none, , Correspondence•
City° elfin ..J J & INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
July 24, 2017
Alex and Valerie Kats
14 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Mr. and Ms. Kats:
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
A complaint was filed regarding the storage of a golf cart between the addresses of 1
and 3 Buckboard Lane. The Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.16.200(E)(1)
and (2) allows for outdoor storage of up to three recreation vehicles so long as it is
not within fifty feet of any roadway easement. The golf cart, which appears to be
associated with 3 Buckboard Lane, is parked inside the 10 foot neighboring
property easement (1 Buckboard Lane) and within fifty feet of the roadway
easement (please see attached exhibit).
Please remove the golf cart from its current location and use the parameters of the
municipal code for placement of the recreational vehicle when it is being stored
outside. The golf cart must be removed within one week of the date of this letter.
Failure to remove the golf cart may result in City staff determining the violation of
the outside storage code is a public nuisance.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call City Hall at 310-377-1521.
Thank you for your attention this matter.
Best regards,
J ilia Stewart
Assistant Planner
cc James and Erin Barbara, tenants
•
Printed on Recycled Paper
08/03/04
Mr. B. Allen Lay
19 Caballeros Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Mr. Lay,
Alex & Valerie Kats
3 Buckboard Lane
Rolling Hills, California 90274
By
rEtivi
AUG 0 5 2004
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
Thank you for taking the time to reply to my letter. In response to your letter I would like
it noted that at the time the alarm went off I was not home. What happened was one of
the infrared devices malfunctioned and caused the alarm to go off. I arrived a few
minutes later and that is the reason why I was unable to cancel the arrival of the Deputy
Sheriff. Also from my understanding anytime the alarm company calls the sheriff they
cannot then be called back to cancel.
Also regarding the response time. I read in the Daily Breeze that the response time for
the surrounding cities of Rolling Hills, this includes Los Angeles, is an average of 6 1/2
minutes.
I know how long the Sheriff took to respond because first I marked the time the Sheriff
arrived and after I called the alarm company aid they told me, in writing, when they
palled the sheriff's department. This is how I know the exact time. I also feel that the
pest way to handle this in the future is anytime the sheriff comes over in response to an
ftlarm they should mark down the time of arrival and have the owner of the house or
properly sign the time to verify.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Alex Kats
cc: Frank Hill
Craig Nealis
May-25-04 07:05P
• •
P.02
B. Allen Lay
19 Caballeros Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Tel: 310-541-7986 Fax: 310-541-5764
e-mail: allenlay@cox.net
May 25, 2004
Mr. Alex Kats
3 Buckboard Lane
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Mr. Katz,
Thank you for copying me on your letters to Frank Hill. I did not respond to your
first letter, as it was not addressed to me. I did pass along my copy of your letter to
Craig Nealis, our City Manager, and discussed your complaint with both Mr. Nealis
and Mr. Hill. I was copied on his response to you.
I will also make sure your latest letter is forwarded to the City Manager and make
sure that Mr. Hill received the letter. I am confident that you will receive a response
from one of them or from our recently installed new Mayor, Tom Heinsheimer.
You might be interested to know that as part of our quarterly review with the local
Sheriff's Lomita Station, we review response times in a number of categories to see
how they compare in the three cities they service. Of course we are looking at
averages, which at last review were within acceptable limits, and not the
exceptionally poor performance you experienced. •
I noted from your recent letter that you clocked the most recent false alarm response
at 28 minutes. I am surprised that knowing the alarm to be in error, you didn't
cancel it before the Deputy Sheriff arrived. I hope you find your experience with
the Sheriffs department much improved the next time you need their services.
Please feel free to call me at my home phone listed above if you wish to discuss any
city related issue. • I will be pleased to talk to you.
Sincerely,
Allen Lay
Cc: Frank Hill
Craig Nealis
May-25-04 07:05P
• I
P_03
E
Alex & Valerie Kats
3 Buckboard Lane
Rolling Hilts, California 90274
05/21 /04
Mr. Frank Hill
City Council Member
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Mr. Hill,
I thank you and respect you for responding to my concerns. None of the other
elected officials chose to respond to me.
In rebuttal to your letter I will state the following.
I . The police arrived 30 minutes late on all my false alarms, thus creating a
trend.
2. I myself clocked 28 minutes instead of the 20 claimed by the Sheriff.
3. It is comforting to know that if all of the other officers are busy on other calls
I have to wait and I have to pay a fine. What happens to me in a true
emergency if the officers are writing a citation, handling a smoke
investigation or something else? What I would like is for the Sheriffs
Department to start writing down the time he arrives and then have the time
sign off and confirm by the owner.
Concerning the City Manager, if I had gotten any appropriate response to my concerns in
the past why would J go forward and contact the city council?
In conclusion I would like to receive a print out confirmation through you of the
following:
1. How many false alarm citations that I have incurred in the past two years.
2. How much I have paid in penalties, not including this new citation.
I thank you in advance for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Alex Kats
cc: Dr. James Black
Dr. Tom Heinsheimer
Dr. Godfrey Pernell
Dr. Allen Lay
City ot /e0ffi wee
THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER
Mayor
GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S.
Mayor Pro Tern
DR. JAMES BLACK
Councilmember
FRANK E. HILL
Councilmember
B. ALLEN LAY
Councilmember
May 14, 2004
Mr. Alex Kats
3 Buckboard Lane
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Mr. Kats:
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY, 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Thank you for your correspondence dated April 20, 2004 regarding your false alarm.
We appreciate you expressing your concerns. Our City Manager met with the local
Sheriff's Captain to investigate your concerns, which resulted in the following
information.
The response time of the Sheriff's Department to your alarm was approximately 20
minutes from the time this call was assigned to the Sheriff's Deputies and when they
arrived at your home. Generally, response times to alarms in Rolling Hills are
significantly less than the response you experienced.
At the specific time of your incident, one of the patrol cars that routinely responds to
alarms was handling a smoke investigation call (possible fire), the other was returning
discovered ammunition in the field to the station and the third car was issuing a citation
at the base of Palos Verdes Drive North. This information is not meant as an excuse,
but rather to provide you with information regarding what the patrol cars were doing
when your specific situation occurred.
You are correct, this is the first alarm at your property in 2004 and first false alarms are
billed at $50. However, the City policy for false alarm assessments is based upon a
number of false alarms in a fiscal year (July 1-June 30). Our records indicate that there
was a false alarm at your home on October 21, 2003, which represented your first
incident during Fiscal Year 2003/04. Second false alarms during a fiscal year are
assessed at $100.00.
I am certain that our City Manager would not have ignored your concerns, whether in
writing or via a telephone call. Our City Manager routinely investigates all concerns
expressed by residents. I understand that he has placed several telephone calls to your
home and office. I urge you to contact City Manager Craig Nealis at (310) 377-1521 to
Pnrr1E:r1 on Hec;y:I d I'si{.rer
•
discuss this matter and allow him the opportunity to hear your concerns. Or, if you
wish, you may contact me at Rolling Hills City Hall at 377-1521.
Thank you again for your correspondence.
Sincerely,
Frank Hill
City Councilmember
CRN:mlk
05-14-04knts.ltr
cc: City Council
Captain Jay Zuanich, Lomita Sheriff's Station
City Manager Craig Nealis
Finance Director Nan Huang
Bookkeeper Jinnie Williams
Alex & Valerie Kats
3 Buckboard Lane
Rollin; Hills, California 90274
04/20/04
City of Rolling Hills
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Attn: Mayor Frank E. Hill
Dear Mr. Hill,
My wife and I are long time residents of Rolling Hills. We currently have an
alarm system in our home. We have any alarm for the following reasons:
1. We use the alarm for personal protection during the evening.
2. We use the alarm for personal protection of our belongings while we are out
of the house.
3. Our insurance recommends the use of the alarm system.
We are an older couple and we feel that the alarm system gives us a sense of security.
Recently we have had a false alarm at our home. The incidents that occurred following
the alarm need to be called to your attention. Rolling Hills has a resolution No. 691
section 3. As you are aware this resolution dictates a fee that is charged to the resident for
each occurrence of a false alarm.
1. The police department arrived at my home 28 minutes after the alarm
company notified the police. My alarm company will provide me with written
confirmation of the set off time.
2. This occurrence is my first alarm occurrence this year.
I would like to be informed by you, what protection and or assistance does the police
department offer two elderly people when they ignore the alarm for a half hour?
I would like to find out why I am being charged $100.00 for my first false alarm of the
year? According to the Rolling Hills paperwork the fee should be $50.00.
I would like to know why I am even being charged a fee for inferior service by the
Lomita Sheriffs Department? I believe the response time should be within 10 minutes.
I have sent this letter directly to you and to the other council members because I feel that
the City Manager's office will ignore my complaint. My home phone number is
377-9582 I would be happy to speak to you and voice my concerns at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Alex Kats
• •
cc: Councilman James Black
Councilman B. Allen Lay
Councilman Godfrey Pernell
• •
City ol RO//I �✓,ee
April 7, 200
Mr. And Mrs. Alex Kats
3 Buckboard Lane
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
NEW FALSE ALARM RESPONSE: March 11, 2004 $100 2"d incident 03/04
FALSE ALARM FEE: $ 100.00
Dear Mr. and Mrs.Kats;
In accordance with Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 9.36, it has been reported by
the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department that activation of the residential burglar alarm has
occurred on property owned by you. Please see attached incident report. The Resolution
establishing the fee for false alarm requires a charge for each occurrence to recover part
of the costs for this special service beyond normal service level, for which the City
contracts with the Sheriff's Department. A copy of Section 9.36 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code is enclosed for your information.
The variable fee is based on the number of false alarms at each address within a 365 day
period beginning with the fiscal year.
It is herewith requested that $ 100.00 be remitted to the City of Rolling Hills within
thirty days.
Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated. If you have any questions please contact
this office.
Respectfully,
Jirnie Williams
Bookkeeper
®Printed on Recycled Pane'
zi.tz.uz uNts
(31U) Unit ibb
UUAU. MU: U. CHAU. MU
•
-TA via t..uniimuratAau
.Rolling Hills Community Assc.
l'Porttignese Bend Road
Rolling HMS; CA 90274
AleX •
•• • • ....3..BO'ckbOci.rd .Lanv . • • •
90274
• • '.::••••• No've.rnbe '''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 'S S S..' ''' •
Dear Peggy,
:•::. . There is an easement between my home and lt4r..';9i<sr. The easement is
.00:usable:and thus there:.are trees and brush that.have grown in.the.thidSfof
the:easseinenttrees have never. bothered me:because in the past Mr. ChOW.:has
been.diligerit in. trimming them yearly. T.his.year he has neglected to tiiinthe
trees on his -side ofthe easement and as a result they are currently blocking 25%
of my view.
As 1 do not wish to create conflict, I respectfully request that someone
from the Community. Assoc. contact Mr. Chow and remind him to trim his
easement trees as he has done so often in the past.
Sincerely,
Kats
. .
cc: Ben C
Jerry Malat
Beverly Hills, CA
310-278-8700
• /We-- /Alter
Afp,er. /AP.
.4 74.
4147-e--
1st
co 14: A67
epvg de~,
eiec4 d-e-e-47
ueFemaer Li, zuuL i5:04 AM
From: A Happy FaxTalk User
•
Fax Number: Page 1 of 1
12/21/02
BENJAMIN J. CHAU, MD, FACS
7 BUCKBOARD LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA, 90274
310-541-4978
Craig Nealis, City Mgr. R.H.
Dear Sir,
I am enclosing my reply to Mr. Katz, which was delivered to his home the next day after
receipt.
The vegetation under discussion was planted exclusively for the protection of the hillside
from runoff from the existing storm -drain of Buckboard Ln. Since the rains have begun, it
is extremely dangerous to work there since the footing is tenuous. Also, if the job is not
performed properly, the natural drainage may be unfavorably altered.
I wish to be contacted if Mr. Katz decides to do the job because some of his plants are
obstructing my view of the horse -trail and would like them topped.
It is my desire to fully comply with the regulations and to put this issue behind us.
Ultimately, the final solution is to remove the vegetation entirely and having the storm
drain extended under the supervision of the responsible City Hall official. I would be
willing in sharing this expense.
Thanking you, I remain,
Respectfully yours,
Benjamin J. Chau, MD, FACS
Subj:
Date:
From:
To:
Reply to la letter sent 4/30/01
Tuesday, May 1, 2001 3:00:02 PM
smstmari@lasd.org
cityofrh@aol.com
•
Please see that Jinny the bookkeeper receives a copy of this.
(310) 539-1661
April 30, 2001
Mr. and Mrs. Alex Kats
3 Buckboard Land
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kats
This is in response to your letter dated March 19, 2001, regarding the
Sheriff's Department response to your residence. Let me assure you that
once an alarm company call an alarm into the Sheriff's Station, the call is
electronically timed. The call of your alarm dated January 25, 2001, came
to our station at 5:15 p.m. The call for service was assigned to a patrol
unit at 5:17 p.m. and the unit acknowledged the call at 5:18 p.m. The
electronically controlled dispatch system indicates that the unit arrived at
your residence at 5:38 p.m.
It is my understanding that most alarm companies call in the activated alarm
calls to the respective law enforcement agency, even though the resident
asks them not to make the call. This is a safety precaution in case the
intruder is on the telephone with the alarm company.
I believe you need to contact your alarm company and determine how long
they
held onto the call before they called the Sheriff's Department as the
5 / 1 / 01 America Online : Cityofrh Page 1
•
•
Department handled this call in a very timely manner.
Sincerely,
LEROY D. BACA, SHERIFF
Edward B. Hitchcock, Captain
Commander, Lomita Station
Thanks,
Susan St.Marie
Operations Sergeant
Lomita Station
(310) 891-3222
smstmari@lasd.org
Headers
Return -Path: <smstmari@lasd.org>
Received: from rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh04.mail.aol.com
(v77_r1.36) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 May 2001 18:00:02 2000
Received: from eocfw-ex1 (lacoeoc.org [207.217.215.1]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v77_r1.36) with
ESMTP; Tue, 01 May 2001 17:59:33 -0400
Received: from mail.lasd.org by eocfw-ex1
via smtpd (for yh.mx.aol.com [205.188.157.25]) with SMTP; 1 May 2001 21:56:47 UT
Received: by mail.lasd.org with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
id <J945ST55>; Tue, 1 May 2001 15:01:41 -0700
Message-ID:<0E266EEB8EB3D3119F1300805F65B49E05FD433E@1-SHQ-MAIL>
From: "St. Marie, Susan M." <smstmari@lasd.org>
To: "'Rolling Hills" <cityofrh@aol.com>
Subject: Reply to Kats letter sent 4/30/01
Date: Tue, 1 May 2001 14:53:40 -0700
Return -Receipt -To: "St. Marie, Susan M." <smstmari@lasd.org>
MIME -Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content -Type: text/plain;
cha rset="iso-8859-1 "
5/1/01 America Online : Cityofrh Page 2