Newsletter No. 66

Homeless housing controversy.

Friendship Cities budget issue.

Council travel budget issue.

Kudos to Supervisor Janice Hahn and Weingart Center’s Ben Rosen for their successful efforts to increase housing for Torrance’s homeless.

At the LA County’s May 27 board meeting, Hahn and her colleagues on the board voted 3-0 to apply for state funds to transform the 120-unit Extended Stay America Hotel on Torrance Boulevard to the state’s Homekey+ program. The vote came with just a week left to meet the state’s deadline.

It really should have been a slam dunk, but it became controversial because the City felt blindsided by the County.

If you haven’t followed this story, here’s the background:

The Weingart Center Assn. is spending millions to buy hotels and transform them into residences for people living on the streets. The foundation prefers extended-stay hotels because they have kitchens and that speeds up remodeling. Also, the particular state money the County is seeking for the remodeling specifies hotels. But it comes with an early June deadline. More about that later.

Rosen pointed out that the residents will not be transients. They will be tenants with leases. He also spoke of the variety of features all their properties have, including 24-7 security and live-in managers.

All this came out during a special meeting the Torrance’s City Council called for 5 p.m. May 23 – the Friday before a holiday weekend. And that’s part of the problem.

Evidently, when the City saw the Extended Stay proposal on the supervisors’ May 27 agenda, Mayor George Chen called for the special meeting.

City Manager Aram Chaparyan told the Council the staff had concerns about the location and the impact on Del Amo, but supporters of the proposal counter with the fact that Housing is built into the plan for the former Sears area of Del Amo. 

Chaparyan claimed that 120 units at one location raised property management concerns, but he didn’t expand on why that would be a problem.

He also said the project may have “increases in police and fire calls without agreements of support from the County.” Even though this is not a new building, he did not explain why these tenants could lead to an increase.

His one complaint that drew my sympathy: Chaparyan said the County had sought “no meaningful input from community stakeholders.” Indeed, the agenda item caught the City by surprise.

When the Council asked Ivan Sulic, Hahn’s rep, why he hadn’t worked with City staff, he said he had mentioned it. But even Sulic seemed to understand how lame his answer sounded. When asked if City staff could be involved in the tenant-selection process, he responded that they could if the City wanted to contribute to the renovation costs.

That did not sit well with the Council, which voted 7-0 to ask the Supervisors to table the proposal so they could have input. And they also added a contingency: If the supes approved the proposal, Torrance would not put any funds into the project.

In the discussion leading up to that vote, District 2’s Bridgett Lewis, District 3’s Asam Sheikh, District 4’s Sharon Kalani and District 6’s Jeremy Gerson had concerns that might have been resolved if Sulic had been transparent from the git-go. I share their irritation.

Mayor George Chen, District 1’s Jon Kaji and District 5’s Aurelio Mattucci went beyond the others’ anger about being blindsided. Chen basically wanted nothing to do with this kind of housing. Kaji maligned the future tenants by saying this project would bring Skid Row to Torrance. And Mattucci reinvented history when he seemingly took credit for devising the Little Houses project. 

Why do I support this proposal? As Lewis pointed out, Weingart has a history of successfully running housing such as this. She distinguished between transient housing and what was being proposed and added that this wasn’t housing for people with mental health or drug addiction issues. 

Torrance Transit waived fares to take a busload of mainly naysayers downtown to protest at the County meeting. Hahn heard their issues and grilled staff about the various Torrance concerns. She received commitments of transparency going forward and of City involvement in selecting tenants. 

Bravo, Supervisor.

Not so friendly:

The budgeting process for the next two years is wrapping up, and the Friendship Cities budget is raising eyebrows.

When the Council first agreed to the program, Chen and Kaji assured everyone there would be no cost to the City. Chen said his trip to his native Taiwan had been at his own expense.

The next thing residents knew, the City had budgeted $35,000 a year for two years for Friendship Cities travel and other expenses. Chen has now made multiple trips to Asia at City expense.

Next year’s budget has $70,000 for one year of the program. Plus, it appears that $300,000 of the City’s business development budget is being spent on the program. Lewis asked how it got into economic development, but she didn’t get much of an answer.

Sheikh asked what the return on investment is on the program. He said he “wants to be able to see what we are getting” and emphasized the City should focus on local businesses needing help. He also didn’t get much of an answer.

In the absence of results, the Council majority appears to be cooling on adding Friendship cities – or at least the ones proposed by Kaji.

At a recent Council meeting, he suggested adding Dekouzantakata, a Japanese city that happens to be Dodger pitcher Ro Ti Souzaka’s hometown. He would have been the third Dodger player with a Torrance Friendship City tie.

In explaining why she declined Kaji’s request, Kalani said, “I believe there are approximately 29 players from seven different countries. And I just don’t feel we are being inclusive by focusing on one.”

More travel pushback:

A few meetings ago, Mattucci asked for a concurrence to give Chen some of his leftover travel budget for a trip Chen didn’t have funds for.

Mattucci couldn’t get four votes and expressed his displeasure. So, in the budget the Council was given some new proposals for travel, including one that would allow Council members to transfer their travel funds to a colleague without a vote.

That attempt to get around the Council failed again.

Back-to-back events:

TOCApalooza takes over the Torrance Cultural Arts Center, 3330 Civic Center Dr, from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Saturday, June 21. Free entertainment on three stages with food trucks and wine beer. Besides activities for children, there will be a juried art and photo show and vendors selling handmade items. It is TOCA’s gift to the community.

For more information, go to https://www.torrancearts.org/shows/tocapalooza. Click on the video to see what to expect. 

Then on Sunday, June 22, Downtown Torrance Pride has organized an all-day Gay Pride event with all kinds of things to do.

To see everything planned and/or to get involved, go to https://www.eventbrite.com/e/downtown-torrance-pride-volunteer-organized-community-event-tickets-1376801433149?aff=oddtdtcreator or https://linktr.ee/DowntownTorrancePride.

Before I go:

The City’s deadline for correspondence to be included in the Council’s pre-meeting public supplemental is 5:30 p.m. the Monday before the meeting. The Council will receive anything that comes in later before the meeting, but it won’t be posted until Wednesday. It will be at the top of the agenda.

You can also leave voicemails to be included as Oral Communications in the supplemental. Call 310-618-2404 to leave up to a two-minute recording that will be transcribed. Voicemails have the same deadlines as the emails.

Want to tell the City Council your opinion on an agenda item or address any concerns? Send it to CityCouncil@torranceca.gov; in the subject line put the agenda item or the topic. The City has changed how to have your comments appear in an agenda item’s Staff Report. You should use the OneMeeting Public Portal at https://torranceca.primegov.com/public/portal?fromiframe=true.

Jean Adelsman

Feel free to share this email -- or tell friends about www.TakeBackTorrance.com. And if you email a response to jeanadelsman@yahoo.com, please indicate whether you are expressing a thought for my eyes only or whether I may share your comments with the whole audience.