PARK CLEAN UP: SATURDAY, May 7, 9 am - noon

Castor bean is trying to make a come back but we won't let it! Pulling these little seedlings is easy to do and very therapeutic. For those wishing to use a bit more muscle, there are plenty of larger, more entrenched weeds to attack.

Meet at the park info sign on Pasadena Ave and then head down into the park. The group will pull weeds, pick up litter, and enjoy the park. Come for the whole time, for an hour, or just stop by to say hello.

Nature Park entrance on Pasadena Ave., east of the York St. Bridge

Remember to:
- wear sunscreen, hat, sunglasses
- bring water
- bring gardening gloves and tools (weeders, trowels, whatever you use in your own garden)
- comfortable work clothes, including work shoes (sneakers or boots)
- binoculars for bird watching (optional)

Children must be under adult supervision at all times. There is poison oak in the park, which we will point out before we start.

Please pass this info along to anyone else you think might be interested in the park. If you know of anyone who doesn't use the internet, let me know so we can be sure they are kept in the loop.

City Council to Review Driving Range Extension in Closed Session

On April 6, 2011 the South Pasadena city council voted against (Ten and Sifuentes for and Schneider, Putnam and Cacciotti against) directing staff to negotiate with Donovan Bros. on a full extension of the driving range to the border with the Nature Park. On a 5-0 vote, the city council directed staff to negotiate in closed session a compromise position with the prospective golf course lessee.

For more information on this meeting, please call the city and request the meeting minutes. They were posted on the web but have since been taken down. I wrote about the meeting on this blog. There is also information in the following newspapers:

The South Pasadena Patch
The Pasadena Star-News
The South Pasadena Review, April 13, 2011, p.2, Council Seeks Compromise on Golf Course Driving Range

Having read through the 58-page agenda packet (yes, several page were "intentionally left blank" but it was quite a read) here are my continuing concerns about this endeavor.

Opposition to Including Extension of the Driving Range in the Golf Course Lease

I am opposed to the inclusion of an extension of the driving range in the golf course lease agreement on the following grounds.

1. Environmental concerns
Loss of habitat, increased irrigation (there are serious questions about the legality of withdrawing water from Arroyo Seco without proper Water Master rights), runoff concerns, and protection of native trees during construction and operation of the driving range extension. As the UC researcher noted during the April 6, 2011 city council meeting, although runoff from turf grass may be minimal, not having seen this site, it is not known whether runoff into the Arroyo Seco would increase or not. Although the city council voted to instruct staff to negotiate with the golf course lessee to protect trees in the land in question, there was no serious proposal on how to protect these trees and still create a driving range that may require significant grade changes. There was no arborist report on the trees, nor was there any information on the changes that might be needed to the existing grade in order to accommodate the driving range activity, both recreational and maintenance.

2. The public was not adequately informed of change in land use for the extension of the driving range
Although the Golf Course Lease Subcommittee did allow for public comment from February 2007 through June 2010, there were no public comments in support of a driving range extension. In fact the minutes for the February 17, 2010 city council meeting indicate that the council rejected a potential expansion of the driving range.

According to minutes of the February 17, 2010 city council meeting (attachment 4, page 298), on a vote of 5 - 0 city council advised city staff to “issue proposed RFP... taking into consideration changes recommended by Councilmember Cacciotti: … Section 1.5 to convey that the Nature Park will be expanded for trails and deletion of a footnote that states the range can be extended 30 yards; allowances are to be made to take into consideration the grant from Supervisor Antonovich that will involve moving a fence; and that the next lease agreement exclude a triangular piece of property (90 ft. by the Arroyo and 180 ft by the trail).”

Furthermore, the city had issued an RFP for use of this land as an extension of the Nature Park and unanimously approved a resolution for a $150,000 project from North East Trees to extend the trail, remove weeds, plant native plants, and place rocks and boulders in the area.

3. Financial considerations
The Arroyo Seco Golf Course RFP states in item 8. Operator Upfront Investment (pp. 265-266) that the golf course lessee will front the money to be returned through rent credits.

“City will negotiate a substantial Rent Credit which will compensate the Operator for the cost of money invested in approved Capital Improvements plus an incentive for making the investment. The Rent Credit will be applied to the annual rent as long as it takes to recapture the Operator’s investment.”

In other words, the risk for and cost of the capital improvements are completely assumed by the city. If the driving range extension does not result in significantly higher revenue, the amount of money the city will receive from the golf course lessee will be reduced by the Rent Credit until the investment, “plus an incentive for making the investment,” is fully repaid to the lessee.

It should be noted that the driving range grossed $232,763 in 2006, $219, 215 in 2007, $187,571 in 2008. We have no estimates on the cost of the driving range extension but even with significant increases in gross revenue from the driving range, the costs may be sufficiently high to make this improvement fiscally unwise.

4. Legal considerations
For changes in land use, CEQA requires an environmental analysis to determine whether a full EIR is required. Even if a Negative Declaration is ultimately issued after having conducted environmental analysis, a public comment period applies. In any event there has been no Negative Declaration or environmental analysis. I don’t believe there is a categorical exemption from CEQA because the property in question was encompassed within the footprint of the prior lease as the City Attorney appeared to suggest at the prior council meeting. With all of the physical changes and disturbance of ground that would ensue from the driving range extension, it strains credulity to think that CEQA would not apply.

There may be serious questions about whether the city was in compliance with the Brown Act during the Closed Session City Council meeting of March 2, 2011, during which the driving range extension was discussed. This would also apply to tonight's closed session meeting, item 5, in which according to the April 6, 2011 motion, the city will be negotiating a "compromise" position for a partial extension of the driving range. Although real estate negotiations on price and terms of payment can be executed in closed session, changes in land use are not specifically covered. Furthermore, the Supreme Court case of Laurel Heights Improvement Association teaches that the environmental analysis must precede any discretionary action by city council.

Full disclosure of the financial, environmental, and open space consequences of the driving range extension should be brought out into the open and given adequate time for public review and comment in accordance with applicable law.

City Council should take the appropriate time to review these points and possible needed actions. If there is concern regarding the impending expiration of the current lease, a number of solutions should be explored, including having the current operator function on a month-to-month basis, having the Department of Recreation and Parks operate the facilities on a temporary basis, or the city could go forward and enter into a lease with Donovan Bros., addressing all other modifications and improvements except the extension of the driving range. That last issue could be resolved by lease amendment, if necessary.

4/17/11 (Sunday) Cleanup & 4/20 (Wed) City Council Meeting

I realize it is a busy time of year for many but unless we are vigilant and vocal the acre of habitat east of the Nature Park will be leveled, converted into turf grass for the driving range extension, and a 75 ft. tall fence will tower over the Sycamore Circle. I would be happy to tour the area on Sunday with anyone who is interested in seeing what is at stake.

For those who were unable to come to the 4/6/2011 city council meeting, or had to leave before the driving range extension was dealt with, the city council voted 3-2 against a motion by Councilmember Sifuentes to direct city staff to negotiate with Donovan Bros. to extend the driving range to the edge of the park. Councilmember Putnam then made a motion to direct staff to continue negotiating with Donovan Bros. to extend the driving range somewhere between the existing borders of the driving range and the Nature Park with an effort to protect the most significant trees in the undeveloped area. They are also to consider curving the fence as needed to keep significant trees on the Nature Park side of of the fence.

Questions abound regarding whether a CEQA review, or even an initial determination, is required. Even if a negative determination is made, I believe there is a required 30 day public comment period. There are also questions about whether the closed session negotiations were actually in compliance with the Brown Act since they are negotiating more than just "price and terms of payment for real estate transactions." Negotiations regarding land use, and funding for improvements may not be covered under the closed session clause. (Hope I am getting this kind of right - I'm no lawyer!)

Finally, there is great concern about whether it is possible to grade the land and still protect the significant trees. Seems to me one would need to hire an arborist to examine the property, along with detailed plans for grading the land.

So, hope to see you at the park on Sunday, and definitely at the public comment period for the City Council Closed Session on Wednesday, 4/20/2011. The driving range is item #5 and the session begins at 6:30PM. All public comments for the closed session are made at the beginning of the closed session, so be there at 6:30.

South Pasadena City Council/Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)

City Hall Conference Room, Second Floor, 1414 Mission Street
Wednesday, April 20, 2011 6:30 p.m.

5. Real property negotiation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: South Pasadena Golf Course
City Negotiator: Assistant City Manager Sergio Gonzalez
Negotiation Party: Donovan Bros. Inc.
Under Negotiation: Terms of Lease

PARK CLEAN UP: SUNDAY, April 17, 9 am - noon
Meet at the park info sign on Pasadena Ave and then head down into the park. The group will pull weeds, pick up litter, and enjoy the park. Come for the whole time, for an hour, or just stop by to say hello.

Nature Park entrance on Pasadena Ave., east of the York St. Bridge

Remember to:
- wear sunscreen, hat, sunglasses
- bring water
- bring gardening gloves and tools (weeders, trowels, whatever you use in your own garden)
- comfortable work clothes, including work shoes (sneakers or boots)
- binoculars for bird watching (optional)

Children must be under adult supervision at all times. There is poison oak in the park, which we will point out before we start.

Please pass this info along to anyone else you think might be interested in the park. If you know of anyone who doesn't use the internet, let me know so we can be sure they are kept in the loop.

City Council Meeting Results (4/6/2011)

Although I left before the end of the city council meeting, I received the following information. I will try to be as accurate as I can but if anyone has different information, please let me know so I can correct or add to this.

After hearing an extensive presentation on how and why the golf course driving range extension was the thing to do - with expert witnesses, pictures and even a couple of golf clubs - Councilman Sifuentes made a motion to direct staff to extend the driving range to the edge of the Nature Park. The city’s lawyer said that the Planning Department would have to perform an initial CEQA review. This motion got support only from Mayor Ten.

Councilman Putnam then made a motion to give staff direction to continue negotiating with the potential (though all through the meeting it sure sounded like Donovan Bros. was a done deal) new golf course operator to: 1) extend the driving range but only to the drip line of the most significant trees in the undeveloped area, and 2) to curve the fence as needed to keep those trees on the Nature Park side of the driving range fence. The motion passed unanimously.

Other than Mayor Ten, the council members felt the use of the land for the driving range extension was not about revenue but about balancing competing values and interests in the community.

The good news:
1. The issue was brought out into the open and not decided in closed session.
2. the city will have to do a determination of whether a complete CEQA review and an EIR are needed. This will allow for more public comment.

The bad news:
1. The city ran this meeting in a totally inappropriate and unfair way, indicating that at least some city council members believe that use of public land is the purview of five individuals without the need to consult the people they represent.
2. The land is still very much endangered and will only be saved if enough people participate in the process.

I was heartened to see so many people come and stay until well after 11 PM in support of preserving habitat!

City Council Action Item 19: Driving Range Extension

Hope to see you at tonight's city council meeting (starts at 7:30 PM) where the extension of the driving range is on the agenda as action item #19. For background information check out page 243 in the attached pdf (thanks to Drew Ready for bringing to our attention):

http://www.ci.south-pasadena.ca.us/government/PDFs/packet/Agenda_Packet.pdf

Several other blogs have taken up the issue of extending the golf course driving range versus protecting habitat:

ArroyoLover with info on the current golf course and its value and uniqueness: (Note: the driving range will not be extended into the Nature Park. The small parcel in question is located between the existing driving range and Park.)

LA Creek Freak with an awesome graphic re-envisioning the open space along the Arroyo Seco in So Pas.

Hope to see you tonight.

Driving Range Extension on City Council Agenda

The driving range extension is item #19 on the City Council agenda for Wednesday, April 6, 2011.

City Council/CRA
0410611 1
Page 3
Action Items & Items Pulled from Consent Calendar

19. Discussion and direction regarding the extension of the Driving Range at the Arroyo Seco Golf
Course

There is no way to know when the city council will actually get to this item. The meeting starts at 7:30 PM and I am going to arrive by 7:45 PM just to be sure I am there if the council members move this item up. Hope many of you can come to make your voice heard. Please pass this info along. Thanks.