By Julie BUTCHER

At the beginning of Tuesday night’s meeting of the Glendale City Council, Councilmember Ardy Kassakhian observed that Monday is Veterans Day and proposed that the city plan for next year an event commemorating the day.

Councilmember Ara Najarian asked when the discussion of the reconfiguration of North Brand Boulevard would be back before the council to discuss; he was advised that city staff is still collecting data on the changes that were tested and will be ready for review at the council’s first or second meeting in December.

Next, the council confirmed the hiring of Daniel Hernandez as the city’s public works director. Hernandez has been working as the interim director for nearly a year. According to city manager Roubik Golanian, Hernandez has 19 years of public and private sector experience; he grew up in southeast Los Angeles, earned a degree in industrial engineering from Cal Poly Pomona and a master’s in business administration from Pepperdine University, and has served as the head of public works departments in Huntington Park, Commerce and San Bernardino.

“He modernized each department by implementing productivity measurement systems, cost controls, work order systems and customer case initiatives, significantly boosting their effectiveness and responsiveness,” Golanian told the council.

Councilmember Kassakhian congratulated and thanked Hernandez for his dedication, adding that “public works is always on of those first things people notice about a city – the condition of its roads and sidewalks – we’re very fortunate to have a city that maintains high standards and, with your leadership, will continue to do so.”

City Treasurer Rafi Manoukian provided the council with an annual report on the city’s investments. Currently, the city has $1.056 billion in investments, up approximately $300,000 from last year. Most of the city’s investments are in federal and state pooled investment programs such as the federal agency callables (24%) and the California Asset Management Program (17%). Current yields of 3.34% are comparable to similarly situated cities: Burbank at 3.58%, Pasadena at 2.56%, Ontario at 3.43% and Santa Monica at 3.48%. The city’s portfolio is managed according to industry standards such as the “prudent investor” rule.

Manoukian noted that the details of the report could be found in the staff report attached to the council agenda: https://glendaleca.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=37500.

Once again, the council debated a $156,710 consultant contract with Eagle Aerial Solutions, a “portal development company, currently conducting the statewide landscape measurement project for the California Dept. of Water Resources.” Usage in more than 400 water districts in the state is being analyzed to help water professionals meet efficiency and allocation requirements established under the new long-term California water conservation legislation, which combines previously adopted state measures SB-606 and AB-1668 under the overarching rubric “Making Conservation a California Way of Life”: https://tinyurl.com/5ye78269.

The new rules represent a paradigm shift from imposing across-the-board usage reduction mandates (a 25% reduction in water usage, for instance) with a customized “water budget” for each urban water supplier, adding an analysis of CII landscapes (those that are commercial, industrial and institutional) to the mix. The proposed contract would help the city establish a baseline for this sector and could help identify areas of potential improvement, such as large green spaces currently being irrigated with potable versus recycled water.

The council voted 2-2 (the mayor was absent) when this issue was last on the council agenda on Oct. 22.

At Tuesday’s council meeting Mayor Elen Asatryan asked, “What if we send the state the bill for this? I’ve talked about the unintended consequences of bills passed at the state level that then we locals have to take on additional work which then ends up costing us money from our own budget. It breaks my heart that at a time when our residents can’t pay their rent and their utility bills that we as a city have to cough up $156K for consulting.”

Asatryan went on, “I’m of the mindset that I would like to send the bill to the state along with any other bills that you can come up with that we’ve been spending on consulting services instead of actual services to our resident.”

Councilmember Vartan Gharpetian agreed.

“I’m okay with that and I also want to look at new mandates. Our residents have done their share and we’re still at Phase 3 of the drought measures and we’re charging them drought fees as well. Between now and 2027 [when this mandate kicks in] I’m sure they’re going to come up with other mandates – they wake up one morning and come up with ideas they’re going to force on the city.”

Glendale Water and Power (GWP) assistant general manager of water Chisom Obegdu noted the local benefits that could also come from the consultant’s work on this. In response, Mayor Asatryan requested a report from staff on the opportunities, saying “the difference is that then we get to make that decision based off our budget where we want to spend it versus something being decided and then shoved to the locals to cover the cost.”

“I think we’re going down a dangerous path here,” Councilmember Dan Brotman interjected. “We get mandates all the time from the state. This is the nature of the work we do. This is not something new. And I don’t know why we’re taking a stand on this item. This is about the state trying to get a handle on water use because we’re in a long-term drought – even though we’ve had some good rains over the last year – we’re still in a drought. It’s going to continue, with climate change; this is not going away. The state wants to be able to figure out how water gets allocated. I have no idea why we’re making an issue out of this item. This is, to me, very fundamental and I don’t want to be a city that starts playing games with the state, thumbs its nose at obvious interests.”

Councilmember Najarian expressed his support for the mayor’s position.

“I fully agree with your position on this item,” he said. “It is an unfunded mandate and far too often we’ve seen the state impose mandates on us. There’s also a regional organization, the Metropolitan Water District, that should be involved in this. The state may tell us to go jump in a lake, but unless we express our opposition to the micromanagement by legislators in Sacramento – and it’s not just on water, it’s on a variety of issues – they want to take away local control from us.”

The plan to send a bill to the state along with a request for possible grant opportunities to cover the cost of the consultant agreement passed on a vote of 3-2. The staff report noted that GWP has funds necessary already budgeted for this and that no new allocation would be needed to pay for it.

Finally, the council revisited the installation of an all-way stop sign in the Adams Hill neighborhood at the intersection of Adams Street and Scofield Drive. The matter was before the council on Oct. 22 after the city’s Transportation and Parking Commission (TPC) failed to act on the community’s longstanding pleas for help in calming traffic in the neighborhood.

“What’s the fastest way to get this done for our residents?” queried Mayor Asatryan.

Two residents of the area spoke against the sign.

Adams Hill resident Brian addressed the council.

“This is a little challenging because I know my neighbors but I’m on the other side of the street – and the other side of the fence on this issue,” he said.

He recalled councilmember comments from the last time the stop sign was before them.

“Governing is looking out for the benefit of the many which sometimes causes inconveniences to the few – this is a prime example of protecting the safety of all who live, drive and walk along Adams Street, including me and my family and my neighbors, with the addition of a stop sign with the unfortunate inconvenience of a few by removing a couple of parking spaces,” he said.

Councilmember Najarian stated his general inclination to let the commissioners decide on the issue. He also questioned why the director of public works could not simply decide on the placement of a warranted stop sign.

“It’s crazy!” he said. “We’re spending a lot of time on one stop sign.”

Ultimately the council set a public hearing on the matter (before Nov. 19) and voted to authorize the director of public works to be able to site stop signs even if they are being utilized as traffic calming devices, decisions currently being made by the TCP commission.