Meeting Time: March 16, 2020 at 5:00pm PDT
Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item


Legislation Text 1. SUPPLEMENTAL Resolution 2. SUPPLEMENTAL Proclamation 3. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Pratik Basu (submitted 3-16-20 at 10:51am).pdf 4. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Ryan Schon (submitted 3-16-20 at 11:23am).pdf 5. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Peter Nolan (submitted 3-16-20 at 11:39am).pdf 6. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Andrea Jacobsson (submitted 3-16-20 at 11:41am).pdf 7. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Chad Downey (submitted 3-16-20 at 12:04pm).pdf 8. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Larry Peha (submitted 3-16-20 at 12:27pm).pdf 9. SUPPLEMENTAL Letter from Chamber of Commerce (submitted 3-16-20 at 1:20pm).pdf 10. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Meghan Arthurs (submitted 3-16-20 at 2:09pm).pdf 11. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from David Pedersen (submitted 3-16-20 at 2:51pm).pdf 12. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Luis Serrano (submitted 3-16-20 at 3:02pm).pdf 13. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Rob Weitz (submitted 3-16-20 at 3:03pm).pdf 14. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Tom Moroney (submitted 3-16-20 at 2:52pm).pdf 15. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Mike Grannis (submitted 3-16-20 at 2:55pm).pdf 16. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Jake Ksendzov (submitted 3-16-20 at 3:27pm).pdf 17. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Solange Comer (submitted 3-16-20 at 2:15pm).pdf 18. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Jessica Kellett (submitted 3-16-20 at 2:11pm).pdf 19. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Varoujan Jinbachian (submitted 3-16-20 at 1:48pm).pdf 20. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Jim Wellbaum (submitted 3-16-20 at 3:39pm).pdf 21. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Jon David (submitted 3-16-20 at 12:22pm).pdf 22. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Tonya Beaudet (submitted 3-16-20 at 11:50am).pdf 23. SUPPLEMENTAL Email from Marisa Reichardt (submitted 3-16-20 at 8:15am).pdf 24. SUPPLEMENTAL eComment from Scott Hayes (submitted 3-16-20 at 4:07pm).pdf
  • 2515634101798012
    Scott Hayes over 4 years ago

    While I understand the need for decisive action to try and help control the COVID-19 virus, I think that the City is overreaching with item 1b. It is not the City’s place to determine whether the landlord or the tenant should bear the financial burden of the required closures. Additionally, it is not clear what type of assistance the federal government may be providing to businesses and individuals. At a minimum the City should wait until the federal assistance package has been finalize before taking any action.

    The City should loosen regulations wherever it can to help support these businesses during the closures.
    1. The City should work with the Chamber of Commerce to come up with a list of restaurants that will be offering takeout during the restaurant closures. This list should be publicized on social media so residents know where they can go to support their local businesses.
    2. It is my understanding that some restaurants have a restriction on offering take-out food in their CUPs. I suggest that the City relax these restrictions during the .
    3. The City should loosen signage rules to allow restaurants to publicize that they are offering take-out food.
    4. The City could allow personal trainers to conduct classes on the beach or at parks where there is enough space to maintain social distancing.

    Scott Hayes

  • Default_avatar
    Jim Wellbaum over 4 years ago

    Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
    Our company operates numerous commercial properties in the South Bay including Hermosa Beach and I am an owner in several including one in Hermosa Beach.
    I appreciate the City’s desire to locally enforce the recent guidelines from the Governor of California and the CDC. However I believe each business owner now needs to take actions that are appropriate to their individual business. Mandating compliance is not a necessary response. Issuing guidelines as a request is more appropriate.
    Additionally, the City attempting to prohibit Landlords from charging rent to their commercial tenants is the most concerning. Besides the fact that it is probably unenforceable, it creates inequity and unnecessary stress in this already troublesome time. We have already instituted increased cleaning at our properties and are having discussions with our tenants about temporary rent reductions which we are addressing on a case by case basis. Please do not pass this proposed Declaration with the prohibition from charging rent – let us work out the economics with each of our tenants.
    Thank you.

  • Default_avatar
    Jake Ksendzov over 4 years ago

    I strongly oppose the city's mandate that landlords may not collect rent from tenants during this crisis. It is not local government's responsibility to interfere with private business. Any rent abatement should be handled by landlords and their tenants. By leasing property to run their businesses, tenants assume the risk brought on by crises like the novel coronavirus, and should be expected to fulfill their rent obligations or have the proper insurance policies in place to insure themselves against business interruptions.

  • Default_avatar
    Rob Weitz over 4 years ago

    I oppose staff's recommendation to prohibit commercial landlords from charging rent. Both tenants and landlords have their own financial obligations, and it is unfair to relieve the tenant while burdening the landlord. Landlords and tenants should have these discussions and come to an agreement without the City's involvement.

  • Default_avatar
    Luis Serrano over 4 years ago

    I am the owner of Pierside Properties LLC, which owns a retail building at 49-53 Pier Avenue. Included in my building are several restaurants, which would be impacted by the proposed rules of Report 20-0167.
    As a landlord of property in the City of Hermosa Beach, I strongly disagree with the passage of the rules in the Report that affect restaurants, alcohol beverage establishments and snack shops (and their landlords) for the following reasons:
    • The State of California has already issued rules for these types of establishments which are similar to the rules being proposed by the City regarding prohibition of on-site patronage. The city rules are duplicative and unnecessary.
    • Regarding the proposed rule prohibiting the charging of rent during the emergency, the City does not have authority to legislate the terms of business contracts between private parties.
    o You are attempting to transfer business risk from restaurant and bar operators to the property owners. This is not the role of City government.
    o These business owners may have or could have purchased Business Interruption Insurance.
    o We have every intention of enforcing our rights under our tenant leases. By giving the tenants the impression that they are not legally obligated to comply with their contractual obligations, you are putting them at risk of eviction when we enforce our rights under the leases and the courts determine that the City does not have the right to interfere with these contracts.
    o Furthermore, I will not renew leases to any tenant that refuses to pay rent following the City’s directive.
    o You are putting the City at risk by assuming
    • Since the City is offering to prohibit Landlords from collecting their rent, will the City be waiving all city fees and property taxes? Will the City force lenders to waive interest on our loans? Will the councilmembers be waiving their salaries and stipends to help these distressed businesses?
    • If the City is worried about the business health of bars and restaurants, why not offer them a line of credit backed by the City? The City does not have authority to put that burden on private businesses.
    • Regardless of this City rule, I will work with my tenants in the ordinary course of business to postpone/defer part of the rent if the circumstances warrant it. But this should be a business decision, not a City imposed obligation.

    As a business owner in Hermosa Beach, I will challenge in court any city rule which states that I cannot form a contract with my tenants and collect rent as a result of them occupying my property. I strongly urge you to remove these provisions from Report 20-0167.

  • Default_avatar
    David Pedersen over 4 years ago

    I appreciate your bold action and support the changes/restrictions proposed specific to restaurants and bars, social distancing and warnings. As the spread of this virus is exponential, swift action is especially important. Those who might think that these measures are too extreme should be reminded that many government actions of a few weeks ago seemed extreme (if not laughable) at the time, but now seem appropriate. In many cases, they should have been implemented even earlier.  Your "reward" for decisive action will be criticism for be it.

    A few additional thoughts:

    1) If we do not act in similar fashion to other communities, we will draw in additional customers that (for instance) patronize our restaurants if those in neighboring cities are closed. That presents undue risk to our community.

    2) I did not see a mention of gyms and other workout facilities. I would encourage you to understand what is being done in other cities as well as what is recommended by science-based public health officials specific to gyms and workout facilities of all types. I believe they are being closed mandatorily and some individual facilities have already voluntarily closed.
    Thank you for your service,
    Dave Pedersen
    Hermosa Beach

  • Default_avatar
    Meghan Arthurs over 4 years ago

    While I absolutely support social distancing, working remote if possible, and staying at home if you are sick, I would ask the Council to reconsider dramatic city policies that will will effect the livelihood of businesses and Hermosa Beach residents. To begin, the number one way to combat not only the coronavirus but also all viruses is have a healthy cardiovascular system. For this reason, I would recommend gym facilities and public running trails be allowed to remain open. For gyms, I recommend reduction in occupancy at any given time and the requirement to have "corona virus combating wipes" which have been around for many years. We also need to consider the mental health of our residents. While we should encourage people staying home as much as possible, we should also encourage residents to enjoy the outdoors and keep a six feet distance between themselves and residents outside their homes. In addition, we need to consider the economic implications of our small beach city if we elect to shut down all "non-essential" businesses. We should, like I recommended with gyms, allow businesses to continue operating in whatever capacity they see fit for themselves. Restaurants should be able to remain open at a limited occupancy with a heavy focus on take out options. We should encourage residents to shop locally as much as possible in order to stimulate our local economy and keep our businesses afloat during this stressful time. Finally, I highly encourage the city to be proactive in their communication and focus on not inducing fear into the public. We are a small but mighty town and working together through this time will allow us to come out on top in the end.

  • Default_avatar
    Larry Peha over 4 years ago

    Mayor and Council members,
    These are extraordinary times, for sure, and extraordinary measures need to be taken. That being said, I would like for you to think about the impacts of your proposal, to allow certain tenants complete rent relief during this crisis. From what I find, Hermosa seems to be the only city mandating this.
    I thoroughly understand the mandate of having to close restaurants, bars and the like, in the interest of common health. However, what I don’t think you understand is that property owners are businesses too. This mandate would just be alleviating the burden of one business yet passing the burden to another business. Why is one more important than the other? As a property owner, I still need to make my mortgage payment, pay my bills, pay my taxes, city fees, etc. This is also my way of making a living. I am retired and the rental income I receive is what I live on, as it is to the businesses you are relieving. Note that the federal government will be providing income relief to these business’s employees which is a big part of their expenses. There has been no such talk of property owner relief.
    Of course, I do not think all of the burden should be on the tenant. I would like for you to consider sharing this responsibility between landlord and tenant by strongly suggesting landlords reduce or defer rent during the mandated time in which the establishments are closed. I understand you are trying to help the “mom and pop” businesses so they do not get wiped out; however, there are several landlords that are mom and pops too.
    I would have come before you tonight, but as you have recommended, I am home watching.
    Thank you for your consideration and leadership.

  • Default_avatar
    Chad Downey over 4 years ago

    With a rush on the grocery stores not enabling families to have proper food stores on hand, and the layoffs that will ensue at these businesses, it is not in the interest of the town to be so restrictive. We shouldn’t panic, can use social distancing, and continue to monitor the situation. Is laying off all the workers at these businesses really what we want to mandate?

  • Default_avatar
    Andrea Jacobsson over 4 years ago

    I am in support of the alternative option that all restaurants, alcohol beverage establishments and snack shops in the City are to reduce occupancies to allow social distancing. Many shelves at supermarkets are bare and we need to make sure people have access to prepared food. Let's not be more restrictive that the orders issued by the California.

  • Default_avatar
    peter nolan over 4 years ago

    While I understand the extraordinary measures being considered to combat Covid 19, I object to the City mandate that landlords are not allowed to collect rent. Landlords have expenses which continue including debt service, taxes, insurance etc. The rent negotiations during the crisis should be a negotiation between Tennant and the landlord without government interference. Certain tenants may have business interruption insurance. The City cannot constitutionally void our lease contracts under the takings clause. The landlords should be free to work out adjusted rent or rent abatement with tenants without the city involvement. The city opens themselves up to litigation as a result of this poorly conceived legislation.

  • Default_avatar
    Ryan Schon over 4 years ago

    This is obviously a rubber stamp meeting and this is going to pass... What is the formal process to extend this past March 28? The city should be proactive and schedule a follow up meeting on March 26 to discuss extending this Proclamation in full rather than go back to normal on a Saturday/Sunday and then have this discussion again on Monday March 31st. If not in full, it should extended under modified circumstances and that expectation should be set now. Based on the circumstances of what we are dealing with it makes absolutely no sense to close businesses for 12 days and then just go back to business as usual and potentially suffer a setback. At a minimum, I implore the city to ban all live entertainment and any "events" (music, DJ's etc.) until Friday May 1st. Hermosa Beach as a destination for outside tourists needs to be limited. The city council's first and foremost responsibility is the health and safety of it's residents; the city should operate as such and proceed with more caution than may seem necessary at this time.

  • Default_avatar
    Pratik Basu over 4 years ago

    I would like to commend the City Council for showing such courageous leadership in these times, especially given the outsize influence restaurants and bars have on the local community. The steps they are taking today will not only help keep us locals safe, but will also be crucial in mitigating the transmission to other local communities as well. This is a perfect example of the positive role local government can play in our lives. Kudos!