Everybody and welcome to the City Council's study session for today. June 18th, 2024. It's 2.30 p.m. and we will start with any oral communications either in presence or telephonic or other means. I have not received anything. Okay, so we have no non-agentized item comment. Okay, good. So we will go on to item number A, direction, cultural heritage commission, interview panel, report, and Michelle, you're going to give that. Good afternoon mayor and city council members. Michelle Ramos-Vigara, deputy city clerk reporting on behalf of our city clerk, Cuma Amed. Today we're talking about the Cultural Heritage Commission interview panel report. The Cultural Heritage Commission interview panel met on Friday, May 24, 2024, to interview six applicants for multiple vacancies on the commission. The panel consisted of Mayor Friedman, Council Member Cormin, the Chair, Chair, and Vice Chair Collins, Tableman Collins. In all, there are three recommendations provided to the city council for consideration. The interview panel considered the following when providing the recommendations. First was Lori Green Gordon. There was a typo in the report which will be corrected. Her term begins on July 1, 2024 to fill in commissioner Jill Tavillmann, Collins seat, and then the next person is Andy Lick. The term begins on January 1, 2025. We'll fill in the seat for former commissioner, current council member Craig Korman. And commissioner Jill Tavillmann, Collins term, would conclude at that time. By way of background, the City Council approved at the formal meeting of Tuesday, May 21, 2024, an extension of term for Commissioner Taddleman Collins until December 31, 2024. The third recommendation is Allen Robert Block, whose term begins on July 1, 2025, and will fill in Commissioner of Vinnaker's seat. All newly appointed candidates misattend all cultural, the commission meetings, the cultural heritage commission meetings, leading up to their appointment. If approved, they will be eligible for an initial two-year turn based on the dates provided. And there is no fiscal impact. And we request that the City Council approve the recommendations with the concurrence of the Council of Formal Report will be prepared for the adoption at the June 27, 2024 City Council regular meeting. Background checks of the appointees have also been completed. It's strongly recommended that applicants learn about the roles and responsibilities of the commissions that they are applying for before their interviews. Information is available on the city's website at Beverly Hills dot org commissioners are expected to schedule their time vacancies. Applicants should also consider participating with the team Beverly Hills Program to learn more about city government. Again, there were typos on the report but they will be fixed for the formal approval. Okay, very good, thank you. And we'll go to the layers on report. You get to give a little layers report just what we did and how we got there, generally. We interviewed six people. They were all very good candidates. It was a difficult decision, but ultimately the group of us unanimously agreed on these three candidates to fill these three seats. Perfect and I concur. There were very good candidates and I believe that the three that we selected were exceptionally good and I think that's how they rose to the top. Okay. I'm sorry. Excuse me. And in terms of filling the spots, we talked already about the extension that we had already granted to Jill Collins. And a little bit of shuffling that went on and we slotted the positions according to how we felt it was appropriate and the recommendations were ultimately unanimous. We will go to councilmember discussion and direction starting with councilmember Wells. Well thank you to the liaison team for taking that time and I accept and approve the recommendations. Thank you. Council Member Corwin. That's the thousand liaison committee. High obviously accept and approve the recommendations. Okay. And Councillor Merrish. Great choices. People we know and have served on other commissions in the past and I am supported. Okay, and Vice Mayor. Yes, thank you. Thank you to the Leaisons as well. I also agree I am in support. Two quick questions. The first one why was one of the terms extended for seven months? seven months. You mean Jill Tavill and the Cowns? So that we would have a staggered group of people sitting to join at once because there would be as of July two vacancies. So that's why we standard hers. So that way we won't have two people turning off in the future at the same time. Okay. That's wonderful. And there's just one other thing that I wanted to say. We are having a lot of vacancies right now. We're looking to fill those vacancies. We're a city of over 32,000 people. And I would like to encourage my colleagues to look at finding some perhaps people who have not served our community yet just to be able to have some differing perspectives and views. But I am very happy with these three individuals and I think that they're going to do an excellent job. Thank you. Okay, and I certainly concur. We always like to have new people come in, but we also want to be sure that we have people who have knowledge of the specific areas and these three people were absolutely exceptional and that was certainly part of the reason that I endorsed it and of course I go along with our recommendations. So we'll put that on our calendar for the next meeting. Is that, shall we? The next meeting is June 27th. Okay, thank you. Okay, very good. We'll go on to item number two. And I can flip the page. Recommendation of the Commission's standardization ad hoc committee to sunset the rent stabilization commission and looks like Assistant City Manager Ryan Goliak will be providing the report. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mayor Friedman, Vice MayorMarenesarian and members of the City Council. I'm Ryan Golic, your Assistant City Manager, and here to give you an update on recommendations from the Commission Standardization AdHot Committee, particularly with regard to the Rent Stabilization Commission. Just a real brief history. The Rent Stabilization Commission was created by the city in 2019. The commission was charged by the city in 2019. The commission was charged with several duties, but more specifically making recommendations regarding the rent stabilization ordinance itself and any other that, the city had done a number of facilitated discussions between tenants and landlords and had identified a handful of topics that required further work beyond what the council had already incorporated into the present day rent stabilization ordinance. And so the council had directed that once the rent stabilization commission was formed, they study and make recommendations on six specific topics. The Rents Abilization has completed their discussion and they've made recommendations on all of the topics directed by the council. Those include major remodel and evictions, cash for keys process, relocation fees when tenants are relocated out of a unit. Requirements regarding proactive inspections pass through surcharges that can be passed through to tenants for various costs associated with the property and also development of a landlord tenant handbook. Some of these items have already been reviewed and implemented based on coming forward to the council. However, we do also have some that we're going to be bringing forward later this year as we sort of assemble the various recommendations from the commission. Given that the commission has completed all of the tasks assigned by the city council that again resulted from those earlier facilitated discussions, those earlier facilitated discussions, the rent stabilization does not have specific matters or business to conduct at this time because they've completed the work as directed. The rent stabilization commission is also not a hearing body for any applications or appeals that result regarding rent stabilization. Generally, the way the municipal code is structured is that a hearing officer considers Registered rent appeals certified rent appeals landlord rent adjustment applications and then we have one other topic Which we've just dealt with recently here and this is the disruptive tenant applications That is the one component in the code that actually requires Review by a subcommittee of two council members as opposed to going to a hearing officer for review. But taking all of that into consideration, the commission does not have current duties as directed by the council. When the ad hoc committee met to discuss the rent stabilization commission and their duties and work that had been performed. The ad hoc committee agreed that the rent stabilization commission had completed discussion of the issues that had been directed and that there wasn't further business. The ad hoc subcommittee also discussed some of the difficulties that we've had with recruitment for commissioners over the years and also challenges posed by the unique makeup of the commission, particularly the different categories of tenants, landlords at large, and also the minimum quorum requirements needed to conduct hearings. So the ad hoc committee did recommend that the Rents Stabilization Commission be sunsetted. In addition, the ad hoc subcommittee had conversations about the disruptive tenant hearing process and identified it as sort of an anomaly in the municipal code that was different from all of the other types of processes that go to a hearing officer. And so the ad hoc committee has also recommended that the disruptive tenant applications be shifted from the current council subcommittee review to instead go to a hearing officer to be consistent with other applications that we process. So with that, if the council concur's with the subcommittees recommendations, we would seek direction from the council on whether to sunset the rent stabilization commission and also switch over to a hearing officer for disruptive tenant applications. If that is the council's direction, we would work with the city attorney's office to develop an ordinance that would effectuate these changes and we would bring it back to the council at a future hearing date. That concludes the presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions and we also have Michael Forbes and Nestero Tazoo from community development to talk about rent stabilization if needed. Okay, let's do the liaison report and then we'll do public comment after the liaison report. Do you like to go first? Thanks Ryan for the report. Ryan basically summarized our discussions. The only thing I would add is that the report mentions that there have been recruiting issues with the rent stabilization commission. As a result of those recruiting difficulties, as of July 1, we wouldn't, the commission will not even be able to have a quorum going forward. So that was in their fact that we took into account when we made our recommendation. Vice Mayor. Yes, thank you. Yes, thank you for the report. As was mentioned, we did do a little bit of research to make sure that this was going in the right direction because we would hate to sunset a commission that was thriving at this time. This was created four years ago and six tasks were given out of the six tasks. Three of them have already been completed. Two of them came to council, one of them being the tenant handbook. And there's still three other issues that are coming to council, but the commission has completed their task at hand. And so at this point, we felt that with the recruiting issues, as was mentioned, they've had a very difficult time filling the vacancies for months now, several commissioners in addition to that resigned. commissioners in addition to that resigned. And it's been, I think that consolidating and saving some, anyway, it's been hard to have a quorum for them and fill the vacancies. The recommendations have been completed and there's a second component to it. Would you like us to speak to that person as well? At this point. We're going to discuss them together. Okay. And the second portion of it is with regard to disruptive tenant applications and we're recommending that this be moved to a hearing officer who would be a more professional environment. It's very difficult for a sitting council member to have These types of issues come to them our job is not to remove tenants from their homes especially in the climate and what's happening right now I think that needs to be presented to trained professionals and to be a good way to get the information from the homes, especially in the climate and what's happening right now. I think that needs to be presented to trained professionals and to be able to have that go to a hearing officer would be a better recommendation and choice. Okay, very good. That concludes the liaison reports and we will go to public comment. Anyone who would like to comment on this please if you're here fill out a slip I have one slip already and if you have any comments and are watching on TV or listening somehow or on your computer you can either call in or Text in and we'll take your comments after that. So I will ask Mark Elliott to come forward. Thank you, Mayor Friedman, members of the City Council. I'll get to see you today this afternoon. I support the elimination of the rent stabilization commission. I recommend it up to myself because when the prior council Council will get to see you today this afternoon. I support the elimination of the rent stabilization commission. I recommend that that myself because when the prior council handed this range of issues to an inexperienced commission, I mean, disaster was kind of foretold. So, you know, better late than never. That was corrected. And I support the elimination. I do think though we have some good commissioners on that commission who've gotten a fair shake. They should get a fair shake. They missed many meetings due to quorum issues. I think they should be in a fast lane for commission consideration for upcoming vacancies. I'm thinking principally of Kathy Bronti and Francis Miller, both who I think really distinguish themselves on that commission. I'm really here to talk about the disruptive tenant provision. As I mentioned in email communication, I suggest you end it, don't mend it. Eliminate sections 466M and 45514 from the rent stabilization office. We don't need this provision. So let me just revisit the civil code which defines a nuisance. Anything which is injurious to health, including but not limited to illegal sale of control substances, indecent or offensive to the senses, obstruction of the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of the property, or in lawfully obstructs the free passage or use. Case law has further defined that. The landlord, the landlord has a law book that they go by legal guidance and formal legal guidance. It defines a nuisance as use of sale of controlled substances, permitting legal gambling, and loodness, prostitution, unlawful distribution of weapons, gang activity, conduct that is generally injurious to public health and morals. And then compare that with the definition in disruptive tenet in our code, disturbing a neighbor's peace or bullying or intimidating a neighbor. I mean, come on, that is a much lower bar. Nobody should be in the position of turfing out a tenant because they annoy a neighbor or they bully a neighbor. There are ways that a landlord can deal with that when they choose to. Too often I hear about landlords that choose not to. We don't have a disruptive landlord provision, but we need a disruptive landlord provision because there are landlords not properly managing their properties. So I want to suggest that you take this off the books because if you turn this to a hearing officer, the problem is we would have a hearing officer hearing these cases who are not elected to represent people here have no context for the city here. A tenant is more likely to be turfed out. We had a couple of you heard a recent, a landlord tenant, I'm sorry, a recent disruptive tenant hearing. And it was so messy, impossible to find the truth in there. That tenant could easily have been turfed out in my view improperly by your hearing officer. It may suit you to get it off your table. It may relieve you from making that decision. It should not go to a hearing officer. Please take these out of the code. Thank you. Okay, thank you. And do we have anybody else in chambers? I don't see anyone. Michelle, anyone on any other electronic means? No. No written and no one else in there. OK. So let's go to council member, comments, and a direction. Well, actually first Ryan, I have a question for you about rent stabilization. You can say that. This sunsetting the commission is in no way diminishing our commitment with regard to rent stabilization. And if I think you told me earlier that the city was probably the first in the state to have rent stabilization. And I'm not sure what year that was instituted. That is correct. So we weren't the first in the state, but we were one of the first cities in the state to have rent stabilization and we've had that in place for I think we're going on. I want to say close to 40 years here now So if the commission were to be sunsetted it would in no way diminish or modify our rent stabilization regulations and those pertain to annual rent increases As Mr. Elliott noted we've got specific provisions that allow for evictions under tenants under certain circumstances. We eliminated no cause evictions a few years back. And so no longer can a landlord just evict a tenant for no reason. There has to be specific criteria that are met for that to happen. And they're very limited criteria. Thank you. And with regard to the having a hearing officer for the tenant, disruptive tenant hearings, what is the process for choosing who that is and how do we ensure to Mr. Elliott's point that they are sensitive to Beverly Hills and the community and really looking at it from a more holistic way as well as following the letter of that. We do contract with hearing officers for all of the instances in the municipal code where hearing officer is called for. We look for hearing officers that have experience with the types of cases that are being presented to them. We generally, I don't know that we have the luxury always of finding somebody that is familiar with Beverly Hills specific issues, but they are looking more just at the facts of the case, what the criteria or findings might be to reach a decision and that's what they base their decisions on, but they are professional hearing officers. That's what they do for a living. It's not as though it's just a temporary thing that they do on occasion. Do you think it is necessary to look at the criteria if we were to move it to a hearing officer with regard to what that criteria is for, the de-mean attendance to be disrupted and be able to be removed. That's certainly something that we could look at in developing an ordinance if that's the council's direction. Another item that was brought up during the disruptive tenant hearings was the potential desire to have the ability to mandate mediation between tenants and landlords. Right now the code does not allow for mandatory mediation. We did have one of the hearings, the subcommittee recommended, strongly recommended mediation between the tenant and landlord, but they also didn't have the authority to impose mediation. And so that could be something we would look at as well. to impose mediation and so that could be something we would look at as well. So I mean my recommendation is I mean first I'd like to think that all of the different commissioners that have served on the rent stabilization commission I've watched many of the meetings and I think it was a very challenging setup and I really admire and thank the commissioners for their dedication to stick with it to really to produce the results that they did produce. And I think that moving forward, I, this and a way would diminish my commitment to rent civilization or to our renters and landlords. And I think there may be other areas that we could be focusing on that may be worthwhile for involving our city The community of renters as well as landlords and I'm not sure what that is but certainly There are other issues and maybe better addressed in a different format with so I am I am in support of Sunsetting the rent stabilization commission at this time. As far as the disruptive tenant hearings, I am in support of having a hearing officer. I don't think that the city council members are the appropriate people to be sitting on that to make those decisions. However, I am sensitive to, you know, that this, it's not just changing this to a hearing officer that there may be other things to consider. So as we approve that, I would also ask that we look at some of the other areas that we may need to adjust as a result of that. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Councillor Mellor. Thank you. So, Ryan, just to serve once clear, by censiting the rent stabilization commission, we are not in any way, shape or form affecting tenants' rights under the rent stabilization ordinance, correct? Absolutely, correct. Okay. And to the extent we want to make changes to the restableness. We can do that at City Council and the issue of our staff initiative. Mr. Elliott mentioned or suggest I should say that we do away with the disruptive ten of provisions in the code and just rely on nuisance lawsuits. So how many other jurisdictions have disruptive tenant provisions similar to ours? I don't know and I'm going to look to see if our rent stabilization staff has information. No. You're going to know we don't have that information right now, we'd have to research that. Okay so I mean when we address the how we handle disruptive tenant situations I think would be good to know whether this is a unique code provision to us whether other cities you know have these kinds of provisions that if so how they handle them so that was the point I wanted to make and then lastly I Mr. Elliot mentioned that the commissioners who are, who have served adverbally on this commission, who will obviously not be on the commission if we sunset it, be given preferential treatment when it comes to applying for their commissions. And I agree with him that we would encourage them to apply and we should consider their applications very seriously. And we do have other vacancies and their commissions and hopefully they will apply so we can consider them and find them at home and other commissions. But thank you, those are my comments. And if I may just real quickly respond to that last comment from Council Member Corman, I want to just make clear if that is a shared desire from the rest of the council, we do have a requirement that there's a one year break in between serving on commissions. If the council was a desire of eliminating or reducing that one year break for the rent stabilization commissioners, that's just something we would need direction to come back on in the future. Thank you, Remani, for that. I would suggest we do wave that for the commissioners on the rent civilization commission so they can apply for other commission as soon as they want to. I agree we should wave that. I mean that would be my for those commissioners. Yes. I am in support of waving the time for applying. I think that makes perfect sense and I would encourage the commissioners to apply to the many different openings. However, when we talk about preferential treatment, I think it really should be determined when they're interviewing for the different commissions that they're really looking at it from who is best suited based on what qualifications and what the needs are of those different commissions. And I do agree with that, but I also think that, you know, we should be sensing the fact that they have served, served well, and obviously are able to serve well on other commissions when they apply. I agree. Thank you. Okay, Council Member Hirsch. Thank you. So I agree that we should waive any quarantine time. It's not their fault that the commission's being disbanded, so they should be eligible to apply. We have to live and learn. And I think part of the problem with the rent stabilization, bless you. Part of the problem with the rent stabilization commission was we tried to determine what buckets people fit in. Unfortunately, that left some room for what I feel people who were serving or wanted to serve for a classification that really they would have been better suited to do somewhere else. For example, we had someone apply who themselves, I think, own 10 properties, not Beverly Hills, but they applied as a renter. And they rented in Beverly Hills, but it turns out they rented from their mother. So, I mean, you know, that would not have been someone who would have well represented, I think, the tenants. And I think you definitely want to have advocacy for tenants. You want to have advocacy for landlords and then ideally neutral people. But part of the problem is it's very difficult, well, it's very difficult to find people who are neutral. And so I think the reality was that one of the reasons it was difficult to get people to fill the commission was because it was difficult to make those separations. In some cases, there are not clear black and white separations and I think that kind of doomed the commission from the beginning. That said, having a commission that's dedicated to rent stabilization and landlord tenant relations highlights how important that issue is to the city and it needs to remain an important issue to the city. I'm not sure if the council should do a a biannual report and just sort of listening to the state of things and what the challenges are, so that we then ourselves need to deal with some of these issues. But bless you. Deal with some of these issues if it's, you know, as things develop. We see it's very sensitive. And so, Asset, I'd like to propose something along the lines that we still continue to get a report from the rent stabilization department, biannually, and be able to get ahead of any potential issues that there are. And I know that we have tenant representatives like Mark L. A. Ed, who will hopefully let us know if there are issues in ways we can potentially address them, including habitability issues, which continue to be a problem. When it comes to disruptive tenant applications, I was one of the ad hawks that wanted to impose mediation, but we couldn't. We strongly recommended. I think we should have the ability to impose mediation first as a first choice. I wouldn't have a problem if we have a process that we start with mediation. It then goes to a hearing officer. however, the parties would have the ability to appeal the hearing officer's decision to the council. Because I think ultimately, and hopefully that would avoid the council from too often having to directly intercede, but I think we're going to have hearing officers who do not know the community and I think some of what Mark Elliott says, that may happen. And I'd like to see us avoid that. So, having the backstop of being able to appeal to the council would be for me sort of a last resort, but it would be something that if we are going to have hearing officers would at least offer some sort of protection. So that's where I am. Thank you. Okay thank you. So the problem I have with with sunsetting the rent stabilization commission. Mayor, I think the vice mayor's. Oh, I beg your pardon. I beg your pardon. Vice mayor. Would you like to go first? Nope, go ahead. All right, thank you. I too want to thank the commissioners for their dedication and their service to our community. And I do encourage them all to reapply for a different commission. I do agree that we should wave the one year. Cooling off period, I guess you could call. I didn't know what the official term, but the cooling off period. I think that having a rent stabilization commission was important, but as was mentioned, I don't know if a tenant or a landlord have the qualifications for the needs that were required to be able to address the needs of the community. So I'd like to encourage our, and focus on our code enforcement to really take on some of those projects because I too was in one of the, in one of the hearings for the disruptive tenant hearing and we did recommend and recommend mediation. I would be in favor of mandating mediation. I would not be in favor of having it come back to council. I think that if we do our homework and find hearing officers that are professional and are good at what they do, then it should be left up to professionals to deal with that. I do think that we are going to be devoted and dedicated to adhering to the rights of our tenants and making sure that things are taking care of. I think we need to focus more on code enforcement, as I mentioned. But I would leave that up to the hearing officers for that version. Thank you. So even though we've heard from Ryan that there is not going to be an effect on enforcement of any of the rent stabilization laws, it's going to look that way. There's an appearance that we are taking away rights that tenants have. And that's something that troubles me. The corresponding facts are that the six items that were provided to the rent stabilization commission have been dealt with and that was their charge. So I'm in a little bit of a quandary in terms of just cutting it off, that is sunsetting it, without there being some sort of substitute in place where the landlords and Kent tenants can appear. Ryan, give us a little bit of history in terms of how and why we even started the rent stabilization commission. It was under another, the jurisdiction was under another commission for those types of issues before, was it not? We previously had a very limited jurisdiction. The Human Relations Commission, one of their charges was to essentially hear disputes between tenants and landlords really to provide sort of a public forum in which there could be a dialogue about some of these differences between tenants and landlords. That was the extent of it. The all other tenant issues regarding habitability and rental increases. Those have always historically been handled by our code enforcement division. And that continues to be the case even today because the, as mentioned, the rent stabilization commission doesn't have enforcement authority over our regulations. They don't hear when somebody thinks that their rent has been increased by too much. It's really a fact-based question as to whether there's been a violation of the municipal code and if there has, then it becomes an enforcement case. We do have recommendations from the rent stabilization commission to develop a more proactive inspection program. That's something that we will be bringing to the council at some point probably later this year. I don't want to get too far ahead of it because that also has staffing and cost implications, potentially fees that get passed on to landlords and tenants. But that is a recommendation that we will be talking about going forward. So in terms of a place where a tenant can go to, if they have an issue, there used to be that ability to go to the rent stabilization commission. Is there anything that has been discussed about having it go back to the human relations? So we technically never removed that provision from the human relations commission. And so it is still a process that could exist. We may merit a second look at what the language actually is in the code, and whether that is the best forum for it, or if there's some other replacement that could occur. But again, it's really the purpose is to serve as a forum for people to air their issues. Not so much of an enforcement arm. Well, okay, but that was the case with rent stabilization. Also, it was just a place to air their concerns as opposed to getting any enforcement. That's correct. Mediation I think is excellent if there are time limits that are attached. I think both for the landlord and tenant, just saying we're going to have mandatory mediation is not enough unless there are time constraints that we are going to watch. The one thing you don't want to have happen, and I think it was happening even in the system we had up till now, was there was a long delay in getting issues heard for variety of reasons, whole variety of reasons. If there is a mediation program that has some significant time limits in it, then I think that's excellent. If mediation is just a step along the way to a hearing, which is then a step along the way to come into council, you're talking about a year plus. And I just don't think that's fair to anyone at all. I agree about eliminating the one year requirement. I think that may even be the preference that should be attached to it, because I do agree with my colleagues that we do want the best person, and if they are the best person, certainly if they were on an equal footing, I can see there being a preference, but I don't see somebody jumping ahead unless they are as qualified as the person we pick. And I think that's what everybody is saying, I think. The, I hear what my colleagues have said and it looks like everybody is in favor of Sunsetting the Rent Stabilization Commission. I would only be in favor of Sunsetting it if we have alternatives for the tenants to have a voice and that be a part of the Sunsetting provision which means there be some work on it before we get there. If when it comes comes to council, the vote is to sunset it by a majority, I am going to immediately agendize the next step, which is to have some sort of replacement there. I think that's extremely important. In terms of authorizing a hearing officer, John and I were part of that sausage making process. And, you know, I think our goal was admirable. We wanted to make sure that all voices were being heard. And I think ultimately that's how we got the sixth person on there because we felt that the quote neutral would be the decider. And I think that that would have happened in fact had we not done the six, but the six doesn't work. You need to have an odd number. I think it is a good idea to have a hearing officer. Again, I'm going to say that there needs to be a timeline on that that is enforceable. And I think with there being a hearing officer within that time frame that is a reasonable time frame, I think it's an essential part of this whole process. In terms of it coming back to Council, I would agree to that on certain aspects. In law, there are not everything is appealable. There are certain carveouts for there is abuse of discretion or something like that. If there were limitations on the fact that it could come to council with only certain types of appeals could come to council Yes, if not I can almost assure you that every hearing officer Decision one or the other is going to come to council on it and I just don't think that's that's workable And I think that was one of the things that we considered originally Was that it was going to take too much counsel time for an individual as opposed to dealing with issues broadly, which is what we should be doing as a council. So anyway, those are my comments. I think you have direction. points of clarification. So just so we're all clear as of July 1 since they won't be able to have a quorum there's sort of a de facto sunset since we're not adding people, we'll be recruiting people to the commission. So I just wanted to get that out there. But the other thing is I know Mayor suggested that when we decide ultimately to officially sunset the commission we should then agenda is the next steps but I don't see why we can't do that simultaneously at the same meeting. And so I think we should be looking to do that. And then because I do think the approach we should make sure when we know what the program is going forward when we send officially sunset the commission. And the last question I have just really clarification for my fellow council members. There's been some discussion about mediation. I assume you're talking about mediation of a solely of the disrupt of tenant disputes, not mediation on every landlord tenant dispute. No, no. Okay, I just wanted to clarify that. It was disrupt of tenant. Okay, assuming we continue with the disrupt of tenant applications, which is also going to be what I think we want to discuss. Okay. Can I make a point two? Sure. I would absolutely agree that since it seems that the commission is not able to act anyway that you agenda something as to next steps is what we can do to make sure the tenants rights are protected. From the perspective of the disruptive tenant hearing, I absolutely favor forced mediation. But here's the thing is if it goes then to a hearing officer and doesn't come to the council, meaning that you would have the final decision, if it was as it were, be from a hearing officer. In that case, I think it would be better to take Mark Elliott's suggestion and just let them take legal action if they need to and Us not be involved at all if we can solve it with mediation great if not we have our court system that they can go to I would feel very uncomfortable having a hearing officer make the final decision and in fact in most cases When it comes to other applications the council always almost always has the ability to call up a administrative decision and that's for the protection of the residents and I would not want to stray from that policy so that's just me and I know we can talk about it later. Thank you. So are you suggesting that any decision of the hearing officer would be able to come to council? Well that or the council could call it up. If you wanted to limit it as you said that there's certain rights of appeal and not, I'd be interested in hearing what it is. But it is almost cleaner in a way as Mark Elliott suggested. We forced them to go through mediation, hopefully they solve it. And if they can't they know they're going to have to take legal action. Now again, one of the things that in a post-commissioned world we can do, and we have in the past, is provide tenant assistance for like that set act to help tenants who are not able to defend themselves, and that sort of thing. But as said, I just feel very uncomfortable having a hearing officer make a final decision that is unappealable or that the council couldn't call out. That's just me, though. So Larry, let me ask you that question then. If we didn't have the council be the administrative body that hears a hearing officer and they wanted to appeal it. What would happen if it was not designated as it's appealable to council? Would they have that automatic right to go through the legal system or would have to say something like that? No, they would be able to challenge that decision in court. What they're, I have not looked at. I mean, I think we are unique in terms of the disruptive tenant. There may be another city out there, but I don't think so. And in terms of whether they can challenge it, yeah, they can challenge it in court. And the court, I assume they take a writ and it would be a abusive discretion standard. So if we just didn't say it was appealable or there could be a call up, that automatically the default would be that it could go through the court system? If you don't have an appeal to the council, the default would be go to the court system. If you would like to call it up, I would have assumed that if you said not coming to the council at all, then I would have written it so that it's not going to either be appealable or be called up. So if you want to be able to call it up, I would appreciate getting that direction and then I can graft it that way. But isn't it possible to just say after potential mediation, okay, you've solved it, you haven't solved it, you know, you're on your own, although we'll provide assistance. To, you know, why do we even need to have the disruptive tenant hearing with a, again, with my concern with a functionary who doesn't maybe know the community, why even go through that process if it could then just go to the legal system afterwards? I'm not sure what we add to it by doing that. Well, I think correct going back to you, I think that's my issue right now is that we want to sunset it, but we really don't have anything. Should it go back? Is there any other work that would be necessary by either the liaison or by the commission to further some of the things we've been discussing. So I'm not sure that's the case because I think ultimately it's a decision for the council to make as a whole and I think we're grappling with the issues. Well, ultimately we have to grapple with whether it goes to liaison committee or not. But I would be interested to know because we're talking about the procedure that we would might want to follow if we are unique with respect to this kind of application, and if we're not unique, are there other cities that have some kind of procedures that we might find informative? Or not? So rather than make a decision right now, I would say this is obviously an issue. We're going to have to decide. And I think it's an issue that the staff can, you know, can brief and suggest, you know, alternative options, you know, to us when it comes back to us. But I think that's the, then we decided at that point we have more information. I agree. I think it will be fine to kind of have that discussion as a council because we've already made the recommendation based on what the REN stabilization commission does. If there are other aspects of it that we want to touch on, I think that's going to be a discussion for the five of us to have up here. Okay, so I'll go back to my original comment, which I think you have direction on. And if it comes back to us, and I feel that it needs to be agendas, which I'm pretty sure I am going to feel that it will be Then I'll just go ahead and do it at that time We're talking about bringing this issue back to us on the next meeting or the meeting after that It would probably be sometime within the next month We would try to bring back an ordinance We would work with the city attorney's office and see how much time we need but we would try to roll all these issues together. So the straights have a conversation about the whole package. Yeah, absolutely, absolutely. Mr. Mayor, if I could, I just want the council to know that the Human Relations Commission still has on the books. One of their mission statements and responsibilities is landlord tenant issues. And the commission's shall, I'm quoting now. The commission shall here, landlord tenant disputes in the commission's shall, I'm quoting now, the commission shall here landlord tenant disputes in order to provide a public forum where tenants and landlords can address issues and resolve differences prior to pursue with prior to pursuing mediation, requesting a formal hearing with the city if applicable or filing a civil suit. So I don't know if that solves the issues that you were thinking about, but I just wanted to bring this to the council attention that it's out there as well. So I would say that as part of this sunset provision, some of the language should be in at least the staff report regarding the fact that it's really going to go back to the Human relations commission. I mean we kind of took it away from them at that time, a little bit fighting and screaming as I recall, right John? They weren't real happy with least losing it. But in any event I think that as long as there is a place and that's really my goal is for the landlords in tennis to have a place to have their disputes heard. I'm not sure of that. Okay, anything else on that issue? I just want to clarify, so we could bring back multiple options to the council, maybe keeping it with the Human Relations Commission being one but some other possibilities as well. Okay. So I've just been reminded that the vice mayor would like to have item C3, information item, second annual festival Beverly Hills event discussed at this time. So perhaps we start with the vice mayor as to your your your concerns. Okay, I appreciate that very much. Thank you. So Stephanie, thank you. So I read through the report and I appreciate that the liaison's worked on this. I'm a little confused about the direction of festival Beverly Hills. Initially, when this was brought up and Council was in agreement with it, it was to celebrate no ruse and the Vernil Equinox during the month of March. Then we decided that we were going to add some other cultural components to it, which was fine. At this point, the cost has gone up to $47,000. I don't know how that, that, it seems like a lot. And, and the date of the event has moved to the middle of July. So I feel like we've lost track of the vision of, and the reasoning why this was recommended and it came to where it is now. And I'm all about inclusivity, unity, bringing the community together. There are plenty of communities that have certain cultural activities or programs that correlate with the lunar new year, that correlate with Alvera Street, that correlate with Alvera Street, that correlate with other festivals that celebrate and bring light to, for people to understand some of the maybe minority groups within that community. And that was kind of the point of this. So at this point, I just, you know, the date is completely different. What are you going to put on a rose table in the middle of July at a park? I don't understand what happened. And if we want to do this and we want to spend $47,000 on it, great. But I would like to bring back again for us to be able to celebrate the Vernal Equinox, to celebrate NoRus, which is important to residents who live in the city and have continuously asked for it. And we have a very large Persian community for 44 years. They've been living here. And there's very little respect that is given to that community. So I can... Oh, let me start. That's all right. So let's talk a little bit about the history. And I don't know if the liaisons want to ring in at a certain point. So there was a desire expressed for a festival, festival of Everly Hills. The original program was there was an ad hoc that was established or a liaison. It was the arts and culture liaison, arts and culture. So if I can help. So in 2022, the commission was looking to, and this was with my predecessor, they were looking to provide a cultural festival, a music festival, and it kind of was several different ideas were discussed. In 2022, it was brought before the special event liaisons. And there was three options provided at that time. Excuse me, who were the liaisons at the time? At that time, I want to say it was Council Member Bosse and Council Member Gold. In 2022, I, or was it less? It might have been less. It may have been less. So I think it was the special event liaison and I could also confirm by looking up the report. But I believe at that point Jenny Rogers director of community services had brought it forward to the special event liaison's which was a council member or mayor Basie at that time and Councilmember Friedman they presented three different options for different skills of the event and that's when the first one was Decided to be at the farmers market as an extension and the date was in March and so in 2022 or in 2023 so this happened in late 2022 it went before the special event liaison in 2022 we ex- or 2023 I'm sorry we executed the program in March at the farmers market. Following that event, the commission had continued to work through their desire to expand the program, and that went before the arts and culture liaisons as the arts and culture division and commission had been working on it. Excuse me. Yes. One second. You want to do an event like this? That's wonderful. I'm in favor of it, and I think you should do it. What I'm trying to point out is that the reason why we brought this up, I brought this up. I remember when we started discussing this, it was to discuss and to celebrate no ruse. And now that vision is completely been muddled and it's gone. Sharona, it's not now. They're saying that this happened in 2022, correct? They made the decision. This is not something we said. But then they moved it to March. We never said let's move it to July. They had made this decision when I think Julian and Lila, whoever were on, and they brought it to us now saying, okay, farmers, market. But John, that's why I'm bringing it up because I don't think that that's appropriate. That defeats the purpose of what the vision was for this recommendation. And to have it as a sea item, to kind of just bypass it, I think there should be space for us to be able to have a discussion. If we want to have a festival, we have next night, this is probably going to end up growing and growing like we do with our events. And we have the December event. That's fine. The No Rules events are not very expensive. It's not something that is going to be too elaborate. It would be something that would be maybe at Beverly Cannon Gardens, have a half-scene up, have some different flavors of foods available, have a little cultural thing to bring our community together so people understand and learn about one another. For us to do this, that's lovely. It defeats the purpose of what the goal of the Noiru celebration was. I'm happy to also bring forward if the council wishes a separate nor ruse program and we can expand on that. I think one of the reasons why we had went to the liaison's late last year following the March event was the array of dates in March that we run into issues. So in 2023 specifically this last year, we had in 2023. So we held our department showcase, which happened on Sunday March 5th. And we were greeted with a complete downpour and it caused a ton of logistical issues for us during our farmers market event for the showcase. So we have since then pushed our department showcase back to avoid inclement weather. We also run into the Vanity Fair Oscar party that takes place out here in front of City Hall, the Los Angeles Marathon where the market is closed and that has impacts in the community. And then both in 2023 and 2024 we ran into Easter. So that was also part of the premise why the commission and staff had brought forward to the liaisons, which were then Mayor Gold and Council Member Basie, the date change. So we can definitely continue to look and explore ideas for a Norruce festival if that is separate to this, or if the direction is to take this back to something that I'm sorry I was not Pervy to it was criticism of you Stephanie, please understand I just think I wanted I want to share the history of this because last year We came to discuss it. It was in March and they said well, we'll try to expand it We had out a lot of downpour this year, so I get it We had a lot of downpour this year, so I get it. But you know, it could even be done the first week of April, or it could be done the beginning of March. There are other options that are closer to the holiday as opposed to having it being done in the middle of the summer. If you want to have a festival, you should. Great. I'll support that. But that defeats the purpose of what the point, are you going to put a No-Rooz table up at the beginning? Are you going to put a No-Rooz table up in the middle of July at the festival and say what about it? How does that make sense? John, you had some comments. So as far as I understood, this wasn't presented to us as an Aruz event that morphed into it. Whatever the origin may have been. This was presented as something that we're going to have at the farmers market, a multicultural, which actually I believe does include Persian culture. I think there were 12 or 13. I was a little peev that there was no Swedish, but okay. And you know, originally it was was gonna be at Roxbury Park because it was gonna be a community event. And we felt that in July, maybe a lot of people are away and that if we're gonna do an event, we should either use the front here between the Wallace and City Hall. We have the ballards for that very reason to have events here. We've very rarely used it, spent a lot of money, or in front of the Beverly Hills sign because it's likely to be a lot of tourists there and that this could attract tourists. I think if we wanna do a No-Roo's event, I think we should. And whether it's indoors or outdoors, or at the Saban Theater, that's something we should do. I've also in the past, but without much success, asked for us to do a fourth of July event, which I think, you know, you talk about, we're all Americans, wherever we come from with our background, heck well, I mean, we're not going to do fireworks, even Santa Monica stopped doing fireworks, but they're, you know, a parade or whatever. There's so many fun things we could do to celebrate the fourth of July, which I think would be great too. So we weren't presented with this as a potential no-roos replacement or whatever. We were just told that there's going to be, and it's next month, there's going to be a multi-cultural festival, which sounds good. And as said, the staff was able to fairly quickly, which I think is an improvement to move the event from Roxbury to in front of the Beverly Hills sign, and I think that's the way to do it. I think the vice mayor raises a separate issue, and I would completely agree that we should do something to beyond the traditional half-scene table that we have downstairs are up here, you know, whether that be a concert at the wallis with Persian and American music, and that sort of thing, we can be looking to events specifically to celebrate Noiros, and I will use the opportunity to bring up the suggestion that we figure out something for the 4th of July, because as said to me, that's something that unites all of us. And it's something that we all partake in and we are all part of. And, you know, more and more, I think a lot of us are, are, are, feel grateful to, to, to live in this country despite all of the mischievous. So. So, I wanted to go around. Did you, have you given the presentation you wanted to or do you want to go? Okay, so let's go to Council Member Wells. Thank you. So I didn't go to the event last year, but in what was presented to us for this year being the second year of this multicultural arts and music festival. My understanding just from the background and the staff report is that this was really, this has been a, this is a vision that was started with the commission. I think Carla can speak to that in terms of what they would like it to be down the road as a, like a music arts festival that's multicultural. And that the first year you went to a smaller scaled down version, but that's never been the vision if I understood correctly. But it was a nice way to start it to start small and hopefully to achieve that vision so this in the second year I Guess the date they found that was best was July 21st and we did bring up our concerns that if we are increasing the budget from It's initial I think it was Thank you so it's three times the budget but we're moving it to July and Thank you so it's three times the budget but we're moving it to July and It's summer and it's at Roxbury Park with that we really wanted to be a success The farmers market last year also provided an audience of people that were there So that's partly how we got to Beverly Gardens because there's always people there and it could be more accessible And people will see it or people will plan to go to it. And if we're going to invest and make it bigger in the vision, then having a better venue would be ideal. It sounds like last year that event in March actually ended up meeting two different purposes. One, it sounds like as the arts and cultural commissions, you know, goal of having this festival, but it also coinciding with New Ru, so maybe that's where the miscommunication was, but I can't say because I wasn't there. But I definitely think your point of having a New Ru celebration is also very valid and that separate from this we should look at that I think it would be really Welcome by the community and something to look Forward to doing at at the time that is appropriate but different and As you said there are a lot of things on the calendar and we've talked about that said there are a lot of things on the calendar and we've talked about that. There's a lot of events and they are all wonderful but we may want to look at them from a more global standpoint and see if we want to, you know, maybe we want to shift some things around or combine things and as we move forward so that we make room for other things as well that we find that are important. So and different scale of the different events. So anyway, for this event, this is how we got to this point. Everybody was very excited about it. At least in the presentation, it was presented as multicultural and that there were 13 different cultures at this point. You know, one of the questions was how much bigger is this program this year by increasing the budget? Are we getting a broader spectrum of cultures represented or is it a higher quality? We certainly know we're moving to a different venue and those are all questions that have come up and are important as we look at this and as we move forward if approved that we will want to look at after and really debrief and evaluate if this was really received well by the community as well and at that time of the year July 21st we're as well, it expands to the broader community in terms of people that are traveling for leisure in the summer that are in Beverly Hills. So all of those things, I think, are important. And I think, you know, to your point, both are important. And it does seem that this has taken a track and maybe was always intended to be on a track from the commission to be a multicultural arts and music festival. At least that's the impression that I've been given. Okay, I see Carla here. Do you want to speak? If you want to, it's fine. If you don't, maybe we'll ask you questions afterwards. Okay, let's go. Come on up, please. Hello. Hi. I am Vice Chair of the Arts and Culture Commission. Thanks to all of you, I appreciate my position and hello to your point, Taurona. I understand what you were just saying. I respect and appreciate it because we all, many of us come from different cultures and feel under represented. I was there when we envisioned what this was going to be. And this is the first I've ever heard of that. So I think somewhere in the conversation or in elements of it, it resonated possibly with you that element, which we wanted to include because it did timing wise come around the time of the celebration, so it was included as one of the many activations. It was never a No Ru's festival, but I support and think that's something that our department should definitely look at, our commission should look at for sure. So we have this vision of music and dance and celebrating all the aspects of cultures within and around surrounding neighborhoods. And we want to do this through the arts department and here and have people come out and have a good time because we're, we come together through the arts. That's the denomination that really makes everybody happy and joyful and want to celebrate. So we had this big vision. Most arts and culture festivals happen in big cities. We are one of the biggest, I would say, as far as known all over the world. So to not have something celebrating arts and culture in a big way has been something we've been missing. And so I'm happy that you all approved for us to get started. Doing it at the farmers' market was not the vision. It was actually very upsetting to all the commissioners when we were put down to that area, but we were very happy that you approved it because you have to get started. And so we took that initial baton to say, just do something so we can get a very small look at what this vision is about. We had the Chinese dragon. We had Indian dancers. we had many many culture separated and people loved it. It was very successful. And so now we're like, okay, you got to look at it. Can we come back and ask for this larger event to come? And the idea to bring it right up by the Beverly Hills sign is fantastic. If that can happen, if not the park, but that's where all the visitors will see it. So we're very excited at making happen. The staff has worked so hard. They're amazing, as you know. And I think and see that this is gonna be amazing. Everybody that's heard about it can't wait to be there from the city around the town's neighboring Santa Monica, we hoe, Culver City everywhere. They're looking forward to attending and enjoying multiple stages, multiple performers, dancing, singing, and eating great food for many cultures. You know, if I can say something now, of course. Stephanie said that she thought that I was involved on it. All of a sudden, it's all come back to me because that's exactly what happened is we wanted to do it slowly, I remember it was Lily and myself, we wanted to do it slowly and it was multicultural. I'm not, from what I'm hearing, I think they're two totally separate events. I think having two events is probably not a bad idea, but I think this one is separate, at least. Now that you are reminding me of what we discussed. Separate from what, no rules? It was not, the genesis of this event was not no rules, at least as my recollection. Correct. If you look at the timeline it is, and you look at the date that we celebrated it was, and that's why it came to the commission too, because it was a recommendation. I'll go back and change. We had a different date and Lily Bosse asked us to switch the date. So it wasn't when we wanted to have it initially but it was I guess. It was brought to March because it was I guess maybe perhaps what you're saying is that the two kind of got combined together and and then like the no what was supposed to be a no-roo celebration turned into a cultural festival which is something we did years ago when I was on the human relations commission not as well as you guys are gonna do but I think that it's gonna be a fantastic event I'm excited about it I'm not I'm not it's not about the event it's excited about it. I'm not, it's not about the event. It's not about the work that staff has done. It's not about the great work of the commission. And we're in support of it. I think it's going to be a wonderful addition to our city. My point is that this was something that they kind of threw no rules into. Yes. And it got lost. We added it. And so I want to be clear on this is not a discussion about perhaps, you know, this is not a discussion about this celebration. This is about that there were two different things. They got morphed in together and then now the whole vision of that got lost. Well, yeah, I know in our meetings we said we want to make sure because we do have a large Persian community. We said as we looked to different cultures to celebrate, Persian community was part of that celebration and what is that culture about and what can we add? And that's when someone said, Norews, Norews. So we're like, oh, okay, well that element will be added. Chinese New Year, okay, this. So it was just one of the many elements. add it to be a part of this vision of having a music or to culture festival, which I remember us sitting there at the beginning, all saying how we want to have a music festival and have it internationally connected. And that's really the vision started there. And as we have conversations now, someone will say, well, that's close enough to know Rousse, can we move it to this, you know, and it all piece together, which is the magic of everybody sharing and sharing ideas. So stand by in case there's any other questions. We'll go to, as I mentioned to Council Member Quarment earlier today, we have a way of filling time. So we'll go to Council Member Quarment. Thank you. So obviously I was not around at the genesis of this event. I don't know what happened when and where, what started the ball rolling. But my takeaway here is obviously a good event that we like, and we're going to support it. And I do agree that it should be at the Beverly Gardens Park and Oxtamroxbury Park. And I think it should be open to many, many cultures. Obviously, it's a multicultural event. We should celebrate a lot of different cultures. But I also hear that at one point, nor was, was an important element, at least for Vice-Morne Nazarian and other people. And maybe that got lost. And so what I would say going forward, maybe not this year, but going forward. And the idea, it sounds like Mission Creek, where we're going to have now two events, one from HIPASM, NORUES, and one for the multicultural thing. Going forward, I would say we should, we do have a substantial Persian community here in Beverly Hills, and I think they deserve an event that celebrates their culture as well as their cultures. And so, going forward, if we're going to have a multicultural event like this, perhaps we should schedule it on a date that is important to the Persian community for some event in the Persian calendar. Whether it's no ruse or something else, depending on what else is going in the city calendar, so that it's clear that we are celebrating the Persian community as well as other communities. I appreciate you saying that. I think we've said it several times on the dias, but for some reason there's a disconnect and staff is not hearing it. So I hope staff has heard it. I think that what we have to realize is that if we continue with the same slate of events we have Vanity Fair, Marathon, we have Easter, we don't schedule programs on Easter we just have to have the celebration a different day of the week Saturdays are difficult because it's shabbat and so we would just have to do it a different day of the week. Okay John so I disagree with Craig a little bit I think that we should have it's fine to have two these are separate things a multicultural multicultural event. Let's see how successful it is in the summer. Four to plus you. Four to ourists. And for our residents here, could be a fun event the way we have the art show and that sort of thing. I wouldn't want to necessarily have a multicultural event for no rules that distracts for no rules. Like it's no rules, but it's also this, that and the other. Let's just have a straight forward no-roos event that only celebrates no-roos, Persian New Year for all of us, whether it be at the Saban Theater or we can figure out what that might be, could be a concert, could be whatever, we'll figure it out. But that should only celebrate no-roos. Then the fact that we are very cosmopolitan city, we have residents that speak 175 languages or whatever it is. And I think, you know, the way that let's see how it develops. This is the first time. I think we're having it at the right place. I think if we would have it at Roxbury Park, it might not be successful. We might say, you know what? Then let's leave it at that. We're giving it the best chance to be successful by having it at the best location. And if it works great, we can build upon it or decide if we want to because that's exactly something the Arts and Culture Commission should do as a festival or multiple ones. And that could turn out to be a good time. And let's do it. But the vice-marrer's point is well taken. Whatever the origin was, we really should focus next year on something specific for noirrs. And I wouldn't want to dilute it. I would want it just to be about noirrs. Let us learn about it, let us celebrate it, let us do that. And then I will, again, this won't obviously be till next year. I would love for us to look at something maybe in connection with a multi-cultural festival if it works out this year next year, but to do something on the 4th of July. I really think that we've just been neglecting that holiday for so many years. And some people, well, and people are away in July as well, which is why we're placing it at rather than at Roxbury Park. But for those who are here, you know, and tourists as well who may come, the Fourth of July is truly a joyous event. It's something we can rally around. We're all invested in it. It's something that belongs to literally all of us. And anyway, thank you. You wanna add something? And then we'll go to Vice-Maris, because I'm not gonna forget this one. Okay. I agree with Council Member Maris about keeping it as separate event. I think, don't we also have the banners for Neroos? Can we do? So I think the timing of that is it's better suited if we can look at the calendar and being sensitive to what we have piled on with staff and really I do think we need to take a hard look at all those things and just be you know we can you know look at it with different eyes and we prioritize and look at it in that way. I think is important. And we can consider the Fourth of July parade. I'm open to those things. But what I also understand is we don't, it's not an endless, you know, we don't have an endless supply of bandwidth for our staff and dates to be able to pull all these things off. So I think we have to have that global view and review and look at it with regard to that because when we approve in a vacuum we're not really seeing the whole picture. It's important for us to do that but I do think all those things are fun. I know whenever I've been in smaller towns, be it Sun Valley or Aspen, the multiple other cities as well in Park City, their 4th of July parades are very fun and it's very small town and it is very community. So it is a thought and I'm definitely open to it. Thank you. Okay, vice-chair. I think I've made my point, hopefully. I, again, I think that this is going to be a great event. It's going to be a lot of fun. It would be nice to do something. I understand the time constraints and the limitations that we have. But I'm pretty confident that we can do something. It doesn't have to be on a huge scale, especially at the beginning. It's just to recognize a community. That's all. You know what I mean? It's not something that needs to cost $65,000 like this event is going to cost, and probably going to grow as time goes by. I think it's something that we can look at and see how we can recognize different groups of our community and just have a celebration. More than anything to bring unity and understand the different cultures, I see sometimes there's so much divide and this is really going to be an opportunity to bring people together. So thank you. Okay and you know I think we kind of are all at the same place. I mean this event coordinated multicultural including Persian because of convenience and I think that there probably should be a separate type of event. And I think the way we've always looked at it is doing it at a smaller scale to begin with, see where we are. And then if it takes off, move it up. That's what happened. I believe with this one, it kind of all came back to me that we wanted to start us slow. It was originally the multi-cult start as slow, it was originally the multi-culture, I mean it was, it was just all over the place. And we wanted to see how it went and it went fairly well. One of the things that we thought about originally, as I recall, was putting it the farmers market. I remember there was some pushback because the vendors there are not always as thrilled as they could be about having another thing going on rather than the farmers market. That's the same discussion, wasn't that we had? It's like a bad dream all coming back. So I do think it was separate. I do not think it was, I think that they morphed into it, and now it seems that it's morphed out of it to the extent that it should be. So we know Roo's in July. Correct. I don't know whether or not there's another holiday other than No Roo's. I'll leave that to others who have much more familiarity with that. But March is a very busy time. It's the MC2A tournament going on. all those kinds of things that are going on, but March madness. So I'm sure that we can find something but in terms of this item it sounds like everybody is okay with it. Is that the direction that we we're all in? Is that right? So for this time, and then we will look at some sort of event on whatever scale is appropriate at the time for Nauru's. Okay. Thank you all very much. Okay. So, we're having filled the time, Craig, and moving forward. We will now adjourn this meeting for those items on our close session agenda, and we will do a roll call first, and then we will ask if there's any public comment, right? And we will continue this meeting until the 27th. Okay. And as stated. So the row call for the closed session, Council Member Wells. Here. Council Member Corman. Here. Council Member Mirich. Vice Mayor Nazarian. Here. And Mayor Friedman. Here. Okay, so do we have any public comment on items on our closed session? We do not. Okay, so we will adjourn to those items on that agenda.