BOARD MEETING DATE: May 3, 2002
AGENDA NO. 22

Administrative Committee

SYNOPSIS: 

The Administrative Committee met Friday, April 12, 2002, and reviewed the proposed agenda for the May 3, 2002, Board meeting. The Committee also discussed various issues detailed in the Committee report. The next Administrative Committee meeting is Friday, May 10, 2002, at 9:30 a.m. in Conference Room CC-8.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Receive and file.

Norma J. Glover, Chair
Administrative Committee

Attendance: Present were Chairman Norma Glover, Members Ronald Loveridge and Beatrice LaPisto-Kirtley, and Members William Burke and Roy Wilson (via videoteleconference). Also in attendance were Members Jane Carney and Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta. Absent was Vice Chair Hal Bernson.

Chairman Glover congratulated Beatrice LaPisto-Kirtley for being re-elected as Councilmember for the City of Bradbury.

DISCUSSION ITEMS:

1. Board Members’ Concerns: Board Member Jane Carney asked if the reformation of the various Advisory Committees has been completed. Barry Wallerstein, Executive Officer, stated that a recommendation will be made shortly to the Governing Board.
   
    
2. Chairman’s Report of Approved Travel: Dr. Wallerstein stated that travel requests were approved for Chairman Glover to attend a Department of Energy Hydrogen Roadmap Workshop in Washington D.C. on March 31-April 3 and to attend a meeting to be held on April 14-17 in New York, NY regarding the multi-regional alliance initiative and to attend INFORM’s Environmental Awards dinner. No motion required.
   
    
3. Approval of Compensation for Board Member Assistant(s): None.
   
    
4. Report of Approved Out-of-Country Travel: Dr. Burke to attend Hart’s 8^th Annual World Fuels Conference in Brussels, Belgium on May 20-24; and Chung Liu and Anupom Ganguli to attend the 14^th World Hydrogen Energy Conference to be held in Montreal, Canada on June 9-13. No motion required.
   
    
5. Status Report on Outreach Program and Approval of Task Orders: Dr. Wallerstein noted that from AES Settlement Project Funds, the Board had allocated $1.5 million over a two-year period to enhance AQMD's outreach to African-American, Asian, and Latino/Hispanic communities. Based on evaluation of competitive bids, the firms selected were RCA Associates, Oralia Michel Marketing and Public Relations, Imada Wong Communications Group Inc., and Strategy Workshop. Imada Wong has since withdrawn.
   
   RCA Associates
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that RCA Associates’ first proposed project will be to initiate an Air Quality Summit (to discuss asthma, air quality, health effects, and environmental justice) in concert with the California Legislative Black Caucus, members of the Congressional Black Caucus, and stakeholders including prominent local churches. Data shows that the African-American community has a 2-3 times higher incidence of asthma. Dr. Burke suggested that Member of Congress Diane Watson be involved in this activity. She was the Chair of the State Senate Health Committee for 12 years, which is related to air quality issues. She would be very helpful in obtaining assistance from the Black Caucus. Dr. Wallerstein introduced Renee Combs Anderson, Principal of RCA Associates. Ms. LaPisto-Kirtley asked why the asthma rate is 2-3 times greater in the African-American community since other ethnicities could also be affected as much due to their location. Dr. Burke stated that with displacement of African-Americans by the Hispanic community they would inherit the dangers Black communities have been exposed. The Hispanic outreach should tie into this issue to reduce the pollution level in other geographic areas. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley asked if AQMD is reviewing this data based on geographic location or by ethnic group. Dr. Wallerstein stated that health statistics show these numbers and that staff recommends the African-American group be given priority. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley requested exploration of potential solutions related to the great number of African-Americans coping with asthma. Dr. Burke suggested that Olympic athlete Jackie Joyner Kersee, who is an asthmatic, be contacted as a potential speaker since she attends similar conferences.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated the second project is to hold two Breakfast Forums per county with topics regarding AQMD’s programs. He said that by listening to attendees’ concerns, we can improve by finding out what the key air quality issues are in each community.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that the third project is to hold weekend Clean Air Fairs involving health providers, other agencies, and possibly the American Lung Association, with displays of clean-fuel vehicles to attract a large number of attendees. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley suggested holding one fair in a county where the most likely success would likely occur, then there would be a benchmark measurement of success that could be duplicated in other counties. There was concurrence.
   
   Mrs. Glover requested that Committee Members review this item in detail so that additional issues will not arise during Friday’s Special Meeting of the Governing Board.
   
   Dr. Burke stated that there are five churches in the Black community which have grown to 10,000-12,000 members in Los Angeles County. He requested this event be run in conjunction with a Sunday service. AQMD could then provide other mega-churches in other counties with the same information.
   
   Mrs. Glover requested legal counsel’s direction regarding having seven Board members present at this meeting. Ms. Carney left the meeting at 10:12 a.m.
   
   Dr. Burke also asked how success would be measured. Ms. Anderson answered that over 300 people would be a barometer to classify the event as highly successful. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley stated she wanted to determine how to run other fairs as successfully and replicate it in other counties. Dr. Burke stated the Board Members in other areas would be called upon for their direction and leadership in locating sites to hold these events. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta mentioned that she has attended several community fairs throughout the four counties and saw success in activities related to local police departments’ child fingerprinting programs.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that Public Affairs will sponsor and participate in a variety of events with the American Lung Association and provide materials. Staff has asked Ms. Anderson to prepare a calendar of events in the four-county area and prioritize the events that would be most beneficial to AQMD participation. Dr. Wallerstein stated the going rate would be paid for a booth at a local fair. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley asked how AQMD sponsors a bicycle event, and Dr. Wallerstein answered that historically bicycles usage has been an outreach-related strategy in AQMD’s clean air plan; booths are staffed to discuss clean air programs with individuals and inform the public on how to contact AQMD. Mayor Loveridge asked what rules are followed for event sponsorship by AQMD, and Dr. Wallerstein answered that there should be a nexus to AQMD’s mission where Public Affairs’ staff makes a recommendation for the Executive Officer to approve. Mayor Loveridge asked how many sponsorships are awarded per month, and Oscar Abarca, Assistant DEO/Public Affairs & Transportation Programs, answered five per month is the average. Dr. Wallerstein stated that AQMD is re-examining how events are budgeted. Mayor Loveridge asked, what makes an event an event? Dr. Wallerstein stated this project has two components—one, to identify events not considered before and two, to prioritize the recommendations of events. Dr. Wallerstein answered that major events, such as Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, would be considered an event AQMD would participate in. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley requested a list of events which AQMD sponsored within the last 6 months including the costs involved, and Dr. Wallerstein stated that he would provide copies to the Committee Members. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta asked for a forecast of upcoming events for the coming year and Dr. Wallerstein answered that this is part of this effort. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley suggested tabulation of how much is spent, who is affected by these events, i.e., elected officials, public, etc. Dr. Burke suggested that even though AQMD staff prepares a list of upcoming events, 20% of money budgeted for events be set aside for unanticipated events.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that the Clean Air Congress is a general outreach to enlist community member assistance by scheduling a series of meetings, providing attendees with a membership card, and scheduling either one large congress in one area or one in each of the four counties. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley asked if this would only involve minorities living in above-average-impact air pollution areas. Dr. Wallerstein answered that this consultant’s project would target the African-American communities. Ms. Anderson stated that RCA is working in conjunction with a USC study of the Alameda Corridor East project as it relates to predominately African-American communities. Dr. Wallerstein stated that a monthly status report would be provided to the Committee Members.
   
   Oralia Michel Marketing and Public Relations
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that Oralia Michel Marketing and Public Relations would coordinate a Latino/Hispanic targeted outreach program including the implementation of an AQMD webpage in Spanish which also features cross-links to other agencies. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta asked if information has been obtained regarding how many households have access through Internet. Dr. Wallerstein stated that based on the consultant’s information the Hispanic community is connected through the Internet through their homes, schools, and libraries. The success of this program would be measured based on the amount of "hits" on AQMD’s webpage. After evaluating the success of this enhancement, Dr. Wallerstein stated that in the future, the webpage may also be written in Chinese. Dr. Burke suggested working through the website of Telemundo, a TV station, to link to AQMD’s webpage. He stated that he has noticed that 50% of the registration for the LA Marathon was done via the Internet.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein continued that the consultant’s next task order would be to include an air quality insert in La Opinion, Vida Nueva, and/or Excelsior. It would include an update on clean vehicle regulations and highlight success stories and could be co-sponsored with radio or TV, and investigate the use of MTA bus boards for advertising. Dr. Burke suggested cooperating with LADWP or Southern Gas Company to enclose the insert in the companies’ millions of bills. Dr. Wallerstein stated these companies will be approached.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that soccer would be utilized as another avenue to reach the Hispanic community through their youth soccer leagues, including the production of a very short video in Spanish, which would relate to clean air, soccer and athletes. Chairman Glover commented that this would be particularly effective in Orange County. Dr. Wallerstein stated that each of the four counties will be presented with a soccer outreach event through an appropriate league. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta stated that Junior United Soccer Association may be another group to be contacted for North Orange County, which includes Garden Grove, Northern Santa Ana, Placentia, and Fullerton. She asked if the World Soccer Event would be utilized. Dr. Wallerstein stated that the Galaxy will be contacted to assist AQMD with this outreach program, but that further review is necessary regarding the World Soccer Event.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that this consultant’s remaining project would be their effort on the Clean Air Congress.
   
   Strategy Workshop
   Dr. Wallerstein introduced Leslie Winner of Strategy Workshop regarding the task orders for the Asian community outreach efforts, which will include asthma testing and outreach through Korean churches which have large memberships throughout the four-county area. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley asked why asthma screening is not being conducted for children in the African-American community, who have a much higher rate of asthma. Dr. Wallerstein answered that the first-round efforts would be conducted through a health summit with churches. Dr. Wallerstein suggested another task order be initiated to include asthma screening as an integral part. Dr. Burke suggested staff provide Committee Members with the additional cost of asthma screening to be conducted for other ethnicities. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley stated all areas should be included for testing for children prior to seeking additional funds. Mayor Loveridge asked that the Board examine "how we declare victory in different efforts" and reach an understanding of what the objectives are in these activities. Dr. Wallerstein stated better information dissemination is needed so as to empower individuals to learn how to interact with AQMD either in requesting a permit or regarding an air pollution concern, and to develop a more informed constituency among the general public. Dr. Wallerstein stated that there will be a number of tools that would be available to assist AQMD in measuring success in these outreach efforts. Mayor Loveridge requested a list of 5-10 outcomes to declare success be provided at next month’s meeting. Dr. Wallerstein stated that he will also be looking for funding from state legislators and/or Congress for additional asthma screenings. Ms. La Pisto-Kirtley stated that a greater turnout would occur if asthma screening and child fingerprinting is conducted. She noted that if the event was attended by a Legislator, it would be noticed by the entire Legislature.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that the consultant’s next task order would be to target small businesses with a series of forums and trade fairs. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta asked if some of the functions task orders are similar to the activities to be conducted at the small business conference the Local Government & Small Business Assistance Advisory Group is coordinating. She wanted to know if these task orders would be a duplication. Dr. Wallerstein replied that this would not be a duplication because there will be a series of forums held at community venues in the four counties rather than holding a symposium in a hotel. Dr. Wallerstein stated that when the forums are scheduled, they will also be dovetailed into the upcoming symposium. Mrs. Glover stated that Garden Grove, Westminster, and Koreatown are good opportunities for outreach due to the various small businesses located in those areas. Ms. Winner stated that all Asian-owned businesses that are permitted would be included in this outreach. Dr. Wallerstein introduced an idea brought forth by Ms. Winner to hold a student forum competition related to air quality. It would involve local school districts in various categories. By asking either a USC or UCLA school of film to participate in this project, it could be shared with other school districts to highlight what is being accomplished by studying air quality issues in the classroom. Mrs. Glover suggested publicizing with cable TV on their free time. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta asked if the competition would be held in colleges. Ms. Winner answered that the film and video classes would be up through high school age throughout the four-county area.
   
   Mayor Loveridge asked if an evaluation of each of the specific projects would be provided. Dr. Wallerstein answered that a monthly committee report would be prepared for broader discussion of the outreach program. Ms. Verdugo-Peralta asked if this would include an up-to-date running total of what has been spent by the three consultants and their contracts’ remaining balances. Dr. Wallerstein stated this information can be provided. Mrs. Glover asked what is the bottom line regarding outreach is and stated that the needs need to be defined in the reports. She suggested that because it is a national problem, a request be made to Congress for federal money for asthma screening to identify why it is occurring, what in the environment is causing it, and how to rectify the situation.
   
   Dr. Wallerstein stated that a Special Board Meeting is scheduled on April 19 but he would like to expand the Board Member attendance to receive approval of the task orders at that meeting. Mayor Loveridge asked that the goals and objectives be clearly identified if this is approved by the full Board. Moved by Glover, seconded by LaPisto-Kirtley, and unanimously recommended for approval.
    

Members Burke, LaPisto-Kirtley, and Verdugo-Peralta left the meeting at 11 a.m.

Member Carney returned to the meeting at 11 a.m.

6. Report from Local Government and Small Business Assistance Advisory Group Regarding Adopted 2002 Goals and Objectives: Jane Carney stated that there are a number of items written with proactive verbs, while the objective here was to look into the various subject areas and report back to the Administrative Committee. She is proposing the items go forward in each subject area specifically in the capacity of advisory group. Mrs. Glover stated that she would like Ms. Carney using her vision, to go back and reform the goals and objectives as chair of the committee and return to the Committee with the revised goals and objectives. Dr. Wallerstein stated, whenever appropriate, staff would like to broaden Board Member dialogue by taking several of the issues to Stationary Source Committee and have appropriate staff present the issue and receive feedback. Ms. Carney recommended that some of the issues would go back to a committee briefing regarding each topic or be sent to a subcommittee for additional work, but there will not be a subcommittee on every topic. Moved by Glover, seconded by LaPisto-Kirtley, and unanimously recommended for approval.

Member Carney left the meeting at 11:04 a.m.

MAY AGENDA ITEMS:

7. Adopt Executive Officer’s FY 2002-03 AQMD Budget and Work Program: Rick Pearce, Chief Financial Officer, stated that the Executive Officer has recommended for FY 2002-03 an increase of 3% or $3 million to the budget and that a public workshop on the budget proposal is scheduled on April 17 and a Governing Board Workshop on April 19. The increase represents the estimated first year cost for labor agreements approved with the Professional Unit, and currently being negotiated with the Teamsters and nonrepresented employees. Mr. Pearce explained that the budget proposal is not balanced and proposes to use the remainder of subvention funds to achieve balance. Mrs. Glover stated that any resources purchased by the subvention money will be under purview of the State Legislature. Mayor Loveridge asked what AQMD’s most serious threat was regarding revenue, and Mr. Pearce answered that the State is proposing a 33% reduction in subvention funds, which will result in unfunding 29 subvention positions in the current budget costing $2.1 million, which will occur by vacating positions through attrition. Mrs. Glover asked if the reserves will be used within three years to augment our budget, and Mr. Pearce answered that the reserves are projected to be depleted within 4-5 years. This item was reviewed by the Committee.
   
    
8. Amend Regulation III – Fees: Laki Tisopulos, Assistant DEO/Planning, Rule Development and Area Sources stated that staff is recommending fees be adjusted by 2.5% to reflect the increase in the Consumer Price Index. Staff was also recommending realignment of fees in four categories to recover actual costs and more equitably distribute costs among inspected facilities. Some clarifications are also being proposed. Moved by Loveridge, seconded by Glover, and unanimously recommended for approval.
   
    
9. Execute Contract for Maintenance Services for Fast Fill Compressed Natural Gas Fueling Station at AQMD Headquarters: Moved by Loveridge, seconded by Glover, and unanimously recommended for approval.
   
    
10. Appropriate Funds for Newspaper Publication of Notices for Issuance of Permits Pursuant to Rule 212(g) Guidelines for Applications Subject to Regulation XXX (Initial and Revised Title V Permits, XIII, and XVII): Carol Coy, DEO/Engineering & Compliance, stated that due to activity in reducing the application backlog for permits, additional money was spent for public notices. Staff is requesting money be appropriated from the undesignated fund balance to cover the actual/projected expenditure through this final year. Moved by Wilson, seconded by Loveridge, and unanimously recommended for approval.
    
     
11. Ethnic Community Advisory Group Minutes for February 13, 2002, and Recommended Appointments/Reappointments for Membership: Attached for information are the Ethnic Community Advisory Group minutes for the February 13, 2002, meeting.
    
     
12. Local Government and Small Business Assistance Advisory Group Minutes for February 15, 2002, and Recommended Appointments/Reappointments for Membership: Attached for information are the Local Government and Small Business Assistance Advisory Group minutes for February 15, 2002.
    
     
13. Review May 3, 2002, Governing Board Agenda: This item was approved by the Committee.
    
     
14. Other Business: None.
    
     
15. Public Comment: None.

Meeting adjourned at 11:24 a.m.

Attachments

1. Ethnic Community Advisory Group Minutes for February 13, 2002
2. Local Government & Small Business Assistance Advisory Group Minutes for February 15, 2002
   
    

ETHNIC COMMUNITY ADVISORY GROUP
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 2002
MEETING MINUTES
 

1. Call to Order/Opening Remarks
   
   Co-Chair Fernando Del Rio called the meeting to order at 1:25 p.m. There was a quorum.
   
    
2. Approval of January 9, 2002, Minutes
   
   The following changes to the minutes were requested: On the Latino Caucus, Fernando Del Rio should be Co-Chair, not Chair, and Ericka Smith should be Chair, not Co-Chair. Under Others Present, Rhonda Reyes, assistant to Board Member Verdugo-Peralta, should be listed.
   
   Board Member Verdugo-Peralta arrived and chaired the meeting. The minutes were approved with the changes noted.
   
   Highlights of discussion:

• Everyone needs to work at bringing new people to the committee. Information about ECAG is on the AQMD’s website, but it does not currently mention the number of vacancies. ACTION ITEM: List ECAG vacancies, by caucus, on the AQMD’s website.
  
   
• The Asian-Pacific Islander Caucus is unique in that the Asian community has multiple cultures and languages. It was requested that the District make an effort to advertise vacancies in the Vietnamese, Laotian, and Indian communities since they currently have no representation on the caucus. It was also suggested to let community-based organizations know of openings. ACTION ITEM: Look into identifying community newspapers to advertise for Asian-Pacific Islander Caucus members, and send information for all caucuses to community-based organizations. Get a copy of the newspapers we do advertise RFPs and other items in to ECAG members.
  
   
• The District will be setting up Clean Air Assemblies as part of its enhanced community outreach. That will be a good pool of people to draw on to build membership, not only on ECAG, but to start to integrate other committees.
  
   
• Board Member Verdugo-Peralta is working on a small business conference to be held later this year, much like the energy conference she spearheaded last year. The purpose is to show businesses how to come into compliance before they receive a Notice to Comply or a Notice of Violation. Several things being considered are an amnesty program and a no-fault inspection program. We would also invite vendors who manufacture equipment that brings companies into compliance. That would give businesses an opportunity to see equipment they may not even know exists. We hope to have information about the Air Quality Assistance Fund by that time, which will help small businesses purchase compliance equipment, which can be very expensive. This conference would be a good place for ECAG to piggyback an outreach effort.
  
   
• ACTION ITEM: Provide committee members with a copy of the final paper on the International Conference hosted by the District last year, when it becomes available.
  
   
• Goals and Objectives: The caucuses will take a final look at the goals and objectives and present changes at the next meeting.

5. Chairman Glover’s Initiatives

• Board Member Verdugo-Peralta reported that Board Chairman Norma Glover presented eight initiatives at the January Board meeting which she plans to implement this year. Initiative #6 is a strategic alliance on environmental justice. Board Member Verdugo-Peralta attended a two-day training workshop on environmental justice that the District co-hosted with U. S. EPA. ACTION ITEM: Arrange for an abbreviated version of the workshop to be given to ECAG members at a future meeting. Initiative #8 – Negotiated Rulemaking Pilot Project, identifies ECAG as having a representative on the working group. ACTION ITEM: Arrange for Deputy Executive Officers to present the initiatives they are responsible for and how they are going to be implemented.
  
   
• There was much discussion about the Children’s Initiatives and concern that since the Children’s Initiatives are now completed they will be forgotten. Board Member Verdugo-Peralta mentioned an $18 million research project just completed by USC. It finds that ozone not only triggers asthma, but also is a cause of asthma. Marilyn Solomon assured the committee that children’s issues are not being ignored. In fact, they are being integrated into all aspects of the District’s strategy, much as environmental justice is. ACTION ITEM: Get a copy of the study to all committee members.

6. Review of Subcommittees

• The Outreach Subcommittee and Media Outreach Subcommittee were combined into one and called Outreach, and an Environmental Justice Subcommittee was added. The Children’s Air Quality Agenda Subcommittee is renamed Children’s Issues Subcommittee. Members present at the meeting chose the following subcommittee assignments:

Board Member Verdugo-Peralta requested that each subcommittee select a spokesperson to report back to the committee. She also suggested the subcommittees work on the goals and objectives. One of the first things they might think about doing is coming up with concepts of how the committee can be more effective and really reach the community. The subcommittees will meet from 12:30 to 1:00 in CC2 and one other conference room. The caucuses will meet from 1-1:15. ECAG will begin its meeting at 1:15. ACTION ITEM: The subcommittee meetings will be noted at the top of the ECAG agenda and thus posted.

7. District Business Card Policy
   
   After much discussion, Board Member Verdugo-Peralta suggested that the committee agree on the wording for a card, which will be sent to AQMD’s legal department for review. After legal review, Board Member Verdugo-Peralta will take the request to the Administrative Committee. If it passes the Administrative Committee, it will go before the Governing Board for action.

   8 & 9 Committee Reports
   
          None.

10. Discussion on Energy Issues
    
    Board Member Verdugo-Peralta discussed the following items:

• Secretary of Transportation, Business and Housing, Maria Contreras-Sweet, has asked Board Member Verdugo-Peralta to attend a meeting to discuss common issues faced by both agencies and how to resolve them. In addition, Board Member Verdugo-Peralta was asked to be a resource to her on energy and air quality issues.
  
   
• Board Member Verdugo-Peralta is a member of the Stationary Fuel Cell Collaborative Core Group. The California Power Authority requested that Board Member Verdugo-Peralta serve on a panel to review proposals from various companies to install a stationary fuel cell at a state or government building.
  
   
• There is an initiative from the Department of Energy called the Freedom Car. It’s an agreement between GM, Ford, and Daimler Chrysler to develop fuel cell cars in the next eight to 10 years.
  
   
• Energy conservation programs: The Office of Ratepayer Advocates, which is an arm of the California Public Utilities Commission, is trying to build up a grassroots effort to remove management of the conservation programs from the existing investor-owned utilities due to the fact that they feel there is an inherent conflict of interest. The problem is that the utilities are the only ones with viable programs that have been working for the public. They just haven’t been doing enough of it. If an organization like SCAG were to take the programs over, there would be a learning curve, and the public would suffer.

11. Enhanced Outreach Program Update
    
    Marilyn Solomon reported on the outreach program. Following are the highlights:

• For the past three or four months the entire Public Affairs staff has been reviewing all of the activities of the department and produced a Master Plan. In addition, staff has been meeting with our ethnic outreach consultants on a regular basis. Three ECAG members were able to join us for a day-long meeting on January 25. There was a mix of Public Affairs staff, all of the ethnic outreach consultants, and a facilitator, Dr. Alex Norman, who is a consultant from UCLA. Out of that meeting we came up with an eight-page plan. Some of the projects we will be working on include: A health symposium and community fair highlighting issues concerning children (the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences in Washington D.C., USC, Black Women for Wellness, King Drew Medical Center, Asthma & Allergy Foundation, American Lung Association, HealthNet, Kaiser, and Blue Cross are all interested in working with us on this); a one-hour cable show with the League of Women Voters specifically looking at environmental justice (after airing, the one-hour show will be edited down to a video that can be used in different settings); special outreach to those people who deal with young athletes; increased outreach on our 1-800-CUT-SMOG line; lining up celebrity spokespeople who can carry the word through public service announcements and personal appearances; a partnership with Vons, which has a fleet of hundreds of clean-fueled trucks that was developed through a grant from AQMD, to let us advertise on the back panels of all of their trucks and end-of the-counter advertising either using inserts or printing on grocery bags; Vons also has a newsletter dealing with health and nutrition features that they target to three groups: Asian women, Latino women, and African-American women; working with the State of California to develop environmental focus curricula; tying all sorts of activities to soccer programs; and expanded Clean Air Awards. ECAG can really help build membership and program development for the Clean Air Assemblies: Groups in each of the four counties made up of community people, businesses, professionals, and civic leaders will meet on a regular basis to address issues of environmental justice and other activities. We expect each assembly will be about 200-300 people, totaling about 800-1,200 people.

12. Discussion on Governing Board Agenda Items

• Amendments to Rule 1421 – Control of Perchloroethylene Emissions from Dry Cleaning Operations, are set for hearing in April.
  
   
• There is an interesting study being done in the Mira Loma area for both indoor and outdoor air quality, especially PM2.5. This is primarily funded by the County of Riverside, but the District is providing some funds for analysis and testing.

Public Comment

None.

Lourdes C. Martinez announced that her secretary, Aurora Schneider, has retired and introduced her new secretary, Pauline Harper, who will be taking over secretarial duties for this committee.

The meeting adjourned at 3:10 p.m.
 

LOCAL GOVERNMENT & SMALL BUSINESS
ASSISTANCE ADVISORY GROUP
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2002
MEETING MINUTES

MEMBERS PRESENT:
Ronald Loveridge, AQMD Board Member
Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta, AQMD Board Member
Greg Adams, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts
Detrich Allen, City of Los Angeles
Gene Beck, EnviroTech Financial
Arthur Brown, Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG)
Margaret Clark, City of Rosemead
Jeff Comerchero, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC)
Gary Stafford, Terra Furniture
John DeWitt, California Industries Oil Marketers Association

MEMBERS ABSENT:
(Chair) Norma Glover, AQMD Board Member
Terry Lacko, Monarch Industries
Dale Silverman, Association of Woodworking & Furnishing Suppliers

OTHERS PRESENT:
John Billheimer, Enviro-Reality
Doug Jeavons, BBC Research & Consulting
Dominic Meo, Meo & Associates
Rhonda Reyes, Board Assistant

AQMD STAFF:
Oscar Abarca, Assistant Deputy Executive Office
Barbara Baird, District Counsel
Gwen Cole, Executive Secretary
Jim Clouet, Senior Public Information Specialist
Julie Franco, Senior Administrative Secretary
Carol Gomez, Manager
Ron Ketcham, Senior Public Information Specialist
Sue Lieu, Program Supervisor
Peter Mieras, District Prosecutor
Marilyn F. Solomon, Deputy Executive Officer
Alene Taber, Manager
Laki Tisopulos, Assistant Deputy Executive Officer
 

Agenda Item #1 - Call to Order/Opening Remarks
Governing Board Member Ronald Loveridge called the meeting to order at 9:33 a.m.

Mayor Loveridge informed the committee that there was a reorganization being discussed for this committee. The recommendation would be to have two advisory groups. The first advisory group would be the Local Government Advisory Group and the second would be the Small Business Assistance Advisory Group. He stated that a Board letter was being prepared to go to the March Governing Board meeting. Once the Governing Board approved any reorganization, members appointed to serve on these committees would be notified and meetings scheduled.

Several members of the committee voiced their opinion that the two groups should continue to stay together because they are interrelated. There was also discussion that AQMD needs to continue to be more sensitive to the needs of small businesses.

Gene Beck suggested that if two committees are formed, then a member should be appointed from Local Government to serve on the Small Business Assistance Advisory Group to report activities to Local Government, and the same would apply for the Small Business Assistance Advisory Group.

Board Member Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta, said that she attended the Blue Ribbon Panel Committee meeting and they are considering the reorganization of all of the advisory groups. She said that at the meeting the committee members felt that there needs to be more focus on the needs of small businesses, especially when it comes to permitting. She also said that there should be some interaction between the two groups and that this recommendation to create two advisory groups was not final.

The Blue Ribbon Panel Committee members consist of: Governing Board Chairman Norma Glover, Board Member Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta, Executive Officer Barry Wallerstein, Marilyn F. Solomon, Oscar Abarca, Greg Adams, Lee Wallace, Bill LaMarr, and Anastacio Medina.

Greg Adams said that in his opinion it was inefficient to split the group into two. He said that from an administrative standpoint AQMD would have to staff two committees, and a Board Member would need to be available to chair at both committees. He was concerned that the small business people trying to run their businesses would have attendance problems, or it would be difficult to get people to show up for meetings.

Margaret Clark felt that if anything, this group spends most of its time discussing small business issues rather than local government issues.

Gary Stafford had a concern that there was not a good cross-section of views from various segments of the small business community, and by making it exclusively to a small business committee there would be a broader cross-section. And, he felt as far as low attendance, it would be a matter of the people who are chosen for the committee. He did, however say that he has seen a lot of support from the local government people.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta said that there was never an intent to exclude one group from the other. They are trying to determine the best way to address the needs of both groups, and are still looking for answers.

Jeff Comerchero said that he felt that there were certain issues that were not being addressed to the extent that they should be and felt that the group was missing out on opportunities, such as planning issues. He did not think that the two groups were compatible. He said that although there is value in interaction between local government and businesses in this forum, there are other forums.

Dee Allen said that she did not agree with Jeff Comerchero, she felt that the two groups should stay together. Local government has benefited from some of the small business issues and vice-versa. She said that she did not oppose expanding the membership of the small business representatives and have additional seats at the table. She also commented that AQMD deals with rules and the only number of development areas are in the transportation and CEQA Handbook, which is something, they are working on.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta said that there was still going to be a discussion as far as she knew. She thought that there was going to be another Blue Ribbon Panel Committee meeting prior to the Board meeting, but didn't know whether that had been scheduled or whether it was not going to happen.

MAYOR LOVERIDGE SAID THAT THE MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE WISH TO ADD THIS ITEM TO THE AGENDA IN TERMS OF AN ACTION ITEM, DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE BOARD MEETING IS MARCH 1^ST, WHICH IS BEFORE THE NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING. MARGARET CLARK AND ART BROWN ALSO AGREED.

Board Member Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta expressed her concern that the majority of people present today were mostly local government people and there were only two small business representatives, and that any recommendations voted on today would tend to be on the local government side versus having fair representation from small business.

Jeff Comechero suggested that the group vote on recommending to the Board the postponement of any consideration of reorganization until such time as something new can be formulated, such as a third choice restructuring the committee, but basically leaving it intact. He indicated that would be his preference.

Greg Adams said that there is a second meeting of the Blue Ribbon Panel Committee that has been scheduled for March 21, and suggested that the input from this advisory group should go back to the Blue Ribbon Panel Committee and at that point a decision should be made whether or not to go in front of the Board.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta commented that she had written all the comments from this group and, she would take them back to the Blue Ribbon Panel Committee to express their concerns. She also agreed that there is a need to take a look at this further.

In response to the comment that there are more local government people at today's meeting, Ms. Dee Allen said that they are suggesting the group stay with small business.

Jeff Comerchero suggested asking the Board to continue this item until such time as the additional option of reconfiguring this particular body is considered and let it exist as the single body. John DeWitt agreed. The consensus of the group was to keep the advisory group as is.

In response to a question, Barbara Baird said that it was her understanding that the two new committees would be full advisory groups, and presumably additional members would be appointed.

 

Agenda Item #2 - Approval of January 4, 2002 Meeting Minutes
Margaret Clark requested that item #6 reflect her concern, along with other committee member's concerns in adopting Proposed Rule 1137. With the inclusion of Ms. Clark's comments the minutes were approved.

Agenda Item #3 - Year 2002 Goals & Objectives
Greg Adams gave a presentation and provided a handout to those in attendance of the year 2002 Goals & Objectives. He stated that he would be focusing on the changes made since last's month meeting. He pointed out that he added a paragraph to the CEQA Handbook Revision section to work with AQMD staff, local government jurisdictions, consultants, and community developers to draft project development standards. The standards would insure residential and mixed use infrastructure development minimizing negative impacts on air quality. He said that he added this paragraph in response to conversations and e-mails that he had received. Dee Allen suggested adding mitigation in the development standards.

With regard to Environmental Justice Developments, AB 1390 (Firebaugh) was added as a bill that the committee wanted to follow.

Under the Small Business Goals and Objectives, "Create No-fault Inspection Service," Mr. Adams said that he received a recommendation from Dominic Meo that an alternative be created to use CPP's or a third party for these inspections.

The consensus of the committee members was to accept the changes noted and agreed that these would be the Goals and Objectives of the Group for 2002.

Agenda Item #4 - Presentation from BBC Research & Consultant
Doug Jeavons of BBC Research & Consulting presented a methodology for conducting facility-based assessments using Rules 1137 (PM10 from woodworking operations) and 1421 (perchloroethylene from dry cleaners) as test cases. The methodology would begin with developing profiles of (representative) firms affected by a rule based on secondary data sources and input from stakeholders. Depending on the type of rule, various data sources may be used since no single source of information is perfect and comparison of data among sources for inconsistency may be needed. The profile development would lead to information on markets, competition, economic trends, operational and financial characteristics (payroll, expenses, profit margin, cash flow, etc), and any other specific issues associated with the affected firms. This baseline information together with costs of proposed amendments or rules can then be used to assess the impacts of the amendments or rules on affordability, competitiveness, and small and disadvantaged businesses.

BBC is scheduled to complete the draft report on these two case studies (Rules 1137 and 1421) by the end of this month and post rule assessment report in March. The summary report is to be completed by April.

BBC has found that the larger the regulated firms the better the data is going to be. The national data is richer than local data and there is better data on manufacturing firms than there is on most of the other sectors, in particularly, service and retail trade sectors. The dry cleaners represent an industry where published data is fairly limited because it is a very small service industry and privately owned. Therefore, secondary data at the individual firm level especially locally is extremely limited. The fact that the dry cleaning industry in which basically everybody is in the same business makes it easier to gather information from a work group or focus group setting. However, for Rule 1137 there are a lot of segments and manufacturers operating under various conditions, the focus group concept will not be easy to implement.

Gene Beck suggested getting more information on woman-owned businesses and businesses owned by the disabled. Mr. Jeavons agreed, and said that in this process of gathering data that the data they have received on majority owned businesses or disadvantaged businesses is not as good as they had hoped.

Mr. Beck asked the question with regard to competitiveness, do we look at this region versus the nation? Mr. Jeavons replied yes, and that more details would be provided in the competitiveness portion of the facility-based assessment report.

Board Member Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta asked with regard to competitiveness, do they also look at whether there has to be an increase in the price due to regulation that the customer is going to pay based on the fact that the manufacturer or service provider is here in the basin versus outside of the basin? Her concern was business retention.

Mr. Jeavons replied that what they do typically for a competitive industry is to assume that it cannot increase its price; instead, it has to absorb the cost. In a case like Rule 1421, the dry cleaners are not in competition with firms outside the local market; therefore, its prices are likely to increase to recover the regulatory cost. Also, in the short run, the firms that have to comply immediately can't increase prices.

Gary Stafford noted that these studies do not incorporate future events such that the minimum wage went up almost 20% on January 1, that the workers' compensation cost in California is going up 50% this year, and that liability insurance costs are going up substantially. All of these will change the financial projections of a firm. Mr. Jeavons stated that these factors will be incorporated to the extent possible.

Board Member Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta wanted to know how they averaged the different types of costs under a rule to a firm. Mr. Jeavons replied that they convert various types of costs to an annual basis.

Mr. Jeavons also stated that the focus of the facility-based assessment is more on the financial information than others.

Agenda Item #5 - Compliance Issues with No Fault Inspections

Mr. Greg Adams requested that the full text of this discussion be reflected in the minutes.

Peter Mieras: Good morning everybody. I wasn't here to know exactly what the discussion was previously and what issues might have been identified. But, I can tell you that both the Federal EPA and this agency, the AQMD, have "no fault inspection policies." That results in no penalties and is kept confidential from the enforcement staff. Why don't I tell you what the Federal EPA policies are and then show you how similar those policies are to the policies that we have?

Under the Federal EPA Small Business Compliance Incentive Policy, EPA will allow a small business up to six months to correct a violation, without enforcement action or a penalty if the small business has made a good faith effort to comply.

Good faith effort to comply can be demonstrated by: Conducting a self-inspection and reporting the violation to the local air district; or it can demonstrate a good faith effort to comply by requesting technical assistance from a small business assistance program.

If under this option, the small business assistance program is separate and independent from the agency's enforcement program, the information obtained about the small business and the violation will be kept confidential from the enforcement staff of the agency provided that there is an MOU between the enforcement folks and the small business folks.

Now, the eligibility criteria applying to either demonstration of a small business' good faith effort to comply is as follows: (1) and this is under the Federal policy, this is good for one time only, unless new requirements come into existence. So, if you have a particular rule that has not been amended and a small business has emphasized its prerogative to have the use of these policies, it is only good one time. But, if that rule ever becomes amended and new requirements are imposed then they get back to having another opportunity to do this again. That’s the first criteria. (2) That the violation is corrected; (3) The violation does not cause actual serious environmental harm; (4) The violation did not present imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or the environment; (5) It did not present a significant health, safety, or environmental threat; and did not involve criminal conduct.

So, these are the eligibility criteria for the application for the Federal EPA Small Business Compliance Incentive Policies. Now, we have both policies in this air district. Small businesses can demonstrate a good faith effort to comply to the enforcement staff or to the small business assistance staff at this agency by use of these two policies. This is our enforcement policy that is on our web site (www.aqmd.gov/legal/prosecpolicy.html) and this is the small business assistance policy that is part of Oscar's program and it is combined in this pamphlet here (Small Business Assistance Resource Guide). So, under these policies, a small business, actually any business can contact the agency and indicate that they conducted the self-inspection, that they discovered a violation and would like to report it voluntarily to the District. And if they do it, and if they correct the violation and provide proof that the violation has been corrected there is no enforcement action and in 99% of the cases there is no penalty and that is under our existing self- inspection, what we call the self-auditing penalty policy which has been a part of the agency's enforcement program for 10 years. Okay, so that is very much like EPA's first option, which is to conduct a self-inspection and report the violation to the agency.

Under the second option, which is to request technical assistance we have a "no fault" inspection policy that has been part of the small business assistance program here for at least 10 years and this says that "there is no charge, you may wish to take advantage of our Technical Consultation Service to request a no-fault inspection of your facility." After the inspection, a small business staff member will meet with you to show you the most cost-effective means of complying with AQMD regulations. There is no charge for this service, and violations uncovered during the consultation will not result in fines or penalties provided they are corrected in a reasonable period of time. Okay, that's our existing policy now. So, is there a compliance issue, is there any significant difference between the Federal EPA policies and the AQMD policies. There is only really one in my view, and that is the time for correction. Under EPA's policy they will allow an automatic 90 days to correct the violation, if that's not sufficient then the small business can ask the enforcement agency or the small business assistance agency that it's dealing with for another 90 days. It’s discretionary, but I'd imagine that it would be granted. So, what happens in this air district where we do either a technical consultation to the business or the business contacts the agency and says I got a violation that is not yet corrected? I would like to take advantage of your penalty waiver program by voluntarily disclosing this to you. But, we need more than several days here. What is a reasonable period of time is described here would have to be fairly brief. We're talking about a week or two at the most. Otherwise, what we would say to the source is you must go to the Hearing Board and seek a variance because the legislators have mandated or invested in our Hearing Board the authority to grant extended periods of time where a source can operate out of compliance, but under conditions imposed by the Hearing Board and through the issuance of a variance that allows the source to come back into compliance without enforcement action and without penalties, if the source is able to provide evidence that the Hearing Board can make the findings necessary to grant a variance. So that is the only significant difference between what we have been doing for the last 10 years and what EPA has offered as of 1996. So, in reporting to this committee in terms of what compliance issues may be present in this situation I would say that there is a time to correct compliance issues legally under the California State law. A source, to operate for an extended period of time out of compliance, needs to get a variance from the Hearing Board in order to have the period of non-compliance excused under conditions established by the variance order.

Failing that, our office, the Prosecutor's Office, has another enforcement tool which we can use called the order for abatement, and if a source is unable to provide the evidence to the Hearing Board such that they can make the six findings required to grant a variance and the source is able to comply ultimately and the source is willing to comply, then we can request the Hearing Board to issue an order for abatement that will allow the source to operate for an extended period of time out of compliance, but under conditions imposed by the Hearing Board. That actually represents an enforcement action, so that period is now subject to penalties. But our policy in the office is a fairly reasonable one with regard to penalties in that situation.

If a source gets a variance from the Hearing Board, they have to pay excess emission fees based upon a table that the Hearing Board uses for determining the type of emissions that are excess during the period of the variance and the fees for those emissions and it's not a lot of money, but it is a certain amount of money. And so, if we are successful in having the Hearing Board issue an order for abatement to a source that can't otherwise make the findings for a variance then we have a rule of thumb of three times the amount of excess emission fees for the period of the order for abatement just so it's got to be a little more expensive to get an order for abatement than it is for a variance because a variance is excused and an order for abatement is not excused. So that's how the program works, and I would be more than happy to take any questions that you may have.

Mayor Loveridge: Cynthia.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta: Yes, how many people, how many staff do we have available to respond to these from small business assistance to go out to these sites?

Peter Mieras: Because that program is shielded from the enforcement program here at the agency, I don't know. I can't answer your question.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta: I suppose my bigger question is then, do we have adequate staff to be able to respond?

Oscar Abarca: We have a combination of inspectors, engineers, and other staff within the Office of Small Business Assistance to go out and provide that kind of service, technical service. In numbers, I believe we have two inspectors in Small Business Assistance, and one engineer.

Mayor Loveridge: Oscar, the other question is how many requests do we have?

Oscar Abarca: In the past, right? Ron?

Ron Ketcham: Just on technical consultations, we have about 500 businesses a year. For example, we have an engineer on staff who is out this morning, probably looking at four different facilities on an issue conceivably resulting in going to the Hearing Board and others with regard to whether or not they need permits.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta: Okay, my next question then would be, let's say that they do get referred to the Hearing Board, if we are talking about a one to two week window here, is there enough time for them to get on the schedule for the Hearing Board within that period of time before they are going to get penalized?

Peter Mieras: If they go before the Hearing Board, the time it may take depends upon what type of variance that they are asking for. If they are asking for an emergency variance, then within 24 hours, if they are looking for an interim variance, a week or two. If it’s a regular variance, there is a public notice requirement for these hearings, so you have to have a notice period. But, for sources that are in violation that go before the Hearing Board and get a variance issued to them, there is no enforcement, even though there may be a certain retroactive period of non-compliance policy in my office then we don't penalize sources that get a variance before it, even though there was a period of non-compliance.

Mayor Loveridge: Are there any other questions? Greg.

Greg Adams: Peter that was very succinct. Thank you. But, the person that really has an issue with the whole thing is Bill LaMarr who is up, I think in Sacramento trying to get some relief from Proposition 65 for his member agency. He sends his apologies. In his absence, can I ask that you perhaps write out what you just articulated, maybe you can take it directly out of the minutes since you did a concise and thorough job and then perhaps we could send that to Bill to ask for his additional comments. Again, he was proposing the model that Texas National Conservationist uses and I personally don't know what the differences are, but maybe what you just said satisfies his concerns and then that would be one item on his subcommittee that he can say that he has accomplished.

Peter Mieras: What is his name again?

Greg Adams: Bill LaMarr, he is the head of the Small Business Alliance.

Gene Beck: The difference between the Federal model and this District's model then seems to be this time frame, by California law you are restricted and cannot issue 90 days or 180 days with an appeal type thing like the feds do. You are prevented from doing that?

Peter Mieras: The Executive Officer of the Air District is under a statutory obligation to enforce any violations that are observed or reported to the District. But, as a safety belt for sources that find themselves in a circumstance where they are unable to comply because of circumstances beyond their reasonable control then they go to the Hearing Board process for those sources.

Gene Beck: Which the feds haven't done.

Peter Mieras: Correct. We are exercising in effect for a period of a week or two enforcement discretion to allow the source time to either correct the situation at that facility or to get a petition filed before the Hearing Board before we are obligated to take enforcement action. I don't know too much about the program because it is sheltered from us, but my understanding is that a lot of problems that they have discovered in connection with these types of consultation services are corrected on the spot, or it might be just getting an application right away to get a permit.

Gene Beck: Let’s say that there is a violation either on a dry cleaning machine, and the seals are leaking or whatever, or it is a paint operation and they would need a VOC control system, there is no way that even with a week or two that they could get a bid to know what it would cost to do that, so when they went before the Hearing Board. They would be on their knees, I have no clue what this is going to cost me or anything else, but I want to do it. Where 90 days would allow it on a Federal level.

Peter Mieras: Well you know, compliance is not optional to comply in either program either Federal or local, but the difference here is that the official in charge of the program on the Federal side of this question will put together some sort of compliance order that is issued administratively by the agency over against this District having the source go before the Hearing Board and make that presentation to that forum. Either way, a decision is going to be made one way or another either to allow the source the time to correct or not. And, here on our side ledger, even if the Hearing Board is unable because of the statutory requirements applying to issuing a variance order, we have the order for abatement safety belt which we will step in and use and make it so that the source can continue to operate and has sufficient time to comply.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta: So if they do have to install something that is going to take beyond the two-week period, then they will normally be able to get a variance from the Hearing Board giving them adequate time to install?

Peter Mieras: Absolutely, either way, order for abatement or variance. The time it takes to get into compliance will be the same time that the variance or order for abatement is in effect.

Gene Beck: Isn't it also true, Peter, that on the Federal level there is no penalty, whereas here there would be a penalty three times the emission fee or something?

Peter Mieras: There is a difference there, yes. Although, on the Federal side, what the policy states is that there is no "gravity component penalty." That is the one where you get 100% penalty waiver. To understand what that means you have to be familiar with the Federal penalty scheme and we basically follow that here, but with a different format. Under the Federal policies, there are two components, one is economic benefit and the other is an additional penalty reflecting the seriousness of the situation as exemplified by the length, by the type, and the conduct involved. What the Federal policy states is that there will be a complete waiver of that, 100% waiver. But, that they reserve the option, the individual, to recover on that. Now, contrast that with our situation here, under our self-disclosure policy where the source is not going to be operating out of compliance, but it is simply reporting a violation that’s occurring and that has been corrected, there is no penalty. We wouldn’t recover an economic benefit unless there would be a significant obvious economic benefit that would be simply unjust to ignore. But, I can tell you in terms of practice we rarely recover economic benefits. Where the source is going to be operating out of compliance under state law, if they can't get a variance then there will be a penalty considered in that situation. The order for abatement, we use this rule of thumb, three times. But, if we have a source like a dry cleaner, or a source like a small gasoline station that is buying expensive equipment to come into compliance, then we can take that penalty and allocate 100% of it to the cost of the equipment. We call that a supplemental environmental project. We do it for big companies, why not little companies?

Gary Stafford: There is another aspect to this, and when the business community asks for confidentiality we also have to be concerned with various environmental and citizens groups that are looking for reasons to come after us. The current Proposition 65 is a good example. That information, I'm violating, and I want it corrected and I go to you, and I have to go to the Hearing Board and someone from Citizens for a Responsible Business is sitting there finds out that I have been emitting -- the next day I get a letter from Mr. Ghalchi that I am in violation of Proposition 65, so confidentiality is very important and will keep people from coming forward because there are other ramifications than the air district when this information is made public. Information gets leaked. It has been leaked from this agency before.

Peter Mieras: I recognize that concern. One of the ways that we can address that concern is to simply adopt a policy that any information generated in connection from one of these technical consultations will be kept confidential. Now, that becomes an issue, of course, with the public records act, because a way for people to get information from the outside is through the public information act/request. I talked with Barbara about this and we believe that if we had a policy for deeming any information generated or received by the agency, even potentially proceedings before the Hearing Board.

Greg Adams: Which is public.

Peter Mieras: Which is public, as I see we have not conceivably thought that aspect out, I reserve that for the discussion today. But, certainly any information taken down by the small business representatives that come to the facility and make a note of the address and name, and that sort of thing and what was discovered and what was done to correct it. We can, simply as a matter of policy, deem that information "confidential" and so, if we get a public act request our response would be that it is confidential and we would utilize the public interest balancing test and the public records act statute in order to withhold that information and keep it confidential.

Gene Beck: Which it wouldn't be if it went to the Hearing Board, it's got to be public. You can't have a closed Hearing Board right?

Peter Mieras: You don't have a closed Hearing Board and the very fact that it is a public proceeding may make it difficult, if not possible to keep that part of the record confidential. Now, in terms of is it really a legitimate fear to worry about citizens’ suits since you are a small business. In the last ten years at the agency it had, I think two citizens’ suits, maybe more, but certainly not very many at all, and these citizens’ suits involve the same kind of sources that only EPA is concerned about which are Title V, major heavy-duty polluters. So, even though any source that is regulated under a SIP-approved rule that is adopted into the Clean Air Act process is subject to citizen suit enforcement and as long as we take enforcement, a citizen's suit can’t proceed.

Gary Stafford: My information is that under Proposition 65 there have been three suits and $20,000,000 in non-court settlements.

Peter Mieras: That's Proposition 65.

Gary Stafford: Yes, but that's toxics information.

Margaret Clark: Then I think that they would also need some help. (unclear)

Mayor Loveridge: I would like to see if we can use 11:30 as the closing time, which gives us about 5 more minutes if we have some public comments as I am sure Peter would say, if you have any further questions. But, why don't we pick up the last question from anyone at the table.

Gary Stafford: I think what you are talking about is basically what we have been asking for. Maybe 90% of what the small business community has been asking for this, and so I think we are thinking much alike right now.

Peter Mieras: When you mention Proposition 65, of course, we are talking about toxics, and even EPA policies are rather dense, it took me a fair amount of time to untangle it to the point where I understood, and I am not convinced that under the EPA policy, even with its confidentiality option that a toxic emitting source would even be eligible for this protection. I know that we do it for dry cleaners and it’s a toxics source Perc emissions. But, if you look strictly on how regulations are drafted and implemented it does have this criteria regarding whether there is any public health implications or threat.

Gary Stafford: But, is there anything that we emit that is not a toxic, somewhere considered a toxic.

Peter Mieras: Well that’s exactly right, that is why you exercise the rule of reason.

Mayor Loveridge: Okay, Cynthia, and then I would like to close this item.

Cynthia Verdugo-Peralta: I think we need to do anything and everything that we can to establish a trust amongst the businesses, so that they will come in and we can bring more, as many companies into compliance as possible, if there is any way that we can expand our existing policy to do so, I would definitely recommend that we do it as soon as possible.

Mayor Loveridge: Further comments on item 5 and then other business.

Greg Adams: Mayor Loveridge, Julie, can I just ask that the full text of this discussion be reflected in the minutes.

Gene Beck: If we do have that meeting, can we have a short presentation on the reorganization of the Public Advisor's Office. The common question that I am now getting is who is now the small business advocate and what are the procedures.

Mayor Loveridge: Any comments? Yes sir.

Dominic Meo: Peter.

Mayor Loveridge: What is your name and title for the purpose of the record?

Dominic Meo: I am Dominic Meo and I am with Meo and Associates. What I tell people is the only penalty for turning yourself in is the 50% penalty that you pay upon applying for a permit and you are saying that you can waive that?

Peter Mieras: I’m not calling a penalty that comes out of, that is a fee that you have to pay.

Dominic Meo: A fee is a penalty?

Peter Mieras: No, in my equation.

Dominic Meo: That’s what I'm saying, we add 50% to the application fee for operating equipment without a permit, and so my point is, there is no way to waive that?

Barbara Baird: My recollection is that the policy has an exemption for small business that has not had evidence of prior contact with the District that was something that a former Board Member, Senator Soto, asked us to put in. So, there is that policy, but there is an exception that you meet a certain requirement in Reg. III.

Agenda Item #6 - Other Business
There was a request from Gene Beck to have a short presentation on the reorganization of the Public Advisor's Office on the next agenda.

Agenda Item #7 - Public Comment
John Billheimer asked if the word "assistance" is necessary in the committee's name "Local Government & Small Business Assistance." He said that most businesses are run by proprietors, which are independent persons by nature, and said that they were not asking for assistance, but rather fairness. Mr. Billheimer also noted that in Mr. Mieras’ presentation no statistics were given, he said that 80 to 90% of the listed sources are generally listed as small businesses, although only 50% of the fees and emissions are from small businesses.

Agenda Item # 8 - Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:33 a.m.

/ / /