Loading...
20250715 Late CorrespondenceBells of Nagasaki A message that rings of hope and peace A Presentation by Pianist Anli Lin Tong 1 Lenee Bilski Non-Agenda Public Comments Urakami Cathedral after Atomic Bombing The Cathedral was built in 1925 2 3 The New Cathedral •The new Urakami Cathedral was built in 1959 •the surviving bell was installed in one of the church’s two new towers. 4 …look for the beauty, purity and sacredness amidst the tragedy..." •Remnants of one of the bells of . Remnants of one of the bells of Urakami Cathedral that was destroyed by the 1945 atomic bombing in Nagasaki, Japan. American Catholics are raising funds to replace the bell at Urakami Cathedral before the 80th anniversary of the bombing. 5 A gift from America to Japan, and from Catholics to Catholics. 6 The New Bell will be installed in a special dedication Mass on July 18. Both bells will be rung at 11:02AM on August 9, 2025 Exactly 80 years after the atomic bomb was dropped in Nagasaki 7 •Touched by both a personal desire for world -wide peace and a quest to bring awareness to the importance of the cathedral bell restoration project, pianist Anli Lin Tong has put together a specially curated, one -hour classical musical program to honor this unique time in history. •Pianist Anli Lin Tong will be joined by Trumpetist Grant Hungerford, Violinist Yutong Sharp, Cellist Catherine Biagini, and the St. John Fisher Church Music Guild Singers. 8 Please Join Us Sunday, August 3 at 2:30PM Bells of Nagasaki: Music for Contemplation St. John Fisher Church, RPV 9 End of Powerpoint Presentation 10 KCLAD Map Sha Tahmasebi Non-Agenda Public Comments Issues of Concern The election to raise assessments was conducted in violation of Prop 218. KCLAD has used threat of a lien and criminal prosecution to coerce residents to pay invalid assessments. City has the unilateral say to increase assessments, if it casts the ballots. City is the entity that has the power to both initiate the dissolution and to dissolve the districts, not the homeowners. Private homeowners pay 20 times more in assessment per acre. When the first homes were damaged and red tagged in 2023, City was on NOTICE that the districts are not managing the landslid e. City had the obligation to exercise its powers over the District FAIRLY. City’s choice was to raise property assessments by 560 %, placing the financial burden on the homeowners already heavily burdened by the disaster, many of whom displaced from their homes. This was an unjust exercise of power. KCLAD is NOT financially efficient, over 40 % of its budget is allocated to Administration Costs. That is unreasonable alloca tion of costs. Admin costs should not exceed 8-12 %. Budget Benefit Assessment Formula Benefit Assessment Formula Assessments are Invalid District clerk stated that if “the City does not vote, it’s a yes vote.” Per law, only ballots submitted count towards the election result. Government Code 53753(e)(4) explicitly states only ballots “submitted” count towards the election result: •(e)(4) A majority protest exists if the assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in opposition to the proposed assessment exceed the assessment ballots submitted , and not withdrawn, in its favor, weighting those assessment ballots by the amount of the proposed assessment to be imposed upon the identified parcel for which each assessment ballot was submitted. Cal. Gov't Code § 53753. [Emphasis added ]. KCLAD CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: FROM: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK DATE: JULY 15, 2025 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting. Item No. Description of Material Non-Agenda Email from Nassim Moradi ** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, July 14, 2025 ** Respectfully submitted, ~~ TereaTakaoka LILA TE CORRESPONDENCE\202512025 Coversheets\20250715 additions revisions to agenda .docx From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear City Clerk , Nassim Moradi <nassim.moradi@yahoo.com> Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:52 PM CityClerk Request for Public Comment to Be Read at Tonight's City Council Meeting I'm writing to respectfully request that the following letter, which I submitted last night to the City Manager and City Council , be read aloud during the public comment portion of tonight's City Council meeting. I'm unable to attend in person but would like this message entered into the public record. Please confirm whether this is possible. Warm regards, Nassim Moradi, MD 4 Figtree Rd , Rancho Palos Verdes Request for City Leadership on Landslide Mitigation and ACLAD Oversight Dear Mr. Mihranian, Thank you for your continued engagement with the ACLAD community and for clarifying the City's proposed review process involving both the ACLAD and City geologists. 1 During the most recent ACLAD meeting, it was stated that the process would begin with the ACLAD geologist providing their input, after which the City geologist would conduct a "peer review." However, I must respectfully reiterate a fundamental concern: the current framework places an unreasonable burden on a small group of homeowners to address a geotechnical crisis of regional significance. The Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex is recognized as the largest active landslide in North America, with land movement rates and geotechnical risks that far exceed what a typical residential neighborhood could reasonably manage. Given this scale, why does the City continue to place primary responsibility for mitigation on a small local district like ACLAD, funded by individual homeowners and managed by neighborhood volunteers? Shouldn't a crisis of this magnitude be addressed at a broader regional, county, or state infrastructure level, with coordinated oversight, technical resources, and public funding? The fact that ACLAD residents are expected to initiate technical work, fund assessments, and support mitigation measures, while the City merely "peer reviews", is not only inequitable but appears to be a deliberate effort to shift both responsibility and liability onto the homeowners. The City's limited role in the process raises serious concerns about governance and accountability, especially given the accelerating pace of land movement and the risk to public safety. Furthermore, given that subsurface water is widely recognized as the primary driver of land movement in this area, the lack of high-resolution hydrogeological mapping across the district is a serious concern. Without a comprehensive understanding of underground water pathways, infiltration points, and perched water zones, the City cannot effectively prioritize well placement or justify long-term mitigation investments. I submit this question with deep respect and appreciation for the ACLAD volunteers, who have stepped up in extraordinarily difficult circumstances; but I am increasingly concerned that they are being asked to carry a burden that should be shared and managed at a far higher level of public responsibility. It is with deep concern and respect that I note: it is not the responsibility of a small group of homeowners to manage and finance the most active landslide in North America. This is a geotechnical and public safety crisis that far exceeds the capacity of any local assessment district. The notion that ACLAD residents should lead mitigation efforts , 2 while the City merely steps in to 'peer review' is not equitable. It is a failure of governance. If the City of Rancho Palos Verdes truly acknowledges the seriousness of this crisis, then it must take full ownership ; by allocating general funds, and leading a coordinated mitigation strategy from the top. While the City may argue that it is 'cheaper' for A CLAD to lead efforts like well placement, cost alone cannot justify shifting responsibility for public safety infrastructure onto residents. That approach comes at the expense of transparency, technical oversight, and long-term accountability. Homeowners can support. But we cannot, and should not carry this burden alone. While I speak only for myself as a concerned resident and property owner, I believe these questions merit serious consideration by the City, regardless of individual homeowner views. The underlying issue is not personal opinion, but the structural imbalance in how this crisis is being managed. I respectfully request a clear and specific outline of how the City will assume primary responsibility for leading landslide mitigation, not by passively peer reviewing the work of ACLAD's geologist, but by taking ownership of technical planning, well placement, long-term funding, and coordination with outside agencies. The current expectation that homeowners initiate and manage these efforts is unsustainable and inappropriate for a crisis of this scale. Sincerely, N assim Moradi MD 3 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK JULY 14, 2025 ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, July 15, 2025, City Council meeting: Item No. 1 Description of Material Email from Gary Palmer Respectfully submitted, ~~ L:\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\202512025 Coversheets\20250715 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday .docx Subject: FW: Proposed property tax assessment From: Gary Palmer <GARY@getmymail.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 2:49 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Proposed property tax assessment Some people who received this message don't often get email from gary@getmymail.org. Learn why this is important Council Members, I am a believer in balanced budgets. I know these last couple years have been difficult and have allowed leeway regarding decisions and deferred costs. I worry that the budget might move to become larger to fund pension obligations and thus cause assessments to residents for services which should normally be within budget. The proposed assessment for landscaping and lighting raises concern. These are things which are usually budgeted and planned and thus no special tax or assessment is necessary. I know it is not the simple solution but urge you to reject the proposal and find the budget via other means within funds already being collected. My larger concern is the pension obligations which just grow. Please consider that pensions are a holdover from a time when government jobs paid poorly and the complete paycheck was consumed paying rent, food, and other necessities; with no ability to save. Now salaries are competing with industry and those employees are able to save for retirement. Industry is eliminating pensions because vehicles like 401 Kand IRA and other government saving plans exist. Pensions provide a very enticing second option and many people who now retire from government work receive more monthly income from pension and savings than they ever actually earned. Consider the elimination of pension for any new hires, use those savings to cover additional costs. Please do not let staff take a simple solution to "just charge those wealthy residents" another assessment. I am retired and NOT one of those "wealthy residents". Cheers, Gary Palmer Rue Langlois, RPV If this email is published, please redact my email address. 1 I