By Paulette Greenberg
[Editor’s Note: The letter regards the ongoing dispute between residents of one block of Farragut Drive and the Grace Lutheran Church over parking restrictions on Farragut.]
Mr. Martin R. Cole
City Clerk
9770 Culver Boulevard
P.O. Box 507
Culver City, CA 90232-0507
Re: Nov.10, 2014 City Council meeting,
Agenda Item No. CS-8
Dear Mr. Cole:
The City Council’s decision on my Brown Act complaint should not be influenced by statements by Councilperson Andrew Weissman, as he is an advocate for the Grace Evangelical Lutheran Church, and otherwise lacks credibility.
Evidently, Mr. Weissman wants this Council to believe that the Farragut Drive residents asked for parking restrictions and the prior City Councils mindlessly complied with the request(s) without conducting a “traffic study.” Mr. Weissman engaged in extensive email communications with the city staff to obtain concurrence with his erroneous position. His efforts demonstrate his lack of credibility.
He ignores the preliminary issues of: [1] whether the City Councils in December 1982 and August 2004 could legally implement or enhance the Farragut Parking Restrictions without a “traffic study;” and [2] if there was such a legal requirement, whether it was rendered moot when the City Council grandfathered the restrictions in December 2004 and re-grandfathered the restrictions in November 2013 (by this currently-constituted City Council).
In his Sept. 8, 2014, email to Charles Herbertson, City Engineer, at 12:10 p.m., Mr. Weissman wrote:
“So it is accurate to say that no traffic impact study has EVER been done in connection with the parking restrictions on Farragut? Yes (sic).
After Mr. Herbertson pushed back, in his Sept. 8, 2014, email, at 12:27 p.m., Mr. Weissman wrote:
“Ok. I’ll gladly go out on a limb and say it. … [T]he [Farragut parking] restrictions were approved without the benefit of any traffic study.”
However, the law presumes and the evidence demonstrates that Mr. Weissman’s advocacy position is without merit.
First: Mr. Weissman has no personal knowledge of what he alleges. However, I was there and have personal knowledge of the toll that the city exacted of Farragut residents to secure the Farragut Parking Restrictions.
Second: Whatever official duty the City Council was under in 1982 and 2004 to enact permit-parking-restrictions on Farragut, it is presumed that the City Council complied. (Evid. Code, § 664; Gilroy Citizens for Responsible Planning v. City of Gilroy (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 911, 919 [“presume regular performance of official duty”].) Mr. Weissman cannot demonstrate otherwise.
Third: As to initial enactment of the Farragut Parking Restrictions, at the least, Mr. Weissman ignored critical evidence. The Dec. 6, 1982, City Council agenda, Item 5A (“Relating to … Preferential Parking on Farragut Drive”), states, in part:
“In your agenda packet is a complete report on this matter report which has been prepared by the City Engineer for your more complete information.
(Emphasis added.) (A copy of the pertinent pages of the Agenda is attached.) Even assuming that a “traffic study” was required, without a copy of that “complete report,” Mr. Weissman cannot credibly state that no “traffic study” was performed in 1981-1982.
Fourth: As to 2004, Resolution No. 2004-R085, which grandfathered the extension of the Farragut Parking Restrictions, was approved by the City’s current city attorney. (A copy of the pertinent portion of the Resolution is attached.)
Further, the city is presumed to have conducted the license plate survey. (People v. Peggese (1980) 102 Cal.App.3d 415, 420 [declarant’s statement of intent not hearsay and admissible to demonstrate he acted consistent with such intent].)
On July 2, 2004, Sammy Romo, then the city’s traffic engineer, wrote:
“[Y]ou wish to extend permit-only parking on your street to 10 p.m., Monday through Friday. Attached to this letter are … guidelines describing petition process/license plate survey. Once it is verified that at least 75% of the residents on your block have signed the petition, Engineering staff will conduct a license plate survey. The survey is performed in order to distinguish the amount of non-residential vehicles and the residential ones.”
Farragut residents provided the city with a petition signed by 87 percent of the Farragut residents. The city engineer is presumed to have conducted “a license plate survey.”
Any comment of Mr. Weissman on Brown Act issues should be ignored. He lacks credibility. Further, the City Council acted properly when enacting, grandfathering and re-grandfathering the Farragut Parking Restrictions.
Ms. Greenberg may be contacted at plgreen@att.net
