PPCC Library Integration Test

Browse Library

Recently Added

← Back to results

1. _Introduction of Board and Audience_. Chairman Harry Sondheim called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with the read

Document type
Minutes
Published date
February 8, 2016
Language
EN
Topics

This document does not have a linked original file.

Document text

1. _Introduction of Board and Audience_. Chairman Harry Sondheim called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with the reading of the purpose of the PPCC as stated in its Bylaws. Members of the Board and Audience introduced themselves.

The Chairman announced that Randy Young is the new Historical Society Alternate replacing Helen Cutler. 2\. _Adoption of Minutes_. Minutes of the meeting of
July 26, 2001 were adopted with the following changes: 2.1 - The correct spelling of the name of the postmistress is “Liz Stempson.” 3.8 - Replace last 3 sentences with: He then learned from Vice-Principal Charlotte Atlas that the banners were placed on the fence at the corner of Sunset and Temescal without authorization and that, on learning of our inquiry, she had instructed the parties that had put up the banners to remove them by that noon. The only banner remaining by mid-afternoon was one directly related to summer activities at the High School. Our thanks to Ms. Atlas for her prompt and effective action. 5.1 - Change “Temescal Canyon Residents Association” to “Temescal Canyon Association." Page 4, First full paragraph, second sentence, add the words "Department of Recreation and Parks after the word "Los Angeles". 3\. _Announcements and Concerns_. 3.1 Treasurer’s Report. Harry Sondheim reported in lieu of Patti Post’s absence that as of
August 13, 2001, there is $10,186.19 in the PPCC checking account and $4,747.19 in the savings account. We are waiting to receive the billing for the cost of printing the newsletter. The council continues to receive contributions by mail and the response to the most recent newsletter is higher than in years past. 3.2 Update on 222 Coperto. At the
July 26, 2001 meeting, Jack Allen reported that our geological report on 222 Coperto was considered by the City.
The City sided with the views of its own geologist which will permit the contractor to complete the project.
Jack Allen recommended that the Board agree to a settlement proposal with the property owner rather than argue the Coastal Commission Appeal.
The Board failed to approve the settlement proposal.
At the August Coastal Commission Hearing, Frank Wilson argued the Appeal before the coastal commission.
Also present to testify were Norma Spak and Kim Coleman, an architect and adjacent property owner.
Ms.
Coleman testified that there were 13,000 cubic yards of earth removed from the site.
Despite Mr.
Michael’s report and the testimony against the permit, the Coastal Commission voted 8-1 to approve it.
Because of the close vote on this issue at the last meeting, the Chair announced that in the future, when there is a close vote, the Board will conduct a roll call vote.
The Secretary has prepared roll call vote sheets to better tally and announce close votes. 3.3 Theatre Palisades.
Isabel Kayser reported that Agatha Christie’s play, “Towards Zero,” opens this Friday and runs through
September 29, 2001. There are also classic movies screened at the Theatre on Sunday evenings at 6:00 p.m. If anyone is interested in tickets, they can call the Theatre Palisades box office. 3.4 New Street Lights. Larry Jacobs reported that the street lights at Sunset and Muskingum are not being lit because the adjacent property owners have to pay for the lighting. The Chair recommended that Larry contact Cindy Miscikowski’s office to ascertain what is the City’s policy regarding street lights. 4\. Old Business. 4.1 Shall the Pacific Palisades Community Council Seek to Become a Neighborhood Council pursuant to the City’s Plan for Neighborhood Councils? The Chair began discussion of the issue by presenting the Board’s 3 options: 1) To Vote to Seek Certification to Become a Neighborhood Council; 2) To Vote not to Seek Certification to Become a Neighborhood Council; and 3) To Refrain from Deciding the Issue at this Time. Discussion: Some Board members noted that there was no need to rush to seek certification because groups cannot formally do so until
October 1, 2001. A decision to “wait and see” made sense to some because (1) the Board would have the opportunity to see how our new city council utilizes the views of neighborhood councils, (2) the Board could obtain further interpretations of the law governing neighborhood councils from the City Attorney, and (3) the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment (“DONE”) would be given the opportunity to respond to questions by our Board and other concerned persons regarding the definitions of terms and concepts in the plan.
For example, the Board discussed Jack Allen’s concerns over the conflict of interest rules and the possibility of having to disclose personal assets if one were on the Board of a Neighborhood Council, along with concerns regarding the definition of “stakeholder.” Richard Blumenberg noted that another group in the Palisades might seek certification prior to the existing community council.
Resident Lara Schwartz, a prosecutor for the city and resident of the Palisades stated that she did not want the Board to make a hurried decision and also did not want the Palisades to appear snobbish to others if the Board decides not to seek certification.
Marguerite Perkins Mautner noted that the Palisades does not have the same problems and issues as other areas of the City.
Gershon Lewis, a 28 year resident and Ernie Meadows opined that the Palisades council should consider certification to provide DONE and the other Neighborhood councils with our experience and expertise.
Lorraine Oshins echoed these concerns and noted that the newly formed Neighborhood Councils might prevent the cessation of certain areas of the city, i.e., the Valley and San Pedro, and create more unity in the city by bringing communities together.
Jack Allen responded that we have given DONE so much already and that the problem is not with DONE; it is with the new city council.
Stuart Muller brought up the idea of deferring the issue with no comment.
Larry Jacobs, Frank Wilson and others discussed the possibility of putting the Board’s concerns in writing to DONE and to discuss the issue of certification when the Board receives a response to the letter. _Motion_ : Larry Niles made a Motion, Seconded by Lisa Maki, as follows: “Because the Board requires further information in order to make its decision as to whether or not the Pacific Palisades Community Council should seek certification as a Neighborhood Council, individual Board members and the public are invited to submit their questions and concerns to the executive committee within the next two (2) weeks so that they may be compiled in letter format and brought back to the Board for review at the Board’s
September 13, 2001 or
October 4, 2001 meeting.
The letter will, in accordance with the Board’s views, be revised, if necessary, and sent to DONE.
After a response is received, the Board will take the certification issue up again.” The Motion _passed_ with 13 in favor and 1 opposed. 4.2 Begin Consideration of Proposed Changes to the Bylaws.
Harry Sondheim reported that he received input regarding changes from himself, Bill Bruns, Larry Jacobs, Ted Mackie and Patti Post.
The views expressed by Board members regarding changes are deemed to be “straw votes” since the proposed changes have to be read at two (2) meetings and then voted on.
The Chair noted that he has concerns with a portion of the bylaws insofar as the bylaws may have to take into account the relationship of the Community Council to the Pacific Palisades Community Foundation, but that this would be discussed at a future meeting.
He also reported that Randy Young and Kurt Toppel, together with the Chair, had reviewed the proposed changes to the bylaws and corrected typographical errors that were pointed out by Board members.
Jack Allen noted that he disagreed with some of the changes which were designated as typos.
The Chair announced that once Jack has an opportunity to integrate these typos into the draft presently possessed by the Board, the Board would consider Jack’s disagreements.
Discussion: The Chair proposed that the Board go through the bylaws, article by article.
Article 1: Foundation - to be discussed at a future meeting.
Article 2: The word “mission.” This will be discussed when the Board discusses the Foundation issue in Article
1.
Article 2, section 2, paragraph C: The consensus of the Board was to delete paragraph C as this view was tentatively unanimous.
Article 2, section 2: The Board discussed the language involving the council’s support of state ballot measures or other proposed laws.
Jack Allen recommended a policy of not getting involved in state ballot measures or similar issues.
Others recommended consideration on a case by case basis.
There was no motion and the language remains the same.
Article 2, section 2: Larry Jacobs requested changing the word “support” to “in support of” and made a motion to change this language.
The motion was not seconded and the language remains the same.
Article 2, section 2, paragraph F: Ted Makie requested that the word “vital” be deleted.
Patti Post recommended that the entire paragraph be deleted as it leads to acrimony.
There was discussion about changing the word “vital” to “substantial”.
Bill Snyder suggested that paragraph F be deleted and this was the tentative unanimous view of the Board.
Article 3: “Definition of the Pacific Palisades” Ted Mackie and Larry Jacobs requested that a legible map be attached to the bylaws.
Stuart Muller requested a written description.
The issue was deferred until Randy Young is present at the Board meeting to assist with the discussion of this issue.
Article 4: Definition of Palisades Community Council.
Ted Mackie stated that the definition was too broad.
Jack Allen recommended leaving the definition as is until the Board decides whether or not to seek certification from DONE.
The issue was deferred and will be discussed in conjunction with the discussion of the issue of the foundation, see article
1. Article 5, section 3, paragraph C: “Board of Governors.” There was discussion about adding the language to allow the Chair to take action, in addition to the current language which allows an officer of the Board or a person designated by the Council. This issue was deferred until the Board discusses Article VI which deals with powers of the Chair. Larry Jacobs brought up the issue of term limits. This issue was deferred until the Board discusses Article VII, section 3.C and Article VIII, section
2. 4.3 Update on 17633 Castellammare. At our last meeting, Jack Allen reported that this property presents a Geological hazard as confirmed by Mr. Michaels, the geologist hired by surrounding property owners. The city abandoned the maintenance of Castellammare without notice to the property owners and took the streets out of public use, although the city is still required to perform minor repairs to the road. The City cannot use State funds to repave the street. On
August 17, 2001, Jack Allen received notice that the Zoning Administrator granted the permit. A copy of Jack Allen’s report is attached to the minutes. In so doing, Jack Allen noted that the Zoning Administrator should have either suspended a decision on the permit or deny the Coastal Development Permit because a serious public controversy has arisen over this development and because an expert opinion had been submitted on the geological issues. The homeowners and PPRA plan to file an appeal and PPRA will likely pay the cost of the appeal ($71.00). _Motion_ : Gil Dembo made a Motion, seconded by Lisa Maki, that the Board join in the Appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s decision to grant the Coastal Development Permit for the property located at 17633 Castellammare. The Motion _passed_ with 13 in favor, 0 opposed and 1 abstention. 4.4 PRIDE. Larry Niles reported that the project at Monument between Sunset and Swarthmore has been funded and work will commence shortly. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. The next meeting will be at Mort’s Oak Room on Thursday,
September 13, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. Minutes submitted by Secretary Lisa Maki _________________________ [Return to top of page](https://pacpalicc.org/index.php/minutes-from-2001/)
---

Show full text

MINUTES FOR JULY 26th 2001

Board Members Present (including Alternates and Advisors): Harry Sondheim (Chair), Barry Kurtz, Jack Allen (Advisor), Ted Mackie, William Snyder, Lisa Maki, Isabel Kayser, Marguerite Perkins Mautner, Ryan McGranahan, Kurt Toppel, Tipi Weiner, Frank Wilson (Chair Emeritus), Paul Glasgall (Advisor), Arthur Mortell, Lorraine Oshins, Larry Jacobs, Stuart Muller, George Wolfberg, Barbara Kohn, Larry Niles, Richard Blumenberg 1\. Introduction of Board and Audience. Chairman Harry Sondheim called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with the reading of the Purpose of the PPCC as stated in its Bylaws. Members of the Board and Audience introduced themselves. 2\. Adoption of Minutes. Minutes of the meeting of
June 28, 2001 were adopted without change. The Chair also announced that the postmistress, Liz Stempson has given authorization for the PPCC to post its minutes and agenda at the post office and the PPCC thanks her for her cooperation and assistance. She is in the process of getting a bulletin board for this purpose. Some residents responded to the Newsletter’s request for expressions of interest in PPCC issues. Larry Jacobs had summarized the requests and distributed them to Area Representatives who were reminded by the Chair to keep these residents informed in advance of the discussion of these issues at PPCC Board meetings 3\. Announcements and Concerns. 3.1 Treasurer’s Report. Harry Sondheim reported in lieu of Patti Post’s absence that as of
July 26, 2001, there is $10,471.19 in the PPCC checking account and $4,744.16 in the savings account.
The Chair noted that we should not get too excited about the higher balance in the checking account as the Board has not yet been billed for the cost of printing of the newsletter.
The response rate to the newsletter is much higher than in years past.
Barbara Kohn asked that the Board remember to cost printers prior to the printing of the next newsletter to which the Chair responded that this is what will be done. 3.2 Update of YMCA Acquisition of Property in Temescal Canyon.
Harry Sondheim reported that the Board will not send a representative to further meetings concerning the acquisition of the property.
He advised the councilwoman’s office to notify him if and when the parties reach a tentative agreement.
The executive committee determined that it was not necessary to have a Board member present at the meetings held to negotiate a settlement of the ongoing property dispute because the Board is not a party to this dispute.
It will become important to obtain community input into the issue when an agreement is imminent.
This issue will be placed upon the agenda if and when a tentative agreement amongst the parties is reached. 3.3 Update on 17633 Castellammare.
Jack Allen reported that this property presents a Geological hazard as confirmed by Mr.
Michaels, the geologist hired by surrounding property owners.
The city abandoned the maintenance of Castellammare without notice to the property owners and took the streets out of public use, although the city is still required to perform minor repairs to the road.
The City cannot use State funds to repave the street. 3.4 Update on City’s General Framework Plan.
Jack Allen reported that the PLUM Committee recommended the adoption of a statement of overriding considerations.
Jack believes this presents problems for the City due to internal inconsistencies in the plan.
He hopes that the council will take a second look at the statement and opined that the matter will likely end up in court.
Our councilwoman tried to take the position that there be some sort of finding of infrastructure to support new development.
This position was rejected. 3.5 Youth Representative.
Harry Sondheim reported that the Chris Martin sent a letter to the Council resigning his position as the Board’s Youth representative.
Chris is leaving the State to attend college.
The current Youth alternate, Ryan McGranahan, was welcomed as the new Youth representative. 3.6 Extension of Bike Path.
The Chair, pursuant to prior Board approval, wrote letters to supervisors Yaroslavsky, Burke and Knabe, indicating the Board’s support of the project.
George Wolfberg reported that he attended the MTA hearing on this issue.
There was a 900 million-dollar call for projects by the MTA but only a small portion is allocated to the construction and/or repair of bikeways.
Yaroslavsky did not make a motion to approve the extension of the bike path although he tried to get the general manager to agree to put funds together by the year 2003 on an interim basis. 3.7 Public Information Officer.
Harry Sondheim reported that Board member Maurizio Vecchione has accepted this position to develop outreach and create greater awareness of the Board’s activities and community involvement. 3.8 Banners at Palisades High School.
Larry Jacobs, representative of Area 4 which includes the High School, contacted council woman Miscikowski’s office and found that the city has no authority over the placement of banners at the High School.
He then learned from Vice Principal Charlotte Atlas that the banners were placed on the fence without authorization and that, on learning of our inquiry, she had instructed the parties that had put up the banners to remove them by that noon.
The only banner remaining by mid-afternoon was one directly related to summer activities at the High School.
Our thanks to Ms.
Atlas for her prompt and effective action. 3.9 Date of Second Meeting in September.
Harry Sondheim reported that the Board’s
September 27, 2001 meeting will be moved to
October 4, 2001 because
September 27, 2001 is a Jewish holiday and the only persons authorized by the bylaws to preside at Board meetings will not be available on that date either because of the holiday or for other personal reasons. The only meeting in September will be held on
September 13, 2001. There will also be meetings on October 11th and October 25th. 3.10 Flood Plain Management Plan. Harry Sondheim reported that this plan has been released for public comment. If anyone is interested in the plan they should contact Stuart Muller. The plan may be reviewed on the Internet at www.eng.lacity.org./projects/fmp/index.html. 4\. New Business. 4.1 Further Consideration of the Application of the Calvary Christian Church to Establish a Sports Field. Some of the Background: On
June 24, 1999, the PPCC Board approved this proposal in concept since it would promote more recreational space for use not only by the Church, but also the community. Thereafter the City negotiated a Shared Use Agreement which provided for limited public use of the playing field during specified times and dates. When the matter came before the Coastal Commission, the staff of the Commission recommended that the fields by made available for public use until 9 p.m. after school hours or after church services and on Saturdays from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Both the original Shared Use Agreement and the staff recommendations are opposed by PPRA. This opposition is based in part (
a) on the fact that the sports field would encroach past the “urban limit line” established by the original permit for the area on which the field would be placed, (
b) on the fact that public land would be granted to a private organization and (
c) on the contention that, while the Staff’s proposal “is a nominal improvement, but unlikely to make an effective difference.” On the other hand, the Sea Ridge Homeowners Association, “agreed in principle to the limited use and conditions” set forth in the approval plans dated
January 28, 2000 from the City of Los Angeles, Office of Zoning Administration,” but opposes the “California Coastal Commission’s Staff Report that the proposed sports field be opened as a public park.” DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUE AT THE 7/26/01 BOARD MEETING: Jim Wadsworth of the Church stated that he had been working on the project for the past four years and that he had obtained approval from the neighbors and various homeowners’ associations, including Sea Ridge, to proceed with the development of the sports field.
The field is planned to encompass approximately 32,000 square feet.
One of the main issues is the fact that 45 percent of this land is City property.
The City has agreed to lease the land to the Church for 25 years.
The Church has agreed to limit the use of the field to after school use, all week.
On Friday’s, the Church will allow AYSO and the YMCA to use the field.
In the summer, the YMCA will use the field for a camp.
The Cub Scouts will also be allowed to use the field on two Saturdays per year and there will be limited Saturday and Sunday use by the school.
Mr.
Wadsworth stated that the construction of the field would pull kids out of the Palisades Park facilities and keep more children on campus after school which will result in less traffic in the area.
Mr.
Wadsworth has attended four public hearings concerning the shared use agreement with the city.
The Church needs Coastal Commission approval to proceed with the project.
The problem with the Coastal Commission is that the staff of the Commission recommends “turning it into a public park” by opening the use to more organizations and requiring additional parking and restroom facilities.
The Church is not happy with the Coastal Commission staff report because the Church made a promise to the neighbors concerning the limited use of the sports field that the Church would not break.
Therefore, if Coastal requires the “open” use of the sports field, the Church will not build it.
Mr.
Wadsworth requested that the Board re-affirm its prior approval of the sports field concept, as set forth in the Board’s
June 24, 1999 minutes which were re-distributed to the Board for its review. The
June 24, 1999 minutes state in pertinent part that: “The Calvary Church, represented by Jim Wadsworth, homeowner and member of the church, presented a well prepared outline with maps of their plans for additional playing field space. Mr. Wadsworth answered, in response to Board member questions, matters concerning parking and also use by the city of the playing fields being developed…A Motion was made that the Council approve the plan in concept and applaud any efforts to promote more availability of recreation space but in particular this effort made by Calvary Church. The motion passed unanimously.” (See, Board Minutes of 6/24/99, section 4.1.) [Note: meeting minutes prior to 2001 unavailable.] Mr. Wadsworth also distributed the
June 8, 2001 letter to the Coastal Commission by councilwoman Cindy Miscikowski, stating her support of the project. A copy of this letter is attached to the minutes. Also attached to the minutes are the Shared Use Agreement between the City and the Calvary Church of Pacific Palisades, Inc., the Coastal Commission Staff Report and the
June 8, 2001 letter by Ellen Oppenheim, General Manager of the City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks to the Coastal Commission which supports the project and opposes the Coastal Commission Staff Report.
BOARD DISCUSSION: Barbara Kohn raised the issue of the “urban limit line.” She stated that the proposal violates the 1981 agreement entered into by WATT INDUSTRIES and PPRA.
The subject property was eventually purchased by the City and the Church and they are the successors and bound by the terms of the agreement.
The core issue is what uses of the City owned property (that which falls beyond the limit line) are permissible.
It is important to note that the Council was not aware of the limit line issue when it extended its approval of the concept of the sports field, nor was the Sea Ridge Board.
Mr.
Wadsworth did not become aware of the “limit line” issue until about one year ago.
The PPRA and WATT INDUSTRIES agreement defines what uses are available but the paragraph is subject to interpretation.
Some Board members opined that the Church’s proposal violates the agreement while others, including the councilwoman’s office, believe that the agreement would permit the proposed use, however not the open use as recommended by the Coastal Commission staff.
Mr.
Wadsworth agreed that the Church is bound by the terms of the agreement.
Ted Mackie noted that he was concerned that the Church did not raise the issue of the limit line when it made its June 1999 presentation to the Board.
Others supported the sports field because it would increase the current usable field and recreation space in the community. PPRA POSITION: Bob Locker stated that PPRA was opposed to the Church’s current proposal on the grounds that Barbara Kohn mentioned.
He stated that there are also issues of the separation of church and state, and whether a publicly leased facility can discriminate as to which groups are allowed to use it.
Mr.
Wadsworth stated that PPRA attorney John Murdoch indicated that he saw no problem with the fields and Mr.
Locker said that he can’t imagine Mr.
Murdoch making such a statement at all and at least not without first consulting with PPRA. TRAFFIC ISSUES: Barry Kurtz and Paul Glasgall, chair of the traffic committee, brought up the ongoing and presently unresolved traffic problems caused by the Church and school.
The Chair stated that this issue would have to be placed on a future agenda as the public had to be notified prior to any discussion and vote.
CITIZEN COMMENT: Those present to discuss the sports field did not appear to favor it.
However, Barbara Kohn noted that she had received one letter of support for the field. A letter from Barbara Manaugh opposing the project was read, in part.
There were also letters opposing the project from Paul and Evelyn Nankivell, Susan Ornstean and Patrick Robinson.
Lawrence Stewart of the Miramar Homeowners’ Association stated that his organization was opposed to the project.
The Nankivell family expressed concerns over issues of geological stability, destruction of the natural habitat and animals, appropriation of public lands for private use and concerns with liability issues.
The above persons also stated that they were not notified of the proposed project until quite recently.
Nancy Hope and Laura Snyder, representatives from the Sea Ridge Condominiums’ Association, were present.
They noted that the Association had supported the fields as per the Church’s limited agreement but they were not aware of the limit line issue when the Association was asked for their support. MOTIONS: After much discussion, three motions were made and voted upon: Kurt Toppel moved that the Board re-affirm its support of the proposal as set forth in the Board’s 6/24/99 minutes, oppose the Coastal Commission Staff recommendation concerning the hours and times of usage of the sports field, subject to the legal resolution of the urban limit line issue.
The Motion did not carry with 9 in favor and 8 opposed.
Ted Mackie moved that the Board oppose the Coastal Commission Staff recommendation.
The Motion passed with 12 votes in favor and 5 opposed.
Lisa Maki moved that the Board withdraw its support of the proposal as set forth in the Board’s 6/24/99 minutes.
The Motion did not carry with 8 in favor, 5 opposed and 4 abstaining from the vote.
Based on the above, the Chair stated that he would write a letter to the Coastal Commission stating that the Board opposes the Staff recommendation of the Coastal Commission and that the Board neither supports nor opposes the Church’s proposed development of the playing fields at the Calvary Church. 4.2 Shall the PPCC seek to become a Neighborhood Council pursuant to the City’s Plan for Neighborhood Councils?
This issue will be discussed at the next meeting.
The Board lacked time to discuss it after a lengthy discussion of issue the proposed Calvary Church sports field. 5\.
Old Business. 5.1 Community Thanks For Trimming the Ivy Around the Mural on Temescal Canyon Road.
Ted Mackie reported that he asked Johnson Tree company to provide the Temescal Canyon Association with a quote to conduct trimming around this mural because the Association’s members can no longer physically perform the work.
Johnson Tree company did the trimming free of charge.
The Board thanked Johnson Tree Company for performing this valuable service to the community and the Chair noted that he hoped that others would be encouraged by this act of community service and kindness. 5.2 Revision of Minutes Page on Website & When Should the Council Post Minutes on the Website?
Ted Mackie reported that he revised the Council’s Website so that the public can index the Board’s past minutes using key search terms and by means of the Microsoft browser and the keys “Ctrl-F.” A Motion was made that the minutes be posted on the Website prior to the Board’s vote to approve the minutes, as long as they are reviewed by the Chair and Ted Mackie.
The Motion was seconded and was unanimously passed. 5.3 Update on 222 Coperto - Jack Allen.
Jack Allen reported that our geological report on 222 Coperto was considered by the City.
The City sided with the views of its own geologist which will permit the contractor to complete the project.
Mr.
Allen met with the property owner and his attorney and came up with a settlement proposal concerning the Board’s pending appeal before the Coastal Commission.
The proposal is that the Board would withdraw its opposition to the plan if: -The developer would reimburse the Board for the $1,700.00 paid to Geologist Mr.
Michaels; -The property owner would agree to conduct annual maintenance of the property; and -The property owner would install a drainage system on the top of the property. A Motion was made and seconded by Richard Blumenberg that the Board accept the property owner's settlement proposal and withdraw its opposition to the project.
The Motion failed with 10 votes in favor, 4 opposed and 3 abstentions _._ Jack Allen noted that he would not argue the appeal before the Coastal Commission and Frank Wilson agreed to appear in his place.
Adjournment.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
The next meeting will be at Mort’s Oak Room on Thursday,
August 23, 2001 at 7:00 p.m. Minutes submitted by Secretary Lisa Maki _________________________ [Return to top of page](https://pacpalicc.org/index.php/minutes-from-2001/)****
---

MINUTES FOR JUNE 28th 2001

Board Members Present (including Alternates and Advisors): Harry Sondheim (Chair), Barry Kurtz, Patti Post, Jack Allen (Advisor), Ted Mackie, William Snyder, Robert Baker, Marguerite Perkins Mautner, Norma Spak, Ronald Dean (Advisor), Ernie Meadows, Kurt Toppel, Paul Glasgall (Advisor), Arthur Mortell, Maurizio Vecchione, Larry Jacobs, Stuart Muller, George Wolfberg, Barbara Kohn, Larry Niles, Randy Young

Summary

The Pacific Palisades Community Council held a meeting where members discussed the 222 Coperto coastal development permit appeal (which the Coastal Commission approved 8-1), considered whether to seek certification as a Neighborhood Council (deferring the decision pending further information from the city), and began reviewing proposed bylaw changes. The Board also voted to join an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's permit decision for 17633 Castellammare.