VNC Administrative Committee Meeting Agenda

03/09/2009 - 7:00pm
03/09/2009 - 9:30pm

Administrative Committee Meeting Agenda

Extra Space Storage, Presidents Row Room
658 South Venice Blvd, Venice, 90291
Monday, March 9, 2009 at 7:00 PM

Note: The Administrative Committee does not address or consider the merits of proposed agenda items. Its function is to determine whether a proposed agenda item will be placed on the next Board meeting agenda, postponed, referred to a specific committee for review and recommendation, treated as an announcement, or considered and resolved as a non-Board administrative matter. Unless otherwise noted, the President abstains on all votes.

1. Call to Order and Roll Call

2. Approval of the AdCom Agenda
3. Approval of any outstanding Administrative Committee minutes submitted by the Secretary

February 9, 2009 Administrative Committee Meeting Minutes
(see http://venicenc.org/files/090209VNCAdComMinutesRev.doc)

4. Announcements & Public Comment on items not on the Agenda (15 min, no more than 2 minutes per person)

5. Old AdCom Business

A James Murez (murez@venice.net) & Jed Pauker (310-839-9209; jed@jed.net): Presentation of a case tracking system for LUPC (15 min) – See AdCom Exhibit A [LUPC to report to Mar 9 AdCom]

B Bruce Birch (retrogrouch@earthlink.net): Post LUPC Policy Statements [Referred to REC; CM to email to IK]

C Joe Murphy (joedmurphyvnc@ca.rr.com): I would like AdCom to consider Jed Pauker’s below suggestion and to include an invitation to Shana Bonstin to address the Board. Jed’s 02/21/2009 suggestion is:

All, Given the time frame, perhaps it will be helpful for LUPC, and for the VNC Board, to schedule multiple considerations over the next two months of the effects of this ordinance.

Whether you already support or oppose the SLSO as it affects Venice, the ordinance represents a very significant amount of work by Planning, with dedicated research and follow-up by LUPC. Its complexity of issues affecting day-to-day Venice life and development cannot possibly be explicated in two or three hours.

I’m not entirely willing to “bet the farm” – the relationship between VNC and the City Planning Department – on an issue where due process is (finally) allowing timely public input. Knowing that it takes a lot to get Venetians out of our yards and into the chambers of civic counsel, wouldn’t some coordinated and sustained outreach effort be a “best practice” here? Understanding that this might slow down the process, what’s the hurry?

Inviting Helene Bibas to answer questions in 2007 and Shana Bonstin to discuss the Director’s Interpretation last month were two of the smartest things LUPC has done during my short tenure. Why not build on these successes by giving this issue the considered forum it deserves? IMHO, Jed Pauker

Inviting Shana Bonstin to speak would broaden Board understanding of this issue. As in the selection of members to fill board & LUPC vacancies, this would provide an opportunity for Board Members to pose questions. It would also provide Shana & LUPC an opportunity to respond in writing for distribution to the Board and posting for public information before discussion at the April meeting and discussion and vote at the May meeting.

6. New AdCom Business

A Mike Newhouse (president@venicenc.org): Discussion of OPD Election.

B Marc Saltzberg (mas_marina@yahoo.com): The Outreach Committee passed the following motion by a vote of 6 to 2 (with the Chair abstaining) at its regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday, March 4th, 2009:

The Outreach Committee will send an email to Venice stakeholders who registered for the first time in February’s Initiative election. The email will thank them for voting and advise them that their registration information has been added to the VNC’s Vote Rolls. The message will also provide them with the opportunity to request that their email contact be added to our email list so that they can receive VNC announcements.

The Outreach Committee would like ADCOM’s approval of this procedural matter.

C Consideration of DRAFT March 17, 2009 Board Agenda (see below)

7. Announcements & Public Comment on items not on the Agenda (15 min, no more than 2 minutes per person)

8. Adjourn

Draft – Board of Officers Meeting Agenda

Westminster Elementary School (Auditorium)
1010 Abbot Kinney Blvd, Venice, 90291
Tuesday, March 17, 2009 at 7:00 PM

1. Call to Order and Roll Call.

2. Approval of the Agenda

3. Approval of any outstanding minutes submitted by the Secretary

February 17, 2009 Board Meeting Minutes
(see http://venicenc.org/files/090217VNCBoardMinutesRev.doc)

Committee Reports are provided in written form when available

4. Consent Calendar

A From LUPC – De Minimis Projects

I Challis Macpherson (Chair-LUPC@VeniceNC.org) on behalf of LUPC: Challis Macpherson moves that VNC Board of Officers send a De Minimis Form Letter stating No Opinion, No Recommendation Without Prejudice to CD11 regarding entitlement applications received from 1-17-09 through 2-9-09. See Exhibit A

5. Treasurers Report – See Exhibit B accept report as presented

6. Scheduled Announcements (no more than 1 minute per report unless otherwise stated)

A Mike Newhouse (president@venicenc.org):

B Governmental Reports

• DONE: Deanna Stevenson
• LAPD: Officer ?, Senior Lead Officer
• State Assemblyperson Ted Lieu: Melissa S. Ramoso, Field Representative (310-615-3515; Melissa.ramoso@asm.ca.gov)
• Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa: Jennifer Badger, West Area Representative (310-479-3823; jennifer.badger@lacity.org)
• City Councilperson Bill Rosendahl: Arturo Piña, Field Deputy
• LADWP: VNC Representatives DeDe Audet & Challis McPherson

C Services of the Los Angeles Public Library, Venice Branch
Lucille Cappas (310-821-20665; lcappas@lapl.org)

7. Announcements & Public Comment on items not on the Agenda (15 min, no more than 2 minutes per person)
(no board member announcements permitted)
8. Old Business

A Mike Newhouse (president@venicenc.org):

B From LUPC

I Challenge to City Interpretation of impact of SLSO on VCZSP
Challis Macpherson (Chair-LUPC@VeniceNC.org) on behalf of LUPC: Regarding DIR 2008-4703 DI, Director’s (of Planning Department) Interpretation of Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance as it pertains to VCZSP; considering that LUPC unanimously disagrees with the Director’s Interpretation and wants the Director to consider VNC prior recommendations, LUPC recommends that the VNC Board of Officers recommend that this document be reconsidered in light of prior recommendations made by VNC. See Exhibit C

II Recommendation for locating Red Car east of Venice Public Library
Challis Macpherson (Chair-LUPC@VeniceNC.org) on behalf of LUPC: Regarding LUPC proposals for community use of 520 Venice Way:

Regarding proposals to occupy city owned land located at 520 Venice Way, Challis Macpherson moves that VNC Board of Officers accept LUPC’s recommendation to recommend to Councilman Rosendahl that the Venice Heritage Museum (Red Car) be situated on Centennial Park, located immediately East of the Venice Public Library, as soon as possible and that the restoration (of the Red Car) take place there on that site.
[Postponed to March 9 AdCom mtg 17-1-1]

9. New Business

A From Board Members

I VNC Vision Goals – Proposed Standing Rule
Linda Lucks (Lindalucks@aol.com) & Joe Murphy (joedmurphyvnc@ca.rr.com): At its December 5, 2008 VNC Board retreat, the Board reflected on work done and considered these Vision Goals as a way to stimulate the vitality of the VNC. The intent is to focus the deliberations of the VNC Board and its Committees so that we can better serve our community. It is therefore proposed that the VNC Board adopt the following as a Standing Rule entitled VNC Vision Goals: [Suggested for discussion only at next Board Meeting]

Standing Rule __ – VNC Vision Goals

To stimulate the vitality of the VNC, the Board and VNC Committees are encouraged to consider the below VNC Vision Goals in their deliberations.

I Vision Goals

Although the VNC is a political body, and inevitably it will become embroiled in issues that divide the community, these goals are designed to promote a more proactive, collaborative vision for VNC Committees to include in their deliberations as they formulate recommendations for Board consideration. The intent is to create a working framework of integrated strategies capable of achieving, over time, broader consensus and increased:

• Participation
• Walkability
• Diversity
• Creativity
• Collaboration
• Brainstorming

Participation: Consider strategies that encourage & facilitate broader involvement of stakeholders, major organizations, community groups, and government institutions, etc. …

Walkability: Consider strategies that reduce the use of cars and that promote alternatives such as walking, skateboarding, biking & bike racks, circulation systems (trolleys), park & ride rather than additional parking, street-narrowing/sidewalk widening, walk/bike/skateboard lanes separated from traffic, easier neighborhood pedestrian access to commercial stores, etc. …

Diversity: Consider strategies that encourage & facilitate realistic recommendations designed to increase economic diversity, including affordable housing, etc. …

Creativity: Consider strategies that promote the arts, encourage & facilitate creativity. This can apply to architecture, public art, social events (neighborhood gatherings/street movies/theatre/dance/pottery/…), etc. …

Collaboration: Consider strategies that encourage & facilitate ‘level playing fields’ for collaborative negotiation; opt for procedures & policies that ‘promote flexibility & dialogue’ over ‘reacting defensively to rigid criteria’, facilitation training, etc. …

Brainstorming: Consider strategies that encourage & facilitate exploring of non-traditional options for achieving shared objectives, etc. …

II Board Commitment: The VNC Board commits to considering these vision goals in its deliberations.

III Committee Implementation: VNC Committees are encouraged to:

• Consider the above vision goals in their deliberations on any matter that will come before the Board as a recommendation from the committee.

• Identify the major organizations, community groups, and City institutions within its purview. Add them to mailing & email lists, invite them to meetings, and include their written positions on any matter that will come before the Board as a recommendation from the committee.

• Designate one of their members as its liaison to consult with and solicit comment from peer liaisons from other affected VNC Committees as deemed appropriate by the committee.

• In its recommendation to the Board, provide a brief summary that includes:

a. Analysis of each vision goal considered (including input from peer liaisons); and
b. Its impact, if any, on the recommendation.

II Amendment to Standing Rule 7 – Administrative Committee
Joe Murphy (joedmurphyvnc@ca.rr.com): Move adoption of the following amendments to Standing Rule 7 – Administrative Committee:

All agenda requests must be submitted to the Secretary no less than 5 days prior to the Administrative Committee meeting. Any request not received by the Secretary 5 days prior to the meeting will not be considered and will be held until the next meeting. [Add]

• All requests & supporting documents must be submitted by 7PM on the Wednesday before the scheduled Administrative Committee meeting – no exceptions (no ‘placeholders’, no distributions at the Board Meeting).
• Board Members & Committees must use the Online Agenda Request Form. Email requests will be rejected.
• The Online Agenda Request Form must include contact information, item title, and fully drafted motions and/or letters.
• Supporting documents must be emailed in digital format with the item title in the subject line. Incomplete or confusing motions or letters will result in the rejection of the item with notice to the person submitting the request & to the President. [End Add]

Persons or groups who are successful in having a matter agendized by the Administrative Committee for a Board meeting are encouraged to transmit said documents to all Board members 72 hours in advance of the subject Board meeting. These transmittals will be the responsibility of the person(s)/group(s) requesting the agendizing and should be done by emailing all documents to all board members. [Delete: , and by posting said documents to an Agenda Documentation account on the VNC webpage.]

Any letter requests shall include a draft letter as well as the names and addresses of proposed recipients. Proponents of the letter shall prepare a draft and email it to the President for review, edit and signature. The President shall return the approved version by email to the proponents with a copy to the Secretary for VNC records. Proponents of the letter shall then copy and send the approved letter.

III Recommendation for board to gain a better understanding of the SLSO as it affects Venice Joe Murphy (joedmurphyvnc@ca.rr.com): I would like the Board to consider Jed Pauker’s below suggestion and to include an invitation to Shana Bonstin to address the Board. Jed’s suggestion is:

Re: Director’s Interpretation of SMSO vs VCZSP
From: Jed Pauker
To: board@venicenc.org
Date: 02/21/2009

All,

Given the time frame, perhaps it will be helpful for LUPC, and for the VNC Board, to schedule multiple considerations over the next two months of the effects of this ordinance.

Whether you already support or oppose the SLSO as it affects Venice, the ordinance represents a very significant amount of work by Planning, with dedicated research and follow-up by LUPC. Its complexity of issues affecting day-to-day Venice life and development cannot possibly be explicated in two or three hours.

I’m not entirely willing to “bet the farm” – the relationship between VNC and the City Planning Department – on an issue where due process is (finally) allowing timely public input. Knowing that it takes a lot to get Venetians out of our yards and into the chambers of civic counsel, wouldn’t some coordinated and sustained outreach effort be a “best practice” here?

Understanding that this might slow down the process, what’s the hurry?

Inviting Helene Bibas to answer questions in 2007 and Shana Bonstin to discuss the Director’s Interpretation last month were two of the smartest things LUPC has done during my short tenure. Why not build on these successes by giving this issue the considered forum it deserves? IMHO, Jed Pauker

Inviting Shana Bonstin to speak would broaden Board understanding of this issue. As in the selection of members to fill board & LUPC vacancies, this would provide an opportunity for Board Members to pose questions. It would also provide Shana & LUPC an opportunity to respond in writing for distribution to the Board and posting for public information before discussion at the April meeting and discussion and vote at the May meeting.

IV Standing Rule Requiring Board Members To Take Ethics Training
Linda Lucks (Vicepresident@VeniceNC.org)

All Venice Neighborhood Council board members are required to complete the State and City mandated Ethics Training course (offered online, hard copy, in person). All new board members must present a Certificate of Completion to the VNC Secretary before they will be allowed to discuss or vote on any land use issues or expenditure of City funds. Board members who serve more than one term must re-certify to the Secretary prior to the beginning of each term or they will also be prohibited from discussing or voting on expenditure or land use issues. Any board member not able to participate for non-completion of Ethics training shall state the reason for recusal.

V Adoption of State and City Ethics Training Course Requirement
Linda Lucks (Vicepresident@VeniceNC.org)

MOTION: Currently members of neighborhood councils are required to take a two part training course on ethics that reviews a number of issues such as, the Brown Act, the California Public Records Act, Gifts, Lobbying and Accountability. This training is about 2 hours. The Ethics Commission and DONE provide an on-line course (www.lacitynieighborhoods.org) and the City Attorney with DONE provide trainings once a year.

According to DONE only 650 of the approximate 1600 members of neighborhood councils have completed the required training. DONE has begun to seriously address the issue and to encourage 100% compliance.

Neighborhood Council Members are provided the opportunity to expend $ 50,000 dollars a year and have the opportunity to weigh in on land use issues. Ethics training would give them a better sense of what is expected of them as public servants.

This Motion would send a clear message that the state required Ethics training should be taken seriously by members of Venice Neighborhood Council. The City Council has moved forward to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of neighborhood councils by adopting a number of the NCRC recommendations.
This has shown a degree of trust and respect to neighborhood councils. With this type of empowerment come certain responsibilities and requirements such as Ethics Training, the Code of Civility and having a greater appreciation for the diversity of the neighborhood and neighborhood council members.

I THERFORE MOVE that all current Neighborhood Council Members be required to complete Ethics training as required by Government Code Section 53235, sign the Code of Civility as established by the neighborhood council.

I FURTHER MOVE that any Neighborhood Council Member who is not in compliance with the ethics training required under Section 53235 of the Government Code, has not signed the Code of Civility as established by the neighborhood council within 45 days of election or appointment to the Neighborhood Council, shall be barred from participating in any official business as a Member of the Neighborhood Council until such time the ethics training and Code of Civility been completed.

VI Require Board Members Signature to VNC Code of Civility
Linda Lucks (Vicepresident@VeniceNC.org): I move adoption of a Venice Neighborhood Council Code of Civility to be signed by all board members on taking office and renewed every year in June.

Collectively and individually, the members of the Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) agree to abide by a Code of Civility to ensure that VNC business is conducted in a respectful and courteous manner, and in a way that will generate respect and credibility for the VNC.

The freedom to express one’s views about public matters is cornerstone of the democratic process. The VNC welcomes the diverse views and opinions of Neighborhood Council board members and stakeholders as they relate to the issues before us. In order for these discussions to be meaningful and effective, we must treat others with respect and dignity.

By adoption of this motion, and by affixing our signatures to this document, we collectively and individually agree to abide by our Code of Civility to the best of our abilities.

1. I will conduct myself in a professional and civil manner at all times as a representative of the VNC.

2. I will treat each member of the VNC and members of the public with respect at all times, regardless of an individual’s opinion, ethnicity, race, sexuality, age, disability, or religion.

3. Even in the face of disagreement, or differences of opinion, I will demonstrate esteem and deference for my colleagues and the public.

4. Under no circumstances during VNC meetings, functions, or events will I engage in or threaten to engage in any verbal or physical attack on any other individual.

5. I will commit to communicate my ideas and points of view clearly, and allow others to do the same without interruption.

6. I will not use language that is abusive, threatening, obscene, or slanderous, including using profanities, insults, or other disparaging remarks or gestures.

7. Derogatory language about an individual’s ethnicity, race, sexuality, age, disability, or religion is not acceptable.

8. I will take responsibility for my own actions, and will work to fulfill my role and responsibilities as specified in the bylaws.

9. I will commit to learn the applicable laws that govern the VNC, the Brown Act, ethics rules, and other applicable laws and will not knowingly violate any of the above.

10. I will do my utmost to create a safe and effective environment for conducting business.

11. I will promote and enforce a safe meeting environment at all times. At moments when members of the public become disruptive and violate the rules of civility that we have pledge to follow, I will join my fellow board members in demanding that the persons conduct themselves in a respectful and orderly manner even if I agree with the point of view that is being expressed.

12. I will seek to present information truthfully, and will not knowingly misrepresent, mischaracterize, or misquote information received from others.

13. I pledge to truly listen to and hear other points of view.

14. I will practice the art of being able to disagree without being disagreeable.

15. If I find myself representing my personal interests before my community’s interests, I will publicly disclose the differences and recuse myself from voting on such matters.

16. I will commit to good faith efforts to resolve any grievances that come before the VMC as specified in the Plan or city ordinance.

17. I owe it to my fellow VNC members, the public, and the decision-makers who we are trying to influence to make the best possible effort to understand the issues before me. I will “do my homework”.

Signed:

Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________
Name__________________________ Date_________________________________

VII Off-leash dogs in Oakwood Park
Linda Lucks (Vicepresident@VeniceNC.org) & Pastor Horace Allen, Friendship Baptist Church:
Request Board send the following letter:

The Honorable Bill Rosendahl
Los Angeles City Council
City Hall
200 N. Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

cc: Captain Joseph Hiltner, LAPD SLO Theresa Skinner
RE: Enforcment of Off Leash Dog Laws in Oakwood Park/Recreation Center

Dear Bill:

Stakeholdeers have brought to our attention a lapse of enforecement of the existing LAMC ordinance prohibiting off leash dogs in Oakwood Park.

We respectfully request enforcement of this law, so that neighborhood residents and their families have full use of the park as designed. There is a legal dog park in Venice on Westminster and Main.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter

Mike Newhouse, President Venice Neighborhood Council

VIII Modification of VNC Street Furniture Position Linda Lucks (Vicepresident@VeniceNC.org) & Dennis Hathaway (dennis.hathaway@venicenc.org): I move to modify and revise a letter adopted by VNC in May 2008, as suggested by the Neighborhood Committee and it’s author the original author of the motion,, Venice resident, Dennis Hathaway, founder of the Coalition to End Billboard Blight, former member of the VNC Land Use and Planning Committee (Revisions in Bold by Hathaway):

Dear Board Members:

I understand that the board is going to discuss street furniture sitings at Tuesday’s meeting. As the original author in LUPC of the below street furniture motion that was adopted by the board on May, 20, 2008, I would like to suggest that the board consider the following additions to that motion:

That all or a portion of the revenue the city receives from CBS/Decaux attributable to street furniture installed in Venice be placed in a special fund to be used for public amenities in Venice designed to improve its visual attractiveness and provide a more inviting, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere.

I know that some members of the community would like to oppose the siting of any street furniture in Venice. As the president of an organization fighting visual blight and outdoor advertising, I am very sympathetic with that view. However, in light of the fact that the city has a contract with CBS/Decaux for street furniture, I think this stance is unlikely to succeed, and that it would be more effective to try to gain some control over where the street furniture is located, and to derive some offsetting community benefit.

Sincerely, Dennis Hathaway

MOTION:
I Move that the May 20, 2008 Motion adopted by the VNC board: “Whereas the below pieces of street furniture have been installed in Venice, and further requests for approval of sites are pending, the office of Council District 11, in partnership with the Venice Neighborhood Council shall determine that street furniture sites are equitably distributed throughout the district prior to approving any additional sites in Venice. Furthermore, the office of Council District 11 shall not approve any street furniture sitings in the following locations without specific VNC consent:

1) Any area west of Pacific Ave.
2) On any street other than Lincoln Blvd., Venice Blvd., and Washington Blvd.
3) In any location where a motorist’s view of cross or oncoming traffic is impeded.
4) In any location where a pedestrian’s direct line of travel on a sidewalk is impeded.

Furthermore, any so-called “public amenity” kiosk shall have one side accessible at all times for community notices, bulletins, artwork, or any other community used deemed appropriate by a community oversight body to be determined.

Furthermore, all or a portion of the revenue the city receives from CBS/Decaux attributable to street furniture installed in Venice be placed in a special fund to be used for public amenities in Venice designed to improve its visual attractiveness and provide a more inviting, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere.

In light of the fact that the city has a contract with CBS/Decaux for street furniture, the Venice Neighborhood Council will work with Councilman Rosendahl to identify appropriate sites, if any to share control over possible locations of street furniture, and to negotiate in good faith, a fair percentage of funds for Venice to derive an offsetting of community benefit.

B From Stakeholder

I Motion to Rescind May 20, 2008 VNC Street Furniture Position
Gail Rogers (Gailee33@aol.com): Request board adopt the following motion:

The board hereby rescinds the following motion which it approved on May 20, 2008:

Whereas the below pieces of street furniture have been installed in Venice, and further requests for approval of sites are pending, the office of Council District 11 shall determine that street furniture sites are equitably distributed throughout the district prior to approving any additional sites in Venice. Furthermore, the office of Council District 11 shall not approve any street furniture sitings in the following locations.
1) Any area west of Pacific Ave.
2) On any street other than Lincoln Blvd., Venice Blvd., and Washington Blvd.
3) In any location where a motorist’s view of cross or oncoming traffic is impeded.
4) In any location where a pedestrian’s direct line of travel on a sidewalk is impeded.
Furthermore, any so-called “public amenity” kiosk shall have one side accessible at all times for community notices, bulletins, artwork, or any other community used deemed appropriate by a community oversight body to be determined.
Transit Shelters
NB Lincoln Blvd NS Lake
SB Lincoln Blvd NS Venice
NB Main St NS Rose
SB Main St FS Sunset Ave
NB Main St FS Sunset Ave
SB Main St NS Venice Way
NB Main FS Westminster
SB Main St NS Westminster
NB Pacific FS Westminster Transit Shelters
EB Venice Blvd NS Abbot Kinney
WB Venice FS Shell
WB Venice FS Lincoln
WB Washington Blvd FS Ocean Ave
EB Washington Blvd FS Abbot Kinney
WB Washington Blvd FS Abbot Kinney
EB Washington Blvd NS Oxford Ave

Public Amenity Kiosk
WB Abbot Kinney NS Main St
II Motion to Adopt VNC Street Furniture Position
Gail Rogers (Gailee33@aol.com): Request board approve the below motion:

Motion: The Venice Neighborhood Council Board hereby declares its opposition to the installation in Venice of all street furniture and its associated advertising per the current contract with CBS Outdoors/ JCDecaux and requests our representatives and all hearing authorities to act to rescind said contract, to require the removal of any street furniture already installed per said contract, and to oppose any subsequent pressures to permit the installation of street furniture and associated advertising in ANY location in Venice.

III Change in Election Rules
Phil Raider (310-399-4449; philraider@msn.com): I respectfully request that a rule be formulated that would insure that there will never again be Saturday only voting in any NC elections. This rule disenfranchises an entire segment of the Venice NC constituency.

IV Motion for an Independent Review of the Feb. 21 VNC Election Mark Lipman (escalatepeace@yahoo.com):
Motion: That, as numerous grievances have been made throughout the Venice community regarding the VNC special election on Feb. 21, 2009, the VNC BOARD establish an independent commission to review the objections made prior to and after the election to see if there are substantial grounds to invalidate the results of the election and see if a new election needs to be scheduled.

C From Rules & Elections Committee

I Bylaw Amendment Regarding City 2010 Election Requirements Ira Koslow (ira.koslow@venicenc.org): REC recommends (3-0-0) that the VNC Board comply with requirements specified in the Los Angeles City Council February 20, 2008 Amendment of its enacted May 30, 2001 Plan for a Citywide System of Neighborhood Councils by adopting, & scheduling an election for stakeholder approval of, the below addition of Article XIII –– VENICE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL ELECTIONS (which conforms to the draft language distributed by DONE) to its Bylaws:

XIII –– VENICE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL ELECTIONS

A. Neighborhood Council Elections and Composition of Board of Officers: This Article explains the administration of Neighborhood Council elections by the City Clerk and provides information regarding Stakeholder membership, the board’s structure, and Stakeholder eligibility for voting and being selected or elected to a board seat. The provisions in this Article supersede any prior inconsistent provisions contained in the bylaws.

The Governing Board must, to the extent possible, reflect the diversity of the Neighborhood Council’s Stakeholders. Accordingly, no single Stakeholder group shall comprise a majority of the Neighborhood Council’s governing body, unless extenuating circumstances are warranted and approved by DONE.

Elections shall be conducted every two years in even-numbered years and shall be administered by the City Clerk beginning on April-June 2010. The rules and regulations promulgated by the City Clerk in conjunction with an election administered by the City Clerk shall take precedence over any inconsistent language in these bylaws. The term for each currently elected board member shall be extended through and until a successor is elected or appointed at the April-June 2010 City Clerk conducted election.

Beginning with the City Clerk conducted election held on April-June 2010, a board member’s term shall be for the duration of two years or until a successor is elected or appointed.

B. Stakeholder Definition. Venice Neighborhood Council membership is open to all Stakeholders. “Stakeholders” shall be defined as those who live, work, or own property in the neighborhood and also to those who declare a stake in the neighborhood and affirm the factual basis for it. All stakeholders aged 16 and above shall be entitled to vote in the Neighborhood Council Elections.

DONE also distributed FAQs, including the following:

STAKEHOLDER

What is the new Stakeholder Definition?

On December 18, 2007, the Los Angeles City Council adopted the Neighborhood Council Review Commission’s Recommendation #42 (File 05-0894-S3), which defines stakeholders as “those who live, work, or own property in the neighborhood and also to those who declare a stake in the neighborhood and affirm the factual basis for it.”

How will the City Clerk verify a Stakeholder’s status at the polls and during the VBM period given the new Stakeholder Definition?

For the 2008 NC elections, the City Clerk will utilize the process that individual NC’s have specified in their Election Procedures for verifying stakeholder status. For NCs that utilize the Self-Affirmation identification method, the City Clerk will employ a written affirmation that must be signed by the stakeholder affirming his or her status, under penalty of perjury.

Determinations on this matter for the 2010 NC Elections will be addressed and discussed with all Neighborhood Councils during the 2009 Moratorium.

Comment: The answer to the second question seems to assume that the current NC ‘Election Procedures for verifying stakeholder status’ can be used during the ‘2009 Moratorium’ during which time ‘Determinations on this matter for the 2010 NC Elections will be addressed and discussed with all Neighborhood Councils’.

It therefore seems reasonable to assume that there will eventually surface a common sense understanding that ‘factual basis’ has to be verifiable in order for ‘a written affirmation that must be signed by the stakeholder affirming his or her status, under penalty of perjury’ to have any sensible meaning.

D From Arts Committee

I Motion for VNC to endorse Public Arts Project
Nadine Parkos (310) 869-4733; nadineparkos@aol.com) : I, Nadine Parkos, Chair of the VNC Arts Committee, move that the VNC Board of Officers accept the motion of the VNC Arts Committee to endorse Venice Artist Robin Murez’s “The Palas” project as a Public Arts Project for Venice. Vote: 7-0-1. Please see description of The Palas project below:

The “PALAS” – that’s Italian for The Balls Following a century’s old Venetian tradition, The Palas are to be permanent visual markers of, and located within, the various neighborhoods of Venice to artistically focus identity, create camaraderie, engender pride and enable participation from each neighborhood in cultural festivities throughout the year and throughout Venice as a whole.

The Palas are two foot diameter concrete spheres encased in a mosaic of black and white marble. They function as sculptural seating – solid, yet soft to the touch – climbable and sit-able.

Each neighborhood of Venice will have its own logo for its Pala. Community participation is invited in their design, fabrication, and site preparation.

The Palas will be located within each of the neighborhoods of Venice – often transforming underutilized or blighted street corners into beautiful green neighborhood gathering spaces. A full set of all The Palas might also encircle the Windward traffic circle or span the medians of Venice Boulevard in Venice.

Over time, banners and costumes with colors and additional unique identifying features will be developed by and for each neighborhood.

These first three Palas may currently be viewed at Robin’s Sculpture Garden, 1632 Abbot Kinney Boulevard. They are part of the Artist’s designed Los Angeles Community Beautification Grant to landscape with an in-ground maze and sculptural seating: “The Venice Corner Ball Park.” See: www.venicepublicart.com.

II Motion for VNC to endorse improvement of the Windward Avenue Traffic Circle
Nadine Parkos (310) 869-4733; nadineparkos@aol.com) : The VNC Arts Committee moves that the VNC Board of Officers approve the incremental improvement of the Windward Avenue Traffic Circle. Vote: 7-0-1 (J. Solomon left before the vote.)

III Motion for letter requesting support for Blankenship Ballet Studio
Nadine Parkos (310) 869-4733; nadineparkos@aol.com) : As an expression of appreciation for the Blankenship Ballet Studio’s service to the Venice community, the VNC Arts Committee moves that the VNC Board of Officers ask Councilmember Bill Rosendahl and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, as City authorities, to do everything within their powers to protect and preserve the Blankenship Ballet Studio as an Arts facility in Venice. Vote 6-0-1 (J. Solomon left before the vote, and M. Blankenship recused himself.)

E From Neighborhood Committee

I Recommended New Members of Neighborhood Committee
Linda Lucks (Vicepresident@VeniceNC.org): In an ongoing effort to reach out to all neighborhoods in Venice, The Neighborhood Committee wishes to add the following individuals as voting members:

Eddie Nuno – Oakwood (to replace Julie Martinez)
Moniica McFerren – Coeur D’Alene (Venice Family Clinc)
Kristopher Valentime – East of Lincoln, South of Venice Blvd.

F From Stakeholder

I Request for Sponsorship of Venice Beach Music Fest 4 August 8, 9
Milton Rosenberg (415-531-9893; miltondavidrosenberg@gmail.com) & Michael Jost (310-866-9276): Request for Sponsorship of the 4th annual Venice Beach Music Festival.

The Venice Beach Music Fest is a free annual music event open to the public held at Windward Plaza. This year, the festival has been expanded to 2 days: August 8 & 9, 2009.

We are requesting sponsorship in the amount of $3000 or any amount possible. Funds would be used for stage and sound production costs. We are respectfully requesting the scheduling of a review with the budget committee. We are also requesting an opportunity to present the sponsorship request to the Venice Neighborhood Council in an upcoming meeting.

Venice Neighborhood Council Participation last year was extremely helpful and appreciated. Sponsorship is acknowledged with the Venice Neighborhood Council Logo on posters, handbills, and onsite banners. Last year, council members said a few words at the event which could augment the acknowledgements from the stage for the Council’s participation again this year. The site is reserved and scheduled with the parks department.

Respectfully,
Milton Rosenberg 415 531 9893
Michael Jost 310 866 9276

G From Ad Hoc Homelessness & Vehicular Living Committee

I Homelessness – Report & Recommendation to Support St. Joseph’s Center’s Service Registry
Mark Ryavec (delphiassociates@ca.rr.com) and Carolyn Rios (310-821-7922; crlynrios@ca.rr.com): The VNC Ad Hoc Homelessness and Vehicular Occupation Committee presents a report and recommendations regarding St. Joseph’s Center’s proposal to create a service registry of the homeless population of Venice. The proposed service registry would be modeled on the successful service registries used in Downtown Los Angeles and also in Santa Monica that have assisted homeless service providers in identifying the most vulnerable of the homeless population and successfully providing them with housing and services. Further, the Committee will ask for the VNC Board to take certain actions, including forwarding letters of support to government officials and agencies, to support the proposal.

II Request for a 60 day extension of mandate
Mark Ryavec (delphiassociates@ca.rr.com) and Carolyn Rios (310-821-7922; crlynrios@ca.rr.com): The VNC Ad Hoc Homelessness and Vehicular Occupation Committee requests a 60 day extension of its charter in order to fully complete its mandate and present its findings to the VNC Board in a coherent presentation.

III [Possible third motion on overnight RV parking per Carolyn]
Mark Ryavec (delphiassociates@ca.rr.com) and Carolyn Rios (310-821-7922; crlynrios@ca.rr.com): The VNC Ad Hoc Homelessness and Vehicular Occupation Committee requests …

G From Board Member

I 3rd Annual Venice Community BBQ and Picnic
Carolyn O Rios (310-821-7922; crlynrios@ca.rr.com): Request the VNC fund $4700 for the 3rd Annual Venice Community BBQ and Picnic, fully sponsored by the Venice neighborhood Council for the stakeholders of our community. Full proposal sent separately.

II Request Fire Captain report on Oxford Triangle Gate problem
DeDe Audet (dd1audet@verizon.net): See below

——-Original Message——-
From: DeDe Audet [mailto:dd1audet@verizon.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 11:03 PM
To: joedmurphy@ca.rr.com
Subject: Security gates

Dear Joe, please place this item on the agenda for Monday, March 9 meeting of the AdCom:
In view of the fact that L.A. Firemen are leaving security gates open, residents of the Oxford Triangle
request the Venice Neighborhood Council to ask our local Fire Captain to attend the upcoming March 17 meeting to explain why this is being done. The Oxford Triangle Specific Plan does not allow vehicular or pedestrian traffic between the C(4) OX zone and the R-1 Zone. Leaving these gates open is an invitation to traffic to bypass the signals at Washington-Lincoln. Thank you, DeDe

III Event for Emergency Preparedness Expo for Families
Linda Lucks (Vicepresident@VeniceNC.org) on behalf of Neighborhood Committee: The Neighborhood Committee will produce a Spring Venice Emergency Preparedness Expo for Families Budget Request: $1900 (pending Budget Committee’s Review) for food/refreshements/kids jumper, publicity. Formal Application under submission to the board. The budget is $1,900 for location, food/drink, jumper & publicity.

10. Announcements & Public Comment on items not on the Agenda (15 min, no more than 2 minutes per person)
(no board member announcements permitted)

11. Adjourn (approx 10:00PM)

AdCom Exhibit A – Neighborhood Council – Case Tracking System

Pilot Overview V1.0, September 6, 2008 (Murez)

The Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) has matured over the past several years. It has evolved from one meeting every couple of months with only one or two projects on the agenda to now responding to a Memorandum of Understanding with the City to submit a written determination report on every permit issued within the VNC geographic region. The committee has become more educated about the planning process and is now working towards a 2010 target of revising the Venice Coastal Zone Specific Plan.
Along with these growing responsibilities, the workload of the committee has increased from one or two projects being calendared every few months to the present level of hearing three to five projects twice a month. On average, what does this mean to each of the eight volunteer members that make up this committee, a workload that includes preparing 27 staff reports per month.

The process to analyze and prepare a project for hearing is fairly simple; contact the applicant, convince them to submit their plans for review, research the variances sought and flush out any that were not realized, organize their information and post it to the LUPC website, engage the potentially impacted neighbors and prepare a synopsis to post for Brown Act notification. Now multiply this process for one project 27 fold and the amount of information gathered and disseminated through this eight member volunteer committee becomes massive. What started out as a simple endeavor has now grown into a complex task with time sensitive details that must be accurately managed.

Automation to the rescue… with this sort of workload, managing details calls for a computerized case tracking system. What is needed is a centralized system that all committee members can access when they have volunteer time to give, that can reduce or eliminate many of the mundane tasks, and that will help engage the general public in the process. The system needs to enforce the policy rules of the VNC Board and the committee, while ensuring Brown Act laws are adhered. And, finally, the system must be available to all Venice Stakeholders and the City at large.

A pilot proof-of-concept system is being developed to address many of these needs. The system is being designed as a collaboration tool that will be managed over the internet. System access will be regulated through User Accounts that are grouped into security levels, starting with the general public then moving up the access ladder to project applicant, followed by registered stakeholder, committee staff member, committee chair, system administrator and program developers. Each higher group will be granted more access to functionality and system capabilities.

The system will track information by assigning case numbers to each project. The project or case files will be stored in a database and accessed through their respective case numbers. The routines that extract and modify the stored information will vary based on the individual access rights. The system will offer read-only reports to the general public while allowing stakeholders the rights to post feedback about issues they might have with any given project. Applicants will be assigned temporary access to upload their information and respond to feedback. LUPC staff members will be able to monitor all aspects of the cases, including being able to publish their findings, track correspondence and write recommendations (tentative motions) for the VNC Board to approve. Search and mapping functionality along with tracking key indicators will enable statistical analysis of accumulative impacts to be graphically generated. The VNC Board members, besides inheriting all the rights of the lower groups, will be able to post their final motion decisions and generate reports required by the City.

In addition, the audio meeting minutes that are digitally recorded will be divided into segments that correspond to the each project and posted into the case file along with any other archives.

In a nutshell, the LUPC Case Tracking system will automate the flow of information through the Neighborhood Council in a consistent, easy to understand format, while relieving a lot of the tedious tasks volunteers must perform at present. (follow up with PowerPoint overview and system demonstration.)

Exhibit A – LUPC De Minimis Projects (Item 4)

Exhibit B – Treasurers Report (Item 5)

Exhibit C – SLS Proposal (Item 8BI)

Small Lot Subdivision (Town Home) Ordinance Summary

A new ordinance (2005) permitting small lot, fee-simple ownership opportunities in commercial and multi-family neighborhoods has recently been adopted. The new law provides an entirely new housing option which allows people to purchase a house and the lot it sits on, just like they do in a single family neighborhood, rather than a unit in a condominium.

Properties zoned for multi-family residential use may be subdivided into much smaller lots than is required today, while complying with the density requirements established by both the zoning and the General Plan. It is anticipated that the ordinance will reduce the cost of home ownership and generate creative housing solutions, such as modern versions of bungalow courts, courtyard housing and row houses.

Documents posted to LUPC section of VNC website:

The Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance
Small Lot Subdivision Design Guidelines, FYI.
The Small Lot Subdivision Advisory Policy from 2006, FYI.
Venice Community Profile
Population, Housing, Employment Projections Plan Population and Dwelling Unit Capacity

Detailed comparison between Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance and the Venice Coastal Specific Plan is contained in the Director’s Interpretation, to be released on Monday. The Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance was adopted after the adoption of Venice Coastal Specific Plan and the subject interpretation clarifies the maximum number of permitted units, number of subdivided lots, number of required parking spaces, location of driveways, and minimum setback requirements relative to each zone and each subarea within the Specific Plan.

Section 11.5.7 F.3 of the Los Angeles Municipal Code authorizes “Interpretations of Specific Plans.” The Director of Planning has the authority to interpret specific plans when there is a lack of clarity in the meaning of their regulations. This Director’s Determination is called a “Director’s Interpretation” and is the formal way to publicly clarify a point of confusion (or differing interpretations). The process for a Director’s Interpretation requires the Decision be drafted and transmitted as done for Project Permit Compliance Decisions. The subject document, upon being published, will be reviewed by the community, including the Venice Neighborhood Council.

The City Planning Commission shall hear appeals on Director’s Interpretations which affect an entire specific plan area, as the subject Interpretation does. I do not have the authority to change this process. I wish there were a way to present to you our interpretation first, get your specific feedback, and then issue the determination.

The Section of the LAMC authorizing Director’s Interpretations is copied here:

H. Interpretations of Specific Plans. The Director shall have authority to interpret specific plans when there is a lack of clarity in the meaning of their regulations.

1. Application Procedure. To request a specific plan interpretation, an applicant shall file an application with the Department of City Planning pursuant to the application procedure set forth in Paragraph (a) of Subdivision 2 of Subsection B of this section. The application shall include a reference to the specific plan regulation(s) for which clarification is requested and a narrative description of why a clarification is necessary for the project or subject property involved. 2. Director’s Decision. Upon receipt of a deemed complete application, the Director’s written interpretation shall be subject to the same time limit to act, transmittal requirement and effective date of decision as set forth in Paragraphs (a) through© of Subdivision 4 of Subsection C. 3. Appeals. The City Planning Commission shall hear appeals on Director interpretations which affect an entire specific plan area or any of its subareas, and the Area Planning Commission shall hear appeals on Director interpretations which are applicable only on a site specific basis. The procedures for filing and processing appeals of Director interpretations shall otherwise be the same as those set forth in Subdivision 6 of Subsection C of this section. LAMC Section 11.5.7 in it’s entirety is posted. Section H is at the bottom of page 7.

Location(s)

Extra Space Storage, Presidents Row Room
658 South Venice Blvd
Venice, CA, 90291
See map: Google Maps, Yahoo! Maps
AttachmentSize
090309VNCAdComAgenda.doc227.5 KB