Council, regular and parking authority meeting of Tuesday, May 6, 7pm. We will begin with the Pledge of Allegiance and if we could have Sean, lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Nice to see you of America. We reach. From which you speak. One. Nician. Under God. In this as well with liberty and justice for all. Thank you so much. We will now take role. City clerk, please. Thank you. This is a roll call for City Council. Council Member Wells. Council Member Corman. Here. Council Member Friedman. Here. Vice Mayor Marish. Here. Mayor Nazarian. Here. All right. This evening we're going to be starting with presentations. So I'd like to invite my colleagues to please join me. So I'm pleased to launch another initiative, which is called Shining in Beverly Hills. And this is to show the city's appreciation for some of the amazing businesses in our community. Our first shining in Beverly Hills is going to the Beverly Hills Market and Delhi. Come on up. Come on up. So for almost 40 years, owners Sean and Angela Sadian have been serving Beverly Hills and the region, providing fresh groceries, daily daily specials and outstanding service at affordable prices. They are the only independently owned market in Beverly Hills and are open for business from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. down the street on Crescent Drive. They offer home delivery catering catering fill special orders as well. And we've certainly had that. The market remains open, even remained open even during challenging times such as the pandemic. During those tough years, Sean, Angela, and their employees had to work extra hard to fill delivery orders and source difficult to find items. And even though his catering business had to close, he didn't lay off a single member of his staff. So Sean and Angela, the Beverly Hills, is one big family and operating their businesses is just one way that they give back. The market has also been deeply involved with the community for years including coffee with a cop, with the Rotary Club of Beverly Hills, the Beverly Hills Adult-Active Adult Club, and many other city events and organizations including the mayor's swearing in. So thank you for being there. All right, do you wanna come up? I'm very pleased to present the certificate to a business that shines day and night in our community. We're so grateful to you, and I'd like to invite you to say a few words. Thank you. Let's give it up for Sean. Thank you. We'll be right back with my few words. I'm sure you'll find them. Anyhow. I'm going to hold this for you until you find your few words. I got it. Oh, I hope so., thank you, Mayor Nazarian, Council Member Wells, Friedman, Maryish and Cormin. Really appreciate it. This is really incredible and, you know, as Beverly is marked celebrate almost 40 years, this means a lot to my family and my employees that have been recognized like this. This business is just a big part of our life. It's not only as a business, but also it gives us a way of connecting with our community, which we love. My family worked there for three generations and we share one thing altogether is about serving our community and being with our community through rough times, good times. And when, you know, about 40 years ago, let's give us some sort of a background on Beverly Hills Market. CD along with the federal government, they tried to open that senior housing and one of the requirements was to put a market, hardware store, and the necessity for senior housing and that qualified the CD for the grant and it was just really a meaningful act that it happened to serve our seniors. And from day one we know it's not just a business. This is a place to connect with people. We want to be with people. Over years, a lot of changes has been through Beverly Hills and and one thing that stayed same was just being us, being there for people and connecting with our people. And you know, we are looking forward and excited about future. We like to expand and hopefully we bring more things for our city and our into the community. Thank you again. Congratulations. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next room. Thank you very much. So tonight I'm honored to present a proclamation in celebration of building safety month in May. Woo! It's an important time to recognize the vital role that building safety placed in protecting lives. Woo! It's an important time to recognize the vital role that building safety placed in protecting lives and strengthening our community. This year we have even more reason to celebrate. I'm really proud to share that the City of Beverly Hills' Building and Safety Division has been recognized by the California Building Officials as the 2024-2025 Building Department of the Year. This prestigious honor means that the Building and Safety Division is the best in the entire state of California. It's a remarkable accomplishment that recognizes performances in the area of code enforcement, community outreach, inspection quality, plan check and permit services, seismic retrofitting, program implementation, plan review and inspection turnout times, and overall operational excellence. This award is earned because of the professionalism commitment and exceptional service your team provides every day. So please come up. Applause. On behalf of the Beverly Hills City Council and the entire community, congratulations to the Building and Safety Division. Thank you for your outstanding work in keeping Beverly Hills safe and resilient and thriving. We're so grateful to you all. Thank you. I'm going to actually actually handed over to our building official, Arlen, who's going to see a few words about building and safety. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. It's a true honor to accept this proclamation, recognizing May as the building safety month. So on behalf of our department, I want to extend my deepest thanks for your continuous support in highlighting the importance of this month and building safety in our city. Building safety month is a global kind of international campaign to raise awareness, educate public, and also promote safe building practices. It reminds us all how critical it is to create and maintain safety, sustainability, and resilience in our homes, workplaces, and public spaces. So buildings safety professionals, including our permit center staff, inspectors, code enforcement, plan reviewers, planners, and other support staff really work hard, and tirelessly to protect lives and property. As Mayor Nazaria mentioned, so this year our department was named as the best building department of the state of California. It's an incredible honor that really reflects and shows the hard work of our entire team, so thanks to every single one of them. And as we kicked off this month, we encourage and invite everyone to learn more about building codes and how we can create safer and more efficient community together. Thank you again for this recognition. I appreciate it. Thank you. Congratulations. It's our honor. Truly, you provide white glove service. And this is only, it's only becoming that you're recognized for the great work that you and your entire team do. Thank you, Mike. All right. Let's take it. for everyone to clean the other room. And then on the side, there's a bunch of dirt. Right there. All right. Let's take it. Very, very many people. Can you do the other one? Do you want to go on one side? There. Right. Should we go to the other one? Right. One. One. One. One. Do the other one. Do the other one. One. Do the other one. One. Do the other one. Do the other one. I've won. I've been time. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay right. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Pardon me. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Can I invite the Public Works Commission to please come up? This week we are recognizing something that touches the lives of every resident every day here in the City of Beverly Hills, our drinking water. This week we join cities across the country in celebrating drinking water week led by the American Water Works Association. While I was a public works commissioner, we launched the Rethink BH tap campaign to promote confidence in Beverly Hills' tap water and highlight its safety, quality, and sustainability as a drinking water source. And many people had many questions during the fires and luckily our city really stood out far and beyond everyone else because of the fantastic drinking water that we provide. Here in Beverly Hills we're fortunate to operate our very own water utility, something that sets us apart from many other cities. That means we manage and deliver our water locally. Working behind the scenes we have a dedicated public work staff, engineers, operators, field crews, water quality experts, and administrative staff who maintain and protect our water system. They are the unsung heroes who ensure that when you turn on the tap, the water use receive is clean, safe, and dependable. And so it really is an incredible team and I'd like to invite all of them to please come up as I present this proclamation. And as they come up the city has also invested in long-term infrastructure improvements and water conservation efforts to help meet the needs of our community. So congratulations. Last week we launched WaterSmart, an innovative user-friendly portal to help customers manage their water consumption and utility bill more efficiently. Today, tonight, I'm honored to proclaim the first week of May as Drinking Water Week in Beverly Hills. Applause Who's going to say a few words? I was sure. Yes sir. Thank you so much. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you again. I'm honored to speak on behalf of the Public Works Commission as we recognize drinking water week here in the City of Beverly Hills as the Chair of the Public Works Commission. I'm proud that we are actively involved in advising on policies reviewing infrastructure projects and supporting initiatives that help maintain and enhance our city's water system. Our Commission plays a key role in ensuring Beverly Hills continues to lead in water quality and sustainability. And I would like to thank the City Council for their support on these efforts. And I would also like to recognize our dedicated public works professionals that are standing before you. They work around the clock to ensure a community receives water that means or exceeds our highest quality standards. I'm here to support them. Thank you. Congratulations. We're going to take one quick picture and then I want to invite the two kiddos to come up for another picture after that I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. I'm not going to do it again. Oh, that's bad. That's bad. That's bad. That's bad. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Big smile all around. Good. All right. Thank you all so much. We appreciate you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I lost to council member. I need to put one of those on. I need an air tag. All right. So yes. So, if you'd like to make public comments, there's several ways. You could text BH, text messages on any city related topic, maybe sent to 310-596-4265 city staff will acknowledge receipt of the text message within one business day. However, resolutions of issues may take a teeny bit longer. If you would like to receive updated text alerts from the Beverly Hills Police Department, please text BHPD Alert to 888-777. Text alerts will keep you informed of any police activity within the city. Now it's time for oral communications, for items not on the agenda. You can call in at 310-288-2288. And anyone in the council chamber who would like to make comments may do so by filling out a speaker's lift and providing it to the city clerk. Public comments are for three minutes. If there's more than 20 people commenting, then comments will be taken at the end of the meeting. There will also be summarization by the City Clerk on written public comments. And then anyone who wishes to speak after that will be called upon at the end of the meeting. So with that, I would like to call. Sorry. Those are old ones. Zach Nia. Hi, welcome. Good evening Madam Mayor, Mr. Vice Mayor, City Council Members. I'd like to bring up a concern in regards to this Saturday's Fire Service Day event. I've attended this event for many years. Ever since I was a little boy. It was my favorite event of the year and I always look forward to it. The best part of the event by far was the fire engine rights. It made the event stand out among the other events that most neighboring stations and departments would hold on that same very day. But ever since 2020, it has been a part of it has not been part of the event. And I understand that COVID was the main reason for not having it. But COVID is not even remotely prevalent now than it was say five years ago. To see such a great event without its best attraction is nothing short of disappointing, in my opinion. I feel bad for the kids of today's generation that they do not get to experience what I did when I was a young boy. In fact, I've had friends from other parts of LA that would make the trip over here just for the event because it stood out to them. But now they tell me they don't think it's worth their time because it's watered down. My relative who grew up here, she was planning to bring her kid, who were your young son, up here for the event. But when I found out there was no rides this year and I told her that, she was like, why is it crazy? It should bring it back. She's not going to come up here. Now I see on the city's website that it says that it's a popular event. Well I think to keep it popular, you should bring those rides back. You know sometimes folks will wait an hour just to get on the ride. I've asked the firefighters over the last couple of years, why is there no fire engine rides anymore? And I got a different answer each time. LA City Fire Station 99 up in Mall Holland, they brought their fire engine rides back after COVID slowed down. I don't see why that's not being done over here. Just like a straight answer as to why it hasn't made a return, especially since COVID, is not what it was five years ago. Thank you for your time. Thank you very much. All right, and the next year, 26 is the Free Fies coming, and 28 is all of this coming. And the slots of foreign visitors are coming for this event, and there is insufficient hotel accommodations in Southern California. And particularly when the visitors come, the first choice is always the Bevel Hill. So I would like to request you, the city has a two-veckent lot next to the police department. What we can do is we can fast track everything for two suggestions. The first lot, which we can do is a conference hall. The convention conference hall, four to six, you can build up that one. And next lot you can have a satellite Consulate offices of different country like 10.20 who can do a good business with America and along with it At the end of the booth ring you can have a tower hotels making 500 to 1000 room for the first lot and a second lot Also, you can make 500 to 1000 room hotel hotel hour so that you can extra add the capacity in the city and this is the right time to cast the hour lot and if the city owned the property you have two choices either you can lease that property or you can accent that property and below it you can do the same parking parking structure, just like the city and the next hall, you have got underground parking, two, three, same way it can be all the way parking from Police Department to the Duhini. So all the parking facilities will be provided to these all structures. Okay, second thing is also very important part you have to remember that when the council let all different council come, they can do all the satellite council services and you can generate extra even you for the advertisement and everything and the traffic is coming. Okay? Now third thing I want to know, I would like to do you have to do everything but at the same time I want to alert you that the federal government has a very, very deteriorating financial condition. They have got 36 trillion dollar depth, 2 trillion dollar of deficit every month, every year, and dollar term, and the speaker has a zero extra income. And they are going to be very, very deteriorating, and they are going to be stopped or any city financing everything. So we had to generate extra revenue. If you want to generate extra revenue, here is a opportunity to use this over a city law to extra generate income. Thank you very much for the services. Well done, you did it under three minutes. Thank you. All right. Are there any more public comments? There are no other public comments for not agenda items in any form. All right. We'll now go over the consent agenda. Are there any items that you would like to see pulled? Colle to go. All right. If I could please have council member Wells read 1 to 4. Okay. I move the adoption of the consent 1 to 3. The consent agenda as follows. Number 1 consideration of the City Council of the minutes of the regular meeting of April 1st, 2025. Number two, review of budgeted demands paid covering dates April 15th, 2025 to April 28th, 2025. Number three, payroll disbursement report covering dates April 15th, 2025 to April 28th, 2025. I'm sorry, could you read the fourth one too, please? And resolution of the Council of the City of Beverly Hills number four, adopting amendments to the master plan of streets, alleys and highways. And five. We're doing it. And approval of number five, acceptance of the contract work for a, La Siena Gapark Restrooms Improvement Project with Ramco General Engineering Contractors Inc. in the final amount of $194,622 and authorization of City Clerk to record notice of completion. The Fire station number two ventilation upgrades project with AC pros ink. In the final amount of 197,797 dollars and 98 cents. And authorization of the city clerk to record notice of completion. And all second. Okay. We have roll call please. Council member Wells? Yes. Council member Cormin? Yes. Council member Friedman? Yes. Vice Mayor Mirish? Yes. Mayor Nazarian? Yes. All right. Now we're going to move to E1 for consideration and urgency ordinance in the city of Beverly Hills amending single family residential development regulations and objective standards for two primary unit projects and urban law splits. May we have a report please? A mayor I need to read something into the record for the script. This is the time and place set for a public hearing to consider an urgency ordinance of the City of Beverly Hills amending single-family residential development regulations and objective standards for two primary unit projects and urban law splits. Let the record show that the notice of this hearing was published as required by law. The records and files of the community development department and the report of the principal planner considering this matter shall be entered into the record. You may earn a Maren is Ary you'll come Chloe Chen. Thank you. This item is a draft interim urgency ordinance to update standards for urban lotsplates and two primary unit projects, also known as SB9 projects. The main purpose of this ordinance is to update the city's zoning code to be consistent with recent changes in state law. SB 9 is a state bill that took effect in 2022 and the city previously adopted objective standards in compliance with this law, which are currently codified as Article 49. SB 450 became effective in 2025 and made changes to SB 9 that include requiring that objective standards applied to SB 9 projects are the same as those applied to projects in the underlying zone unless the standards are more permissive. Including cities from denying duplex projects, even if they alter a significant portion of an existing structure. Limiting the findings for a specific adverse impact to public health and safety issues only, whereas previously this could include impacts to the physical environment. And requiring that cities make a decision on SB 9 projects within 60 days of deeming it complete. As a refresher, SB 9 requires that cities ministerially approve up to four housing units on a single family residential parcel. There are two different options to achieve this. First, an urban lot split allows the subdivision of a single family parcel into two lots. On each of the new lots, one primary unit or main home plus an ADU or junior ADU can be built or two primary units can be built on each lot. This results in a maximum of four units across the two new lots. The second option is called a two primary unit project, which does not involve a lot split, but allows up to two primary units plus an ADU or JADU on an existing single-family parcel, and so either option allows a maximum of four units on single-family lots. In compliance with state law, the draft ordinance removes previous standards that are no longer allowed, and updates or adds new standards, including underlying zoning standards that would already apply to a primary unit in the underlying zone. Previously, the SB9 standards allowed a maximum unit size of 800 square feet, a maximum height of 14 feet, a 10 foot front setback for the rear lot and an urban lot split, and screening for the rear unit. The updated standards remove requirements for inclusionary housing, screening of the rear unit, and for the front unit door to face the street, and instead limits one primary entrance to face the front lot line of each lot. The new standards now require that the rear lot front setback is measured from the alley or the lot line for this front and parallel to the street, calculate the maximum FAR prior to an urban lot split, and requires that the building official review the project for specific adverse impacts if it is located in the very high fire hazard severity zone with optional review in areas outside of the fire zone. The ordinance would also apply several underlying zoning standards to these projects such as the Eman-Mum Unit Width and Floor Area, height limitation and the permitted location of parking and the front setback calculation for the rear lot. State law also allows the denial of an SB9 project if the building official finds that there is a specific adverse impact related to public health and safety. The high fire hazard severity zone is an area identified by Cal fire as having a higher risk of wildfire. And this area has been recently updated to include the majority of land north of Lomita's Avenue. The identified wildfire evacuation routes in this area comply with Cal Fire requirements. However, due to the existing street patterns, the routes run mostly north to south with very few east-west routes, and these are narrow one-lane winding streets. Given that the risk of wildfire occurrence has increased with climate change and that wildfire would likely spread north from the mountains to the south, there is a potential adverse impact to public safety that could result from vehicle congestion on these evacuation routes and this was evidenced by the recent policy fire during which roads were blocked with abandoned vehicles. Therefore, the JAPT ordinance would require that the building official review any SB9 project in this area individually to determine whether this impact could occur. And the City Council may adopt an interim urgency ordinance with the four fifths majority vote. The ordinance would be effective immediately for an initial period of 45 days, but may be subsequently extended for a total period of two years. For adoption, the City Council must find that the ordinance is required to address a current immediate threat to public health safety or welfare. And the Wildfire Risk and Associated Evacuation Conj risk, disgust, present, and immediate threat to public health and safety. With that, staff recommends the City Council adopt the interim urgency ordinance and find this action exempt from CEQA. I'm available for any questions. Thank you. Great, thank you very much. Do we have any public comments on this item? We have no public comments on this item. We did receive a written comment from James Lloyd. It is too long to read, but it is part of the record and was forwarded to council. Could you give us a synopsis, please? I do not have the synopsis at the moment, but I can read the letter really quick up until three minutes if that's acceptable? Yes. Spare with me. Thank you. I'm going to. Would you like us to come back to it? Would you like us to come back to it? Okay, thank you. Dear Reble Hill City Council, the California Housing Defense Fund, Cal HDF submissive letter to flag two specific legal issues with the city's proposed ordinance that implements SB 9 as modified by SB 450, calendared as agenda item E1 for the council meeting of May 6, 2025. Resulting lot size. The first issue is found in Code Section 10-3-4904B. There is the two resulting lots shall be approximately equal and no smaller than 48 percent or larger than 52 percent of the lot area of the original parcel. This clearly violates government code section 66411.7 sub division A1, the parcel maps subdivise an existing parcel to create no more than two new parcels of approximately equal lot area provided that one parcel should not be smaller than 40% of the lot area of the original parcel proposed for subdivision. The law was clearly written to allow flexibility while providing that a resulting lot be no smaller than 40% of the original parcel. The law requires approximate equality in size, not exact equality. By mandating that the parcels be within 48 to 52% of the original parcel, the city is illegally denying the applicant the flexibility written into SB 9. Additionally, this code provision serves no public purpose other than to hamper potential lot splits. The legislative findings provided in section 4 of SB 450 clearly indicate that the legislature intended the law to encourage and increase in the overall supply of housing. Encourage the development of housing that is affordable to households at all income levels, remove barriers to housing production, expand homeownership opportunities, and expand the availability availability of rental housing. The lot size requirements of Code section 10-3-4904b, as well as other aspects of the city's ordinance, example the minimum unit size of 1600 square feet, clearly run counter to the legislature's stated intent. In addition, Code section 10-3-4912 allows the city to deny SB 9 projects in the very high fire hazard severity zone. The building official or his or her design may make a written finding to deny an urban lot split or the construction of primary residential units as part of the two primary unit projects or urban lot split. Such finding shall be based upon the preponderance of evidence that the proposed housing development project would have a specific Addverse Impact as Defined in of subdivision D of government code 65589.5 upon the public health and safety and for and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. And he said while it is law, laudable that the city is updating its SB 9 ordinance, the city should amend the draft ordinance to bring it into compliance with state law. It was longer, but I just provided you the end. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for your in-problem. All right, great. So now we will go to Council questions and we'll start with Council Member Wells. Thank you very much. I just have one question and it's along the same lines of what we've been talking about in the city. When it comes to Southern California Edison, our power is very unreliable. And especially when it comes to the high fire zone. And I understand that we can't put any requirements for backup power or redundancy with regards to power. But how do we let the residents know that are thinking of adding units to those areas that it's something they should be aware of and consider because it's high fire and we know for certain that we don't have reliable power there. I'm not sure if perhaps our building and safety team or could answer that question. I mean, is this sort of a like informational? I mean, like that we would, you know, alert them that there are issues in those areas that perhaps they'd want to consider backup power, that they'd want to consider having, you know, ways to be able to move, you know, evacuated, needed,, like how alternative methods in place so that they're protected, because we can't require it. And I do want them to know. Add one clarification is that for the primary residences that get constructed, so either via a lot split or without the two primary residences, those we do have a requirement the primary residence has to have backup power. It's the ADU's where we don't have the ability to require backup power at this time. Right, and we don't necessarily have to require sprinklers, is that correct? If they are, so an ADU that is built to a company and existing single family home home that does not have sprinklers the ADU does not require sprinklers But if you're building brand new on the property new single-family home Plus potentially new ADU they would they would need to be sprinklered Okay, I just think it would be important for people to understand that as they're considering it Up front in terms of building instead of finding out later are trying to then retrofit. Thank you. Those are my only questions. Thank you. Councilmember Corman. Thanks. Let me ask a follow-up question to that last piece of information. So is there a prohibition on requiring sprinklers in an ADU specifically? And the reason I asked is because I have an older house. Didn't have sprinklers. I put a pavilion in the back and I was required to put sprinklers in the pavilion. Yes, the state ADU specifically says that you cannot require sprinklers in an ADU if the primary residence does not have sprinklers. Okay, thank you. So I know that well first of all we you heard the letter a few minutes ago about the the SB 9 and SB 450 talk about you want to have equal if there's a lot split they want to have roughly equal but no less than 40 percent. We have a a slightly higher percentage, and they make the argument that's more restrictive and therefore it's counter to the law. What is our response to that? I respond. less than 40%. We have a slightly higher percentage and they make the argument that's more restrictive and therefore it's counter to the law. What is our response to that? Our response would be that state law only sets a minimum requirement. So that's where it says it shall be no less than 40% and then defines the split to be approximately equal. In our draft ordinance we're defining approximately equal to be between 48% to 52%. And we believe that's in compliance with state law because state laws only setting kind of the maximum bound for. So would it be fair to say that we don't see that as an impediment to the lot split, making a higher minimum percentage. Does not is not an impediment to an actual lot split. It simply makes the properties more equal. Correct. Okay. And then with respect to the argument that the minimum square footage in state laws 800 square feet, but we require 1600 square feet, what would be our argument to say that 1600 square feet is fine. So that's actually a requirement from the underlying zoning. So in the central hillside and true steel areas, the minimum requirement for floor area is 1600 square feet. And because of the change to state law that says we have to apply the same zoning standards to SB 9 projects as we do to projects in the underlying zone, we've applied that standard to SB 9 projects as well And would it be fair to say that the 800 square feet Requirements state laws really designed to make sure that no one makes too small of a unit that isn't practical to use or sell or Or rent that's correct It's state law says that we cannot preclude the development of a unit up to 800 square feet. Okay. Now we have the provision that was also complained about the letter, about the in a very high fire, I always get them wrong. The very high fire has her verity. So very, very thank you very much in though in that zone the building We can look at whether there is an adverse impact That to health and safety under government codes 658 52.21d 2 And and I know that there is also a provision in SB 9 that also requires that any lot that either has a duplex put on it or is a lot split, has to satisfy the requirements in a different government code section, 65913.4. and then it talks about specified subparagraphs of B's, 2K of paragraph 6 of subdivision A of that section and if you look at that government code section, it also talks about high risk and very high risk fire hazard areas and it specifically says that it says the development is not located on a site that is any of the following. And D says within a very high fire hazard severity zone, as it's term of the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection pursuant to Section 51178 or within a high or very high fire hazard severity zone is indicated on maps, a dock of the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, pursuant to Section 40202 of the public resources code. This is my question now. Sorry. This subparagraph does not apply to Sykes excluded from the specified hazard zones by a local agency pursuant to subdivision B of Section 5179. I assume we have not excluded any of our areas under that code. Or sites that have adopted fire hazard mitigation measures pursuant to existing building standards of state fire mitigation measures applicable to development. And I guess the question I have is, do we know exactly what that means, sites that have adopted fire hazard mitigation measures pursuant to existing building standards or state fire mitigation measures applicable to development? Because I know we have a very complicated, very thorough local hazard mitigation action plan that includes fire suppression things. I know we have that in the building code, but I don't know if they satisfy this standard. And I know that there are insurance companies out there, some of which would say, no, your mitigation measures aren't good enough for us to ensure properties in your zones. So I'm wondering if, for purposes of the permanent ordinance, if we could get maybe some, if we haven't already, get the legislative history, if we can't of that language and see what they meant by it, I know right now we have not proceeded under that code section, but it strikes me that if the mitigation measures we have adopted don't qualify in some way shape or form to what they were getting at, then all the properties in the severe high, the very high-fired hazard severity zone or just the high-risk zone would be knocked out of the box. So is that something we could do? Great question. Yes. My understanding is that we actually did check with our building and safety team and fire department and we have adopted mitigation measures that do comply with those standards noted and you know the fire department does implement all sorts of mitigation measures that do comply with those standards noted. And the Fire Department does implement all sorts of mitigation measures, such as field modification standards, defensible space areas, where you can't have any vegetation growing, and then also fire prevention plans, and a lot of outreach to homeowners. However, I believe the state law still allows in these sections that I've pulled up here that we can still deny an urban law split or a two primary unit project if the building officials specifically reviews that project and sees that there's a specific adverse impact. Right. And that's the other code section we're proceeding under. And you know, I fully understand that we believe we've taken mitigation measures to suppress fire in these areas. And it may well be that they are sufficient under the other code section that I quoted. But I don't think it hurts to get the legislative history and see what exactly they were thinking about. We may assume that our mitigation measures qualify, but maybe there is something that would suggest there's something missing that we didn't adopt or something they're looking for beyond that. Good evening, Mayor and City Council. We are aware of what that code section references. There's specific provisions in both the building code and the fire code that deal with additional measures in the urban wildland interface area and we have adopted those provisions. Okay, so that language does refer to specific provisions that we've adopted. Yes. Okay, well then, I guess I wasted everyone's time. But I thought it was worth trying because it could automatically knock out of the box a lot of potential properties. Those are my questions, thank you. Thank you, Council Member Friedman. Thank you. I want to, on exhibit B of the attachments, there is a wildfire evacuation route map and it's in red and it stops at sunset Boulevard. This is really for Ryan. Then there on exhibit A is the very high fire hazard severity zone map. And I only got that correct because I read it. It shows I believe a different configuration. Now we had discussed that goes really below sunset also, the very high fire hazard severity zone correct. That is correct and Chloe has it up on the screen here. The new maps have not been adopted yet. So as we sit here right at this very moment, sunset is still the border for the very high fire hazard severity zone, but give us another month or so here, and we will transition over to the new map, which goes down into the 7 and 800 blocks. And that was my point. I just wanted everyone to be aware of the fact that it has changed, and there is a larger, very high fire hazard severity zone now. That's correct. Or will, once we adopt adopt it, which as I understand it, it's required that we adopt it or else we'll be in violation of some state law. Okay. And that now goes into what I want to really ask, which was on the updated standards, it says that shall review individual projects if in the very high-fire hazard severity zone for a specific adverse impact, and then it says may review it if not in the very high-fire hazard severity zone. I guess there's a question for the building official who I see there. What would be the criteria used? The shower is obvious, that's a must. What would cause you to review it in a May area? So as we see in this new map, so they're dividing into three areas. It's very high high and moderate, so there isn't very limited or close to none. Requirements for the moderate fire hazard areas. So all the requirements are only for the very high and high depending on which area they're located. So depending on the location of that project, if it's let's say north of sunset, as she mentioned in the presentation, so greater likelihood of the fire, basically hazard in those areas, mainly in the hillside slope area and through Zell, and also limited east, west, basically evacuation routes that would be another justification for those areas. But the property that are south of sunset, but still in the very high-fire hazard but they're on the flat lots, they may have some rear access to the alleys so that would be a good justification to allow those projects, but not projects above sunset which there is no rear access or east- West evacuation routes. So essentially anything north of sunset is almost is an automatic Well, you're gonna review it you you must review that but it's almost an automatic that it will be denied because of the lack of East West access. Well, no, he wouldn't say that. He would simply must review it to see if there is a adverse health and safety of the state. So the shall portion is only for the review. Correct. And the may is only for the review. Correct. And I imagine that our building official would say that in the rest of the city, he would have to determine any specific factor that might trigger a review. There clearly it's not in a very high fire hazard, it's a very decent, but there could be other factors that would influence a review. So that means that it may be reviewed in other areas, but it's not covered under this specific, I don't know, is it language within the ordinance? The ordinance merely instructs him to review anything that's in the very high-fired hazard severity zone. Anything else in the city? He has the option to review it. So if there's something unusual about that property, he could review it and say, you know what I need to look at this and determine whether or not this particular property would have an adverse impact on the public health and safety. And if there was a request by residents for some reason to review it to the building official, would that be something that the building official would consider? Yeah, I imagine if there was a request to review it, he could certainly review it and determine whether that really, whether there really was an adverse impact to the public health and safety. Thank you. Just to add one more note, I mean, we would review the specific conditions of every single project and we have a process. Every project that comes to a plan check, we have a planning and building prescreening so we should review all the projects. And in this case, we'll be a collaboration between building and specifically on a fire department. We'll review the wheat of the street. We will review the earning radius and so many other factors that say the attorney mentioned. Okay, thank you. I want to go back because I missed the import of the sprinklers in an ADU. Just if we can go over that. If there is a new ADU on a lot with a primary home that has sprinklers on it, that new ADU, even if new construction is not required to have sprinklers. If the primary residence existing on the lot has sprinklers, the ADU has to have sprinklers. Does have to have. Yes, but it's the older housing stock that do not have sprinklers. If there's new ADU construction on the same lot, we cannot require sprinklers. Is that by ordinance or is that by state law? That's by state law and it's reflected in our ordinance because we're required to be consistent with state law. Okay. Those are my questions, thank you. All right, thank you, Vice Mayor Mersh. Back to the slide which is about the, hold on. The one about the original lot allowable FAR. Okay, it says the maximum FAR is calculated prior to the lot split. Does that effectively mean that since you can split the lot that you're allowed to double the FAR? No, so this or do you split the maximum FAR among the existing lots? The latter. So if before a lot is split the maximum is 40% plus 1800 is it? 1500. 1500. So if it's let's say 5,000, then the maximum FAR between the new, all, between all four of the new units cannot total more than 5,000. Between the two primary units. Primary units. So that the ADUs and JADUs do not in terms of their FAR don't count. They do count however state law also allows a 800 square foot ADU to be built even if you've maxed out your floor area. And so there is that state law provision but otherwise that would be the maximum floor area. And does that apply to the J, so you're 800 ADU and 800 J ADU? A J ADU is limited to 500 square feet and it has to be a portion of your existing single family home either attached or converted. And that does or doesn't count so you could have 800 it counts. Yes. So the only additional you'd be allowed would be if you'd maxed out would be plus a separate ADU 800, but you can't redistribute that. You can't have the ADU be 600 and then add the 200 to. That's correct. Okay. So correct. So we're clear if you do a loss split and you put two duplexes on each law, you can't then add ADU so those lots. Right. Because it's a maximum of four. Right, maximum of four units, right? What parking requirements do we have or do we not have? We're only allowed to require one parking space per unit in an SB9 project, but then there's also some exemptions. So if you're within half a mile of a major transit stop, there's no parking required. I believe AB-297 would also apply to a project if it's within the boundaries of that so that's the one half mile radius as well. And then also SB9 specifies that if you're within one block of a car share opportunity then you also do not have parking required.. So but we're under no obligation to allow residential permit parking or overnight parking or anything like that, correct? No. Well, no, but are, you know, we have coming through the rule that says that if you're not parked to to code, you're not eligible for residential permit parking. And I think that's important because the goal is obviously to take cars off the street. So all right, thank you. No, I my only concern drawn about that. And I said that facetiously is that we have previous standards that the state didn't like. and they now legislated the changes to SB 9. And I wouldn't be surprised if they do something like that. I do get your point that the state is saying that we want to reduce the use of cars. That's going to be the conflict. Well, there's no conflict. If people are supposed to use public transportation and that's the theory, then let them use public transportation. Then they don't need parking spaces. Totally rigged. Okay. All right. So this is basically the city's previously adopted. We had our own regulations for SB 9 projects and now the recent legislation has superseded the city's regulations, right? And so the ordinance before us just reintroduces the new rules for SB 9 projects and is in compliance with state legislation. I do not have any questions. I do have one, actually I do have one question for Larry. There was a letter written and there was some information that was being shared in the letter. Can you speak to the accuracy? Was that accurate or? I don't agree with it. I think for the reasons that Chloe mentioned earlier. First, I don't believe that we're required to allow lots to be split so that they are 40% one lot and 60% another lot. It says relatively equal size. We have a regulation which implements that relatively equal size in terms of 48 to 52%. The second thing that they mentioned about the very high fire hazard zones, they're really just talked about the fact that the building official has to make certain findings in order to prohibit a SB 9 urban lot split. And that's what we contemplate. He will review it and he will make specific findings if he finds that there is an adverse impact to the public health of safety then he will deny it if he doesn't find that then he won't deny it. So I don't agree with the letter. And just for clarity the very high fire severity zones were set by who? I'll fire. And they're a part of the state. Okay, very good. Thank you. So now we will go to comments if any. Council member Wells. Thank you. I appreciate that you put this together and that we are updating this so that we can address these issues as quickly as possible. So thank you for doing that. With regards to the fire mapping it also brings up for me because it's really not our choice and we're looking at these high fire zones and we're looking at evacuation routes and we know that from Palisades there were cars Blocking the road people abandon their cars and they couldn't move them. I think that we as a city should also look at Limiting parking and having just resident permit parking on streets that are in the high fire zone, especially where there's limited access to the evacuation routes because we find ourselves in an emergency already it's challenged and we're looking at if you only have to have one parking space you're adding cars onto the street and so so I think we have to look at that so that we can limit parking on the streets. Because as it is, the streets are not very wide. And if you have parking on both sides of the street and then you have one car to go down and people don't live there, there's no way for you to get them to move the car. So it's a bigger issue, I think, that would be the next step for this. And I approve the ordinance. So thank you. Thank you. I too support the ordinance. The prior ordinance, prior ordinance and this ordinance were designed to try to protect our single family areas from development which state likes but I don't think we do and that is duplexes in our single family areas from development, which state likes, but I don't think we do. And that is duplexes in the single family areas. The, as Councilmember Friedman pointed out, the Sacramento legislature didn't like the solution we had, the response to SB9, so they've outlawed some of the things that we did. And those things were designed to make them perhaps less attractive in Beverly Hills. And so now we have the ordinance in front of us. The ordinance does, I think the main part of the ordinance, as far as protecting our neighbor, as it's concerned, is by making sure that the width of the potentially split lot is subs the same as a normal single family home. The street these developments may not look so different from adjacent homes. That's the hope. Obviously, if you have four homes and a lot's going to have more cars, more traffic, more people. But at least aesthetically, this will hopefully have them lend in. There is one other aspect of SB9, which we have not talked about. And it is essentially that when it talks about the properties that the characteristics of the properties that you can have SB 9 developments on. One of the statutory exclusions is the development is not located within a historic district or property, including the state historic resources inventory as to find a section 50.1 the Public Resources Code, or within a site that is designated or listed as a city or county landmark or historic property or district pursuant to a city or county ordinance. So about 10 years ago, we revised our local historic preservation ordinance to exclude historic districts in the single family zones. And we did that, I think, for good reason. And I sort of was one of the people leaving the charge, because when you talk about a community like Beverly Hills, where people maintain their properties, they have pride of ownership, and they maintain their landscaping. If you put impediments on people's ability to develop and redevelop their properties, we saw estimates that that could reduce the value of the property by 10 to 15%. There are studies that show that historic districts are actually beneficial to districts and to means neighborhoods. Those are usually in areas where the designation of a district incentivizes people to keep their properties up as well as we do. So I don't think those benefits necessarily apply in Beverly Hills. And I still, to this day, am not a big fan of historic districts in Beverly Hills. But as was said earlier, and it connects with another matter, times change, and sometimes we have to re-examine our assumptions. I think SB 9 and SB 450 potentially are existential threats to our single family zones. Maybe this solves the problem well enough that we don't have to worry about it. But I think this is something we need to keep an eye on. And if we find duplexes being built in our single family areas, and people don't like them, and somehow the blocks on which those properties develop become less desirable and there's a drop in property values as a result of that. Then we might want to take a look at historic districts in the sense that which is the lesser of the two evils. I'm not saying that we should go right now and look at historic districts but it's something just to keep in the back of our minds. And I would also add that although we are currently, we have a certified housing element, if something were to go terribly wrong and HCD were to yank our certification, historic districts would perhaps give us, and perhaps Dave Snow can collaborate in this, but historic dishes could perhaps give us some sequel protection. Again, someone trying to build like a 10 story apartment building in the flats. And obviously that would be disaster that no one want to see. So again, not really advocating historic dishes right now, but I'm just pointing out that this is an alternative strategy in SB 9 SB 450. And if we did not have a certified housing element, then we, it would offer some protection, some secret protection. When caveat, the district would have to be in place before the housing element is desertified and someone tried to do a polymerna application because when they do the preliminary application on a project, it locks in the development code. At the time, they file the preliminary application, but it's a valid preliminary application. And historic preservation ordinances are part of our development code. But do you want to talk to us about the secret potential secret advantage of historic districts? Sure, Madam Mayor, members of the City Council. So as Council Member Corman has identified, if a property is within a historic district, that would be considered a historic resource for purposes of CEQA. And as you'll likely recall, the builders remedy projects, still are subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Provided there isn't some statutory exemption that would apply. The fact of a potential impact to a resource, a historic resource, would mean categorical exemptions, the types of exemptions that we typically see for density bonus projects, etc. would not apply because there's an exception to those and likely an environmental impact report would be required and then the conclusion of that, if it's a significant unmitigable impact in order to proceed with the project, the city council would need to adopt a statement of overriding considerations, basically that the benefits of the project outweigh the adverse impacts. Okay. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate the explanation. Those are my comments, but I am in favor of this ordinance. Thank you. Thank you. Council Member Friedman. Thank you. So, I think it's important to remember that our city is over 60% of it is multi-family homes. Is that correct? 65%. 65%. So over and even closer to 70 than to 60 or in between anyway. We have 5.7 square mile area. We're a built-out city. We're a landlocked. We're surrounded by everybody else. Yet the American dream has been, and as far as I'm concerned, still is, to be able to own a single family home. I think most people would want to aspire to that desire. Yet we have a Sacramento legislature that is intent upon changing the character of our city, and quite frankly, changing the American dream. Having said that, we have to be in conformance with state law and that's what this urgency ordinance is doing because right now we are out of compliance. Our ordinance that was passed previously under SB 9 is just out of conformance. It's wrong. so we have to change our ordinance or we could either get penalized or people can sue us if we try to enforce an ordinance that is not effective any longer. So even though it goes against my grain in terms of what I would like to see Beverly Hills be in the future, I don't think we, I certainly don't have a choice since I have to uphold the Constitution of the State of California. And that's part of the laws of the State of California. I think that we, that I will certainly vote in favor of this, but I'm not happy to do it. You mean Vice Mayor? You mean I agree with last. I mean what's happening in Sacramento is an attack on local communities. It's done so with the most, it's done with the most cynical of reasoning behind it. We see it in the letter as well. You've got groups that are funded by developers and dark money and God knows who, Qatar, maybe, that are doing, you know, that are using nice sounding words like home ownership when they're working against it. And it's really, again, it's gaslighting at a major level, but it is something we have to vote on. And shame on us collectively for or shame on the system collectively for putting legislators who have not the interests of the communities they're supposed to serve at heart, but of special interests. And this is the consequence of that. Money and politics and it's cynical and it's wrong. And we're the ones who, we, not just in Beverly Hills, but in every local community. It's not that they're just trying to change our community. It's they're trying to change all communities. And it's not urban planning that they're supporting. It's urban reacting. So with that, I'll support it as well, because it's something we have to do. I think that we are all in agreement that this is something that is an ordinance before us that we're all compliant to do with in order to be in compliance. So with that said, is there a motion? There's a lot of emotion, but do I hear a motion? Thank you. Thank you. I move that the full reading of the urgency ordinance be waived and the urgency ordinance is titled an urgency ordinance of the City of Beverly Hills amending single-family residential development regulations and objective standards for two primary unit projects and urban lots of it's be adopted. Seconded out. All right, roll call please. Council member Wells. Yes, Council member Korman. Yes. Council member Friedman. Reluctantly yes. Vice Mayor Mirish from the city attorney on closed session items. there's nothing to report this evening. Thank you. And any report from the city manager? Nothing this evening, Mayor. Now, any city council or committee reports and comments? Councillor Merville Wolfe. Yes, thank you very much. Since we last met here for our formal meeting, I had two meetings on April the 29th to liaison meetings. The first being the Chamber Liaison Committee meeting where we reviewed with the Chamber, the fiscal year 2425, second and third quarter. Some of the highlights were recapping the economic development trip for both New York and for Miami. And we focused a lot about talking about as we move forward and for next this coming year, focusing on marketing and partnering with the businesses in our city and combining them with as well, the CVB and really maximizing our opportunities with events that are happening to support our businesses in the city and to attract businesses to the city. For the Arts and Culture Commission, Joe Marish and I, Councillor Member Marish and I had a meeting, liaison meeting where we reviewed a special exhibit that will be coming hopefully to the Beverly Gardens Park for this July. I think that's going to come to the Council. I'm pretty certain. I believe it's coming to the next meeting. Okay. It's really quite spectacular and I'll look forward to seeing that presentation for next week but it'll be for this summer and it's a great opportunity to really attract tourism into the city. And lastly, on April the 30th, we had an audit and finance liaison meeting myself with Council Member Cormin. And we really talked about the issuing the RFP to to do a business tax study to look at revenue enhancement as well. We discussed. talked about the issuing the NRFP to do a business tax study to look at revenue enhancement, as well we discussed the Blue Ribbon Committee and there are recommendations previously around revenue enhancement opportunities, and as well we spoke about expense reductions in how to really address the upcoming deficits in the out years for our budget. And there'll be more to come for that. That's all I have to report. Thank you. Great, thank you, Councillor Monacoormit. Yeah, thanks. Yes, and it's falling up on the report on the Audit and Finance Committee. The outside auditors found that our financial statements were in excellent shape. There was mine or hiccup that had had to do with the fact that we neglected to increase the solid waste fees last year when we said we were going to and how that was treated on a counting basis, but I don't have a problem with that. I mean, the fact that it was treated slightly differently than perhaps they should have been done, but that's been corrected. And other than that mine or detail, our financial statements were solid, so that's good. This past weekend at the farmers market, we had participated with a number of my colleagues with the Rugula and the Gundi, a contesting contest, and that was a lot of fun, and everyone seemed to have a good time. I got some ribbing because I had not had Gundi before, and people were saying, what are you doing judging this? And I said, well, it's true that I might not have a frame of reference, but the good news is that means I'm not biased. But that was a lot of fun. And it was, people really got into it. When the winners were announced, there's a lot of cheering and a lot of clapping and a lot of smiles. This is a lot of fun. So that's my report, thanks. Thank you. So a week ago, last Monday, I had the privilege of being honored by the California State Assembly, more specifically Assemblyman Zabur, who nominated me on Holocaust Remembrance Day. We were recognized by the California Assembly on the Assembly floor. I had the opportunity to be on the floor, which is rare for people who are not actually assembly people to be there. And there was a resolution that was presented and in a bipartisan unanimous vote 76 to zero there was unanimity in observing Holocaust Remembrance Day and making sure that is a process that will continue for many, many years, remembering it so that nobody shall forget. My wife was able to come with me and we were able to speak to several assembly members and it was really interesting because when you have both the Republicans and the Democrats coming together on one issue and it was unanimous, there's a lot of camaraderie amongst them. And then as soon as that portion of the ceremony was over, there was debate on other issues and they were back at each other. It was a really fulfilling experience. It was the people that were honored. I think we're either 10 or 12 of us from different portions of the state. And there were either Holocaust survivors, children of Holocaust survivors, which was part of the reason I was honored, or people who had done work for Holocaust remembrance. And it was just a moving experience to be there, and I was thrilled to be a part of it. Thank you. Congratulations. I'd like to add my congratulations to you, Les. being up there in a rare moment of unity, although I imagine thereafter you probably had to hold your nose because they were not just back at it fighting each other. They were looking at ways to screw cities over. Sadly, that's about all we can expect from Sacramento. I also participated in the Rougaluch judging contest and May is of course, as we know, is Jewish American Heritage Month. And so interesting developments going on, including obviously the day of Holocaust Memorial Day, day of remembrance of those who died defending Israel and then Israel's national independence day, which to those of us who care about Israel means a lot. So it's a time where a lot of things are going and of course, while all of this is going on and while in the Middle East and in America, there are so many things happening, including an unprecedented tsunami of anti-Jewish racism. Of course, you've got the slave state of Qatar, which is attacking Israel and is finally being called out by more and more people, which is something that I'm happy to see. I know that Rabbi Dunner from Young Israel Beverly Hills is in Washington, and I believe he will be protesting outside the guitar embassy in the next day or so. If I weren't Washington, of course, I would join him, and I commend him on everything that he has been doing. He has been courageous and unapologetically pro-Israel and I think that's so important that the city is as well. I would like to describe us as unapologetically pro-Israel at a time when there are so many false narratives going around. So furthermore, I propose that we designate the slave state, the mafia state, the criminal state of Qatar, a state sponsor of terrorism, that we sanction Qatar, that we freeze its assets and use them to compensate the victims of Qatar-funded terrorism, including those who have been victimized by Qatar-owned Al Jazeera. And finally, that we request the State Department expel the Qatar-E Consulate from the City of Beverly Hills, because state sponsors of terrorism and youating racists are not welcome in our city. Thank you. Thank you very much. I too had an eventful couple of weeks since her last meeting. I met with the Consul General of Saudi Arabia, Bandar Al-Zaid. We had the first spotlight with Sirona at Novakov. It's a great way to network and get to know businesses in the community. It was very well attended and looking forward to celebrating other businesses within our community. I had the honor of welcoming all of our little kiddos for employee take your children to work day. It was probably one of the highlights of my week. And I also hosted UCLA law students group at City Hall just for them to see and learn about governing and actually attend a city hall meeting. We greeted, I was lucky enough to greet at the Beverly Hills International Music Festival at Grace Dome Mansion, recognizing Guillaume Hachua and the Armenian Genocide, which was an interesting collaboration. We also had our arbitrary planting ceremony, and I had Vice Mayor Marish and Council Member Friedman there on that day. We also celebrated Earth Day. You guys forgot to mention Earth Day. And we had Council Member Cormain and Council Member Friedman there. Councilmember mentioned, we had the Chamber Liaison meeting. We had a community-wide night of remembrance at Saban Theatre for Yom Hazika Rohn. And we, I'm glad that our priorities are now completed. We had our priority setting final meeting. And I had first straight talk with Serona and I wanted to thank Fire Chief Greg Barton for joining me as we discussed fire safety being proactive in our community and we discussed the new fire severity zones and how that impacts our community members as well as insurance and so thank thank you, Chief, for being there. We also lit up City Hall with the Israeli flag and the American flag celebrating Israeli Independence Day and Council General Israel Baha'i joined us for that. As was mentioned, we kicked off Jewish-American heritage month at Beverly Hills Farmers Market with a Gondi and Motsubal soup contest and Rougala contest, interestingly enough, in Ashkenazi won the Gondi contest first place. We also had a very unique Motsubal miso Motsubal soup that won. That was quite delicious. And it was just really a great way to merge all of our cultures and bring them together to create unity. So I just wanted to take a moment to thank my colleagues for being there and thank the community for coming out. I don't think I've ever seen an event at Farmer's Market with as many people as were there that day. So it was really exciting. I also had my first mayoral initiative with regard to the innovation circle. We had our first meeting with over 20 young people who came to join us. And that was very exciting for me. I look forward to working more closely with that group. And finally, I'd like to invite the community to an event that we're having on May 21st. It's called Never Again Is Now. It's the diversity of the Jewish experience at the writer's guild at 6 p.m. on May 21st. Refreshments will be served. And it's going to be a great way to just really find ways that we have in common and celebrating Jews of all different backgrounds and cultures. So, with that, we're going to adjourn the meeting. The next City Council meeting is going to be scheduled for May 20th, 2025. Thank you all for being here.