Avalon discusses street vendors

By Charles M. Kelly

The council spent about two hours discussing whether to change Avalon’s sidewalk vendor ordinance.

The council took no action. The issue will come back at a future date for further discussion.

First, the background, then the discussion.

Background

“In 2019, over a series of 7 regular meetings of the City Council, the City Council developed Chapter 21 of Title 5 of the Avalon Municipal Code (AMC), establishing the regulations governing operations of sidewalk vendors within the City of Avalon,” wrote City Manager David Maistros in his staff report to the council.

“This ordinance came in response to Senate Bill 946 which was signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown in September 2018,” Maistros wrote.

“SB 946 forbids cities from prohibiting sidewalk vendors but provides cities local authority to restrict sidewalk vending to prevent undue concentration of commercial activity that unreasonably interferes with the scenic and natural character of an area, protect the public’s use and enjoyment of natural resources and recreational opportunities, as well as allows regulations directly related to objective public health, safety or welfare concerns,” Maistros wrote.

The current ordinance, according to the Maistros report, limits the number of vendors to six: Three food vendors and three merchandise vendors. The ordinance also forbids sidewalk venders from operating within 20 feet of any store, restaurant, or building, according to the Maistros report or within 10 feet of a bus stop, bench, water fountain, or bike rack.

Sidewalk vending was forbidden in high-traffic areas and recreational areas such as Cabrillo Mole, Crescent Avenue from the Mole to the Casino, and Joe Machado Field.

“The Community Services Department manages the sidewalk vending program and maintains a waitlist for interested permit holders. At the time this report was authored all six sidewalk vending licenses permitted by the AMC have been issued. Currently, there is one, active pre-packaged food vendor, four merchandise vendors, and one vendor working toward food licensing. There are 12 vending permit applications on the waitlist,” Maistros wrote.

“The City Council and the City Manager have been contacted by a sidewalk vendor interested in expanding the scope of the sidewalk vending ordinance to allow for vending along Crescent Avenue,” Maistros wrote.

According to his staff report, the vendor had requested expanded locations for vending, including the base of the Green Pier, next to the Wrigley Stage, on or adjacent to the basketball court (to name a few).

The vendor also requested the city lift the six-vendor limit and streamline the permitting process.

The conversation

Due to space limits, the following is a summary of the discussion of sidewalk vendors. It was not possible to quote or paraphrase every word.

City Manager David Maistros addressed a vendor’s request to steamline the permitting process. He said there is a waiting list for the permits.

“Once somebody is taken off the waiting list and given the opportunity, I think we do a pretty good job of moving that process through once we get all the paperwork,” Maistros said.

“Any delay is really waiting on the waiting list,” Maistros said.

Maistros said he believed the vendor who requested the change in the vendor ordinance would like to be located on Front Street (the local nickname for Crescent Avenue).

“Legal has advised us that our current ordinance, based upon the work that council did in its adoption in 2019 setting forth the findings and recognizing the unique characteristics of the city, that that work at that time goes a long way to making the existing ordinance both enforceable and defendable,” Maistros said.

(See “City looks at street vendor rules” at thecatalinaislander.com.)

“So nothing has to be done but if council chooses to, you can certainly have that discussion,” Maistros said.

City Attorney Scott Campbell, participating online, said the city has the right to regulate in areas other than parks. He was apparently referring to State Senate Bill 946.

Campbell said the preamble of the bill authorized the city to adopt requirements regulating the time, place, and manner of sidewalk vending if the regulations are directly related to objective health, safety, and welfare standards.

According to Campbell, the vendor was arguing that the Avalon ordinance was invalid. Campbell said the city doesn’t think it is invalid. “It’s consistent with state law, but more importantly he’s saying that given that he’s operated for a couple of years and given that the city’s had the benefit of this ordinance, there should be some adjustments to the ordinance.”

Councilmember Lisa Lavelle asked for staff to remind everyone of how many locations there are.

Maistros said there were 10 general geographical locations. Some of those locations had multiple spots.

“Meaning that if you have other vendors, there’s distance requirements between vendors, so that’s what that would fit as far as the maximum number of vendors in those particular geographical spots,” Maistros said.

Lavelle said she was looking through what was being requested.

“I don’t mind if we look at increasing the number of vendors,” Lavelle said.

“I do still think there needs to be a cap on it, only because we don’t have an expendable amount of sidewalk space to manage, unfortunately,” Lavelle said.

“It would seem to make sense that we wouldn’t make more vendors available than the number of spaces we have available,” Lavelle said.

Councilmember Yesenia De La Rosa suggested matching the cap to the number of spaces available.

“Something close to it that’s manageable,” Lavelle said.

She said she didn’t know if there was a requirement for how often street vendors have to operate versus how often they actually do operate.

Lavelle suggested finding a middle ground between what the city had and the maximum number of vendors.

“I’m concerned about Front Street,” Lavelle said.

“I think part of me wants to look at the area behind the fountain at the stage as one possible potential area,” Lavelle said.

She was also worried about the area known as “the Elbow”.

With the traffic, pedestrians and the work the city was doing there now, Lavelle said it didn’t make sense to make that a more chaotic space.

“I worry though on Front Street, just kind of looking at how the vendors set up and what they’re using and the space they’re taking up,” Lavelle said.

She said she didn’t agree with using a vehicle to move carts or bring them down to Front Street.

Lavelle said she didn’t know if there was a way to regulate that space.

“We’re trying to take vehicles off Front Street on purpose for emergency services and make it more limited, not have more vehicle traffic there,” Lavelle said.

Campbell said the council could do that if it’s universally applied to all vendors who want to sell in that area.

Councilmember Mary Schickling said she could see a vending area on the plaza by Pier 24.

According to Lavelle, the sidewalk area was the city’s, but one side was property of the Island Company.

According to Mayor Anni Marshall, there was no room at all.

Community Services Manager David Hart said was one of the first places they looked at when they were looking at this.

“We’re also restricted to how close we can be to the seating area,” he said.

“We couldn’t put an 8 foot by 4 foot cart without impeding traffic and without taking away the seating,” he said.

He said the hours of operations are be from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m.

“They are not supposed to be working from 10 to 8,” he said.

However, he said the city has been lenient about those hours because they have had vendors who operate at night and are “making a killing and it provided something for our visitors and our locals who are out late.”

Marshall said the council might want to consider that.

“The other question I have is, what is meant by ‘welfare,’” Marshall said.

Campbell said that is generally construed as, for one example, view of the harbor. “So the welfare of visitors, the welfare of residents, is being able to look at the harbor,” Campbell said.

He described “welfare” as quality of life issues.

Schickling asked if the city assigns a vendor a spot or if they can go where they want.

Maistros said they can go wherever they want.

“So say we invented a new spot that’s coveted?” Schickling said.

“It’s first come, first serve?” she asked.

Hart said the city spoke with vendors when this first came up because the vendors realized there are certain spots that are more coveted than others.

According to Hart, the city schedules and rotates those spots.

“We felt was that was the most fair way,” he said.

The probelm right now, according to Hart, is getting the vendor up and running. He said three vendors are operating and the other three are trying to get their carts operating.

According to Hart, one issue for people who sell food is that they don’t have a commisary where they can store their carts or prep their food.

“Since there is no commisary on the Island, it’s been hard for people to try to organize or contract with the restaurant, because now you’re upping their insurance and they can’t be in the same space at the same time,” Hart said.

“We give them six months to try to get their cart up and running,” Hart said.

Usually they go to selling merchandise, according to Maistros.

“If they don’t come on board in the next three months, I’m going to have three spots open,” Hart said.

He said the waiting list was now down to about 10.

Marshall asked if vendors were required to operate for so many days.

Yes, according to Maistros.

Of the three active vendors, he said two were very active in the beginning and they’ve been backing off; one due to family issues and the other was trying to do too many things.

“We want to help the people who have the permit,” Hart said.

Lavelle asked if the council opened up the number of permits, would that be enforceable.

Hart said it was hard to regulate. “We would have to schedule everybody out,” Hart said.

“We can’t really regulate what time they’re all out there,” Hart said.

He said he didn’t know one vendor was out to midnight selling hot dogs.

Lavelle explained that she was referring to the staff time to get the vendors on board or support them.

Hart said there were two people in house in his department.

“There is no way that us two would be able to regulate 10 vendors,” Hart said.

He said it was tough enough to do six.

Hart said he would work with Code Enforcement and Code Enforcement would work with him.

“It seems to me that increasing the numbers of vendors is something that’s necessary if we’ve only got one that’s active,” Marshall said.

Marshall said the city had three that were waiting.

De La Rosa asked if the city had considered doing temporary seller permits for vendors who want to sell for the Fourth of July, Chirstmas, but can’t because of the waitlist.

“What if we give like a 90-day period, or a 30-day period, where you get a temporary seller’s permit?” De La Rosa asked.

Marshall said the city has that now.

“So there is a mechanism for that,” Marshall said.

Hart said any time the city does some sort of special event, the city can absolutely bring vendors.

De La Rosa asked about outside of special events.

Campbell said in answer to her question, the whole purpose of the sidewalk vendor ordinance is to have a licensed vendor that qualitfies through the county for he alth and safety. He said pop up stores are not allowed on city property.

Carl Johnson had a question. “I’m not a vendor and don’t actually have an interest in vending,” Johnson.

Johnson asked the city to define the word “spot” as in location for vendors.

“I don’t think there should be any limit on spots as long as they can meet the safety and welfare requirements,” Johnson said.

“Why are we dictating where they can vend and how many can vend?” Johnson asked.

According to Johnson, Avalon should have an unlimited number of vendors.

Johnson said that would elminated the backlog, apparently meaning the waiting list for permits. He said he had some ideas for commisaries that would free up the list a little bit more.

Lavelle, going from memory, said spots were spaces for emergency vehicle access while also providing vendors with enough space for their needs. “I think that’s what were defined as originally,” Lavelle said.

Daniel Felts, the vendor requesting changes to the code, came up to the podium. “I don’t want to bore you guys with the reasons why I think this should be amended,” he said.

“I’ve been emailing you guys back and foruth dozens of times. There’s no reason for me to sit here and pick at things,” Felts said.

“I’m actually the only vendor operating at this time because the process is so difficult,” Felts said.

He asked the council to dream with him. He said right now next to the Wrigley stage is an ugly pump house. “Imagine a vendor selling handmade goods sitting there, out of everybody’s way,” Felts said.

“That’s one location. There are several other locations,” he said.

“I don’t think it should be opened for an unlimited amount of vendors,” he said.

He proposed adding one more vendor on each list—apparently referring to food vendors and mrechandise vendors—would clear up the wiat list.

“It took me two-and-a-half years to get my street vending permit,” he said.

“I actually had to come up and request to see the dates on the applications before the city decided to issue me my street vending permits,” he said.

Referring to the waitlist, he said there was no kind of procedure involved.

“There need to be some set ground rules involved,” he said.

“I understand Crescent is congested. I’m not trying to add to that,” he said.

He argued that under the Sentate Bill, the only reason the city can forbid street vendors on Crescent Avenue is if they are inthe way of egress as a legitimate health and safety concern.

He also said that while there may be six permits, there is only every one vendor down there.

Felts said a lot of the spots the city identified are not economically viable.

He said he just wanted to identify areas where a vendor could operate.

He said he did think street vendors needed to be regulated. He said he was trying to do what is right for his business.

“I’m not taking away from these larger businesses in any shape or form,” he said.

“I have a city business licnese. I am the same as any other business in town. I don’t understand why I have to settle for second-class treatment,” he said.

He said he didn’t understand why there is so much fight back and forth over this.

Felts said most of the businesses that operate on Front Street were operating their second or third business.

“To so my tiny, insignificant business is taking away from their profits is ridiculous,” he said.

Cinde Cassidy said he had been an incredible vendor. Cassidy said on of the most arduous conversations the council had had was when the council spent seven, eight, or nine meetings trying to figure out the sidewalk vendor ordinance.

Cassidy said she supported two of the proposed changes to vendor locations: Where the photo booth is located and the Casino dock. “Obviously, that’s completely under utilized,” Cassidy said.

Cassidy didn’t agree with vending on Front Street.

She said if there only six permits available and only one operator is operating, there’s a breakdown in the system.

Cassidy proposed that vendors who do not operate within three, four, or six months forfeit their permits.

Hart said when the process started, the city had 30 people on the waiting list. He said the city was down to 10.

According to Hart, the city gives applicants six months because it takes them tat long to go through Los Angeles County Health when they were trying to do food. He said then Covid hit. “So we had a year when we weren’t even allowed to be out there,” Hart said.

He said basically the city now has a whole new list.

Cassidy said when the city originally discussed the issue, emergency ingress and egress on Front Street was one of the biggest issues.

She suggested allowing dining on Front Street if the city was going to entertain having vendors on Front Street.

Lavelle wanted to know if there was a way for Avalon to advocate for a streamlined process with Los Angeles County Health.

Bre Bussard asked if there was an approval process or if the permits were on a list of first-come, first-served.

Maistros said there was an application process.

Bussard asked if someone is able to bank that permit.

Hart said the city gives applicants six months.

“We’re going down the list,” Hart said.

He said it was easier with merchandise because you don’t have to go through Orange County Health.

Later, Councilmember Michael Ponce said he had no problem going from six to eight permits.

Marshall said she didn’t think it was necessary.

Lavelle argued allowing eight or 10 permits would help to get through the people who are currently on the waiting list.

Councilmember Mary Schickling asked if there was a possibility of someone being denied a permit.

She said if you were on the waitlist for a couple of years “it would behoove you to get your paperwork and get all your stuff together.

Lavelle said that the problem with food service is that it’s literally trying not to put the cart before the horse.

Felts agreed a lot of areas on Front Street would impede on traffic. However, he argued that his cart is 4 feet wide. “It is very hard to say how the ordinance is anywhere from the Mole to Casino is off limits,” Felts said.

He did not see the reason for not trying to come up with some spots on Crecsent Avenue.

City Attorney Campbell said Catalina has a unique situaiton. “Again, it’s health, safety, and welfare,” Campbell said.

According to Felts, the State Senate Bill referred to parks and the city changed it to areas. “Can you just explain to me the reasoning why staff presented that to council?” Felts asked.

According to Felts, an email from Campbell said the Senate bill did not clearly define the term park.

Campbell said the law allows the city to regulat parks and other areas.

Felts argued the law only allows the city to regulate other areas if there is an objective health and safety concern.

Felts said he has asked the city to provide objective concerns for each of these locations and the city had yet to do so. “I think we should open this up for further discussion,” Felts said.

Lavelle wanted staff to measure the areas by the stage and the fountain just to discuss whether that location was viable.

She asked about safely setting up and removing the cart. Lavelle wanted the rules about what is allowed and not allowed to be part of the discussion.

She also suggested giving applicants 10 months rather than six.

De La Rosa said as much as she would love for vendors to be on Front Street, she would be more comfortable with a green light from the Fire Department chief.

“I want to have the data so we can look at it and come to a decision and make sure that we’re making the right decision,” Lavelle said.

Fire Chief Michael Alegria said it was not just size on Front Street. He said there were all the events on the stage, where now they’re setting up, where’s someone going to go.

“We’re talking about all these different things of eliminating people driving and going down Front Street and just adding to it,” Alegria said.