HomeMy WebLinkAboutApprove and Adopt Minutes - City Council/Public Finance Auth (2) r�N ^'-
2000 Main Street,
oF ��;: Huntington Beach,CA
92648
City of Huntington Beach APPROVED 7-0 AS
v ry AMENDED BY SUPPLEMENTAL
cF' Gu,v PF` COMMUNICATION
File #: 23-652 MEETING DATE: 8/1/2023
REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION
SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
SUBMITTED BY: Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk
PREPARED BY: Robin Estanislau, CMC, City Clerk
Subject:
Approve and Adopt Minutes
Statement of Issue:
The City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes of June 8, 2023, and the City
Council/Public Financing Authority regular, and Housing Authority special meeting minutes of July 18,
2023, require review and approval.
Financial Impact: None.
Recommended Action:
A) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes of June 8,
2023; and,
B) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular, and Housing Authority
special meeting minutes of July 18, 2023
Alternative Action(s):
Do not approve and/or request revision(s).
Analysis:
None
Environmental Status:
Non-Applicable
Strategic Plan Goal:
Non Applicable -Administrative Item
Attachment(s):
1. June 8, 2023 CC/PFA special meeting minutes
City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 2 Printed on 2/7/2024
powered by LegistarT*'
File #: 23-652 MEETING DATE: 8/1/2023
2. July 18, 2023 CC/PFA regular, and Housing Authority special meeting minutes
City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 2 Printed on 2/7/2024
powered by Legistarrm
City Council/ ACTION AGENDA August 1, 2023
Public Financing Authority
CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
6. 23-612 In response to Dec 20, 2022 City Council direction, report on history of
authorized actions in the Moore v. City, Gates lawsuit and report on
review of RWG involvement
PowerPoint presentation made by City Attorney Gates
7. 23-671 Update on Pacific Airshow v. City of Huntington Beach lawsuit
Verbal update provided by City Attorney Gates
CONSENT CALENDAR
CITY CLERK
8. 23-652 Approved and Adopted Minutes
Recommended Action:
A) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority special meeting minutes of
June 8, 2023; and,
B) Approve and adopt the City Council/Public Financing Authority regular, and Housing
Authority special meeting minutes of July 18, 2023 as amended by supplemental
communication.
Approved 7-0
9. 23-663 July Update of Activities for Citizen Boards, Commissions, Committees
(BCCs) and Regional Agencies
Recommended Action:
Receive and File.
Approved 7-0
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
10. 23-630 Adopted Resolution 2023-35 Confirming Cost Report for Weed Abatement
on Private Parcels within the City for the 2023 Season
Recommended Action:
A) Adopt Resolution 2023-35 "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach
Confirming the Report of the Public Works Director Regarding the Cost for Weed Abatement on
Private Property Within the City for the 2023 Season;" and,
B) Direct that all charges listed thereon be certified to the Orange County 2023/24 Property
Tax Roll.
Approved 7-0
Page 4 of 12
722 in City of Huntington Beach
INTER-DEPARTMENT COMMMUNICATION
HUNTINGTON BEACH
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Robin Estanislau, City Clerk
DATE: July 31, 2023
SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION FOR AGENDA ITEM NO. 8
— CORRECTIONS TO CITY COUNCIL/PUBLIC FINANCING
AUTHORITY MEETING MINUTES DATED JULY 18, 2023
Please find attached a request for corrections to the July 18, 2023 City Council/Public
Financing Authority minutes submitted by Ariel Strauss with Greenfire Law, PC. Staff
has reviewed the request and approves of the suggested changes, with one revision to
2) as depicted in red text.
If approved, Council action in the August 1 minutes will be recorded as "approved as
amended by supplemental communication."
Attachment: Communication from Greenfire Law, PC
SUPPLEMENTAL
COMMUNICATION
Meng Date: 01 la023
Agenda Item No.; g (z3- l' 52)
Ariel Strauss, Of-Counsel
2748 Adeline Street,Ste.A
GREENFIRE Berkeley,CA 94703
Law, PC 510-900-9502 x 702
astrauss@greenfirelaw.com
www.greenfirelaw.com
August 1, 2023
Via Electronic Mail
To: City.Council@surfcity-hb.org
RE: Correction to July 18th Meeting Minutes (August 1 Council Meeting Agenda Item 8)
Dear Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark, and Council Members Burns, McKeon,
Kalmick, Moser, and Bolton:
I am writing on behalf of Christina Price requesting that the Council amend the proposed
Minutes concerning July 18, 2023 Agenda Item 17 concerning denial of AT&T's application for
CUP No. 23-006 to construct a wireless communication facility at 8101 Slater Avenue.
Ms. Price greatly appreciates the Council's careful consideration of the cell tower at the
previous meeting and having the courage to come to the right conclusion in the best interest of
the community and in accordance with the Zoning Code. At that meeting,the Council correctly
upheld the appeal because it determined that it could not make the findings required by Zoning
Code Section 241.10(A)(3) for issuance of a conditional use permit. Given that AT&T may be
considering filing suit, which under federal law must be done with 30 days of the denial letter
that was issued on July 26, 2023,providing minutes that clearly reflect the robust record
supporting the Council's decision is particularly important.
In general,the proposed Minutes are impressively detailed and accurate. Some portions
are unclear and I recommend the following four additions:
1) Page 14 of the draft minutes summarizes Senior Planner Hayden Beckman's presentation.
Critically, according to the video recording, Mr. Beckman added: "I would like to clarify
for the record and for the Council that the appellant's letter in this specific instance was
correct. There is a facility that is 840 feet due west of the subject site. This is a roof-
mounted facility that was modified in 2020."
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xr5dHArmJSc at 2:17.) Given that AT&T's failure
1/4
to consider alternative sites was central to the Council's denial decision,the second full
paragraph of page 18 of the Minutes should be amended to conclude:
Senior Planner Beckman clarified that there is an existing roof-mounted facility
840 feet due west of the subject site that was not identified in the application or
staff report; staff did not believe that roof-mounted facilities were required to be
considered for collocation when considering an application for a free-standing
facility.
2) The proposed Minutes summarize Carol Jean Zeno's public remarks in a potentially
misleading way. The Minutes state "Ms. Zeno stated to the best of her knowledge
Huntington Beach Community Church is the only entity that responded to the inquiry for
locations." However, following that statement, she relayed that at the Planning
Commission hearing, a commissioner stated that"he knows some of the owners of these
places on Beach Blvd. I'll help you; I'll go talk to them. I'm sure they'd like easy money."
(Id. at 2:31.) The underlined portion of the following text should be added to the final
paragraph of page 17:
Ms. Zeno stated to the best of her knowledge Huntington Beach Community
Church is the only entity that responded to the inquiry for locations. But a Planning
Commission had expressed his believe that owners of the other sites would be
interested in "easy money" if properly contacted, and he had offered to facilitate
that.
City staff recommends: "Ms. Zeno stated to the best of her knowledge Huntington Beach
Community Church is the only entity that responded to the inquiry for locations, and that a
Planning Commissioner had offered to facilitate discussions with other commercial property
owners that would be interested in "easy money"by hosting the proposed facility. "
3) For a more complete understanding of the intention of the Council, slightly more context
should be added to the second paragraph on page 18, which reflects Senior Planner
Beckman's actual statement (Id. at 3:38), with this underlined text added:
Senior Planner Beckman read the three required findings and explained that it is
staffs interpretation that the proposed motion is that the third required finding for
approving a CUP,namely the satisfaction of all applicable provisions in the Zoning
Code, could not be met.
4) In the second paragraph on page 18, For grammatical clarity,the final full paragraph of
the Item 17 Minutes should be revised to read (with strike-through text deleted and
underlined text added):
A motion was made by McKeon, second Van Der Mark to deny approval of CUP
23-006 on account of being unable to make the required finding
denial found in Zoning Code Section 241.10 A. 3., "The proposed use will comply
with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20
through 25 and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district
2/4
in which it would be located."
3/4
These corrections and clarifications will make for a more complete and readily
understandable record, and I request that the Council approve these changes.
Respectfully,
G ) IRELAWPC
/ r
Arid Strauss, Of-Counsel
4/4
Moore, Tania
From: Fikes, Cathy
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 9:38 AM
To: Moore, Tania
Subject: FW: Requested Corrections to 7/18 Minutes (8/1 Council Meeting Agenda Item 8)
Attachments: 2023-08-01- Comment Requesting Correction to Minutes.pdf
From: astrauss@greenfirelaw.com <astrauss@greenfirelaw.com>
Sent:Tuesday,August 1, 2023 7:16 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF) <city.council@surfcity-hb.org>
Cc: Gates, Michael<Michael.Gates@surfcity-hb.org>; Hyland, Connor<connor.hyland@surfcity-hb.org>
Subject: Requested Corrections to 7/18 Minutes (8/1 Council Meeting Agenda Item 8)
Good morning Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark, and Council Members Bolton, Burns, Kalmick, McKeon
and Moser:
Attached, please find recommended corrections to the proposed minutes regarding the Council's decision to deny
AT&T's requested CUP to construct a cell tower at 8101 Slater Avenue. These changes will provide a clearer and more
accurate record,which is particularly important at this time as a complete record supports the Council's decision and
potentially discourages suit by AT&T.
Sincerely,
Ariel Strauss
510-900-9502 x 702
Greenfire Law,P.C.
2748 Adeline Street,Suite A
Berkeley,CA 94703
PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,18 U.S.C.Section 2510,and its
disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message.This transmission,and any attachments,may contain confidential attorney-
client privileged information and attorney work product.If you are not the intended recipient,any disclosure,copying,distribution or use of any of the information
contained in or attached to this transmission is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.Please contact me immediately by return e-mail or at 510-900-9502 x 2,and destroy the
original transmission and its attachments without reading or saving in any manner.
SUPPLEMENTAL
COMMUNICATION
Meng Date: Ri I ao?3
Agenda Item No.; g ( - (05-d)
1
Ariel Strauss,Of-Counsel
2748 Adeline Street, Ste. A
GREENFIRE Berkeley,CA 94703
LAW, PC 510-900-9502 x 702
astrauss@greenfirelaw.com
www.greenfirelaw.com
August 1, 2023
Via Electronic Mail
To: City.Council@surfcity-hb.org
RE: Correction to July 18th Meeting Minutes (August 1 Council Meeting Agenda Item 8)
Dear Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark, and Council Members Burns, McKeon,
Kalmick,Moser,and Bolton:
I am writing on behalf of Christina Price requesting that the Council amend the proposed
Minutes concerning July 18, 2023 Agenda Item 17 concerning denial of AT&T's application for
CUP No. 23-006 to construct a wireless communication facility at 8101 Slater Avenue.
Ms. Price greatly appreciates the Council's careful consideration of the cell tower at the
previous meeting and having the courage to come to the right conclusion in the best interest of
the community and in accordance with the Zoning Code.At that meeting,the Council correctly
upheld the appeal because it determined that it could not make the findings required by Zoning
Code Section 241.10(A)(3)for issuance of a conditional use permit. Given that AT&T may be
considering filing suit,which under federal law must be done with 30 days of the denial letter
that was issued on July 26,2023,providing minutes that clearly reflect the robust record
supporting the Council's decision is particularly important.
In general,the proposed Minutes are impressively detailed and accurate. Some portions
are unclear and I recommend the following four additions:
1) Page 14 of the draft minutes summarizes Senior Planner Hayden Beckman's presentation.
Critically,according to the video recording, Mr. Beckman added: "I would like to clarify
for the record and for the Council that the appellant's letter in this specific instance was
correct. There is a facility that is 840 feet due west of the subject site. This is a roof-
mounted facility that was modified in 2020."
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xr5dHArmJSc at 2:17.)Given that AT&T's failure
1/3
to consider alternative sites was central to the Council's denial decision,the second full
paragraph of page 18 of the Minutes should be amended to conclude:
Senior Planner Beckman clarified that there is an existing roof-mounted facility
840 feet due west of the subject site that was not identified in the application or
staff report; staff did not believe that roof-mounted facilities were required to be
considered for collocation when considering an application for a free-standing
facility.
2) The proposed Minutes summarize Carol Jean Zeno's public remarks in a potentially
misleading way. The Minutes state"Ms. Zeno stated to the best of her knowledge
Huntington Beach Community Church is the only entity that responded to the inquiry for
locations."However, following that statement, she relayed that at the Planning
Commission hearing, a commissioner stated that"he knows some of the owners of these
places on Beach Blvd. I'll help you; I'll go talk to them. I'm sure they'd like easy money."
(Id. at 2:31.) The underlined portion of the following text should be added to the final
paragraph of page 17:
Ms. Zeno stated to the best of her knowledge Huntington Beach Community
Church is the only entity that responded to the inquiry for locations.But a Planning
Commission had expressed his believe that owners of the other sites would be
interested in "easy money" if properly contacted, and he had offered to facilitate
that.
3) For a more complete understanding of the intention of the Council, slightly more context
should be added to the second paragraph on page 18, which reflects Senior Planner
Beckman's actual statement(Id. at 3:38),with this underlined text added:
Senior Planner Beckman read the three required findings and explained that it is
staffs interpretation that the proposed motion is that the third required finding for
approving a CUP,namely the satisfaction of all applicable provisions in the Zoning
Code, could not be met.
4) In the second paragraph on page 18,For grammatical clarity,the final full paragraph of
the Item 17 Minutes should be revised to read(with strike-through text deleted and
underlined text added):
A motion was made by McKeon, second Van Der Mark to deny approval of CUP
23-006 on account of being unable to make the required finding
denial found in Zoning Code Section 241.10 A. 3., "The proposed use will comply
with the provisions of the base district and other applicable provisions in Titles 20
through 25 and any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district
in which it would be located."
2/3
These corrections and clarifications will make for a more complete and readily
understandable record, and I request that the Council approve these changes.
Respectfully,
G E I' LAW,PC
Ariel Strauss, Of-Counsel
3/3