DELAY IN THE BORDER ADJUSTMENT
City attorney ruling forces change in plans

In 2002 the Westside Neighborhood Council, which stretches all the way north to include Century City, was assigned a small strip of Northeast Palms by the city's Department of Neighborhood Empowerment, even though nobody in Palms knew anything about it.

Historically, the little strip (bordered by red above) is part of Palms.

So in May 2006 the president and secretary of the Palms council asked the Westside council to consider appointing a committee to study a boundary shift. In August the Westside council approved changing the border. The Palms Council went ahead with an outreach campaign in that area.

This is a small district (known as Area A) consisting of some 266 apartment units in about 23 buildings and no more than 35 businesses at about the same number of addresses. There are no single-family homes. It is estimated that the population is about 465, based on 1.75 residents for each apartment unit.

Fifty-one signatures on petitions favoring joining Palms were gathered from the area by the Palms council. They included 12 businesspeople and 39 residents.

Westside gets a new president

After civic leader Terri Tippitt was elected Westside president in December 2006, she appointed Melissa Kenaday to chair a committee to reopen the boundary question.

And on March 8, 2007, the Westside board did vote to "reconsider" its action of seven months earlier.

Tippitt said that Lee Wallach of the Motor Ave. Improvement Assn. has claimed that merchants in the area want to remain with the Westside council.

Wallach and several members of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners Assn. appeared at a Palms Neighborhood Council meeting on July 5, 2006, to oppose the construction of a commercial-apartment complex on the northeast corner of Palms Blvd. and Motor Ave.

The Palms Council, through its Representative Assembly, voted to support that development.

Since then Wallach has formed a Motor Ave. Improvement Assn., which seeks to combine all stakeholders between Pico Blvd. on the north and Washington Blvd. on the south.

And Tippitt is known to be miffed because the Palms council is also seeking an "overlap area" of Palms Park and the Palms Rancho-Park Library, which are now solely within the territory of the Westside council. In a Jan. 25, 2007, e-mail, she called the Palms border-adjustment effort a "land grab."

Tippitt, president of the West of Westwood Homeowners Assn., has been a longtime supporter of park improvements and, in fact, has a plaque in her honor at the park (above).

City attorney is asked for an opinion

Palms Secretary George Garrigues drafted a letter to Deputy City Atty. Thomas J. Griego asking for an opinion as to the legality of the Westside "reconsideration."

The letter states that the Westside action was not in conformity with the Westside bylaws, which limit reconsideration of any motion to the same or immediately subsequent meeting. It also said the August 2006 boundary decision was "in the nature of a contract" which could not be unilaterally changed.

Finally, it said that under a city policy regarding boundary changes the approval of the Westside council is not needed at all.

(Click here to see copy of the letter, below.)

Westside NC reaction was swift

An advance copy was sent to Kenaday under a Palms policy of sharing all pertinent information with the Westside. She responded almost immediately by forwarding the letter to the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment with the comment:

"Unfortunately with this response from Palms NC, my opinion is that any future co-operation between NCs has been negated."

P.O. Box 341070
Palms, California, U.S.A., 90034
(310) 839-7708

March 22, 2007


Thomas J. Griego
Office of the City Attorney
700 City Hall East
200 N. Main Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Dear Mr. Griego:

This is a request for a legal opinion concerning the following.

FACTS

A. After public notice and discussion, the following motion was adopted by the governing body of the Palms NC (the Representative Assembly) on April 5, 2006: "The President and Secretary are authorized to go ahead with a proposal to adjust the northern boundary along the I-10 Freeway, with an overlap area for Palms Park, and are further authorized to have the proper paperwork approved by the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment and the City Attorney's office before being brought back to the Representative Assembly for final approval after the PNC election in May."

B. On May 6, 2006, the president and secretary of the Palms NC made a presentation at the board meeting of the Westside NC and requested that the Westside NC consider the above proposal. A WNC committee was appointed to deal with the matter.

C. On June 7, 2006, after public notice and discussion, the following resolution was adopted unanimously by the governing body of the Palms NC:

“Whereas the Guidelines and Instructions for Boundary Adjustment prepared by the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment state that a petition for such an adjustment may be submitted at any time by a certified neighborhood council,

“And whereas it is the desire of the Palms Neighborhood Council to move ahead on proposed boundary adjustments in Northeast Palms as quickly as possible on behalf of the stakeholders in the affected areas and in the rest of Palms,

“Therefore it is resolved that the President and Secretary are authorized and requested to develop a detailed description of an outreach process which will be used to:

“1. Identify and contact community stakeholders in the areas proposed for inclusion in the Palms Neighborhood Council.

“2. Inform those stakeholders about neighborhood councils in general and the options for joining the Palms Neighborhood Council or remaining with the Westside Neighborhood Council.

“3. Determine the support, or lack thereof, on the part of stakeholders for a change in the affected areas as outlined in Resolutions 1, 2 and 3 adopted this date.

“And it is further resolved that said outreach process might include community meetings, presentations to key stakeholder groups, posting of information on bulletin boards and collection of signatures within the proposed area, all in accordance with the policies of the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment.

“And it is further resolved that the President and Secretary solicit the input of the Westside Neighborhood Council at all stages of the development of the outreach process and that the proposed process be presented to the Palms Representative Assembly with all deliberate speed, along with the observations of the Westside Neighborhood Council, if any.

“And it is finally resolved that this resolution be sent to the Westside Neighborhood Council for information and comment.”

D. On Aug. 9, 2006, the Governing Board of the Westside NC took the following actions:

“It was moved and seconded to support changing our southern boundary to the 10 freeway east of Overland to the National exit from the westbound 10, so that our new boundary would be the 10 freeway. Palms Park and the Library will remain in our area. Passed 10-3-0.

“It was moved and seconded to clarify the previous motion that we will not take any action to implement the boundary change until after our election on December 7, 2006. Passed 11-1-0.”

E. The Palms NC secretary states that the Aug. 9 motions of the Westside board were in the nature of a contract and that the Palms board relied upon those motions as follows:

(1) between August 19 and the early part of December 2006, the Palms NC engaged in an outreach program within the affected area, including door-to-door circulation of fliers and other informational material, the public posting of information sheets and the circulation of petitions by four members of the Palms NC board and

(2) a petition and supporting documents were prepared by the secretary, at great expense in time and labor, for submission to the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment and the Board of Neighborhood Commissioners for their expected approval, and

(3) on January 3, 2007, he presented to the governing body of the Palms NC “a petition to the Department of Neighborhood Empowerment to adjust the northeast boundary of Palms northward to the I-10 Freeway east of Overland and west of Exposition, an addendum and supporting Exhibits A through N and Figures 1 through 3 and moved the adoption of all the items except for Exhibit L (proposed bylaws changes), which will be considered at the February Council meeting. The motion was adopted unanimously.“ And,

(4) on February 7, 2007, the Palms adopted the necessary amendments to the bylaws, “contingent on their being accepted by DONE and contingent upon the boundary change being approved.”

F. On March 8, 2007, the Governing Board of the Westside NC adopted a motion to reconsider the action taken on August 9, 2006, concerning the boundary change.

G. The bylaws of the Westside NC state as follows:

“The WNC may reconsider and amend its action on items listed on the agenda if that reconsideration takes place immediately following the original action or at the next regular meeting. The WNC, on either of these two days, shall: (1) make a motion for reconsideration and, if approved, (2) hear the matter and take an action. If the motion to reconsider an action is to be scheduled at the next meeting following the original action, then two items shall be placed on the agenda for that meeting: (1) a motion for reconsideration on the described matter and (2) a proposed action should the motion to reconsider be approved. A motion for reconsideration can only be made by a Board Member who has previously voted on the prevailing side of the original action taken. If a motion for reconsideration is not made on the date the action was taken, then a Board Member on the prevailing side of the action must submit a memorandum to the Recording Secretary identifying the matter to be reconsidered and a brief description of the reason(s) for requesting reconsideration at the next regular meeting. The aforesaid shall all be in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act.

“To the extent the WNC has not adopted its own rules for conducting its meetings, the WNC shall follow Robert’s Rules of Order. The Rules of the WNC that have been formally adopted and set forth in writing shall, unless contrary to State or federal law, take precedent where there is a conflict with Robert’s Rules of Order. All committee meetings shall be governed by any written rules adopted by the WNC for conduct of meetings, or by Robert’s Rules of Order, where no WNC rule applies.”

H. Article V-2-(d) of the Plan for a Citywide System of Neighborhood Councils states in part:

“If incorporation of an area into an existing Certified Neighborhood Council’s boundary is initiated by an entity other than the Commission, Community Stakeholders of the area to be incorporated and of the affected Certified Neighborhood Council(s) must agree to the proposed incorporation prior to consideration by the Commission.”

REQUEST FOR OPINION

A. Is the agreement of the governing boards of both neighborhood councils required before a border can be adjusted between the territories of the councils?

B. Was the motion to reconsider adopted by the WNC Governing Board on March 8, 2007, valid?

C. If it was valid, did it have the effect of rescinding the motion adopted on August 9, 2006, or must the
Palms Neighborhood Council • March 22, 2007 • Page 4

original motion be reconsidered in its entirety and when should that be done?

D. Is the motion adopted by the WNC Governing Board on August 9, 2006, to “support changing our southern boundary,” etc., still in effect?

E. If it is in effect, has the action fulfilled the requirement of Article V-2-(d) of the Plan?”

F. If the motion has fulfilled that requirement, can the Westside NC revoke that agreement, and, if so, how?

ARGUMENTS

A. The agreement of the governing boards of both neighborhood councils is not required before a border can be adjusted between the territories of the councils. The Plan does not state that the governing boards of both councils must agree. It plainly states that the “Community Stakeholders” must agree. The process of demonstrating the agreement of the Community Stakeholders is outlined in the Plan and includes posting of public notices in several languages and a public hearing by the Commission. If the process were to require the approval of both boards, then the Plan would say so.

B. The March 8, 2007, motion to reconsider was invalid because it did not comply with the bylaws of the Westside Neighborhood Council. It did not take place “immediately following the original action or at the next regular meeting” nor was it accompanied by “a memorandum to the Recording Secretary identifying the matter to be reconsidered and a brief description of the reason(s) for requesting reconsideration.”

C. If the motion was valid, however, then it did not have the effect of rescinding the August 9, 2006, motion but only to put the original motion once again in front of the WNC Governing Board, which should have once again voted on that original motion immediately unless the original motion had been laid on the table or otherwise delayed in accordance with Robert’s Rules of Order.

D. The August 9, 2006, motion is therefore still in effect.

E. The action taken on August 9, 2006, does not fulfill the requirement of the Plan, which provides other means for Stakeholders to demonstrate their support of or opposition to a proposed boundary change.

F. The Westside NC cannot revoke its agreement to the request of the WNC officers because the agreement was in the nature of a contract and its terms were relied upon and carried out by the other side. (In this regard the agreement was also like a state’s ratification of an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which cannot be revoked.)

Yours very sincerely,

PAULINE STOUT, president ____________________________________________
Palms Neighborhood Council


GEORGE GARRIGUES, secretary ____________________________________________
Palms Neighborhood Council