (most active at dawn and dusk), but often shift to more nocturnal activity in urban and suburban areas in an effort to avoid people. Coyotes prefer open space and natural preserve areas over human-dominated landscapes, but are extremely adept at living in proximity to people. Coyotes thrive in these areas because food, water and shelter are abundant. Home range sizes vary for each individual coyote. Research has shown that home range sizes for resident coyotes average 2-5 square miles, while transient coyotes have larger home ranges (averaging 10 square miles). Home range size can be an important indicator of resource distribution and abundance and also may correlate with population density. Coyote attractants in urban areas Coyotes are drawn to urban and suburban areas for the following reasons: 1. Food. Urban areas provide a bounty of natural food choices for coyotes, who primarily eat rodents such as mice and rats. However, coyotes can be further attracted into suburban neighborhoods by human- associated food such as pet food, unsecured compost or trash, and fallen fruit in yards. Intentional and unintentional feeding can lead coyotes to associate humans with sources of food, which can result in negative interactions among coyotes, people and pets. To reduce food attractants in urban and suburban areas: ■ ■ Never hand-feed or otherwise deliberately feed a coyote. Avoid feeding pets outside. Remove sources of pet food and water. If feeding pets outside is necessary, remove the bowl and any leftover food promptly. ■ Never compost any meat or dairy (unless the compost is fully secured). ■ Maintain good housekeeping, such as regularly raking areas around bird feeders, to help discourage coyote activity near residences. ■ Remove fallen fruit from the ground. ■ Keep trash in high-quality containers with tight- fitting lids. Only place the cans curbside the morning of collection. If you leave trash cans out overnight, they are more likely to be tipped over and broken into. ■ Bag especially attractive food wastes such as meat scraps or leftover pet food. If it is several days before garbage will be picked up, freeze the food temporarily or take it to a dumpster or other secure storage container. 2. Water. Urban areas provide a year-round supply of water in the form of storm water impoundments and channels, artificial lakes, irrigation, pet water dishes, etc., which support both coyotes and their prey. ■ In dry conditions, water can be as alluring as food, so remove water bowls set outside for pets and make watering cans unavailable. 3. Access to shelter. Parks, greenbelts, open spaces, golf courses, buildings, sheds, decks and crawl spaces, etc., increase the amount and variability of cover for coyotes. They allow coyotes to safely and easily remain close to people, pets, homes and businesses without detection. ■ In the spring, when coyotes give birth and begin to raise young, they concentrate their activities around dens or burrows in which their young are sheltered. Coyotes may take advantage of available spaces under sheds or decks for use as a den, bringing them into close contact with people and pets. 4. Unattended pets. Pets are a normal part of an urban landscape. Within their territory, coyotes may consider pets as potential prey or potential competitors. Free-roaming pets, especially cats and sometimes small dogs, may attract coyotes into neighborhoods. The best way to minimize risk to pets is to not leave them outside unattended. ■ ■ Cats. Coyotes primarily eat small mammals such as mice and rats, but will also prey on slightly larger mammals such as rabbits and groundhogs. Approximately the same size as a groundhog or rabbit, free-roaming outdoor cats may also be seen as eligible prey items by coyotes. It is important to note that attacks on cats are normal coyote behavior and do not indicate a danger for people. The only way to protect cats from coyotes (and the other dangers of outdoor life such as cars, disease, dogs and other wildlife) is to keep cats indoors (or only let them outside in a secure enclosure or when accompanied by a person and under the control of a leash and harness). Feral cats. People who feed feral cats are often concerned that coyotes might prey on the cats. These concerns are well founded, as coyotes will be attracted to both the outdoor pet food and the cats themselves as prey. Although there is no sure way to protect feral cats from coyotes, the following tips can be helpful: ■ Feed cats only during the day and at a set time-and pick up any leftovers immediately. Solving Problems with Coyotes 7 • Provide escape routes for cats. • Haze coyotes seen on the property (see Appendix B). Making them feel uncomfortable will encourage them to stay out of the area. • Dogs are also vulnerable to coyote confrontations. These incidents generally involve coyotes who are accustomed or habituated to people (usually due to wildlife feeding) or coyotes who are protecting their territory and pups (usually during breeding season). • Small, unattended dogs may be seen as potential prey for coyotes. It is important to either keep dogs on a leash 6 feet long or shorter when outdoors or to stay within 6 feet of them when outside. (Coyotes may view a dog on a leash longer than 6 feet as an unattended pet.) Attacks on unattended small dogs are normal coyote behavior and do not indicate a danger for people. • Although attacks on larger dogs are rare, coyotes will sometimes go after a large dog when they feel that their territory is threatened. This generally occurs during the coyote breeding season, which takes place from January through March. During this time, it is especially important not to let dogs outside unattended and to keep them on leashes (6 feet long or shorter) when in public areas. 8 Solving Problems with Coyotes • Fences can be used to keep coyotes out of residential yards, but they must be "coyote- proof." Coyote-proof fences are at least eight feet tall and made of a material that coyotes cannot climb or at least 6 feet tall with a protective device on top such as a "coyote roller (coyoteroller.com) that rolls off any coyotes (and dogs) that try to scramble over the fence. To prevent coyotes from digging under a fence, it should extend underground at least twelve inches or include an L-shaped mesh apron that extends outward at least 18 inches and is secured with landscape staples. ■ Other domestic animals kept outside, such as chickens and rabbits, may also be viewed as prey by coyotes. Protect poultry or other outdoor animals from coyotes (and other predators) with protective fencing (both structural and electric), by ensuring that they are confined in sturdy cages or pens each evening and by using livestock-guarding animals where possible. Coyote coexistence strategies and techniques MONITORING AND COLLECTING DATA Monitoring and data collection are critical components of an effective coyote management plan. This is best accomplished with input from both residents and city officials using a coyote hotline and/or an online reporting form. The purpose of monitoring human-coyote interactions is to document where coyotes are frequently seen, to count how many coyotes are within an area and to identify human-coyote conflict hotspots. Gathering specific data on incidents will allow for targeting of educational campaigns and conflict mitigation efforts, as well as the ability to measure success in reducing conflicts over time. A standard Coyote Incident Form (Appendix A) should be made available to residents and employees to allow for consistent reporting of coyote incidents. Contact information-including the date, time, name, address and phone number of the individuals submitting the report-should be included, as well as specific information about the incident. HUMAN-COYOTE CONFLICT DEFINITIONS The following definitions will be used for the process of categorizing human-coyote conflicts: Coexistence: Humans and coyotes exist together. Humans take an active role in helping coyotes in their community stay wild by removing attractants, taking responsibility for pet safety, hazing coyotes in their neighborhood and learning about coyote ecology and behavior. Observation: The act of noticing signs of a coyote(s), such as tracks, scat or vocalizations, but without visual observation of the coyote(s). Sighting: A visual observation of a coyote(s). A sighting may occur at any time of the day or night. Encounter: A direct meeting that is between human and coyote(s) with no physical contact and that is without incident. Incident: A conflict between a human and a coyote where the coyote exhibits any of the following behaviors: growling, baring teeth, lunging or making physical contact with the person. A human is not bitten. Human attack: A human is bitten by a coyote(s). Provoked· An attack where the involved human encourages the coyote to engage. Examples include a human hand-feeding a coyote, approaching a coyote with pups or intervening in a coyote attack on a pet. Unprovoked· An attack where the involved human does not encourage the coyote to engage. The following definitions will also be used for the process of categorizing conflicts among coyotes, pets and livestock. Pet attack: Coyote(s) kills or injures a domestic pet. Attended· Pet is on a leash less than 6 feet in length or is in the presence of a person less than 6 feet away. Unattended·Pet is free-roaming, walking off-leash more than 6 feet from a person, or on a leash longer than 6 feet. Livestock loss/depredation: Coyote(s) kills or injures livestock. Solving Problems with Coyotes 9 EDUCATION AND OUTREACH A critical element of a successful coyote management plan is the education and awareness of residents. Education is the key to having residents make appropriate decisions regarding their safety and managing their property and pets. This involves decreasing food attractants, taking precautions with pets and creating tolerance of normal coyote behavior. An educational campaign should focus on how residents can coexist with coyotes successfully. Educational outreach opportunities include: 1. Educational materials. These can include brochures, informational postcards mailed or hand- delivered to specific neighborhoods with a high number of coyote sightings and interactions, detailed information and appropriate links made available on local websites, e-newsletters, development of various public service announcements to run on public access channels, or coyote signage posted in appropriate parks and open spaces. 2. Trainings. Incorporate coyote education in schools and make educational seminars and trainings available to the public. 3. An outreach and education team. Composed of trained community volunteers (Appendix B), a team can help with community outreach by tabling at community events, presenting in classrooms and/or following up directly with individuals and neighborhoods who may have concerns. HAZING: AN INTERVENTION TECHNIQUE Generally, coyotes are reclusive animals who avoid human contact. Coyotes in urban and suburban environments, however, may learn that neighborhoods provide easy sources of human-associated food while presenting few real threats. These coyotes, having lost their fear of humans, may visit yards and public areas even when people are present and may cause conflicts with people and pets. Humans have contributed to this habituation of coyotes by not reacting when they see a coyote. We have a tendency to either ignore them due to fear or to be enamored by them because they are wild and it is "cool" to see one. To coexist safely, it's important to modify this behavior and attitude in resident coyote populations. 1 O Solving Problems with Coyotes The best solution for addressing problematic coyote behavior is by instituting a community-based hazing program (See Appendix B). Hazing is an activity or series of activities that is conducted in an attempt to change behaviors of habituated coyotes and/or to re-instill a healthy fear of people in the local coyote population. Hazing techniques include generating loud noises, spraying water, shining bright lights, throwing objects, shouting, etc. Hazing can help maintain coyotes' fear of humans and deter them from neighborhood spaces such as backyards, greenbelts and play spaces. A hazing program encourages the use of harassing actions without employing weapons or causing bodily harm to the coyote. The more often an individual animal is hazed, the more effective hazing is in changing coyote behavior. Being highly intelligent animals, coyotes who are hazed quickly learn to avoid neighborhoods, people and pets. The goals of hazing are to: ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Reverse the habituation of coyotes to people, teaching them to once again fear and avoid humans Discourage coyotes from entering public areas such as parks, playgrounds and yards when people are present Discourage coyotes from approaching people and pets Empower residents by giving them tools to use when they encounter a coyote, thereby reducing their fear of coyotes Increase awareness about coyote behavior among residents and involve the community in coyote management efforts Basic hazing: Consists of directly facing the coyote and being "big and loud" by waving your arms over your head, making loud noises or squirting the coyote with water until the coyote(s) chooses to leave. Using a variety of different hazing tools is critical because coyotes can become desensitized to the continued use of just one technique, sound or action (see Appendix B). Basic hazing can be performed by anyone and includes the following techniques: ■ Yelling and waving your arms while approaching the coyote. ■ Making loud noises with whistles, air horns, megaphones, soda cans filled with pennies, pots and pans. ■ Throwing projectiles such as sticks, small rocks, cans, tennis balls or rubber balls at the direction of the coyote. ■ Squirting water from a hose, water gun or spray bottle (with vinegar water). See this fun and educational video for more hazing tips: bit.ly/7 9hkl<B2 High-intensity hazing: Consists of approaching the animal quickly and aggressively, throwing projectiles, paint balls, pepper balls, sling shots, clay pellets or pepper spray at the coyote. High-intensity hazing should only be carried out by trained professionals such as animal control and police officers. High-intensity hazing should be used in specific areas and only in response to more egregious incidents. LETHAL CONTROL Lethal control programs may seem a like a quick fix to problems among coyotes, people and pets. However, removal programs are not effective in reducing coyote populations or addressing the root causes of conflicts. Coyote removal programs are costly (due to the difficulty of catching coyotes) and controversial among the public. When implementing lethal control, it is extremely difficult to ensure that problem-causing coyote(s) will be the ones located and killed. Since firearms are usually unsafe to use in urban and suburban areas, traps (which are by design non-selective for particular coyotes) are generally the method used. Because coyotes are so intelligent and wary of human scent, it is very difficult to catch any coyote in a trap, never mind the problem- causing coyote. Research has shown that when lethally controlled, coyotes exhibit a "rebound effect" (a surge in their Why killing doesn't work Pi~O<. fS:MAL!: Shoot or poison coyotes and you will have iust as m21ny again within a year or two .. Km one or both mern- bers of the n.lpha pafr (A.)-the only one that normally reproduces·-and other pairs wlH form and reproduce. At [he same time, lone coyotes will move irt to mate, young coyotes wm start hin1111g offspring sooner, and litter sizes 1,vill grow. KEY ST.MIU PACK Gnly the afpha pair reproduce,, ;rnd Its litt!!fs are small. Pack member, are less likely to eat ,heer, KILLING cuts numbers by h;;lf, but only tern,r,,rartly. PACK D-l!SRUl"TED IIY LETHAL CONTROL suMvors, rclr.ed by males from outside, start reproouclng Utter 1,zes tncre,se. The r,eed to l~ed many pups can lead adults to prny on sheei;. Solving Problems with Coyotes 11 reproductive rates), allowing for quick regeneration of their population numbers. The disruption of their family group structure leads to an increase in the number of females breeding in the population, and the increase in available resources leads to larger litter sizes, earlier breeding ages among females and higher survival rates among pups. This allows coyote populations to bounce back quickly, even when as much as 70 percent of their numbers are removed through lethal control efforts. For these reasons, lethal programs are not effective at reducing coyote populations, and non-selective coyote trapping programs are not effective at solving conflicts. In addition, coyotes removed from an area will quickly be replaced by transient coyotes looking for a vacant home range. If the root causes of human-coyote conflicts have not been addressed, incoming coyotes may quickly become nuisance coyotes as well. It is far better to have well-behaved resident coyotes who will hold territories and keep transients at bay then to risk having to deal with newcomers who do not know the "rules." Lethal responses (coyote removal) should be considered only in the event of an unprovoked, confirmed attack on a human. If implemented, lethal control efforts should focus on the offending coyote(s) only, rather than the coyote population at large. This 12 Solving Problems with Coyotes requires significant surveillance efforts to make sure that the correct animal(s) is targeted and removed. Lethal control should be considered as only one of a suite of management interventions (e.g., removal of attractants, hazing, etc.) that involve an array of humane and non-lethal measures. It is worth remarking that if non-lethal control techniques are effective enough to reduce human-coyote interactions and conflicts to acceptable levels, then the lethal control limited option may remain in the toolbox without being used. In addition to the suggested responses below, the following community-wide ordinances may be helpful: Leash law. Implementing a leash law and monetary fine for off-leash dogs can help address problematic behavior that could lead to coyote-pet conflicts. Residents should be instructed to keep pets on a leash 6 feet long or shorter. Anti-feeding ordinance. Banning the feeding of wildlife (exceptions may be made for bird feeders) and establishing a monetary fine may be helpful in addressing problematic feeding behavior that can lead to the habituation of coyotes. Human-coyote conflict classification and recommended responses Coyote following or approaching a person with no incident Coyote following or approaching a person and pet with no incident Coyote entering a yard with pets, no incident Coyote entering yard with people and pets, no pet attack occurring Coyote injures or kills unattended pet in backyard Coyote injures or kills pet off-leash in open space area Coyote injures or kills livestock Encounter Encounter Encounter Encounter Unattended Pet Attack Unattended Pet Attack Livestock Loss/Depredation Distribute educational materials and information on normal coyote behavior. Distribute education materials and information on normal coyote behavior. If area frequented by people, educate on normal coyote behavior and how to haze to encourage animal to leave. Look for and eliminate attractants. Educate on coyote attractants; provide hazing information and yard audit*. Educate on hazing techniques. Look for and eliminate attractants. Educate on hazing techniques and pet management. If an open area, post education signs to alert other residents to keep dogs on leash and to haze coyotes. If it is pup season and there is a known den nearby, consider blocking off the path or area until pup season is over. Educate on coyote attractants and pet management, provide hazing information and yard audit*. Gather information on specific animals involved and report circumstances. Educate on coyote attractants and pet management, provide hazing information and yard audit*. Gather information on specific animals involved and report circumstances. Educate on coyote attractants and pet management, provide hazing information and yard audit*. Gather information on specific animals involved and report circumstances. Educate on pet management and hazing, Look for and eliminate food attractants. Post education signs in open area to alert other residents to keep dogs on leash and to haze coyotes. If it is pup season and there is a known den nearby, consider blocking off the path or area until pup season is over. Gather information on specific animals involved and report circumstances. Educate on proper livestock husbandry (including the use of secure enclosures, livestock guarding animals, and/or proper fencing). Solving Problems with Coyotes 13 Coyot kills pet with hu (within Coyote injures or kills pet on~leash (within 6 feet) Coyote aggressive toward person, . showing teeth; b~tk fur raised, lunging, nipping wi.thout · contact * (See Appendix C) 14 Solving Problems with Coyotes Gather information on specific animals involved and report circumstances. Educate on pet management, coyote attractants and hazing, Perform yard/neighborhood /public area audit*. Post education signs and/or send educational materials to residents in the area. Implement high intensity hazing techniques (by ACOs, police, etc.)-using rubber bullets, paintball guns, etc. Gather information on specific animals involved and report circumstances. Educate on pet management, coyote attractants and hazing. Perform yard/neighborhood/ public area audit*. Post education signs and/or send educational materials to residents in the area. Implement high-intensity hazing techniques (by ACOs, police, etc.)-using rubber bullets, paintball guns, etc. Gather information on specific animals involved and report circumstances. Educate on pet management, coyote attractants and hazing. Perform yard/neighborhood/ public area audit*. Post education signs and/or send educational materials to residents in the area. Implement high-intensity hazing techniques (by ACOs, police, etc.)-using rubber bullets, paintball guns, etc. Identify and gather information on all details of attack (including action of victim before and after attack, whether feeding or pets were involved, action of victim towards coyote and how incident was resolved.) Any human bitten by a coyote(s) will need to seek the advice of their physician concerning the administration of a post- exposure rabies vaccination. If the offending coyote is killed, he/she should not only be tested for rabies, but should be also given a full necropsy (to determine general health and whether feeding was involved). Educate residents on coyote attractants, yard/neighborhood audits, hazing and pet management. Levy fines (for wildlife feeding or leash law violations) when appropriate. Implement high-intensity hazing techniques (by ACOs, police, etc.)-using rubber bullets, paintball guns, etc. for any other habituated or bold coyotes in area. Identify and gather information on all details of attack (including action of victim before and after attack, whether feeding or pets were involved, action of victim towards coyote and how incident was resolved.) Any human bitten by a coyote(s) will need to seek the advice of their physician concerning the administration of a post- exposure rabies vaccination. If the offending coyote is killed, he/she should not only be tested for rabies, but should be also given a full necropsy (to determine general health and whether feeding was involved). Lethal control efforts, if implemented, should focus on the offending coyote(s), rather than the coyote population at large. Educate residents on coyote attractants, yard/neighborhood audits, hazing and pet management. Levy fines (for wildlife feeding or leash law violations) when appropriate. Implement high-intensity hazing techniques (by ACOs, police, etc.)- using rubber bullets, paintball guns, etc. for any other habituated or bold coyotes in Appendices Appendix A: INCIDENT REPORT FORM Date: __________ Time of interaction: __________ Duration of Interaction: ________ _ Name of reporting party: ____________________________________ _ Address of reporting party:------------------------------------- Phone number of reporting party: _________________________________ _ Address of interaction: _____________________________________ _ Location type (park, commercial property, residential property, natural preserve, vacant land, other): __________ _ Type of interaction: Observation, Sighting, Encounter, Incident, Pet Attack: Attended/Unattended, Human Attack: Provoked/ Unprovoked?(See reverse for definitions) ______________________________ _ Activity of reporting party prior to interaction (e.g., walking, running, riding bike): _________________ _ Was the coyote being intentionally fed? Was there pet food present? Was unsecured garbage present? Were other food attractants present? Yes □ ......................................................... No □ Yes □ ......................................................... No □ Yes □ ......................................................... No □ Yes □ ......................................................... No □ (e.g., bird seed, compost, fruit, etc.) If yes, describe: ___________________________ _ Was a pet involved? Yes □ ......................................................... No □ Type of pet: Cat □ ........................... Dog □ ........................... Other □ ________ _ Breed/weight of pet: Was pet on leash? Yes □ ......................................................... No □ (If yes, was leash longer than 6 ft.?) Yes □ ......................................................... No □ Description of interaction/what happened: ______________________________ _ Actions taken by reporting party (e.g., ran away, hazed coyote, none, etc.): ___________________ _ How did coyote respond? (e.g.,* ran away, approached, etc.) Solving Problems with Coyotes 15 OFFICE USE ONLY: Outcome of incident: _______________________________________ _ Human injuries: _____________ Post-exposure rabies vaccination recommended: Yes □ ........................ No □ Pet injuries: ____________________________ Pet killed: Yes □ ........................ No □ Coyote injuries: _______________________ Coyote euthanized: Yes □ ........................ No □ Coyote necropsy results:--------------------------------------- Stomach contents: human food: Yes □ ........................ No □ Sign of disease: Yes □ ........................ No □ If Yes, describe: ______________________________________ _ OBSERVATION: The act of noticing signs of a coyote(s), such as tracks, scat or vocalizations, but without visual observation of the coyote(s). SIGHTING: A visual observation of a coyote(s). A sighting may occur at any time of the day or night. ENCOUNTER: A direct meeting that is between human and coyote(s) with no physical contact and that is without incident. INCIDENT: A conflict between a human and a coyote where the coyote exhibits any of the following behaviors: growling, baring teeth, lunging or making physical contact with person. A human is not bitten. HUMAN ATTACK: Provoked: An attack where the involved human encourages the coyote to engage. Examples include a human hand-feeding a coyote, approaching a coyote with pups or intervening in a coyote attack on a pet. Unprovoked: An attack where the involved human does not encourage the coyote to engage. PET ATTACK: Coyote(s) kills or injures a domestic pet. Attended: Pet is on a leash less than six feet in length or is in the presence of a person less than six feet away. Unattended: Pet is free-roaming, walking off-leash more than six feet from a person or on a leash longer than six feet. LIVESTOCK LOSS/DEPREDATION: Coyote(s) kills or injures livestock. 16 Solving Problems with Coyotes Appendix B: GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING A COMMUNITY-BASED HAZING PROGRAM Because coexisting with wildlife involves the community, the most successful coyote hazing programs involve residents and volunteers. Residents are best equipped to respond consistently and at the most opportune times in their own neighborhoods, greenbelts, parks and open spaces. Coyotes will also learn to fear the general public faster if they are hazed by the residents that they already encounter in their home ranges. Involving the community in coyote hazing efforts has the additional benefit of empowering residents and reducing their fear of coyotes by giving them tools to address coyote conflicts themselves. Before attempting to haze coyotes on their own, residents should first be properly trained on the following topics: • • • • ■ ■ Basic coyote ecology and behavior . Seasonal behavior changes-breeding season, pups, denning behavior. Influences of human behavior on coyotes . How to identify and remove food attractants . Safety tips for pets. Hazing techniques, tools and tips for success. When possible, in-person trainings and meetings are the best way to relay this information to residents and to train them in coyote hazing techniques. Supplemental materials, such as handouts, brochures and websites, can also provide this information when necessary. CREATING A VOLUNTEER HAZING TEAM A group of volunteers trained in coyote hazing techniques can be quite useful to respond to coyote conflicts in public areas (such as parks, playgrounds, etc.). The following guidelines are suggested for managing a volunteer hazing team: 1. Volunteers should be trained in proper coyote hazing techniques (as discussed above). 2. Volunteers should be added to a Community Citizen Volunteer email list, from which they will be notified of "hot spots" and asked to haze in the area. 3. Updates, additional coyote information, electronic flyers and handouts should be sent to members of the Community Citizen Volunteer group to disseminate to the general public. 4. Volunteers should fill out a Hazing Interaction Report after each hazing activity. 5. Hazing Interaction Reports will include the following details: ■ • ■ Date, location, time of day, number of coyotes. Initial coyote behavior, hazing behavior, coyote response. Effectiveness ratings. • Tools and techniques used. ■ Additional details/comments. COYOTE HAZING TIPS FOR SUCCESS 1. Hazing is most effective when an individual coyote is hazed by a variety of people using a variety of tools and techniques. 2. The coyote being hazed must be able to recognize that the potential threat is coming from a person. Therefore, hiding behind a bush and throwing rocks or hazing from inside a car or house (for example) isn't effective. 3. When hazed for the first time, a coyote may not respond at first or may run a short distance away. If this happens, it is important to continue hazing (and intensify the hazing if possible) until the coyote leaves the area. Otherwise, the coyote will learn to wait until the person gives up. Inconsistent hazing will create an animal more resistant to hazing instead of reinforcing the notion that "people are scary." 4. Make sure to provide an escape route for the coyote. Do not corner the coyote or chase the animal in the direction of traffic or other people. 5. A group of coyotes should be hazed in the same manner as a single coyote. In a group, there will always be a dominant coyote who will respond first, and once he runs away, the others will follow. Solving Problems with Coyotes 17 6. Hazing efforts should be exaggerated at the beginning of a hazing program, but less effort will be needed as coyotes learn to avoid people and neighborhoods. Coyotes learn quickly, and their family members and pups will emulate their behavior, leading to a ripple effect throughout the local coyote population. 7. Certain levels of hazing must always be maintained so that coyotes do not learn or return to unacceptable habits. 18 Solvi11g Problems with Coyotes 8. Obviously sick or injured coyotes should not be hazed by the general public. In these cases, police or animal control officers should be contacted. 9. People should never run from or ignore a coyote. Running from a coyote can initiate a chasing instinct, while ignoring a coyote creates habituation and negates the positive effects of hazing. 10. It is important to identify and remove possible coyote attractants in conjunction with hazing. Hazing will be less effective if food attractants are plentiful in a neighborhood. Appendix C: YARD AUDIT (For municipal or homeowner use) Never feed pets outdoors; store all pet food.securely indoors. Remove water attractants (such as pet water bowls) in dry climates. Remove bird feeders or dean fallen seed to reduce the presence of small mammals that coyotes prefer to eat. Clean up fallen fruit around trees. Do notinclude meat or dairy among compost contents unless fully enclosed. Clean up food around barbeque grills after each use. Secure all trash containers with locking lids and place curbside the morning of trash pickup. Periodically clean.cans to reduce residual odors. Trim vegetation to reduce. hiding places and potential denning sites. Restrlct access under dee.ks and sheds, arqund woodpiles,,or anyot~er structure that <::an provJde cover or dennihg sites for coyotes or their prey. Endose property with an 8-foot fence,(or a o~foot fence with an additional extension or roller-top) to .deter coyotes. Ensurethat there are no gaps and that the bottom of thefence extends underground 6 inches or is fitted withamesh.apronto deter coyotesfromdigging underneath. · Never leave pets unattended outside'. Never allow pets to "play" with coyotes. Fully enclose outdoor pet kennels. Walk pets on a leash no longerthan 6 feet ln l~ngth. We encourage you to take,stepsto eliminate attractants on your property in ord 0 erto,minimi:i:e coriflictswith coyotes. We also urge you to share this informationwithfr1ends a.nd peighbors because minimizing.conflicts is most .effective when the entire · neighborhood works together. · Solving Problems with Coyotes 19 Appendix D: COYOTE RESOllJT!ON RESOLUTION NO. ____ _ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A COYOTE MANAGEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the City of ____________________________________ has a duty and responsibility to its residents to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of its residents; and WHEREAS, the city of ____________________________________ desires to identify and achieve a balance between the importance of human safety and the ecology of the region; and WHEREAS, due to the varied interests of persons and organizations regarding actions that can be taken in the management of coyotes, a written management plan is desirable to ensure that the varied interests are evaluated and considered when seeking to address conflicts with coyotes, and; WHEREAS, the City of _____________________________________ has developed a Coyote Management Plan to provide recommendations for educating the community regarding living and interacting with wildlife and addressing perceived or actual conflicts with coyotes including sightings, attacks on pets, aggressive behavior of coyotes, and a general fear of harm to life and property caused by coyotes, and; WHEREAS, the purpose of the Coyote Management Plan is to provide effective solutions to coyote conflicts, including a behavior classification and recommended response chart, to resolve and reduce human-coyote conflicts within the City in a humane and effective manner; and WHEREAS, a combination of education and hazing have been found to be the most effective methods to alleviate the potential dangers that may result from coyote-human interactions, and WHEREAS, the ______________________________ is directed to utilize non-lethal methods, including education and hazing methods, as primary methods in coyote management, considering lethal responses (coyote removal) only in the event of an unprovoked attack on a human, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT .RESOLVED by ___________________________ , that: The Coyote Management Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby approved. The resolution shall be effective immediately. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS _________ DAY OF __________________ _ ATTEST: ______________________________________ _ 20 Solving Problems with Coyotes PHOTO CREDITS Ff~OI\JT COVER: WILLIAM WEAVER/WILLIAM WEAVER PHOTO. PAGE 3: JGARERI/ISTOCK.COM. PAGE 4: STEVE SHINN/STEVE SHINN PHOTOGRAPHY. Pft,CE 5: SPONDYLOLITHESIS/ISTOCK.COM. PHOTO CREDITS mo NT COVEil: WILLIAM WEAVERiWILLIAM WE/WER PHOTO. PAGE 3: .JGARERI/ISTOCK.COM. PAGE 4: STEVE SHINN/STEVE SHINN PHOTOGRAPHY. PAGE 5: SPONDYLOLITHESIS/ISTOCl<.COM. Our Promise We fight the big fights to end suffering for all animals. Together with millions of supporters, we take on puppy mills, factory farms, trophy hunts, animal testing and other cruel industries. With our affiliates, we rescue and care for thousands of animals every year through our animal rescue team's work and other hands-on animal care services. We fight all forms of animal cruelty to achieve the vision behind our name: a humane society. And we can't do it without you. trl.~~/ y:_--~J~ THE HUMANE SOCIETY ~ ~'> OF THE UNITED STATES 1255 23rd Street, NW, Suite 450 Washington, DC 20037 :c;?Ol 9 THE HSUS. !\l.L RIGH l f,l:Sl:fNLD. Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: McKenzie Bright Monday, November 15, 2021 1 :15 PM cc Ara Mihranian; CityClerk Comparison of Cities Race to Zero Pledge to the City's Adopted Emissions Reduction Plan (ERAP) Race to Zero_ERAP Comparison Memo.pdf Good afternoon Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council, Please see attached as late correspondence for Item Hon the November 16 agenda, a comparison between the Cities Race to Zero pledge and the City's adopted Emissions Reduction Action Plan (ERAP). Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, McKenzie McKenzie Bright, Administrative Analyst City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 (310) 544-5305 -mbright@rpvca.gov Connect with the City from your phone or tablet, download MyRPV. I l1i,; c,rnciil message contains information bolonqinq to the City of Rancho l'alos Verdes, which rnay bo privileged, confidential ancl/or µrotoctccl from ,Ji<;c!o;;ure, nw in!onnation is inlondc"ci oniy for lViC of the individual or entity 11ilmed, lJnauthorizod dissemination, distrillu\.ion, or c:opyin,j is ,,lrictly prohibited, If you n2ccivccl this elflail in error, or are not. an intended recipient, please notify tile sender inHnediately. Tliank you for your a',;'.;istance and cooperation, City Hall is open to the public during regular business hours. To help prevent the spread of COVID-19, visitors are required to wear face coverings and adhere to physical distancing guidelines. If you need to visit City Hall, please schedule an appointment in advance by calling the appropriate department and follow all posted directions during your visit. For a list of department phone numbers, visit the Staff Director',' on the City website. 1 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ARA MIHRANIAN, CITY MANAGER NOVEMBER 15, 2021 SUBJECT: COMPARISON OF CITIES RACE TO ZERO PLEDGE TO THE CITY'S ADOPTED EMISSIONS REDUCTION ACTION PLAN (ERAP) Staff Coordinator: McKenzie Bright, Administrative Analyst The following provides supplemental information pertaining to Item Hon the November 16, 2021 City Council agenda: consideration and possible action to join the Cities Race to Zero campaign. The Cities Race to Zero pledge commits the City to strengthen its contribution to the Paris Climate Agreement -agreeing to keep global heating below the 1.5°Celsius goal. The pledge does not mandate any regulations or taxes -it makes suggestions and provides resources that cities may elect to use to help reduce emissions but does not have any requirements (aside from the adoption of the pledge to join the program) and does not have any enforcement mechanisms. The City's Emissions Reduction Action Plan (ERAP), adopted in December 2017, serves as a planning tool to be considered as the City develops its long-term planning goals, and to help the City determine appropriate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction strategies. The following table contrasts the Cities Race to Zero pledge with the ERAP. Cities Race to Zero ERAP Policy: Paris Climate Aoreement Policy: California State Law Guiding Principles: Guiding Principles: • Recognize the global climate Allows the City to: emergency • Understand the community GHG • Commit to keeping global heating emissions that it now produces below the 1.5°Celsius goal of the Paris • Identify strategies that will result in Agreement GHG emissions reductions • Commit to putting inclusive climate • Develop an implementation plan action at the center of all urban • Monitor and report progress toward decision-making, to create thriving and climate change goals equitable communities for everyone For the purposes of: • Invite partners to join us in recognizing • Enhancing the community and the global climate emergency and help neighborhoods to help ensure a safe, us deliver on science-based action to healthy, and sustainable environment overcome it. • Promotinq and encouraQinq the The City Council commits towards working to reach net-zero in 2050 or sooner and limits warming to 1.5°C. The City Council plans to set an interim 2030 target consistent with a fair share of 50% of global emission reductions. The City Council will continue to pursue inclusive and equitable climate actions and publish the results of the City's progress to the CDP-ICLEI Unified Reporting System. Reduction Standards: Pledge to working to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 or sooner. Set an interim 2030 target consistent with a fair share of 50% of global emission reductions (met through the ERAP). Benefits to Joining Cities Race to Zero: adoption and growth of zero emission vehicles • Advancing strategies for housing and buildings that reduce energy and water usage • Promoting behavior change that reduces waste • Advancing strategies to encourage and support the market for renewable enerQy and storaQe Reduction Standards: The strategies contained in the ERAP are estimated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to meet the City's reduction goals of 15% below the 2005 levels by 2020, 49% below the 2005 levels by 2035, and 80% below 1990 levels bv 2050. The City can utilize the work it is doing to implement the ERAP to join the Cities Race to Zero campaign, as there is significant overlap between the principles and reduction standards between the pledge and the ERAP. By taking the Cities Race to Zero pledge, the City would join over 120 American cities and be among over 730 cities around the world to take the pledge, gaining access to resources from other cities on best practices. Taking the pledge further demonstrates the City's ongoing commitment to reduce GHG emissions. Should the City not elect to take the pledge: Should the City not take the pledge, it will continue to work on implementing strategies recommended in the ERAP. Most, if not all, of the resources for cities through the Race to Zero pledge are publicly available online and the City would be able to access the information/list of participating cities should it wish to collaborate with or use programs from cities who have taken the pledge. Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Subject: Late corr Teresa Takaoka Monday, November 15, 2021 7:31 AM CityClerk Fw: City Council Meeting -11 /16/21; Item H, "Race to Zero Pledge" From: Mickey Rodich <mickeyrodich@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2021 6:31 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: City Council Meeting -11/16/21; Item H, "Race to Zero Pledge" The COP26 United Nations Global Climate Summit meetings just finished yesterday and it seems like a concerted effort by our staff to rush through this organized commitment to "The Race to Zero Pledge". It was all ready to go before the COP26 conference probably started. Do our residents have anything to say about this? I think this article should be open for discussion when discussing "The Race to Zero Pledge" (Item "H") for the City Council meeting on 11/16/21. I feel that Item "H" should not be on the Consent Calendar. It should be in a public meeting setting so that our residents can make that decision. I feel that there are 2 sides to this Item and both should be discussed. It would be prudent for RPV to not participate in this program, because program's like this lead to more taxes and more regulations. Subject: Fw: Fwd: THE EVIL CARBON DIOXIDE Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of 1 Geology. Sounds pretty learned/credible, don't you think? These are his extensive credentials: Born: 12 February 1946 Residence: Australia Nationality: Australian Fields: Earth Science, Geology, Mining Engineering Institutions: University of New England, University of Newcastle, University of Melbourne, University of Adelaide Alma mater: University of New South Wales, Macquarie University Thesis: The pipe deposits of tungsten- molybdenum-bismuth in eastern Australia(1976) Notable awards: Eureka Prize (1995, 2002), Centenary Medal(2003), Clarke Medal (2004) Where Does the Carbon Dioxide Really Come From? Professor Ian Plimer's book in a brief summary: PLIMER: "Okay, here's the bombshell. The 2 volcanic eruption in Iceland. Since its first spewing of volcanic ash, it has, in just FOUR DAYS, NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you have made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet -all of you. Of course, you know about this evil carbon dioxide that we are trying to suppress -it's that vital chemical compound that every plant requires to live and grow and to synthesize into oxygen for us humans and all animal life. I know .... it's very disheartening to realize that all of the carbon emission savings you have accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of driving Prius hybrids, buying fabric grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kids "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, vacationing at home instead of abroad,nearly getting hit every day on your bicycle, replacing all of your 50 cent light bulbs with $10.00 light bulbs ..... well, all of those things you have done have all gone down the tubes in just four days! The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in just four days -yes, FOUR DAYS -by that volcano in Iceland has totally erased every single effort you have made to reduce the evil beast, carbon. And there are around 200 active volcanoes on the planet spewing out this crud at any one time -EVERY DAY. I don't really want to rain on your parade too much, but I should mention that when the volcano Mt Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in 3 all its years on earth. Yes, folks, Mt Pinatubo was active for over One year -think about it. Of course, I shouldn't spoil this 'touchy- feely tree-hugging' moment and mention the effect of natural solar and cosmic activity, and the well-recognized 800-year global heating and cooling cycle, which keeps happening despite our completely insignificant efforts to affect climate change. And I do wish I had a silver lining to this volcanic ash cloud, but the fact of the matter is that the wildfire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year. Just remember that your government just tried to impose a whopping carbon tax on you, on the basis of the BOGUS 'human- caused' climate-change scenario. Hey, isn't it interesting how they don't mention 'Global Warming' anymore, but just 'Climate Change. It's because the planet has COOLED by 0.7 degrees in the past century and these global warming advocates got caught with their pants down. And, just keep in mind that you might yet have an Emissions Trading Scheme -that whopping new tax -imposed on you by your government, that will achieve absolutely nothing except make you poorer. It won't stop any volcanoes from erupting, that's for sure. But, hey, ..... go give the world a hug and have a nice day 4 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Subject: Late corr Teresa Takaoka Thursday, November 11, 2021 9:48 AM CityClerk FW: Ladera Linda "Financing" From: pam alien <dawneallen3@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2021 9:41 AM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Ladera Linda "Financing" As a resident & one of many residents @ Ladera L., who are AGAINST the multi million dollar 'Project", the costs incurred must NOT become the burden placed on "We the People". Why will this "project" benefit our Ladera Linda community? Sincerely, Pamela Allen 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Teresa Takaoka Sent: To: Monday, November 15, 2021 7:30 AM CityClerk Subject: Fw: LADERA LINDA" Project" Le From: pam alien <dawneallen3@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, November 14, 202112:49 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Fwd: LADERA LINDA" Project" ----------Forwarded message --------- From: pam allen <dawneallen3@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 5:43 PM Subject: LADERA LINDA" Project" To: <parks@rpvca.gov> I STRONGLY OPPOSE the current plans for Ladera Linda "project'>.#1.. This will open My/Our Community to excessive traffic attempting to both enter & exit Forrestal & P.V.South. #2 Also, non-residents parking on streets in front of our houses. #3 Possible crime increasing due to influx of non-residents, as has occurred last year & last month to my neighbor. This Ladera Linda , hugely excessively expensive "project" will NOT benefit Our community. #4 The relatively quiet, safe neighborhood I have appreciated being a resident in for 48 years, will be changed dramatically IF you choose to ignore the voice of most of RPV residents .. And what happened to "We The People" having the last word ... ?? Please STOP this "project." ... & give the concerned residents of Ladera Linda community' another choice for "restructuring" Ladera Lunda ... Sincerely Expressed, Pamela Allen & concerned residents. 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Subject: Nina Smith <ninansteveca@yahoo.com> Friday, November 12, 2021 9:53 PM CityClerk; CC Ladera Linda Community Center RPV Council I am in favor in support of the Community Center and Park Project moving forward, and support the City proceeding with using an ultra-low interest loan (2% or less) from Bank of the West for up to $6 million of the cost. I don't normally support the idea of a loan, but this is a fixed low rate and I believe that inflation is in our future. I support paying it off as soon as possible and having a reserve in case of an emergency. Thanks Nina Smith 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Sent: To: Subject: LC ladera linda project -----Original Message----- Teresa Takaoka Monday, November 15, 2021 2:29 PM Enyssa Momoli FW: City council From: Barbara Scherba <bscherba@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 2:25 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: City council CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. Dear sirs: We are very much in favor of proceeding forward with the current Ladera Linda Project. We are aware that money may be borrowed at a low interest rate and we think this is a wise decision . We are looking forward to seeing Shis project break ground in March. Sincerely, Mark and Barbara Scherba 3716 Coolheights Dr. RPV 1 Enyssa Momoli From: Teresa Takaoka Sent: To: Thursday, November 11, 2021 8:45 AM CityClerk Subject: FW: Hatano Farm Repurposing Late corr From: Randy Harwood <randykharwood@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2021 6:03 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Hatano Farm Repurposing Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council; I understand that the Council is considering adopting a new use for the Hatano Farm land located in the Alta Vicente Reserve. I believe this is a wonderful opportunity to greatly enhance the value of this land to the benefit of the community, the City, and the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy. Allowing the Land Conservancy to repurpose this area into a native plant and seed nursery would increase the effort to propagate native Peninsula plants. This would be invaluable in the effort to stockpile seeds and use these plants to restore more habitat and provide native plants for the local community's use in home and business landscaping. Additionally, this would be a good time to memorialize the long history of farming in the Peninsula by the Japanese community. Descriptive signage and complimentary displays of old farm equipment in strategic areas along the trails would not only honor the Japanese community's history, but also provide many new educational opportunities for children and adults who visit Alta Vicente. I know that the Land Conservancy members are very interested in utilizing this area for such an educational opportunity. I am very interested in the ongoing efforts of the Land Conservancy and the City to restore native habitat for the benefit of the plants, animals and birds. The repurposing of the Hatano Farm to a native plant and seed nursery would not only be a valuable resource for the community, but also would greatly benefit the Peninsula's threatened butterflies, gnatcatchers and cactus wrens. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important repurposing proposal. Sincerely, Randy Harwood Rolling Hills Estates 1