Thread by @KNOCKdotLA

Good morning, y'all!

It's just past 10am and @alexmce is here to live-tweet today's meeting of the @LACityCouncil!

Agenda/video feed: lacity.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting…

(No Twitch stream today :/)

To give public comment:
1. Call [phone].
2. Use Meeting ID 160-535-8466 and then press #.
3. Press # again when prompted for participant ID.
4. Once admitted into the meeting, press *9 to request to speak.

Back at the horseshoe

Mitch O'Farrell calls 28 special for remarks

Krekorian calls 26 for comments

2-25 and 27 pass unanimously

33-44, all approval of city settlement payouts, pass unanimously.

Matt Szabo is now here to make some comments before the Council votes to confirm his appointment as City Administrative Officer. He's talking about the urgency of moving quickly on relief/aid this year.

Szabo emphasizes the urgency of getting aid out quickly on childcare and parks, but really underlines getting importance of getting the unarmed response teams up and running, and not on a trial/pilot basis either.

Szabo: "Speaking of labor, that will be 1 of 4 areas I will focus on intentionally and look to expand or in some cases create within the CAO's office to address"

His other three areas, in order: homelessness, equity, and "performance management and innovation." On homelessness, says "we need to resolve the litigation, we need to resolve our relationship with LAHSA."

Szabo is now establishing that the CAO's office has a charter mandate to do performance management and reevaluate programs or initiatives. Sounds like he has some plans.

O'Farrell responds first with deep praise for Szabo and his experience. "You really, really get it," O'Farrell says.

Krekorian now: "I first wanna attach myself to the comments of Mr. O'Farrell" - has one question for Szabo, prompts him to speak about "what [he sees] as the relationship between the CAO and the City Council in terms of policy development."

Szabo: "In terms of policy.... completely respectful that Council is a policymaking body," outlined how CAO can support the Council. (I.e.: "Message received Paul")

Curren Price: "Pleased to hear you emphasize equity," and wants details on how his CAO office would work in support of equity.

Szabo: If we're serious about equity, that means we're gonna have to move away from 'divide by fifteen.'

Mark Ridley-Thomas: "In your list of important items... you include homelessness.... I wish to pose a question, how high does it rank.... and what specifically will be different about the way you choose to address the defining question in this city."

SZABO: "There are really only three entities in the city that can tell departments what to do," in terms of co-ordinating across departments. (Mayor, Council, CAO's office) -- says he thinks there's an opportunity to expand CAO's role, and he comes back to getting more resources.

I don't know that I've gotten it into a tweet yet, but a clear theme for Szabo here is to establish that he intends to ask for more resources for the CAO's office.

Koretz: "Couple things that I wanted to flag for you, not as sexy as other issues" -- human resources... he's worried about implementation of the city payroll system replacement.

Bonin, re: homelessness: "I'd like to see the CAO's office, whether it needs more resources to do so or not, broaden its scope and understand that it's not just about the dollars and cents but the unique challenge that all 15 of us face in trying to get stuff done"

Szabo: "The rush, as you described, of trying to hit a judge's number -- that sort of instability is not going to lead to overall... geographic distribution. [...] I'll leave it at that."
Bonin: "Cool. Look forward to working with you."

KDL: "Can you share a little of your thoughts with regards to revenues and what it looks like in the out years?" Emphasizes city's financial need to have restaurants, & hospitality "rebound"

Szabo: "I cannot overstate how much of an impact the American Rescue Plan had[..] it will not be here in the coming fiscal year, and we are going to have to have a very honest conversation.[..] We may have to recommend that some programs cease. I do need to set that expectation."

KDL on another point, references that "the vast majority of land sites" for housing and shelter "were rejected," by CAO would like to see "a CAO's office that gets to yes"

Buscaino: "On the point of performance metrics, what metrics should LAHSA be evaluated by?"

Szabo: "First and foremost, they should be evaluated by the metrics and responsibilities that are dictated in their contract. At a minimum, you need to set expectations." [..] "At minimum, we should operate with the rigor that we would approach fixing broken sidewalks."

(Surfacing the subtext of the last one -- Buscaino wanted to hear Szabo talk about knifing LAHSA, Szabo declined, and used the sort of management language he would for any department, but does clearly want to review how LAHSA operates.)

Cedillo: "I continue to hear stories of abuse -- retail tenants not paying rent to their landlords. We hear stories of abuse from landlords.... but there's abuse on the other side too, where people are gaming the system."

Cedillo: "How do we get those dollars (state and federal recovery dollars) to those who need them (landlords)?"

Cedillo *also* brought up the city-county dynamic with LAHSA and wanted Szabo's thoughts on that.

Szabo begins his reply to Cedillo by throwing cold water on idea of creating a city Dept of Mental Health... "I have no interest in playing any kind of institutional rivalry games b/w city and county. I think we have a huge opportunity w/ the lawsuit" to strengthen relationship

Rodriguez: "I want to underscore how desperately we rely on the business tax, the TOT, to sustain the city [..] As we talk about performance metrics, I know that we're in good hands with you."

Szabo unanimously confirmed to applause.

It's time for public comment

After Fauble reads technical amendments to the hookah exemption for flavored tobacco ban motion, anyways.

First caller, Arnie Abramyan, president of the National Hookah Community Association, asking for yes votes, pointing out that hookah lounges like other businesses are attempting to recover after being closed for a year. "We are the little guys" that need electeds' support.

Next caller, Ana Martinez, from ACCE (via translator), in District 3, "I would like you to keep your commitment Gil Cedillo regarding the ordinance for tenant harassment, if it can be approved with the correct language."

Next caller, Chris Hudgens on item 28, member of the National Hookah Community Association. "I think it's important to protect small businesses in LA. [..] Thank you for your support."

Next caller: "I wanna first adjourn in memory of the three to eight homeless people who will die on the streets today because of these people, in their suits, standing around."

Next caller, Shannon Kozlovich, from Equality California, calling in support of the flavored tobacco ban.

Next caller, from ACCE, in district 9: Wants the ordinance to be as strong as possible, and for the burden of proof to be on the landlord, not the tenant. "It's the difference between me needing a lawyer and not."

Next caller, also from Equality California, in support of banning menthol cigarettes specifically.

Next caller asks for a yes vote on 28, closes with "Save hookah"

Next caller, George Johnson on 28 and general public: Says hookah is not big tobacco, that hookah is a very small community. "I wanna keep it short and sweet, I don't need general public comment, I just wanna say thank you thank you thank you" for the exemption motion.

Next caller, volunteer for Cancer Action Network and mother of teenagers in CD14: "I'm appalled at how prevalent vaping is among teenagers." [..] "Do what you know is right and eliminate the sale of all flavored tobacco products to kids."

(Got pulled away from the meeting and missed a few comments -- sounded like they were all about 28, the flavored tobacco ban/hookah exemption)

Public comment is concluded, now moving onto Mitch O'Farrell's comment on 28.

Technical difficulties as O'Farrell is getting deep into the weeds on the legal structure of what would happen with hookah ("smoke lounges") permitting with passage of 28.

Rodriguez: "One of the concerns I have is that in trying to fulfill that goal [preventing teen tobacco addiction], that we are impacting small business owners in my district"

Rodriguez advocating for her amendment creating hookah carveout.

Krekorian: "I've never smoked a hookah, people in my extended family have never smoked a hookah, Armenian culture is defined by its music, and its art, and its literature, and its faith, and its Komitas and its katchkars. It's not defined by hookah."

Krekorian: "I ask for your aye vote on the committee recommendation, and for 28b"

City Attorney Senior Assistant Valerie Flores:"Committee report would confine the exemption to currently existing, grandfathered legally operating smoker's lounges, the CD7 amendment would allow new lounges to operate & not just allow for on-site consumption but off-site sales."

John Lee: "I've never been one to support 'sin taxes,' but I am a bit of a hypocrite when it comes to tobacco products." "I always wanted to make it as expensive as possible" to get cigarettes.

28(b) amendment approved unanimously.

28(a) up for vote right now, as friendly-amended by Blumenfield to apply to only existing establishments. Or about to be, anyways, after the City Clerk reads the language.

Oh good we have more details to hammer out about what 28a accomplishes. Blumenfield is freestyling some legalese but pointing out that the City Attorney's office would arrive at the final language.

Just a heads up I'm gonna have to take off after this vote finally happens. It's not that I have *a ton* going on in my life, but I do have enough that "two hours of tobacco ban legalese discussion livetweet" doesn't totally fit...

Although O'Farrell is getting very snippy about Rodriguez' proposed amendment so there is some entertainment here.

This livetweeter blesses Bob Blumenfield, who is doing yeoman's work in getting down to the nuts and bolts of what the difference between Rodriguez' amendment and O'Farrell's language. "Bob you did a good job" I hear in the background after, sounded like Rodriguez

KDL: "I don't want to belabor this issue, I think this debate is clear as mud right now and it's getting murkier."

I might not even make it to the vote. I don't know. Everyone's been repeating themselves and seeking clarification on the same subjects for an hour.

Cedillo, to O'Farrell: "Let me suggest that at this point, we have accomplished what is your overall goal and objective. [..] You have accepted in your proposal that there is a space for hookah. This simply augments that."

Oh no no no. Cedillo started by trying to wrap this up but now he's analogizing tobacco products to tequila and soju and I have 0 confidence that won't create further confusion.

Cedillo, with clear frustration to O'Farrell: "Take the win."

Cedillo, mercifully, calls the question, to general approval, but there is an objection. But Bonin's been waiting on the queue patiently. Bonin? (Laughing:) "I was rising to call the question."

I KNEW IT -- NOW KREKORIAN IS ARGUING WITH CEDILLO'S TEQUILA ANALOGY.

This could not be more exactly what I was afraid of. We were so close to getting out off of this, but Krekorian objected to the call of the question *so that he could quibble with Cedillo's tequila analogy*

Krekorian, like O'Farrell, is worried that if we exempt hookah too broadly, salers and kids are gonna start doing e-vape hookah pens instead of the juuls.

Personally I am not worried about teens running around with hookah setups after juuls get banned but I do not myself possess the wisdom of a Paul Krekorian.

The frustration is just palpable everywhere, you keep hearing things like "That's what we were trying to get to the whole time" in the background.

Amazing. Koretz moves to continue this for a week. Why not.

28(c) passes

28 passes

29-33 pass

Lee rises for some adjourning motions and I could not be out of here any harder.

I've never done this when I sub in for Chris but today, after that, I'm going to go ahead and lift that we are a small, independent newsroom that runs mostly on volunteer energy, and your support would go a long way making this sort of coverage possible. knc.la/patreon

Also before I wrap up I just want to extend a gigantic amount of love and support to @FilmThePoliceLA, a rigorously good person who is going through something just incomprehensibly devastating. We love you and we're here for you.

@FilmThePoliceLA That'll do it. This has been @alexmce, filling in for @christopherroth. Back to your regularly scheduled Knock programming.