[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[3:07] Please stop their conversations and silence their phones. That would be much appreciated.
[3:15] Okay. I'm
[3:16] going to go ahead. Councilor Resernitzkai will lead us in a pledge of allegiance and
[3:37] Councillor
[3:38] Renegrette, would you mind reading the land acknowledgement?
[3:46] The city of Santa Monica is located on
[3:48] the land of Tovongar. With great respect, the city acknowledges the Gabrianyo Tongva as the first
[3:52] people of this ancestral and seated territory of Kuduvanga, a village that we now know as
[3:58] Santa Monica.
[3:59] We honor their elders, past and present, and the Gabrieleño descendants who are part
[4:03] of the Gabrieleño Tongva tribes.
[4:05] We recognize that these peoples are still here, and as settlers, known as Kuyam, guests, we recognize
[4:10] our responsibility and obligation to care for their land and partnership with them.
[4:13] The City of Santa Monica commits to work in partnership with the Gabrieleño Tongva people
[4:17] to uplift their voices and visibility on their ancestral land.
[4:22] Fantastic.
[4:23] And I guess we will ask Clerk about the living act and do the roll call.
[4:30] Yes, so I'll start with the roll call, Council Member Negrete.
[4:34] Here.
[4:35] Council Member Hall.
[4:37] Present.
[4:38] Council Member Askin.
[4:40] I'm here.
[4:40] Council Member Snow.
[4:41] Here.
[4:42] Council members are Ms. Gaia, Mayor Protard and Zwick is absent and Mayor Trosis here we have a
[4:50] quorum and do any council members have any disclosures to make a pursuant to the Libyan act hearing none
[5:00] We can move on to agenda management. Great. So, I would love to ask the council for a motion. In a second, that prior to general public input, we hear public input on the city manager's report and the city manager's report and special agenda item two.
[5:22] So moved. And, and then I would just like to know and I want to read something that we have pulled item 10a as requested by staff.
[5:31] just for an abundance of clarification, the city is withdrawing the proposed set of amendments to the hotel worker living wage ordinance from formal council consideration, which have been scheduled for consideration at our June 9th meeting and its place, the city will instead take a narrow step by interpreting our existing law as requiring that Santa Monica align its hotel worker wage with the city of Los Angeles raising it to $25 for our effective July 1st, 2026.
[5:57] This is maintaining the commitment that Santa Monica made a decade ago and there's additional comments.
[6:05] The broader amendments being withdrawn from consideration were initially brought forward to address the time sensitive question.
[6:11] On May 26, the City of Los Angeles adopted a new hotel wage structure tied to a health benefit or pay system, which are local Santa Monica ordinance never contemplated.
[6:23] and then, you know, we, because of our hotel worker minimum wage is written to
[6:28] track Los Angeles wage and Los Angeles has now found that the wage, the new set of provisions.
[6:35] It was not immediately clear how our existing code would be implemented, but after additional consideration,
[6:42] we're clear that we're going to issue written guidance and we do not need to hear this item.
[6:47] So with that being said, we will go ahead and hear public input on the city managers report.
[6:53] Are there any items? Yes.
[6:54] Can we just do a quick voice vote on agenda management?
[6:57] Oh, sure. Okay, so we're pulling ten A.
[7:00] I will.
[7:02] Yes, approve it.
[7:06] It's a voice vote. So yeah.
[7:09] All in favour?
[7:10] Aye.
[7:12] Any in opposition?
[7:15] No.
[7:15] And then for the record, Mayor Pro Tems' wake is absent.
[7:18] Great.
[7:20] Okay.
[7:21] So is there any public input on the City Manager's report?
[7:27] I do not see any.
[7:29] So let's go ahead and hear that.
[7:31] Thank you, Madam Mayor.
[7:32] Members of the City Council.
[7:34] Good evening.
[7:35] I think to start the report tonight wanted to share that the next two weekends
[7:39] in Santa Monica are going to be packed with spectacular events first coming up
[7:45] this Friday leading into the weekend the World Cup is kicking off at the
[7:52] rebranded Los Angeles Stadium for the next couple of weeks. We can't call it
[7:55] so-fi. Santa Monica is going to be a location where you can have multiple options
[8:02] to watch all of the games that are playing out. First we've got the Miklo
[8:07] of ultra peer side club on the pitch side club on the peer.
[8:11] We're going to have an all day celebration fan festival
[8:15] and watch party at Santa Monica Place.
[8:18] And we're going to have the new Golden Hour series
[8:20] on the third street promenade, all starting and kicking off.
[8:24] This Friday is part of our World Cup activations here in town.
[8:29] In addition, we are looking forward
[8:32] to having Pride on the promenade coming up this next Saturday
[8:36] on Saturday on the promenade. From 11 to 4, we're going to feature a drag
[8:43] brunch community booths, games, a library pop-up, rainbow story time, and so much
[8:49] more. And as we roll through the day, starting at 5 o'clock, running until
[8:53] midnight, Santa Monica Block Fest will take over with a family-friendly pride and
[8:58] World Cup themed music festival. We're going to have multiple stages, pop-up bars,
[9:04] and for the first time we are going to be rolling out a night market with more
[9:08] than 20 food and merchandise vendors will also be showing the World Cup on the
[9:12] big screen. All that's coming at you this coming Friday and Saturday. As you
[9:18] move into the weekend we're still gonna have an additional series of events. We
[9:22] will have a new wellness event at Tongva Park the Garden Series. We hope folks
[9:26] might take some interest in exploring. We're also going to be opening our long
[9:33] awaited 19th Street Community Farm in Wellness Garden with a big street party that we're inviting everyone to.
[9:42] As we move into the weekend thereafter, we're going to have a new Juneteenth celebration at Miles Playhouse
[9:49] and Read Park with live music, artwork shops, DJ sets, special film screening.
[9:56] we will then be having our 34th annual
[10:00] June 13th celebration, returning to Virginia Avenue Park on Saturday, June 20th. Our team has confirmed
[10:06] we will have soul, funk, and jazz performances, community resource booths, food truck vendors
[10:13] in so much more. And we're going to wrap up that following weekend with Make Music, Santa Monica
[10:19] on Sunday, June 21st, with five events filling the city with music all throughout. That's a ton
[10:25] of stuff coming right at us. We hope everyone will visit us online at
[10:29] Santa Monica.gov for the full events calendar. It's going to be a busy, busy
[10:35] summer in Santa Monica moving ahead with so much fun. Stay online and check our
[10:41] social media accounts to stay up with all the latest. Lastly, the reason we move
[10:46] this report up is that every meeting we are trying to introduce folks to our
[10:52] adoptable pets of the meeting and today we have another pet to adopt I think I see I see I see
[11:02] Bosco Bosco is everyone up waiting for his forever phone home he has been at the Santa Monica
[11:10] Animal Shelter for a year everyone take a look at Bosco Bosco was friendly affectionate he's a two
[11:17] your old pit bull mix loves snacking on treats. He loves playing with squeaky toys and he has been
[11:23] using his time at the shelter to improve himself. He's learning how to be good on a leash.
[11:31] He's got a bunch of new tricks and cues that he now knows. He would make a great jogging buddy for
[11:36] somebody. Please, please, please contact the animal shelter if you're interested in meeting Bosco
[11:42] or any of our other furry friends,
[11:44] and as always, you can visit the Santa Monica
[11:47] Animal Shelter Foundation website
[11:49] to make a donation or shop the chewy wish list.
[11:52] Everyone say hello to Bosco
[11:54] and thank you Madam Mayor for the time.
[11:56] Am I correct in understanding
[11:57] that Bosco's been at the shelter for a year?
[11:59] Yes.
[12:00] Someone needs to adopt Bosco, guys.
[12:02] Who's gonna do it today?
[12:03] Anyone?
[12:04] No, okay.
[12:09] Okay, thank you, Mr.
[12:10] if you wanna bring him back behind the well
[12:12] for us to pet him,
[12:12] Molly we talk we would we would love that. Okay. We will now move on as per our agenda to
[12:22] okay while council members are in its guys doing that.
[12:29] Sounds like she wants to adopt them.
[12:31] Let's go to the home.
[12:34] We're going to go ahead and provide public comment on non-agenda items and I will go ahead.
[12:42] everyone has one minute I was is that incorrect sorry we're doing this one
[12:47] Samo people we're doing that first my apologies sorry Sergio please proceed
[12:51] maybe we should it's a hard act to follow it was good evening mayor council
[12:59] members and city team I'm Sergio Ramirez chief of staff and I wanted to
[13:02] provide you with an update on the one Samo people's Academy today we are here to
[13:07] to recognize our first cohort of one Samuel People's Academy participants, all 25 participants
[13:14] committed their time and energy throughout the six sessions. This cohort embraced opportunity
[13:19] to learn more about their city, engage on complex issues, and strengthen their connection
[13:25] to Santa Monica and one another. There was zero nutrition among the cohort they all made
[13:31] to the finish line. Their thoughtful questions, active participation and commitment and specific engagement are exactly would make these programs meaningful and successful.
[13:43] They're already the volunteer, participate and meetings and join the commission so Maria can guide them through that process.
[13:50] I also want to extend our sincere, my sincere gratitude to the 57 staff members across every single department who presented and supported the academy.
[13:59] Over the course of succession staff generously shared their expertise provided behind the scenes inside and to city operations.
[14:07] They helped create an engaging and informative experience for participants.
[14:12] This program would not have been possible without them.
[14:15] Their dedication and willingness to invest in the community's education and transparency is really appreciated.
[14:21] They also brought the best swag.
[14:23] They gave tours, then we even had a class in our very own electric, big,
[14:27] blue bus that they all thoroughly enjoyed.
[14:30] A fire chief might have catapulted from the civic structure, parking lot without my permission, but it was a big hit.
[14:39] Again, on behalf of our city managers office team, thank you to our participants, our staff and council for supporting the one-stop-a-people's academy.
[14:48] We look forward to building on this success for future cohorts.
[14:51] Currently, we're working with housing and human services on the youth and government day,
[14:55] which would be in September of 2026, and we will launch our second quote.
[15:14] Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you so much. As I understand it, we're going to go ahead and call everyone up. And I just want to leave you with a quote from one of our participants.
[15:29] First of all, I just want to say thank you to Councilman Renegrette, who obviously did you want to say a couple words?
[15:33] This was very much your baby, and I think a resounding success.
[15:38] Thank you. I think one of the things, when I came on Council, I realized was I didn't know bleep about City Council or City Hall.
[15:47] So I, to realize that as I spoke to people in the community and invited young elementary and middle school and high school students,
[15:54] that more and more parents would
[15:56] chaperone because they wanted to
[15:58] learn more about a city hall.
[16:00] And so the discussion around
[16:01] the people's academy started a long time ago.
[16:04] I want to thank the city manager for
[16:06] expediting this into Sergio and the team
[16:09] for really making this happen.
[16:10] I know it took a village.
[16:11] I hope that you took something away
[16:14] besides these amazing key chains and plants.
[16:17] And I look forward to seeing you guys
[16:20] at meetings, maybe joining a board
[16:22] or a commission and I hope you're inspired
[16:23] to get more involved because as I say in all my tours this house is your house so thank you
[16:28] for participating. Amazing and so I think I am going to start by reading a few names and each
[16:34] of us will read a few names. Does the team have their scripts ready to go? Okay, so we're going
[16:39] to call up in no particular order or I think perhaps an alphabetical order. Robert and NL
[16:45] Malmoui, sorry if I'm just pronounced any of these Olivia Attig, Varda Barcar.
[16:51] Bronwyn Barken, Suzanne Brackel, Susanna Brackel, Alexander Brown, aka Brownie, and Jennifer
[16:59] Dixon,
[17:04] Yona Feld, Vicki Gordon, and Jason Lynn.
[17:11] Samara Lopez, Stephen McCandru, Rebecca Nazarian,
[17:17] Berenice Onofrevesquez, Eduardo Ostrobovich,
[17:22] Andrea Padilla, and Carrie Reign.
[17:30] Julianne Ryan, Wally Samu, Guy Shaqman.
[17:39] Brandon Ternero, Keith Wompler,
[17:41] Catherine Williams, Damon Woods.
[17:52] Did
[17:56] everyone's name hear all that?
[18:09] Is there a Vicki? Who's Vicki?
[18:13] No Vicki.
[18:17] Catherine.
[18:19] Catherine Vicki? No, okay.
[18:23] I thought we had 100% for the station.
[18:26] Guy.
[18:27] Hi, guys here while lead Carrie Anita, Brandon Carrie Anita Eduardo is not here.
[18:43] Are these folks not yeah okay great we'll have to give them to me because you
[18:47] You got one key?
[18:48] I did.
[18:48] Tier K.
[18:50] Yeah.
[18:50] Okay.
[18:53] Okay.
[18:54] So I didn't want to take over any further.
[18:56] Yes.
[18:57] I think it's over.
[18:57] That's okay.
[18:57] No.
[18:57] I think we're going to run our bed right now.
[18:59] Yeah.
[19:00] Okay.
[19:00] Or do you want to be done then?
[19:02] So, I feel like, I guess we're going to...
[19:04] Do you want to be done then?
[19:04] Well, if someone becomes older,
[19:06] thank you guys for participating.
[19:08] Yeah.
[19:09] And everybody wants to do this once again while
[19:11] and far back for the bar behind the gate.
[19:16] You know.
[19:17] And you guys?
[19:18] Yeah.
[19:52] Okay.
[19:53] Okay.
[19:53] All right.
[19:57] No, no, please.
[19:58] One, two, three.
[19:59] One, two, three.
[19:59] One, two, three.
[20:22] Aye, aye, aye, aye, aye.
[20:33] It is such a thing.
[20:36] Mayor, as everyone's going to their seats, is it okay if I present something to the team
[20:41] that we also just as we acknowledged earlier, I would love to give Sergio, Ramirez and
[20:47] David, Gardeninger.
[20:49] We have certificates for you too, to thank you for in recognition of successful completion
[20:57] of the once Samo's People's Academy is civic education program and all the work that you did
[21:02] to put this together. So it was you getting everyone to actively participate and engage
[21:06] that made it possible for everyone to learn what they learned. So thank you.
[21:19] You guys are awesome. You made it happen in record time. So thank you.
[21:25] Okay. Now onto a topic of liberation. We are going to proclaim Juneteenth.
[21:33] So what I'm going to do is I'm going to go ahead and I don't have a script for this one so I believe I'm just reading the proclamation and then the folks that are here, please team tell me if that's incorrect.
[21:45] The folks that are here will come up and say a few brief words about Juneteenth because it's so what.
[21:53] All right, so in case you don't know, whereas on June 19th, 1865, Union soldiers arrived
[22:00] in Galveston, Texas and announced General Order III declaring enslaved persons in Texas
[22:06] were free and announcement that came more than two and a half years after President Abraham
[22:10] Lincoln issued the Mancipation Proclamation on January 1st, 1863 and whereas the moment
[22:16] to stay known as Juneteenth marks the effective end of Chattel Slavery in the United States
[22:20] and stands as the most significant emancipation celebration in American history, and whereas
[22:25] Juneteenth has been observed by African-American communities for over 150 years, as a
[22:29] day of reflection, rejoicing cultural expression in the affirmation of freedom, dignity, and
[22:35] the enduring pursuit of equality and justice, and whereas on June 17th, 2021, President
[22:41] Joseph R. Biden signed the Juneteenth National Independence Day Act into law officially designated
[22:46] in June 19th, as a federal public holiday, and whereas the State of California has long
[22:53] recognized Juneteenth as a day of observance, reaffirming the state's commitment to honoring
[22:56] the heritage, contributions, and resilience of African Americans, and whereas the City
[23:02] of Santa Monica is actively championed equity, inclusion, and the celebration of its diverse
[23:06] cultural heritage, and whereas the 34th annual Juneteenth celebration in Santa Monica represents
[23:12] over three decades of community-led dedication to honoring the legacy of emancipation through
[23:18] education, cultural programming, music, food, art, and the uplifting of black voices,
[23:23] stories, and achievements, and whereas the organizers, volunteers, sponsors, artists,
[23:28] educators, and community members who make this celebration possible, embody the spirit of collective
[23:32] action and civic pride, and whereas the city of Santa Monica honors the African-American community
[23:38] past present and future and recognizes that celebrating Juneteenth is a living testament
[23:44] to the strength, creativity, and enduring contributions of black Americans to our city,
[23:49] our state, and our nation.
[23:50] Now therefore, I, Carolyn Schroess, on behalf of the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim
[23:55] June 19th as Juneteenth Day in the City of Santa Monica.
[23:59] That's right, we can have you hands that, or clap.
[24:03] And do we have any folks who are coming up to speak?
[24:06] Okay, great.
[24:08] Okay fantastic. Oh,
[24:19] I'm sorry I'm calling for LeVern Rossi. I didn't say that
[24:21] before who is an icon and a legend.
[24:32] Good evening. Thank you mayor and council members. It
[24:41] is an honor to accept their proclamation tonight as we begin what is in many ways
[24:53] Cinematic is unofficial kickoff to June 10th.
[25:00] March,
[25:03] June change has always been more than a date.
[25:11] It marks the moment in 1865 when the
[25:16] last enslaved African Americans finally heard they were free. A moment delayed but not denied.
[25:28] and that history of resilience, resistance, and cultural pride is exactly what our community
[25:39] continues to uplift through the June Teeth celebration in Santa Monica.
[25:47] And as someone who will also accept the proclamation again on June 20th, at our 30th,
[25:58] fourth annual Juneteenth celebration.
[26:04] I want to say how meaningful it is to stand here tonight.
[26:11] This proclamation doesn't just recognize a holiday, it recognizes a community,
[26:19] A legacy, and the people who have carried the celebration for more than three decades.
[26:31] I want to honor our founder, Lover and Ross, whose story telling especially, the Henry
[26:44] The Henry Box Brown narrative has shaped the heart of this event, and I want to acknowledge
[26:55] the legacy of Roland Ray Was.
[27:02] Many of you may remember him whose tradition of sharing watermelon has become a symbol
[27:14] of joy and togetherness for generations.
[27:20] Before I end, the city's recognition of JCISM, which is the acronym for the Juneteenth
[27:30] Celebration, Juneteenth Celebration in Santa Monica's Grievous Decisions, from preserving
[27:39] cultural integrity to choosing drones as a safer and more culturally respectful tribute
[27:50] rather than fireworks. It shows a real commitment to honoring African American history with
[27:59] intention, not just ceremonies, and to
[28:04] finally, tonight is not just a
[28:07] proclamation, it is a promise that
[28:13] Santa Monica values this history, this
[28:17] culture and the community. And as we
[28:22] move forward, as we move toward June
[28:25] next week, we invite everyone, we invite everyone to join us in celebrating the legacy
[28:35] and the liberation. Thank you very much. Thank you, thank you.
[28:44] I think if we could have all the folks who want to take a photo with this, sorry, and want
[28:51] celebrate this, we're going to give you the proclamation in the well here.
[30:01] I'm going to give you a minute. I'm going to give you a minute.
[30:05] I'm going to give you a minute.
[30:54] Okay, phenomenal. Now we will near. Oh, yes. We have a late speaker on the proclamation.
[31:01] Great. Let's, um, is, is Council of Metables hearing a late speaker? I'm seeing yes. Okay. Great. Let's invite them up.
[31:07] I'm sorry. I didn't. Sorry it was moved by all second. Hall second by choruses.
[31:16] And we can just get it. All those in favor aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed?
[31:36] I have one minute or two minutes one okay hi everybody last year I went to
[31:48] I danced so much that the following day, I had to take Tylenol on sleep all day.
[31:54] It was a great event.
[31:56] And I brought to the attention of one of the people involved in the event, the inclusion
[32:00] of Puerto Ricans, or a Puerto Rican band in this stage because the story of the African
[32:07] diaspora in Puerto Rico, as you know, the Spanish brought Africans to Puerto Rico as slaves.
[32:13] And the Puerto Rican Day Parade that is the biggest parade in the country is this Sunday.
[32:19] So in the name of inclusion, I diversity, I thought it was a great idea.
[32:24] And I was met with resistance by one of the people that work in the interfaith community
[32:30] in Santa Monica.
[32:31] That is not a Santa Monica resident, but I believe in diversity and inclusion.
[32:35] I was the one who started writing a blog 2016 called diversity matters.
[32:41] And I think it's important to include Puerto Rico in this event.
[32:45] So thank you so much.
[32:47] Thank you so much.
[32:49] Okay.
[32:50] We will now go ahead and start hearing the general public input on items on the agenda.
[32:56] Each person will have one minute.
[32:58] And we will, is that, did you have something to say?
[33:02] Just wanted to remind you we have three.
[33:03] Yes.
[33:04] And so we will hear the miners first.
[33:07] And then we have two folks on the phone.
[33:09] So we have Dessa Arshion. I'm so sorry for Arshion Dessa. I'm sorry, Arshion Dessa. I'm so sorry for
[33:21] but butchering that. Teal Green, Joseph, Holcher. If you guys could come up high and feel free to
[33:28] start your comments and just announce your name.
[33:36] Council members, my name is Arshion Dessa and I'm a
[33:39] student at Brewood High School. I came today because I believe local government should represent
[33:45] the community and listen when residents express concerns. I respectfully ask the City Council
[33:51] to withdraw Santa Monica's support and co-sponsorship of this bill. Many community members have spoken out
[33:58] and asked the City of Santa Monica to reconsider its position. At a minimum, I believe the city should
[34:04] to remain neutral, rather than actively supporting legislation that many residents oppose.
[34:11] Please reconsider the city's involvement and withdraw its support.
[34:16] Thank you for listening and for your service to our community.
[34:19] Thank you, if you agree you could have happy hands but we don't clap.
[34:24] Great, teal green.
[34:31] Good evening mayor and council members, my name is teal green, and I'm a high school student at Pacifica Christian High School in Santa Monica.
[34:37] My friends and I, who founded Surfers Who Serve, are here today with the Coastal Alliance
[34:42] and Surfrider to respectfully ask that the City of Santa Monica to withdraw support and
[34:48] co-sponsorship of AB 1740.
[34:51] As young people, we are often told that our voices matter and that government should listen
[34:55] to the community.
[34:56] Many residents have raised concerns about this legislation, and I believe-
[35:00] We believe the city should take those concerns seriously. Regardless of where people stand on the bill itself, Santa Monica should not be using its name and influence to promote legislation that remains controversial and decisive. The vice, sorry, excuse me. I respectfully ask you to withdraw the city's support and co-sponsorship of this bill. Thank you for your time. Thank you. And Joseph, hold sure, so sorry. And then I'm just sorry, I'm going to call up a few more names who can get in line.
[35:28] and Mario Sandivall, Luke, Colberg, Laura Wilson, and Matthew Housel.
[35:35] My name is Joseph Holescher.
[35:38] I'm a student at Pacific Christian High School, a surfer, and a co-founder of Survers You Serve.
[35:44] I've been surfing the Santa Monica Bay since I was five years old.
[35:47] The ocean is not just where I spend my time, it's my home.
[35:51] This is now the third time my friends and I have come before City Council on the Coastal Commission,
[35:56] asking leaders to protect the Santa Monica Bay for the next generation.
[35:59] We keep showing up because we care deeply about what happens here.
[36:04] My generation will live with the consequences of the decisions being made today.
[36:08] We want clean water, healthy beaches, and a coastline that future kids can enjoy the same way we have.
[36:14] I respectfully ask the City Council to withdraw its support and sponsorship of AB 1740 as young people inherit the consequences of these decisions.
[36:23] We are asking you to stand with us, not against us.
[36:26] The Santa Monica Bay is one of California's greatest gifts.
[36:29] Please help protect it, not just for us, but for every generation that comes after us.
[36:34] Thank you.
[36:34] Thank you so much, and I feel free to come up and state your name.
[36:43] Good evening, Mayor, Council, staff, and members of the public.
[36:47] My name is Mario San de la V. I am here representing the Surfrider Foundation.
[36:52] I am the campaign coordinator for the Los Angeles Chapter.
[36:56] our jurisdiction runs from the South Bay to the Ventura County line, including all of Santa Monica.
[37:02] And I'm here before you. The last time we were here was May 12th at your last city council meeting
[37:08] to speak in opposition of AB 1740. And I would just like to say it hardens me to see so many young people
[37:16] here today also voicing their opposition for this divisive and controversial legislation. As you know,
[37:23] the city of Santa Monica has received $375,000 in public grant funds to complete its local
[37:29] coastal program. And it's one of the only 12 up and down the state jurisdictions that still
[37:36] has failed to complete its local coastal program or LCP. I would like to thank you for
[37:42] entering into a memorandum of understanding. Thank you. So Luke Colberg, Laura Wilson, Matthew
[37:50] How's the bill David's in dear riddle?
[37:53] Yeah, that's feel feel free to just come up and state your name no problem
[38:00] and
[38:03] Okay, and I have a packet to deliver to each every one of you the city attorney and also the city manager
[38:10] So I will leave that here for you
[38:14] My videos not up. Does my time start now this
[38:22] shows you
[38:28] They are now operating a restaurant, 15 people on my bedroom window to the public.
[38:36] They remove the sign out front but they still continue to serve food to the public.
[38:42] Am I understanding if they're not supposed to do that?
[38:44] But Jesus, I don't want to be mad anymore and I try not to be mad and I try not to know
[38:47] the people out there because I know that they're, and I just want you to start to protect
[38:52] our rights that are being violated there, and having huge parties, low out parties, it's just insane
[38:59] that's happening over there right now, so we really appreciate your support, thank you.
[39:04] Thank you so much.
[39:12] I should have a video as well,
[39:17] Matthew, yes, thank you.
[39:25] All right, my name is Matthew Houser, I also live at 1015th Street next to this hotel, now called the May's on 27th.
[39:33] This is the impact of a party that was held last weekend as they're continuing to do.
[39:39] The new operas greatly expanding the use of the property.
[39:42] We're experiencing large parties, loud music, double park cars, noise that doesn't stop till after 10 p.m.
[39:48] They're advertising and serving the public in a restaurant that the city tells us they have no right to do.
[39:53] They put seating for 14 people below our bedroom window.
[39:56] they put all these lights in the foliage that
[40:00] Flood our bedroom and they leave them on all night long. They seem to have zero consideration for the residents and flagrant. We violate their operating parameters. I've lived in this apartment for 30 years, and it was always a beautiful peaceful quiet residential neighborhood. And we just don't have any answers as to why this is being permitted and ask the city council to protect our right to a quiet enjoyment of our residential neighborhood. They're parking cars on the street.
[40:29] they're supposed to have off-site parking, they're charged in the guest $75 for the parking,
[40:36] and we understand that that's not permitted last night. We went out, there were seven cars with
[40:41] Velae slips from the hotel taking up residential parking and charged in their guest $70 a night.
[40:49] This is an abuse, the residents, and if it's allowed, it's the beginning of the end for
[40:55] But the protection of residents and the expansion of business operations into residential neighborhoods and we implore the City Council protect our right to the quiet enjoyment of our residential neighborhood. Thank you.
[41:08] Thank you so much.
[41:11] Bill, Mr. David's here and then we have Cynthia Riddle, all call the FEMA names Ryan and sorry if I'm is Luke Colberg now here after Mr. David's you can go Mr. Colberg. Yeah.
[41:24] I've been a resident of Santa Monica for 36 years, and if reading about the building in the Pico neighborhood that was going through construction staffers, a number of questions have come to mind.
[41:39] Number one, the city does not provide an overview of the tenants who live in the building.
[41:46] there are no demographic surveys pertaining to the building, there are no inquiries as to whether or not people are using their apartments professionally.
[42:00] Second question comes to mind project managers.
[42:04] There is no accreditation for project managers.
[42:08] They come in with no skill sets sometimes.
[42:13] They come in with no specific aptitude for providing the services of overseeing the construction of a project.
[42:25] Also, in terms of.
[42:30] Thank you, Mr. David.
[42:31] I don't know if our city attorney is available to speak with you and I think they have, but.
[42:35] Um, we know where he lives. Yeah, I don't want him to say it publicly. Yeah. Um, okay. Cynthia Riddle. Okay. Thank you, Mr. David. Cynthia Riddle, Ryan Calkins, Carlos Arosco, and sorry, Luke Colberg, you're going. Sorry, Luke Colberg is going first. My apologies.
[42:55] She's going to go on the right hand side.
[42:57] I have the photo.
[42:59] Hi, I'm Cynthia Riddle.
[43:00] I moved here a year ago to 33, 356 Barnard Way.
[43:06] It's a senior facility.
[43:08] The parking is deplorable.
[43:11] On, I've done a survey of the residents between the residents
[43:16] and the aides that come on Mondays and Wednesdays, which
[43:18] are the street cleaning days.
[43:20] there are 29 people who don't have parking. We can't park to the south, that's LA, the west is the ocean, the north is half a mile away, and so that leaves a few spots to the east.
[43:33] I took it to Peter Zulowski on the parking division. We had a meeting last December.
[43:43] in January he informed me that he had to talk to the fire department. So you can see on this map there's like a on the bottom there's like this D shape.
[43:54] And to the right of that is where parking is allowed and to the left of that is where their parking is not allowed.
[44:01] I came up with four solutions. I pretended I was a city planner. It would be very easy.
[44:15] I'm so sorry everyone has one minute today, but our team can speak with you.
[44:20] I just want to say for the public we're not this is not like a response, a call in response
[44:25] time, but there are multiple ways to get in touch with staff and we are always happy to
[44:30] help you.
[44:30] I don't know, Mr. Chief, there's a possibility of getting some more information.
[44:34] It is not that we don't want to listen to you, which is that this is a public comment period.
[44:40] Okay.
[44:41] Okay.
[44:41] Thank you so much.
[44:42] Appreciate it.
[44:42] And now, Mr. Colberg, sorry, come forward.
[44:46] Thank you.
[44:47] Luke Colberg, Chair of the Surfrider LA Foundation, and we're here opposing AB 1740 in its current form, and urge the City of Santa Monica to pull their support.
[45:00] And sponsorship of the bill, or even better, urge to ask assembly council members of work to withdraw the legislation altogether. Thank you. Thank you. We have Ryan Kalkins. Sorry. What, what is your name? I'm with Sir Frider. I was told on the list. I don't have you yet. You can come up in your name is called. So we have Ryan Kalkins, Carlos Arrozco Jacques.
[45:29] and Steve Gowriall.
[45:32] All right, good evening.
[45:34] My name is Ryan Cawkins.
[45:36] I'm a construction superintendent
[45:38] and have spent the last several years managing
[45:41] a large multi-family housing project here in Santa Monica.
[45:45] I wanted to speak about the importance
[45:47] of retaining experience building and safety inspectors.
[45:51] Throughout my project, I worked with multiple inspectors.
[45:54] Some retired, some moved on,
[45:56] and other inspectors had to step in
[45:58] and uncover portions of the project.
[46:00] While everyone I worked with was professional and helpful,
[46:04] the turnover was noticeable on a project that lasted several years.
[46:08] Large construction projects are complex.
[46:11] Experience inspectors develop a deep understanding of a project's history,
[46:16] previous approvals, field conditions, and path decisions.
[46:20] When inspectors leave, that knowledge leads with them.
[46:23] And new staff must spend time getting familiar with the project.
[46:28] One of the biggest concerns from a contractor's perspective is inspection availability.
[46:34] Today, it can already take roughly two weeks to obtain certain inspections.
[46:38] We are hearing that staffing levels continue to decline.
[46:42] Those wait times could potentially grow even longer.
[46:46] For construction projects, inspection delays can affect schedules, occupancy timelines,
[46:51] funds, financial costs, and ultimately the deliver of housing.
[46:56] A two-week way is challenging.
[46:58] A four-week way could have significant impact on projects throughout the city.
[47:03] My experience with Santa Monica Building and Safety Department has been positive, and
[47:08] I believe the city has built a strong reputation for professionalism and quality.
[47:13] I'd encourage the city to continue investing in recruitment and retention efforts
[47:18] But here and continue providing the level of service that residents, businesses, and
[47:24] construction projects depend on.
[47:27] Thank you.
[47:27] Thank you so much.
[47:30] Carlos Orozco.
[47:34] Good afternoon, Mayor, fellow council members, and fellow public.
[47:39] My name is Carlos Orozco, and I'm a vice president for Morley Builders, I'm a general contractor.
[47:45] Based out of Santa Monica, we've been in this backyard for 50 years.
[47:49] We've been operating for 75 years, and we've seen quite a decrease in inspection, and it's causing some concern.
[47:59] We have four major projects in City of Santa Monica currently active, and we have another two.
[48:06] And when I say they're large projects, they're over $40 million each.
[48:11] What we're starting to see is that there's an impact on inspections, not to the
[48:18] fault of the folks that are there. The inspectors are doing a great job coming
[48:23] in and supporting the effort, but what I'm seeing as a trend is alarming at best,
[48:28] because what we're seeing is impacts that are going to affect not only the general
[48:32] contractor in terms of schedule and cost, but thank you. We have Shock, Steve
[48:41] Mr. Gabriel, Norman Gilbert Victor.
[48:45] Hello, Mayor and City Council.
[48:48] I also work for Morley Builders, I'm a project manager, working on a job just on 7th Street in California.
[48:55] It's a building that was built in 1969, houses 285 elderly individuals and
[49:02] it's currently under construction right now, we're halfway through.
[49:06] And it is a extremely demanding inspection type of project.
[49:13] Your inspectors have been amazing, the ones that we have in Santa Monica are incredible.
[49:17] But just to touch on some of the previous comments, we are seeing a decline and much harder
[49:24] ability to get inspections, often leading us to coordinate directly with inspectors who
[49:32] have to go out of their way just to accommodate our schedules, which we are so thankful for.
[49:37] We're trying to make this community better and update these buildings for the residents and without their support
[49:44] It would just would not be possible. So anything that you guys can do to help
[49:51] Thank you
[49:53] So may I have your name was that Jacques? Thank you Steve gobriel Norman Gilbert
[50:00] Director James Brewster. Hello. I'm Steve Gorbaryon, the lead building, um, combination building inspector of the city's item box, building and safety. Um, when I first started in this role prior to COVID and the layoffs, our department had 12 very season combinations, senior inspectors on staff. These were experienced professionals who knew the codes inside and out and could handle complex inspections efficiently and provided reliable service to our construction community. Today, we are struggling.
[50:31] Stregly significantly with both hiring and retaining qualified inspectors.
[50:35] Despite our best efforts, we have not been able to rebuild the depth and expertise that
[50:40] we once had.
[50:41] This shortage means longer wait times delayed projects and increase pressure on the remaining
[50:45] team.
[50:47] Every day I find myself on job sites explaining the contractors and builders that we are short
[50:51] staffed and asking for their patients.
[50:53] It is exhausting.
[50:55] Both for me and my colleagues, to repeatedly deliver the message we're working hard to keep up with demand.
[51:01] Our team is dedicated and doing everything possible, but we are simply-
[51:06] Thank you, appreciate you, thanks for engaging, Norman.
[51:13] Good evening, my name's Norman Levin, and I'm a construction superintendent for a company called Harvey General Contracting.
[51:20] I also have the same problems that the other contractors here seem to have.
[51:24] We call for inspections, generally done online, we can't get inspection sometimes for two,
[51:32] sometimes three weeks that put out.
[51:34] We have impossible schedules that we have to meet.
[51:37] The amount of stress that we're under from owners is ridiculous.
[51:44] The amount of cost that is lost, the amount of money that is lost while we're waiting
[51:48] for inspections is just huge.
[51:52] The owners say to me now we wish we hadn't built property in Santa Monica.
[51:58] Well, the commercial projects that I'm working on would probably bring a lot of tax dollars to this city and a lot of support.
[52:07] We're fortunate enough that we have some very reasonable, very good capable building inspectors in Santa Monica.
[52:18] Thank you.
[52:20] Gilbert.
[52:23] Gilbert Don also a general superintendent for Harvey general contractors and first like to thank the City of Santa Monica for their professionalism, the thrill through safety and taking us to these projects as we've been here for three, four years now building and I've just seen them decline as far as running thin working on their own time and doing their best to help us out working to
[52:52] five o'clock to get some inspections so we can proceed to keep our guys working and just want to say
[52:57] thanks to them and here to support them. Thank you. Victor, and then we have James Brewster, Cameron,
[53:05] Asole, Troutman, or S.L. Yes, sorry. Good afternoon, City of Santa Monica and Council members.
[53:12] My name is Victor. I'm a superintendent for a local contractor. As you can see my boss before me,
[53:18] we're in a dream stress right now because we're trying to finish a project that does not have a
[53:22] date that we can change. So with that being said some of these inspections that we're not getting
[53:27] or unable to get in a timely fashion is pushing back our schedule. We have no recourse but to come
[53:34] here and try to help this department get the help it needs to keep them and keep the inspectors
[53:39] that they already have helping us get these buildings done. Because remember they're enforcing the
[53:44] building code that keeps us all safe. Please remember that. Thank you. Thank you.
[53:50] Good
[53:55] evening, Mayor and Councilmembers and City Manager.
[53:59] My name is James Brewster.
[54:01] I serve as a combination billing inspector, supervisor for building safety.
[54:06] The challenge has been going on since the COVID era.
[54:12] We have struggled to maintain a full staffing level while neighboring cities continue to offer substantially higher compensation for the same highly specialized positions.
[54:22] These are highly specialized positions requiring multiple certifications, extensive code knowledge
[54:29] and technical expertise.
[54:31] And sound independent judgment, it takes years to develop this level of expertise.
[54:37] When positions remain vacant, the public field inspections take longer to schedule, projects
[54:44] take longer to complete, and customers wait longer for services they've already paid for.
[54:50] The question is not whether our employees work hard, they do.
[54:54] The question is whether the city is invi-
[55:01] Good evening, Mayor and council member and city manager. My name is Cameron Robandy. I currently serve as
[55:09] principal plan check engineer with the Department, with the Department of Building and Safety.
[55:14] My colleagues and I are here to bring your attention, the substantial disparity in compensation
[55:20] that has grown considerably over the past six years compared to our neighboring cities in Los Angeles,
[55:26] West Hollywood and Beverly Hills. Since 2019, regionally, we have experienced 20-25 percent
[55:35] inflation with increases in housing costs, insurance utilities, foods and other everyday expenses.
[55:43] While this cost of living has increased dramatically, compensation in San
[55:47] America has not kept pace to meet the needs of its staff. This growing gap is making it increasingly
[55:55] It's certainly difficult to retain and recruit qualified professionals.
[55:59] We are losing valuable institutional knowledge and.
[56:05] Thank you.
[56:07] So we have Asal again, so sorry if I'm mispronouncing.
[56:11] Ashley Olsen, Harvey, Edder, Alex, Ortega.
[56:15] Good evening, Mayor, city council members, city manager in the public.
[56:20] My name is Asal Trautman.
[56:22] I serve as a combination building inspector too, but it's a beautiful city of Santa Monica.
[56:26] I'm here today because our department is facing a critical retention problem driven entirely
[56:31] by compensation disparities with neighboring cities.
[56:35] Well, most jurisdictions staff their inspection teams with separate electrical plumbing and
[56:39] mechanical inspectors.
[56:41] Santa Monica relies on combination building inspectors, professionals who must be certified and
[56:47] proficient across all major disciplines.
[56:49] In other words, we do the work that other cities is performing by multiple specialists.
[56:53] We have these cities are paying more significantly higher salaries for narrower scope of work.
[56:59] This pay gap is leading to the steady loss of experienced inspectors.
[57:05] To nearby agencies that offer higher compensation for less responsibility.
[57:09] Every time an inspector leaves, this city loses years of technical knowledge, customer service capability,
[57:14] and specialized experience that cannot be quickly replaced.
[57:18] These departures create delays in inspections, longer turnarounds, and increase costs to the community due to
[57:23] Okay.
[57:29] Just want to confirm did Cameron speak already? Yeah, sorry. Oh, okay. Hold on there. So there's one in here that just says Cameron.
[57:42] Okay, we haven't gotten there yet. No, no, you're fine. Okay, Ashley Olson. Sorry. And then we have Harvey Eder, Alex Ortega, Alex Kovsky, Cameron Hesselli.
[57:54] Hi, good evening. My name is Ashley Olson. I'm here once again to request that the city withdraw its co-sponsorship of 1740. This should not be Santa Monica's legacy. Thank you.
[58:07] Thank you. We are love an efficient comment. Appreciate you. Thank you.
[58:14] Hello, howdy, I'm Harvey Iter, I'm speaking for myself, public solar power coalition.
[58:18] We're quoted a month ago in the 11th and the paper that no 1.8 million spent for homelessness
[58:26] and housing, that you're not made of doing 90% market rates in state law requires 40% equity.
[58:34] Now, equity is, if the price goes down 50%, you still got something, all right, they're taking
[58:39] are medical care. They're taking away food and stuff. We don't know what's going to happen
[58:43] in the future in this country. We got to have stuff that predicts ourselves. Okay? So that's
[58:47] very important. Also, this measure A, that's a billion dollars a year, for 10 years. We're 10%
[58:53] of the, we're 1% of the population. That's 10 million dollars a year. They sit each, oh,
[58:58] Shaz, this analysis, it's only one million going. Here, where's the other nine million?
[59:02] There's 900, 800 million and they say they got 500, 800,000 to community groups and
[59:09] districts, where is the beef? Where's the beef? Where's this money going to and how is it being distributed?
[59:16] Thank you. Before we continue with Alex Ortega, I just have a quick question for
[59:20] our city attorney. I noticed Madam City Attorney that 12b is our public hearing on staff vacancies
[59:26] and a couple of people here have commented about positions in a specific department and I just want
[59:30] to get some clarification about whether or not those are permissible general public comment.
[59:35] Well, I guess if they spoke with a clerk's office and weren't intending to speak on that item,
[59:39] then it probably would fall under that.
[59:43] But there is an item later, and if it does speak directly to staff to staffing and the vacancies
[59:49] under item 12b, it is appropriate to speak at that time so that the record of the public
[59:53] caring is complete.
[1:00:00] Okay, so if you're just giving a general comment on your workload or the situation, that's fine. I mean, we hear things down on the agenda, but if you wanted to speak to 12b, that will be later in the program. So just wanted to thank you, Madam City Attorney, Alex Ortega.
[1:00:17] Good evening. My name is Alex Ortega, I'm a combination three building inspector. Just as the previous inspectors have mentioned, contractors, developers are waiting weeks for inspection while surrounding cities.
[1:00:32] respond with their inspection times within one to two business days.
[1:00:36] These delays are holding up businesses openings and tax revenue the city is counting on.
[1:00:43] In my seven years, at least 10 inspectors have left for higher pay with other agencies.
[1:00:49] That knowledge has not come back.
[1:00:50] Santa Monica requires its inspectors to hold for ICC commercial certifications covering all trades.
[1:00:56] States. Most other cities use a single discipline and require only one ICC certification.
[1:01:02] We do the work of force specialists and should be paid accordingly. Santa Monica charges
[1:01:08] some of the highest permit fees on the west side. The people doing that work deserve fair
[1:01:13] compensation. Thank you. Thank you so much. Alex Kukovsky, Cameron
[1:01:18] Haselle, Jerry Ruben.
[1:01:24] Hi, my name is Elique Kukovsky. I'm the Vice President and Founder of
[1:01:28] a service association representing many of the surfers who spoke earlier and across the
[1:01:33] Santa Monica Bay. I'm respectfully asking for council to drop its support of AB 1740 and submit
[1:01:39] correspondence to have the bill pulled. As I stand here during World Oceans Week on the 50th
[1:01:46] anniversary of the Coastal Act as a surfer and a community activist, I ask you to think deeply about
[1:01:52] about what it means to protect the legacy of the Coastal Act and our most precious resource,
[1:01:58] the Coast.
[1:01:58] Once destroyed, once overbuilt, once we get rid of access, we do not get do-overs.
[1:02:05] When the human body, cancer cells grow unchecked until the human host body is destroyed.
[1:02:10] The stakeholders are being bystanders to the cancer of greed that is infected Santa Monica
[1:02:15] all the way up to San Cromento.
[1:02:17] That cancer of greed is harming our coastline.
[1:02:20] and we deserve better.
[1:02:22] We should have coast for all.
[1:02:24] We must insist upon this.
[1:02:25] Thank you.
[1:02:26] Thank you.
[1:02:29] Great.
[1:02:32] Hello, City Council.
[1:02:33] My name is Cameron Hasselli,
[1:02:35] and I'm a Santa Monica resident.
[1:02:36] I am also the operations manager of Ocean Park Inn
[1:02:40] on Lincoln Boulevard.
[1:02:42] For those of you who may not know us,
[1:02:43] we are a 28-room budget hotel
[1:02:45] that primarily serves families,
[1:02:47] seeking an affordable way to experience
[1:02:49] everything Santa Monica has to offer.
[1:02:52] It is an honor to be part of the Santa Monica community and we take great pride in operating
[1:02:56] a business that serves both residents and visitors alike.
[1:03:00] As I understand it, Santa Monica's hotel worker wage ordinance is tethered to the city
[1:03:04] of Los Angeles.
[1:03:05] However, Los Angeles has provided an exemption for hotels with fewer than 60 rooms.
[1:03:10] Given that supporting local businesses is a key component of Santa Monica's realignment
[1:03:14] plan, I respectfully ask whether the city council would consider a similar exemption for
[1:03:19] a small family operated hotels.
[1:03:21] Thank you for your time.
[1:03:23] Thank you, Jerry Rubin.
[1:03:25] And then we have Tom Lairmore,
[1:03:26] Adam Finkel, Morgan Hunter Gross.
[1:03:31] Thank you very, very much.
[1:03:32] Jerry Rubin, Santa Monica.
[1:03:35] First, I want to thank all the businesses
[1:03:38] that one, the most loved businesses in Santa Monica,
[1:03:42] particularly one of the point out
[1:03:44] that the B.C. and Vagory want and virtually every year
[1:03:47] since it started.
[1:03:48] And if anyone wants to get some of the best date bread, go over to the farmer's market
[1:03:53] on Wednesday on Second Street North, check out Astrid Jack Beasyam.
[1:04:00] Second, I'm a member of the Urban Forest Task Force, but I'm speaking for myself, and
[1:04:04] item was on the agenda, and it dealt with the electronic billboards being placed.
[1:04:10] Which I support, and I think they're a real needed in Santa Monica, but this should never
[1:04:17] replace a healthy tree on the promenade, anywhere in the downtown district, or anywhere in the city,
[1:04:24] there's enough space to find without getting into. Should we put it here and remove this tree?
[1:04:31] So we took a vote and the message to the council and hopefully whoever's coordinating the electronic
[1:04:38] billboards will take that into consideration. Thank you. Thank you. Tom Learmore and Adam Finkel,
[1:04:45] Morgan Huntergrass.
[1:04:49] Good evening Tom Larmor. I'm speaking tonight, wearing my boys and girls club hat, which I've been involved with actively for over 40 years and I'm
[1:05:00] I'm here to ask you to put on the November 26 election ballot an exemption from the measure GS 5% transfer tax applicable to charities. And the reason I'm asking that is that measure GS was justified by the fact that through city policies, taxpayer funded programs, property values have gone substantially up over the years.
[1:05:28] and when they're sold, they arguably, they benefit private parties.
[1:05:34] The Boys and Girls Club obviously is not a private party.
[1:05:37] The proceeds that it will receive when it sells a parcel on Lincoln Boulevard.
[1:05:41] Doesn't go to any individual.
[1:05:43] It goes to the club to subsidize, help it subsidize its operations, continue the operations, expanding.
[1:05:53] Thank you.
[1:05:55] Mr. Frinkle.
[1:05:56] Madam
[1:06:00] Thinkal, 1225 Hills Street.
[1:06:03] I'm a 60 year resident of Santa Monica, 32 year building and construction business owner.
[1:06:12] And as you've heard this evening, you have a remarkable staff that's running your building and safety program.
[1:06:18] You have a great staff in the field doing the inspections, they need the support that they deserve to continue to do their work to have the fellow staff.
[1:06:29] having stay on board because they're having staff members get trained here, come on board, begin, and then they leave because they have opportunities elsewhere to make more money.
[1:06:41] The City Council at some point is going to be faced with helping them along and supporting their project.
[1:06:49] And I hope that you'll do the best you can to support them all in their efforts to make the city wonderful. Thank you.
[1:06:57] Thank you.
[1:06:58] Thank you.
[1:07:00] Morgan Hunter-Gross will go Tracy Quinn, Joe DeRosa, Elizabeth
[1:07:03] Vanetberg.
[1:07:06] Hello.
[1:07:07] My name is Morgan Hunter-Gross.
[1:07:09] My one month in Santa Monica has concluded at 19th Street.
[1:07:15] My time is up.
[1:07:16] Time is the top.
[1:07:17] I've got Eagle, the bear.
[1:07:19] It's interesting.
[1:07:20] The bear reminds me of Sonoma Fort where the Spanish missions made all the way up linked
[1:07:27] to the streams and springs of Santa Monica.
[1:07:32] I said an Airbnb in Santa Monica for one month.
[1:07:41] I'm trying to figure out how to describe the feelings I feel about Airbnb as a corporate
[1:07:49] in their externalization of responsibilities for a Scabies infestation.
[1:07:58] It's also interesting
[1:07:59] that on the top of our seal are airplanes.
[1:08:05] Where the people of the streams, seas, and skies.
[1:08:10] Thank you, Tracy Quinn.
[1:08:16] Hi, good evening.
[1:08:16] I'm Tracy Quinn, CEO of Heal the Bay.
[1:08:19] We're a nonprofit education and advocacy organization
[1:08:23] based here in Santa Monica, where we have worked
[1:08:25] to protect our coastal waters for over 40 years.
[1:08:28] I want to join my fellow surfers and coastal advocates
[1:08:31] in respectfully asking for the city to remove support
[1:08:34] for AB 1740. I want to thank you for prioritizing completion of Santa Monica's LCP and for your
[1:08:40] leadership in reaching an MOU with the Coastal Commission targeting certification by 2027.
[1:08:45] Now that the LCP process is moving, now is the time for you to remove your support and
[1:08:51] co-sponsorship of 1740, he'll make continues to remain concerned about the coastal act exemptions
[1:08:58] that could cause harm, long-term harm to our beaches and to our local communities. So thank you.
[1:09:04] Thank you.
[1:09:05] We have Jojo Roce, then we'll have Elizabeth Vanneberg,
[1:09:08] Sean Besser, Pastor Brady Roberts.
[1:09:11] I have a video over here, she's going for me.
[1:09:16] Good morning, city council members.
[1:09:18] In 2023, I showed this proposal to the city council,
[1:09:23] and I'm glad they moved forward with the entertainment industry
[1:09:25] and are positioning the city for global events as I recommended.
[1:09:31] However, you guys have sort of forgot
[1:09:32] about the heart of this proposal,
[1:09:34] which was the Los Angeles artist series
[1:09:35] over at 302 Colorado. You know, it's supposed to be used for concerts, production, activations,
[1:09:44] art galleries and shows like that. Unfortunately, Saturday is signaling that they may hold
[1:09:49] the property vacant for another two years or more while they look for a buyer and I am urging the
[1:09:54] city to take control of this and make it a try and get me in there to be able to
[1:10:00] So I can purchase it so I can use it for a Los Angeles artist series, doing anything from eminent domain or however the city can possibly get involved. It's a blighted area and a lashable landmark building. Historically landmark building. There should be all sorts of support from the federal government and the state.
[1:10:23] Thank you. Mr. Inberg. Yeah.
[1:10:30] Good. Good evening. Elizabeth Fannenberg. Good evening, Mayor Taurusis and city councilmembers. My name is Elizabeth Fannenberg.
[1:10:37] Chair of the Wilstrom Montana Neighborhood Coalition, also known as Wilmon, and I'm speaking on behalf of the board tonight.
[1:10:43] Santa Monica has always been a community that values environmental leadership, public access, and thoughtful planning.
[1:10:49] Those values are best reflected through a strong local coastal program developed with community input, not through broad state legislative exemptions focused on a single city, i.e. Santa Monica.
[1:10:59] Please withdraw your support for AB 1740 and focus on creating a coastal plan that truly reflects Santa Monica values.
[1:11:06] Thank you.
[1:11:08] Thank you.
[1:11:09] So we have Sean Besser, and then we'll hear from Pastor Brady Roberts, Jonathan Foster,
[1:11:13] Claire Thomas, Karen Mellick.
[1:11:15] Good evening, Council and staff.
[1:11:17] My name is Sean Besser.
[1:11:19] We've seen great success with the realignment plan in so many ways already, including accelerating
[1:11:24] permitting and attempting to make it easier for businesses to open.
[1:11:28] However, the final mile project delivery clearly remains stalled.
[1:11:32] I'm here to echo the concern that you've heard tonight over the bottleneck in our building inspection process.
[1:11:39] I've personally experienced these frustrations during a recent remodel.
[1:11:43] And given my civic engagement activities, I'm regularly contacted by business and
[1:11:48] property owners facing inspection scheduling delays that sometimes take three plus weeks.
[1:11:54] Every day a project sits idle, the city loses out on potential tax revenue and
[1:11:59] and residents lose out on access to housing or business space.
[1:12:02] I have also gotten to know members of our dedicated inspection teams,
[1:12:06] including James Brewster and Asal Troutman, who you've already heard from tonight,
[1:12:10] and have seen their frustrations with lack of resources and support grow over the past couple of years.
[1:12:15] I urge the council to prioritize.
[1:12:18] Thank you so much.
[1:12:21] So we have Pastor Brady Roberts, is Pastor Brady Roberts here?
[1:12:28] Great.
[1:12:29] We love pairing down of the list.
[1:12:34] Jonathan Foster, Claire Thomas, Karen Malik.
[1:12:39] Hello, Jonathan Foster.
[1:12:41] I had seen Anna Kitsparian of the young Turks on YouTube.
[1:12:46] It's funny how she also, she looks like she's turned into a porn girl,
[1:12:49] but she has these similar issues that I have in certain ways where
[1:12:54] before 2004, even people harassing me on Third Street,
[1:12:58] see some of these people that do this they have a spouse right so they've got one whole group
[1:13:03] of family on one side a whole group of family on the other side co-workers people they went
[1:13:09] to high school with and they come over and harass the crap out of me and when I say get to have
[1:13:14] away from me then they tell their whole network and in an instant 20 to 300 people hate me
[1:13:22] right and this has been going on to me for the 25 years and this I'm talking about before my
[1:13:27] My surgery in 2004, how crappy local people around here treated me.
[1:13:34] All I did was set up a drum set on third-street promenade, try to play and make a little cash.
[1:13:40] The bullying is the word.
[1:13:42] I've been being-
[1:13:45] Okay.
[1:13:46] Claire Thomas?
[1:13:47] Hi.
[1:13:48] Claire Thomas, President of Friends of Sunset Park, I'm speaking for myself.
[1:13:51] I'm disappointed to see that FOSP, NOMA and Northeast neighbors are no longer listed on the city's website because we did not apply for the neighborhood association grant money.
[1:13:59] The most regarded neighborhood associations was approved at the September 30th, 2025 City Council meeting.
[1:14:04] The motion does not state that a neighborhood association that doesn't apply for the grant money will not be recognized by the city as a neighborhood association.
[1:14:12] Applying for the grant program has historically not been a criteria for being a city recognized neighborhood organization.
[1:14:18] Therefore, it is wrong for the city to remove its recognition of the three neighborhood organizations that did not apply for the grant money.
[1:14:23] Neighborhood organizations are not just for social events and community building.
[1:14:27] They are also addressed safety and maintenance, police reports, a discussion at monthly meetings,
[1:14:31] supporting the national night out, share information that weekly what's new,
[1:14:35] advocate for issues that are important to our neighborhood, and write letters requested by the city
[1:14:39] for support of city grant funding.
[1:14:40] The link project we just read a letter.
[1:14:42] We have been asked for our email list by city council members to send out their updates.
[1:14:46] Since the approved motion did not say that only neighborhood organizations that apply for
[1:14:50] the grant money would be city records.
[1:14:58] Okay.
[1:15:00] Thank you, great shirt. All right, Karen Malik, then we have Kelly Simon, Andrea Sarah Mayer. Hi, I'm Karen Mealick.
[1:15:12] Congratulations on the encouraging financial report for the city with surplus is both last year and this year and next year's budget projected to be balanced. These budgets include paying the $12 million joint use payment. Yet the May 26 staff report
[1:15:29] says that if the partial tax ballot measure does not pass, if the city extends the joint use agreement,
[1:15:38] they would need to be cost savings in service-level reductions.
[1:15:44] Why?
[1:15:45] The city is already providing these services while making the joint use payment and having surpluses.
[1:15:52] It seems like a scare tactic to get support for the proposed partial measure.
[1:15:56] If the parcel measure tax passes, I ask that the 12 million continue to be used for parks and
[1:16:04] recreation, used for the airport conversion, pocket parks, and to help.
[1:16:11] Thank you, and sorry, I keep mispronouncing your name.
[1:16:14] We have Kelly Simon, Andrea, Sarah Mayer.
[1:16:24] Hello, everybody. Good evening, Kelly Simon.
[1:16:27] As my name, I'm a Longtime Santa Monica resident.
[1:16:30] It was on 26th Street for 26 years, part of that Northeast neighborhood website or group
[1:16:38] that Claire Thomas mentioned.
[1:16:40] So did oh what Claire Thomas said, she was much more articulate than I am.
[1:16:45] So I came here kind of unprepared, but I feel like it's important to like participate in
[1:16:52] governments.
[1:16:52] And I was here till two in the morning on the night that we got the speed limit lowered, the
[1:16:57] 25 miles an hour.
[1:16:58] And I thought me being present had something to do with it, but I learned later it was all about like the survey that had already happened and I could have stayed home once about 10 o'clock that night.
[1:17:07] So I'm looking forward to enforcement of the speed on 26th Street and also removing the support of AB 1740.
[1:17:16] You know, as many people have recommended and I'm dreading that it's for a building that's coming to 26 and will sure.
[1:17:23] I think it has three levels of subterranean parking, but.
[1:17:25] But thank you.
[1:17:29] We have Andrea, and then Sarah, Mayor, and Dr. Baronees and O'Free Vasquez.
[1:17:36] Hello, hello.
[1:17:37] Andrea, McPherson.
[1:17:39] I've been a resident of Santa Monica for almost 10 years now.
[1:17:44] And I'm an advocate for better treatment towards residents who may be disabled and may not
[1:17:51] have the ability to let EMT and the fire department know what exactly
[1:17:56] else them during a 911 call and I appreciate you guys taking the time out to
[1:18:03] follow through with my request with QR codes to for the EMTs to scan them and
[1:18:10] to find out what's wrong with that resident specifically because everyone
[1:18:14] doesn't have family so I appreciate that. I have a solution for the scooter
[1:18:19] problem though. That is what has been happening to the people of the boardwalk who live actually
[1:18:28] on the boardwalk. They have been impaled by many different things including myself and I've had
[1:18:34] a fracture. We need to have-
[1:18:40] Thank you. I believe our staff is working on that but again not a question
[1:18:44] and answer time. So, we have Sarah Mayer, Dr. Berenice and Ophare Vesca's and John Cyrus Smith.
[1:18:53] What an absolute disappointment. Your guys' support of AB 1740 is here on our coastline
[1:19:01] with our beautiful Santa Monica Bay. I don't know why this council doesn't listen to youth,
[1:19:06] doesn't listen to lifelong residents, and just does whatever they want. I don't know how many of you
[1:19:13] attended a concert at the Civic Center.
[1:19:15] But I doubt if you did, you would have voted to get rid of it.
[1:19:18] You guys have missed the mark here in Santa Monica
[1:19:21] and you are failing the city.
[1:19:23] You guys do everything in your power
[1:19:25] to stop the voices of the people from neighborhood associations,
[1:19:29] to trying to limit what we can speak on
[1:19:31] and what council can bring.
[1:19:33] You guys are the anti-faces of what the beach side town
[1:19:36] of Santa Monica is.
[1:19:38] And I was horrified during your campaign
[1:19:40] interrosis in your backyard was the things you said. I was worried about you as a council member. And my goodness, I am horrified by you as mayor. And I can't wait for the community unite and to get you out of here because you are the.
[1:19:57] I'm sorry, may I get your name please?
[1:20:00] Thank you.
[1:20:09] My name is Dr. Bernie Sonoprovasquez, and I think this is my first time here, or maybe second time. I'll be a regular customer.
[1:20:20] In 1968, I started earning a minimum wage of 89 cents per hour as a nursing attendant.
[1:20:30] So I'm here to tell you that I understand what it is to live on the minimum wage.
[1:20:37] The struggles, the challenges that you have to go through, however, I am here to express
[1:20:45] as the raising of the wages, not minimal anymore,
[1:20:51] but the wages of the hotel workers
[1:20:53] will have a domino effect on all the residents
[1:20:56] and many other situations here in Santa Monica.
[1:21:02] Also, I would like to,
[1:21:05] when the item returns to the council.
[1:21:14] Okay,
[1:21:17] okay.
[1:21:21] Your thanks.
[1:21:22] Thank you. Yeah, your time is expired. Appreciate you coming. John Sarah Smith. Oh, my apologies. Okay. No. Thank you. And then Alessandra Scoto.
[1:21:41] I know. Yeah.
[1:21:44] If folks good evening, Mayor Council, Mr. Chi, John Cyrus Smith, Recreation of Parks Commissioner,
[1:21:50] speaking about two things.
[1:21:51] You might recall that I came here at the beginning of the year and stood here and
[1:21:55] challenged you to finally approve and fund the Memorial Park expansion plan.
[1:22:01] Well, it now looks like it's going to happen.
[1:22:04] Thank you, staff, thank you.
[1:22:06] That's good government.
[1:22:08] Other thing, AB 1740, it's a bad bill.
[1:22:11] It's a disingenuous bill, and all of you know it.
[1:22:15] It uses event permitting and bike lanes as smoke screens to allow the council to supersize
[1:22:22] the coastal zone without coastal commission oversight, and it only applies to here.
[1:22:27] It's an attempt to bypass the local coastal plan process.
[1:22:32] And now it has this poison pill that would approve it regardless.
[1:22:37] That's not good government.
[1:22:38] it's not transparent. I think you should withdraw your support. I thought you guys were and I think you'd tell Rick Suburra to kill this bill.
[1:22:49] Thank you.
[1:22:51] Alessandra Scoto and then Zoe Muntanera and then we have two comments on the phone.
[1:22:56] Okay.
[1:22:57] The American Rocess and City Council. I'm here to talk on behalf of protecting our oceans.
[1:23:03] I'm sure you know the health benefits of the ocean, it promotes relaxation and lowers
[1:23:08] anxiety and stress and so on, there's so much scientific data behind that.
[1:23:13] There are nonprofit organizations that use the ocean for healing.
[1:23:17] I volunteered at a walk on water and surface healing where we take children with autism
[1:23:23] and other special needs into the ocean to teach them how to surf or swim or play or just
[1:23:28] really be in the water to just get the benefits of the ocean. So with that, I really would
[1:23:34] implore you to think about, you know, what do we want to do for humanity at this point?
[1:23:39] Do we really want to serve a special interest of the view or do we want to protect the ocean
[1:23:43] and serve and help each other live healthier and happier lives? Thank you. Thank you so much.
[1:23:50] I am lost for words and I'm glad that I had some time to calm down from this encounter.
[1:24:07] As many of you saw Bad Bunny on the Super Bowl, he brought all the countries
[1:24:15] into one event that has been the most watched Super Bowl ever.
[1:24:22] And when I approach someone that is a reverend president of the Santa Monica Interfaith Council,
[1:24:30] a woman of God, and I'm treated in a way that does not have a place in this chamber or any place,
[1:24:41] I'm speechless, really.
[1:24:43] And I understand why diversity and inclusion cannot be possible in this city.
[1:24:47] because everybody's egos are so evolved into the credit, into the ownership.
[1:24:57] Thank you.
[1:25:00] Madam Clerk. We just have one caller now, so second speaker. Okay. David Wally, please bring them in.
[1:25:12] Mr. Wally, you can press star six and your time will begin.
[1:25:20] Good evening, city of Santa Monica. This is David Wally again, on this of UCLA political science department class of 2007, city court. Can you hear me?
[1:25:36] Oh, okay, so I'm sorry. I prepared comments for two minutes, but I guess
[1:25:41] people were only getting one minute.
[1:25:43] So this is David Watley and I'm calling to follow up
[1:25:45] on my public comments from last month.
[1:25:48] I'm looking for Lane Diel.
[1:25:50] But is that Carolyn's right?
[1:25:52] Is that your voice by here?
[1:25:54] This is David Watley from UCLA.
[1:25:56] Young alumni development council this whole year, 2015 to 2016.
[1:26:01] We served on the UCLA, Young alumni development council
[1:26:03] together under when Lane Diel was senior attorney
[1:26:06] for years in the way.
[1:26:07] I can't, I can't, I have to, I watch, I watch the YouTube channel, city of Santa Monica, YouTube channel, and I was like, oh my God, I have to share one for myself.
[1:26:17] I can't believe that you look incredible, like you're almost like half the person used to be.
[1:26:23] Okay, Mr. Raleigh, your time is up.
[1:26:25] And that was our last speaker.
[1:26:28] Okay, great. We will thank you all. We will now move on to our consent calendar, and I believe that there are a few items that are being pulled.
[1:26:39] We have two items that we're aware of, item 4A and item 4I.
[1:26:46] Great, and then there's a couple of recusals, I believe.
[1:26:55] I'm just getting up my statement here. I will be recusing myself from item 4H, which
[1:26:59] is an agreement with LA County out of an abundance of caution. This contract will be entered
[1:27:05] into direct with my employer, and although the contract will not have any direct impact
[1:27:08] on my salary or employment, the county will recuse in order to even avoid even the appearance
[1:27:13] of a conflict. So, we will entertain a motion to hear everything. Oh, sorry, go ahead,
[1:27:19] So we just heard general public input. We do have a few speakers on my apologies. Yeah, so no problem. We're gonna hear those and we are pulling for a for I and then for H for separate vote.
[1:27:36] And we'll take a motion on that.
[1:27:38] Do you want to do motion now and then hear the comments?
[1:27:42] right because we would be approving it. Thank you. So let's hear Denise Barton, Harvey
[1:27:49] Edder. This is comments on closed session and consent calendar. Chris Guciera's Patty
[1:27:55] Braun Morgan-Hunter-Gross, Jonathan Foster.
[1:28:04] Item 5F, Mayor Carolina Teresa said in one of her announcements of Denise Anderson Warren
[1:28:09] coming back to City Clerk that she was being brought for the elections. Here are some
[1:28:13] reasons that may be of concern, such as Miss Anderson Warren is commonly known as to
[1:28:18] be serving the interest of the lobbyist group Santa Monica forward instead of being a politically
[1:28:22] neutral public official.
[1:28:24] And Miss Anderson Warren has also interfered with and lied about submissions by a group
[1:28:29] proposing one of the ballot measures for which she was never disciplined and has a tar
[1:28:34] complaints whitewashed.
[1:28:36] The City Council appoints as being done and fires the city clerk and the city needs a highly
[1:28:42] skilled and ethical city clerk not a plant within the city hall doing the bidding of lobbyists groups bringing this back to the
[1:28:49] common of bring your back for the elections without me. Merrick terraces is dirt is the city clerk. Next on item four H would we be paying for
[1:28:58] duplicate services and why are we paying for duplicate services in LA. But isn't our mayor terraces is boss Holly Day Mitchell big on homeless programs and
[1:29:06] services. Again, why are we paying for services in LA? You know, Santa Monica is a separate
[1:29:11] city from Los Angeles County for many things. And if the record of Karen Bass is half the
[1:29:17] people she has ended up back on the street, back out on the street, that would really
[1:29:21] make me question LA County homeless program. Besides, LA not being able to account for the
[1:29:27] funds for homeless services. And how many of the beds in Compton are being used for homeless
[1:29:32] those people from Santa Monica.
[1:29:34] And Karen Bass has recently made the comment
[1:29:36] of Los Angeles has made a choice in the past decades
[1:29:39] to not address homelessness and address solely on building.
[1:29:42] Sounds a lot like here, huh?
[1:29:44] Thank you.
[1:29:47] Harvey, Edder?
[1:29:53] Hello, I'm Harvey Edder.
[1:29:54] Howdy.
[1:29:55] I'm speaking on a few things on four on a-
[1:30:00] It's e. There's $800,000, and that's for five years. And that comes to $4 million. You passed
[1:30:08] a $6 million that was in the paper today for the Bach grant and whatnot and the home program.
[1:30:18] First of all, there needs to be a priority set up, and they set this emergency up with the city
[1:30:23] manager's head of it. Okay. First of all, it has to be based on the senior disabled vets,
[1:30:30] local residents, business and activists should be given priority. I fit in all of them. All right.
[1:30:35] A lot of people do. There has to be quality. It's got to be equity and these other programs
[1:30:41] about maintaining rent and everything. It'll also be coordinated to develop equity. You've got money
[1:30:45] from these bonds and whatnot, you know, 20 million dollars to this project and this and that.
[1:30:51] and the heating and ventilator also be solar.
[1:30:53] There's tax credits available that aren't being used.
[1:30:55] And this is equity that can go down to the people
[1:30:57] that need it.
[1:30:58] The affordability and what's happening in this country
[1:31:01] are extremely, they're not going to get any better.
[1:31:04] The Republicans, they just had this guy,
[1:31:05] the local guy here that's in DC,
[1:31:09] said that the Democratic Party is full of fraud and stuff.
[1:31:11] OK, that's the Republicans.
[1:31:13] They swore to the Constitution and all the stuff
[1:31:16] from the front line on this.
[1:31:17] They violated their oath, they should not be able to vote.
[1:31:19] They should not be a party allowed in this state or any other state and enough is enough the redistricting and doing all this stuff
[1:31:26] It's time to get out there and put your body on the line because if that's when it comes to the proud boys and all this crap
[1:31:32] We got to stand up or we'll be taken out
[1:31:36] Thank you
[1:31:38] Chris Gutierrez patty brawn Morgan hunter-grows trans and foster
[1:31:43] Your name is on twice you just want to clarify I can I can combine them the
[1:31:49] I'm writing, I'm speaking for C and for L. Okay, great.
[1:31:54] And you're requesting for minutes or two.
[1:31:56] I'm not going to use all of them, I'm not going to make this really short and sweet for all of us.
[1:32:00] Congratulations, it's great to be here this evening.
[1:32:03] Congratulations Santa Monica, it's wonderful marriage roses, city council members, city manager Chi,
[1:32:09] to be able to support your acceptance of $10.5 million in awards from the county and state.
[1:32:17] funding to advance the planning to the great park that will replace the Santa Monica airport sooner than we might have expected.
[1:32:27] I am Chris Gutierrez. I'm a member of the great park coalition board and I'm speaking for it to convey our celebratory remarks for this important milestone and the momentum it provides for the great park.
[1:32:41] The coalition commends a collaborative efforts of the airport conversion project team, city staff,
[1:32:48] elected officials, agency partners, and community advocates whose work helps position Santa
[1:32:54] Monica to compete successfully for the award of $499,149 from the LA County Measure A funds and a $10 million
[1:33:03] dollar climate for climate fund from proposition 4 from the California state parks.
[1:33:10] Santa Monica as we all know has long been known for its sustainability leadership. These major
[1:33:16] grant awards reflect that leadership and the strength of the city's long term planning efforts
[1:33:23] and extensive community engagement that have helped shape the great park. So congratulations again,
[1:33:30] and Bravo, thank you.
[1:33:33] Thank you, Patty Brown.
[1:33:35] And I had the same question.
[1:33:37] I see your name twice.
[1:33:38] Are you speaking on two items?
[1:33:40] Four, C and four, L.
[1:33:41] And two minutes.
[1:33:43] Oh, okay.
[1:33:44] So if you are two or four.
[1:33:46] Sorry.
[1:33:47] Oh, two should be enough.
[1:33:48] Yeah, thanks.
[1:33:49] Good evening, Mayor Turosus and council members.
[1:33:52] Joining Chris Gutierrez to congratulate you on city staff
[1:33:57] and the airport conversion project team
[1:33:59] month securing more than 10.5 million in state and county funding for the future great
[1:34:03] park.
[1:34:03] I'm Patty Braun, VP of organization at Santa Monica, Malibu, Council of PTA's and Board
[1:34:08] member of the great park coalition.
[1:34:10] These grants are so exciting and important because they provide critical resources to advance
[1:34:15] the project and reflect confidence from the state and regional partners in Santa Monica's
[1:34:20] plans for the airport site.
[1:34:22] The measure A grant helps move the project from planning toward implementation.
[1:34:26] We're so excited about that.
[1:34:28] While the Prop 4 award recognizes the great park's potential to restore habitat, improve
[1:34:33] storm weather management, address extreme heat, expand access to nature, and create lasting
[1:34:39] environmental and public health benefits.
[1:34:42] And perhaps most importantly, these awards help position Santa Monica for future investments
[1:34:48] and demonstrate that state and regional partners see the value and promise of this project.
[1:34:53] These grants are being awarded because Santa Monica has a compelling plan for the airport
[1:34:57] at site and
[1:35:00] Great Park that restores open space, expands access to nature and recreation and delivers lasting environmental and community benefits. As these funds are put to work, they'll help years of planning and community engagement into visible progress on the ground. And that progress will help build public confidence that the community's vision for a great park is becoming a reality. Tonight's action shows that the great park is no longer just a vision, it's becoming an investible reality. Thank you.
[1:35:28] Yeah, thank you so much.
[1:35:30] More than a hundred gross, Jonathan Buster, John C Smith.
[1:35:34] I'm here to talk about foresee.
[1:35:36] So I think the half million dollar design grant is interesting.
[1:35:41] And I wish it could stay inside Santa Monica.
[1:35:47] I don't know if we're still working
[1:35:48] with the Boston design firm,
[1:35:50] who set up the office in Los Angeles.
[1:35:53] I read the 2012 Rand Santa Monica Airport report,
[1:35:57] which was absolutely fascinating to see what the smartest minds of Santa Monica thought of what
[1:36:03] to do with Santa Monica Airport. It's interesting how it would have really helped for the fire
[1:36:08] and the police station protected this plan that they would have been proposing.
[1:36:15] So yeah, I think overall, Santa Monica Airport, I've been studying it for the last year,
[1:36:22] I've learned so much and I think $10 million sounds like a lot of money but that's about
[1:36:30] an acre of redevelopment and reclamation.
[1:36:35] So
[1:36:38] thank you Jonathan Foster.
[1:36:44] Hello again Jonathan Foster, I second the girl with the black hair and the black and white
[1:36:49] shirt that was upset with the mayor.
[1:36:50] So on 4B, 4C, 4H, a little bit, and I believe 4L.
[1:37:04] So on 4B elections, I am for candidates for prison.
[1:37:09] I think everybody running in elected office should be arrested, put in jail.
[1:37:14] 4C is a lot like 4L dealing with the airport.
[1:37:20] So right now there's a scramble to put up buildings and take over the land that's supposed to be all grass, it's supposed to be a, you know, it's supposed to be a park.
[1:37:32] And we can't regrow the creosote bush and dirt that used to be there. That's all gone. So let's get grass.
[1:37:38] It should be basically some bathrooms, three or four football fields that can be multi-multiply used, tennis courts, pickleball, basketball, maybe an indoor pool.
[1:37:51] All the other stakeholders, get the hell out of here.
[1:37:56] It needs to be grass, just grass, 46 seconds on homelessness here, prevention for a predictive prevention housing and
[1:38:07] department and all this kind of stuff. And one of the, again, the problems that that we're
[1:38:13] having is paycheck has already been decided by somebody in Europe, what we're going to be giving
[1:38:20] people in their jobs. And the minimum wage, I'm going to say it again, minimum wage adjusted to
[1:38:26] inflation is $60 an hour. Nobody anywhere in the United States of America should be making less
[1:38:33] in $120,000 a year, and this immediately ends the dependency on government to take
[1:38:42] care of people's lives.
[1:38:44] That's why I tried to run for President.
[1:38:48] Thank you.
[1:38:49] John C. Smith.
[1:38:54] Hey, folks.
[1:38:55] John C. Smith, here again, good evening there, Council, Mr. Chi, three quick things, $10 million
[1:39:01] for the Great Park.
[1:39:03] Be still, my heart.
[1:39:04] It's incredible.
[1:39:06] I just want to five A you know it seems every council agenda now has a closed session item that reads John Doe, John Doe, Jane Doe, John Doe and we all know what it's about and I just think it's time that the council provided an update on how many cases have been settled at what cost, how many are still pending and what comes next because it's so important.
[1:39:29] Finally, item 5G, I saw this, the city manager performance review, I just wanted to commend
[1:39:36] all of her chief.
[1:39:37] I think he's done a good job.
[1:39:38] He shows up at the Wilmont meeting and gives straight answers about, you know, issues
[1:39:42] like realignment and homelessness.
[1:39:44] He takes the lead, he takes action and he's not afraid to try something new and I just want
[1:39:51] to appreciate his efforts.
[1:39:52] Thank you.
[1:39:53] Thank you.
[1:39:55] and then we also seem to have a late comment that came in, just do that get
[1:40:00] One or two minutes. One, on council approval? Yeah, is everyone okay at the late chat? I'm okay with it. Okay, any opposed? Right here, none. Okay, Zoe, one today. Two or one. One minute. Okay, so I dido my fellow neighbor on olive or cheese work in the city. So thank you so much for your performance. I want to talk about parks.
[1:40:29] This weekend, on Sunday, I went to Jesse Brewer Park for the Latina Fest and I spoke to the founders and next year is going to be the 10th year and I pitched to do it in Santa Monica for the 10th anniversary of the Latina Fest.
[1:40:46] It was women, business owners, entrepreneurs, forums, conversations, selling, food, culture.
[1:40:54] It was amazing. I was so inspired and I would love to bring that to Santa Monica. So I already spoke to one of my Puerto Rican staff members here, Ms. Marrero from the Cultural Department.
[1:41:09] And she also did the, you know, desire to bring Latina fest for Santa Monica in the parks for next year.
[1:41:19] Great. Thank you. Okay, so we have a few items pulled for a is at first, and I believe
[1:41:26] Councilmember Raskin pulled it, but I think some multiple of us have questions. So do you want to start?
[1:41:32] Perhaps first, I should make a motion to approve the consent calendar with the exception of items for a is it for I?
[1:41:38] And each and as part of the motion, I'm going to ask that we appoint Councilmember Halls that acting chair in your absence.
[1:41:45] I'll second that.
[1:41:52] Role call vote. Councilmember Zurnitskaya. Yes. Councilmember Snell. Yes. Mayor Pro Temzwick is absent. Councilmember Raskin. Yes.
[1:42:02] Councilmember Hall. Yes. Councilmember Negrette. Yes. And Mayor Trances. Yes. Motion passes. Great.
[1:42:09] So we'll go to for adoption of a resolution authorizing acceptance of the
[1:42:17] reconnecting communities pilot program pilot grant with the California
[1:42:22] Department of Transportation for the reconnecting Pico project and execution of
[1:42:26] necessary associated documents. Yeah thank you Erin to our staff. I asked for
[1:42:33] just a very brief staff report because I have some comments related to the scope of
[1:42:37] work and also given the significance of this item I figured it's important
[1:42:44] press have a conversation about it so I agree. Do we want to do we want any
[1:42:50] slides or okay fantastic
[1:43:01] here Tony Lopez senior park planner within public
[1:43:06] works the reconnecting community's pilot program is federal funding awarded for
[1:43:11] projects that reconnect communities by removing retrofitting or mitigating
[1:43:15] highways or other transportation facilities that create barriers to community connectivity,
[1:43:21] including to mobility and access or economic development. The application was submitted by staff
[1:43:28] for the reconnecting PICO project back in September of 2024. We were then awarded in late 2024,
[1:43:35] however, all federal grants required confirmation. So it wasn't until October 15th of 2025 that we were
[1:43:42] notified that we can proceed with the grant agreement process with FHWA and DOT.
[1:43:49] We were awarded a grant in the amount of $2 million with the city match of a little
[1:43:55] over $500,000.
[1:43:57] The scope is feasibility and optimal placement of freeway cat parks along the I-10 freeway
[1:44:03] segment from 11th Street to 20th Street in the Pico neighborhood, prioritizing cat park
[1:44:08] locations in alignment with available funding sources and an implementation timeline just for
[1:44:14] everyone's edification. Sometimes we get this question, what is a cap park? It's basically a park
[1:44:19] on top of the highway. Some of the overarching goals include addressing historical disparities,
[1:44:26] promoting economic opportunities and mitigating environmental justice concerns in alignment with
[1:44:31] the goals of the grants application themselves. The project envisions through the study the development
[1:44:37] of pedestrian-friendly sidewalks, bikeways,
[1:44:40] and potential integration with public transit.
[1:44:43] More specifically, the scope includes existing conditions
[1:44:46] analysis and site research, community outreach,
[1:44:50] and public engagement, development of concepts,
[1:44:53] and a constructability review, and pre-development activities,
[1:44:56] which is essentially complimentary plans
[1:44:58] and studies to support an environmental.
[1:45:00] And finally, a final report that kind of summarizes everything in the scope. The plan project completion date currently is July 31st of 2029, as the budget period end date is January 31st, 2030. We usually like to keep a couple months buffer on RN because sometimes there's project delays and also the post grants completion work that has to be done.
[1:45:26] So the next steps currently we are waiting receipt of the final agreement from CalTrans for
[1:45:32] city of Santa Monica signature.
[1:45:34] We have been in coordination with the city's attorney office on the draft agreements.
[1:45:39] And we are literally just waiting for that agreement to come back to us.
[1:45:44] Once we sign that agreement, we will send it back and then DOT will sign it once again.
[1:45:50] And that will give us the opportunity to finish out the coordination that we've already
[1:45:55] be gone on the grants portal administrative items and then we can release an RFQ.
[1:46:02] And that will be it.
[1:46:03] Any questions?
[1:46:04] I have a couple of the Councillor Raskin pulled out.
[1:46:08] Councillor Rahal?
[1:46:12] No.
[1:46:15] I just had a quick question about that timeline that you presented.
[1:46:18] What is the deliverable that the public should expect by 2030?
[1:46:22] A final report that looks at the existing conditions analysis of the general site area,
[1:46:30] so 11th Street to 20th Street, in and around the I-10 Freeway.
[1:46:35] It'll also look at some concepts of where and the prioritization of particular cap-park
[1:46:41] locations.
[1:46:43] There will be a constructability review of essentially what does it take to do this work and essentially
[1:46:49] the recommendations on what can be done.
[1:46:53] Okay, so we shouldn't be expecting any sort of like final design or?
[1:46:56] Not at all.
[1:46:57] It's just the feasibility of how we can achieve this.
[1:47:00] And why does that take us four years to do that?
[1:47:02] Just curious.
[1:47:04] Well, it's a 2027.
[1:47:07] So we anticipate that by the end of this year, we'll probably be through the RFQRP process.
[1:47:11] And then with contracting, we'll probably start in early spring of 27.
[1:47:14] And it's, you know, it's about 25 to 30 acre site, so from a feasibility perspective on understanding the transit implications, the structural utilities, and essentially the concept design of what this can be.
[1:47:33] It's basically a design project without technically a design.
[1:47:37] Okay, thank you.
[1:47:38] Councilor Raskin.
[1:47:45] First of all, thank you to you and to Chris and the team and to everyone who's gotten
[1:47:49] us to this point.
[1:47:50] I know this is yours in the making and over a decade in making the really.
[1:47:57] And so my understanding of the FHW grant program is one that's about reconnecting communities
[1:48:03] in general, not necessarily about capping, but about various ways in which we can reconnect
[1:48:07] communities.
[1:48:08] Is that generally an accurate way to describe the grant program?
[1:48:11] Yes.
[1:48:11] Yes, so potentially this program could look at trade-offs between capping and other methods
[1:48:17] of reconnecting.
[1:48:19] Correct.
[1:48:19] Okay.
[1:48:20] All right.
[1:48:21] That's really my only question.
[1:48:23] I'll have some comments.
[1:48:24] Yes.
[1:48:24] I'll turn it.
[1:48:25] Councillor Zoreska.
[1:48:28] I'll echo this.
[1:48:31] There we go.
[1:48:32] I'll echo the thanks.
[1:48:34] Super excited.
[1:48:35] I just wanted to ask for some clarification around the proposed public engagement process
[1:48:40] and what that might be anticipated to look like, and I apologize if it's too early in the process to really know, but I'm just curious how we would be able to make sure that folks who were the most impacted by the dissection of this neighborhood because of the freeway would be a big part of kind of the communication and engagement process.
[1:49:06] I will say it's two answers.
[1:49:11] It's a bit early, however, in the fact that there is a match to this grant, we have looked
[1:49:18] at the schedule related to CIP budget cycle.
[1:49:24] We, based on the success of some of our other or recent efforts in terms of reaching out
[1:49:29] to the community, we are looking at community outreach in every phase of the grant scope.
[1:49:37] specifically focused on like before we even put into paper understanding kind of what the expectations are of the process and understanding what are the best ways to conduct outreach before we even start it.
[1:49:51] So that's why I say it's little too early, but it's more about utilizing our expertise to kind of define a path but then bounce those ideas.
[1:50:00] Yes, back with the community, is this really the way you want it to be conducted? Sorry, one other question is part of the scope of this to determine what the potential costs might be for, for capping the freeway or any portion thereof. Okay, thank you. Amazing. Okay. You asked my question, but I think I just want to put a, no, no, a finer point on it. Can you ensure that the PICO neighborhood association,
[1:50:28] Association, PICO, residents, PICO, and people that are stakeholders in this community and even those who maybe were displaced from this community by the freeway are engaged and centered in the community engagement process.
[1:50:41] 100%.
[1:50:41] Okay, great. I just want to make sure.
[1:50:44] Excuse me, Councilor Russ. I think there's some questions or comments.
[1:50:49] Yeah, I've got a few comments here.
[1:50:52] So, you know, arguably the freeway is the most significant environmental hazard in Santa
[1:51:00] Monica.
[1:51:02] Residents around the freeway are subject to air pollution, noise pollution, light pollution.
[1:51:06] We have a neighborhood that is divided and scarred.
[1:51:10] There are now several generations of young kids in our city that have grown up experiencing
[1:51:13] asthma, hearing impacts, and many other health consequences.
[1:51:17] And it wasn't always this way.
[1:51:18] There's a famous scene in Hoofram Roger Rabbit that I often like to quote, and I'm going
[1:51:22] to butcher this, but it generally goes that any valiant says, nobody's going to drive
[1:51:26] this lousy freeway.
[1:51:28] You can ride the red car for a nickel, the old streetcar you see.
[1:51:31] Judge Doom says, oh they'll drive, they'll have to.
[1:51:34] You see, I bought the red car so that I could dismantle it to build the freeways.
[1:51:39] The true history is a little bit more nuanced, but the dark and racist history of our freeway
[1:51:43] is very well documented.
[1:51:45] generation of wealth of stolen from the predominantly black and Latino families whose homes were bulldozed to make way for the freeway.
[1:51:51] So cabling the freeway, in my opinion, would be a partial improvement.
[1:51:55] But it doesn't solve the underlying problems.
[1:51:57] Many of the environmental impacts would still be there. It will still reinforce a car-dependent culture.
[1:52:02] And it is essentially a form of a band-aid. But it's a significant improvement to the harms that we have and the damage neighborhood that we have.
[1:52:10] In my opinion, and I urge my fellow Councilman to support this, that we have a moral imperative
[1:52:15] for apparent neighborhoods.
[1:52:16] We need to stay focused on the long-term goal of removing the freeway and replacing
[1:52:20] it with parks, a grand boulevard, or other neighborhood serving uses.
[1:52:24] So I'm going to make a motion that we move forward with the staff recommended actions here
[1:52:29] and to also direct staff that to the extent that is authorized by the terms of the grant,
[1:52:33] to look into trade-offs between capping and other alternatives, including freeway removal,
[1:52:37] and to reaffirm our commitments to closing the freeway, and to follow the models of other cities like San Francisco, Seattle, and others that have successfully restored and healed their cities by removing freeways.
[1:52:49] I'll second that.
[1:52:54] Okay, so motion by Raskin, seconded by Council Member Snell. I'll do a roll call vote. Council Member Negrette.
[1:53:01] Yes, Council Member Hall?
[1:53:03] Yes.
[1:53:04] Yes.
[1:53:04] On sole, member Eskin.
[1:53:05] Yes.
[1:53:06] Mayor Pro Temsweik is absent.
[1:53:08] Councilmember Snell.
[1:53:10] Yes.
[1:53:11] Councilmember Surnitskaya?
[1:53:12] Yes.
[1:53:13] And Mayor Trusses.
[1:53:14] Yes.
[1:53:14] Motion passes.
[1:53:16] Great.
[1:53:17] Congratulations.
[1:53:17] Thank you.
[1:53:18] We're excited.
[1:53:19] And if there's any way to do it quicker than 2030, we would love that too.
[1:53:22] Do my best.
[1:53:23] Okay.
[1:53:24] I would propose that we hear for I next and then I'll leave for 4-H.
[1:53:30] And I'll read the item for I award requests for proposal number 2784 and authorization
[1:53:37] to enter into agreement with economic and planning systems incorporated for preparation
[1:53:43] of an exit study for the Parks and Recreation Development Impact.
[1:53:46] Is there no
[1:53:52] presentation?
[1:53:53] Oh great, so someone who pulled this?
[1:53:57] I pulled it.
[1:53:58] Oh great.
[1:53:58] Let's please.
[1:53:59] Yeah.
[1:53:59] Do you want to ask questions?
[1:54:00] Thank you. Yes, I do have a question. Thank you very much for bringing this forward.
[1:54:04] But my question is that, and this next next study is just for the park, if I understand it correctly.
[1:54:12] Parks and Recreation Development.
[1:54:13] The fees for park and Recreation. Have there any consideration to put together a study for all types of fees with respect to it and why this has been taken out separately and just curious?
[1:54:24] So, I would say I think it was end of 2024, all of those staff members who were responsible
[1:54:32] for managing their impact fees got to get to understand where essentially the next
[1:54:39] study stood in terms of their timing.
[1:54:41] Because there was a misalignment and one, I think it was the child care had already begun
[1:54:47] their next study. We were in we had initiated the conversation because we were
[1:54:54] getting ready to do our next study. We understood that mobility was kind of a
[1:55:00] Local government's out from starting their RFP for transportation fees. So at that time we decided, okay, we needed to advance this process, so let's all just go. So the hope would be that as we all complete this next round of next study, we can then be in the better alignment with the more recent next study done. So as we continue to move forward, rather than do them every five years, maybe one will be every three years so that it aligns with the one that's coming up on their five year mark so that we can
[1:55:29] and then be in lockstep so all the fees are doing their next study at the same time.
[1:55:35] So I just had to do with the scheduling more than anything else.
[1:55:37] Thank you.
[1:55:40] Councillor Reserves, okay.
[1:55:42] Thank you.
[1:55:43] So I just had a couple of questions.
[1:55:46] First, could you define what a next study is?
[1:55:50] I'll do my best.
[1:55:52] So it essentially helps to determine what the maximum threshold is
[1:55:58] for the impact fee that the city can, I guess, charge is the right word.
[1:56:04] And that is based on a lot of different factors.
[1:56:06] It's based on what our community plan is in terms of what we want to do for open space.
[1:56:11] So essentially, the Parks and Recreation Vision Plan, it looks at what it costs to maintain
[1:56:17] and operate or improve our existing parks and open spaces.
[1:56:20] It also looks at opportunity sites for expanding our open space or acquiring new open space.
[1:56:27] But it also looks at the feasibility and economic burden on developers in alignment with kind
[1:56:35] of what the proposed fees might be, which is why we included in our RFP scope, which I believe
[1:56:40] is task seven, which is the economic burden analysis against what those fees might be.
[1:56:45] And does that economic burden analysis and feasibility account for other development impact fees and
[1:56:52] other costs associated with the development of new, you know, anything?
[1:56:59] Well, I think this kind of links back to Council Member Snell's question in that.
[1:57:05] Like, this one is specific to the parks and rec fee because each fee has a lot of, I can't
[1:57:11] speak to child care needs to provide them or what transportation needs to provide those
[1:57:16] for those studies because there's a lot more complex need to those.
[1:57:19] So for this particular exercise, it's more focused on development that's related to parks.
[1:57:27] And what other sources of funding do we use for new parks and maintenance of existing
[1:57:35] parks and all of the things that this would be intended to study?
[1:57:40] So we rely heavily on the development impact fee because currently we have quite frequently
[1:57:46] to general fund is one option but we also have our measure A annual allocations but I will
[1:57:54] use the example of our recently completed Douglas Park playground project. Our annual allocations
[1:58:01] accrue but they don't like those accruals to sit very long because those funds are meant to build
[1:58:07] and improve parks. So at that moment in time we made a decision to draw down 1.443 million dollars
[1:58:16] to help on the construction of that project.
[1:58:20] The project itself costs close to $2 million.
[1:58:22] So we offset those annual allocations
[1:58:25] with the development impact fee
[1:58:26] to help cover the cost of the design
[1:58:29] and construction of those parts.
[1:58:32] We do have some allocations from CDBG,
[1:58:36] which is part of the planning that,
[1:58:38] I believe, Mark Ameral presented a couple weeks or months ago.
[1:58:42] That allows for particular improvements
[1:58:46] associated with parks and open spaces within CDPG eligible areas.
[1:58:52] And then other than that, the development impact fees pretty much hit.
[1:58:56] Oh wow, okay.
[1:58:59] So I'm trying to basically, I'm trying to really understand it because it may.
[1:59:06] Maybe I can add a little bit of context.
[1:59:08] So at 30,000 feet development impact fees really are intended to be assessed to offset the impacts
[1:59:15] that new development has on a community, new development creates new people, new service demands,
[1:59:21] new service levels that have to be met.
[1:59:23] We have very advanced impact fees here in Santa Monica.
[1:59:28] The largest of those impact fees is our parks and recreation impact fee.
[1:59:33] Based on some of the recent changes to stay law in order to continue charging fees,
[1:59:39] you have to identify a more specific nexus.
[1:59:42] Once you determine that nexus, it assesses what's the maximum extent of the fee that you can charge on new development and you can set a rate anywhere up to that maximum amount.
[1:59:54] And so what we're trying to do here really is initiate the study so that we can bring back for council.
[2:00:00] The overall assessment, what should the impact fee be moving forward? It will set a maximum, but certainly you can look at lowering it depending on the policy preferences of the council. This initial step, again, is relate the analysis to put and develop all the inputs and then determine what the per unit cost might be moving forward. Thank you. That does help. I will add to that we requested within the RFP to ask for some alternative fee ranges.
[2:00:29] so that we can better present back to council in the future of, like, this is the maximum, but these are others and the applications to see what those.
[2:00:37] Okay, and kind of building off of council members, Snell's question, is there a specific reason why we can't study all of the development impact fees in one go?
[2:00:50] Because I think they all contribute to what it costs to build.
[2:00:55] And certainly I think what we're trying to do again, there's different departments that are leading different fee components.
[2:01:03] Each fee component has a different set of inputs to the point Tony made.
[2:01:07] We're starting this now to try to get all the fees aligned so they're on the same schedule moving forward based on the schedules that we started a couple of years ago.
[2:01:16] The fees are being analyzed on different schedules.
[2:01:18] goals, the goal is to get them all aligned so that they're on a five year rotating schedule
[2:01:22] combined, so we can try to do it all together moving forward.
[2:01:27] And when would we expect this to come back?
[2:01:30] We anticipate that the timeline for this particular scope is probably six and nine months, so 2027.
[2:01:39] Inclusive of the RFP process, or this is?
[2:01:44] This is for the award so they can start it for the contract.
[2:01:46] Okay. Is the so the cost of this or the proposed cost is $115,400 and $50 under according
[2:01:56] to the staff report is that roughly what we pay for other nexus is it seems a little
[2:02:04] high on. Okay. Okay. I think so. I don't know if other folks had questions.
[2:02:12] So once this study comes back, and I guess this was directed to City Manager, we have an opportunity to take a look at all the fees with respect to how it affects development, because I think that's the important thing with respect to it.
[2:02:28] in the study is going to be a next-of-feet, but we want to make sure that, you know, with
[2:02:34] development, we're not taking independently looking at charges that are together. So I think
[2:02:42] that's more important than bias. The update of the fees is one process, but the existing
[2:02:48] fees, certainly when this all comes back, we would break out the fee load on a per-unit basis
[2:02:54] for the council to assess.
[2:02:56] Okay, thank you.
[2:02:58] Great. I'm happy to make a motion.
[2:03:00] I will move the item.
[2:03:03] Oh, you have one quick.
[2:03:03] Okay, great.
[2:03:05] I noticed that from the 2425,
[2:03:08] the activity for this,
[2:03:10] for the parks and recreation impact fee,
[2:03:12] or fees collected for fiscal year 2425,
[2:03:15] or 46,527 dollars,
[2:03:20] and this next study
[2:03:22] would cost more than twice that. I just wanted to call that out because I do have some
[2:03:29] concerns about the cost. I don't know that there is anything to address that, but I just
[2:03:37] wanted to call that out because it does. It looks like you want to make a comment.
[2:03:43] That 46,000 was the fees that were collected in that fiscal year from development.
[2:03:50] And then it's more reflected to the fact that we haven't had a lot of development for the fee to assess
[2:03:56] The actual per unit cost of the fee the park and wreck fee it depends on the unit size how many bedrooms
[2:04:02] But again, it's our largest fee. I believe for a two unit bedroom right now it runs up to $9,000
[2:04:09] Per unit and it is the largest of the impact fees we assess
[2:04:19] Okay, I'll move the item
[2:04:21] Okay,
[2:04:24] council members are good sky roll
[2:04:32] call vote. Sorry. Yes. Council members now. No.
[2:04:39] Mayor Prattim's wake is absent. Council member Raskin. Yes. Council member Hall. Yes.
[2:04:46] Council member Nugrete. Yes. And the air choices. Yes. Motion pass. It's great. I will ask
[2:04:52] Councilor Hall to come over here and I will refuse myself for right now.
[2:04:56] and 4H is award
[2:05:00] Contract with LA County Homeless Services and Housing Department for predictive prevention, pilot, utilizing a county homelessness prevention unit service model in the city of Santa Monica. Thank you. Are there any questions? Seeing none, any comments? I like to move this item. Second. Motion by Council Member Snell, seconded by Council Member Surnitskaya for the staff recommendation. Council Member Negreté? Yes.
[2:05:30] Yes, Council Member Hall.
[2:05:33] Yes.
[2:05:33] Council Member Raskin.
[2:05:35] Yes.
[2:05:35] Mayor Pro Temswick.
[2:05:36] It's absent.
[2:05:37] Council Member Snell.
[2:05:38] Yes.
[2:05:39] Council Member Surnitskaya.
[2:05:40] Yes.
[2:05:41] Mayor Trussis is also absent, but motion passes.
[2:05:45] All right.
[2:05:45] Thank you.
[2:05:46] And if we could have the closed session read out, please.
[2:05:55] 5A is conference with legal counsel regarding existing litigation and involving the various
[2:06:01] on the agenda. 5B is another conference with legal council existing litigation regarding the city and I see SOP at all.
[2:06:13] Another existing litigation with the city at all versus Waymo LLC at all.
[2:06:20] Existing litigation with Santa Monica EV holdings LLC at all.
[2:06:25] 5E is existing litigation with Waymo LLC versus the city.
[2:06:32] 5F is a public employee appointment regarding the city clerk position, conference with
[2:06:37] labor negotiator and the city negotiator is the mayor and personnel director.
[2:06:42] And 5G is public employee performance evaluation for the city manager and the last close session,
[2:06:52] 5-H, conference with legal, council existing litigation, Laurie Gentles versus City, and
[2:06:57] this is a report out.
[2:07:01] Attorney, what time do we think we will be back for how long should this take?
[2:07:05] We expect to be back in one hour and 15 minutes, and even if we do not complete everything
[2:07:12] on the agenda, we will announce that to the public, on the closed session agenda.
[2:07:16] If we do not complete everything within an hour and 15 minutes, that was not under a
[2:07:23] We could do it now if you would like, but if you would prefer not to, we can do it all
[2:07:29] now.
[2:07:31] I would estimate an hour and a half.
[2:07:33] Okay.
[2:07:34] An hour and a half.
[2:07:34] Great.
[2:07:36] So we will be back at, we'll just say nine o'clock.
[2:07:40] Great.
[2:07:40] Thank you.
[2:07:41] Thank you very much.
[4:06:52] Okay, thank you for your patience. We are returning from closed session. It is 937. We'll just wait for a couple of folks to trickle in.
[4:07:07] So, we will,
[4:07:12] I think, take a quick travel announcement. If anyone has any reportable travel that they like to talk about, pursuant to AB 1234.
[4:07:26] I will just say quickly, I last week attended the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
[4:07:30] representing Santa Monica hosted by Mayor Rex Richardson in Long Beach, California.
[4:07:35] We elected Mayor Todd Chloria of San Diego, the next president of the U.S.
[4:07:41] Conference of Mayors. We heard from Gavin Newsom, JB Pritzker,
[4:07:46] multiple national and also local leaders met with mayors from around the country talking about
[4:07:53] everything. A lot of discussion about economic revitalization around major events.
[4:07:59] Additionally, how to handle mass disasters.
[4:08:02] I know that many cities have gone through that and meeting with subject matter experts also got to experience the inaugural concert in the Long Beach Amphitheater, which I just want to say was pretty spectacular.
[4:08:13] It's a currently temporary venue overlooking Long Beach Harbor.
[4:08:19] really a lot of vads for what we could do here in Santa Monica with a world-class
[4:08:24] music destination close to the ocean. So just very inspirational and it was
[4:08:30] great time. So with that being said, any other reports of travel? No, we will now
[4:08:37] move on to agenda item six, public input on remaining agenda items. Oh sorry
[4:08:44] My apologies.
[4:08:45] I don't know.
[4:08:46] City Attorney, would you like to report on the closed session?
[4:08:49] So all items were heard with one reportable action taken as noted as a report out.
[4:08:55] It's item five.
[4:08:59] Pardon me.
[4:09:00] Of course.
[4:09:01] I believe it's five.
[4:09:04] Yeah.
[4:09:05] I got it.
[4:09:06] Five H.
[4:09:07] In the matter of Lori Gentles versus City is an employment action.
[4:09:15] At its February 10th, 26 meeting, the City Council approved a settlement in the Lori
[4:09:20] Gentles versus City action.
[4:09:22] The City denies liability and does not admit fault, but agreed to settle for $550,000 and
[4:09:28] certain non-monetary terms.
[4:09:30] And in exchange, plenty of agreed to release all claims against the City.
[4:09:33] The settlement was approved by a voter five to two with Mayor Pro Temswick and council member Hall voting now great
[4:09:41] And I was discussed previously item 10 a has been pulled at the repressor staff so we will hear now public input on the remaining agenda items
[4:09:50] And I'll call it folks and if they can come up when I call them we have Denise Barton more than 100 gross
[4:09:57] Lynette Jonathan Foster Freddie Luis
[4:10:10] Good evening. Please do tell us which of these actions would encourage more public participation in city council meetings. The essence of the round act. Over 25 speakers cut the public speaking time to one minute, cutting public input time to 20 minutes and pushing the rest until the end of the meeting. Still says your time is more important than the public's eliminating reasonable accommodations for seniors and disabled at in person city council meetings, staying accommodations may give them via telephone.
[4:10:39] which says you will hear us, but don't want to see us, which is offensive and discriminatory.
[4:10:44] And the residents want more than two city council members to be needed to post a 16 item.
[4:10:49] Or what about staying out at closed session for hours or stepping the agenda like tonight.
[4:10:55] All those are discouraging the public to participation.
[4:10:58] So maybe you shouldn't be sitting up there.
[4:11:03] Next on item 16B.
[4:11:05] Again, just because Los Angeles County does something does not mean the city of Santa Monica separate city has to do it.
[4:11:11] And I have to ask how much will this pledge from prosperity cost the taxpayers since our
[4:11:16] new mayor and council seem to be co-mingling many from the city of Santa Monica in the county
[4:11:21] of LA, who has shown not to be the best record of results for their many events?
[4:11:28] I would again ask why the city of Santa Monica is funding Los Angeles County programs, especially
[4:11:33] because the city is claiming budget deficits to the residents, as well as when you put 16
[4:11:39] and items like this on the city council agenda with no information on what the program
[4:11:43] and pledge includes really put some residents to disadvantage. Thank you.
[4:11:50] Thank you. We have Morgan Hunter-Gross, Lynette John, and Foster.
[4:11:57] Hello. I'm here talking about 11D. I think I'm against this new rules change of order
[4:12:04] because something happened last week when the 16 item I learned about the Virginia
[4:12:08] apartments. So I went to go look at the Virginia apartments that night, right
[4:12:12] afterwards, in the early 11th, 12 o'clock at night. And then I think if we hadn't
[4:12:18] have had that moment, I wouldn't have learned about the corporations, Santa
[4:12:25] Monica, and the whole Santa Monica SMR history and linkback. And I think just the
[4:12:36] The ability to bring something up and educate the public is vitally important.
[4:12:42] Now transparency isn't necessarily a solution of everything.
[4:12:46] It's not a means to an end, but it's a path on the way there.
[4:12:51] So as I'm going to read a section from, I was looking at the changes to the report.
[4:12:57] And I just, we didn't have all the time to read it.
[4:13:00] The city manager will work with the, they're adding this because anything with an underlying
[4:13:04] is being added, anything that's being crossed out is being deleted. So this is an underlined thing
[4:13:09] that's being added. The city manager will work with the requesting council members to decide if
[4:13:14] the item will be placed on the agenda or address them in other ways. No less than two and no more than
[4:13:23] three council members may place a council member discussion item on an agenda to consider a formal
[4:13:29] censure of a council member for the violation of the law, local ordinance, common law, conflict
[4:13:35] of interest, council, rule, or resolution. Do process shall be provided, including the
[4:13:41] notice of the allegations and an opportunity to oppose the accusation. So you need two people,
[4:13:49] but not more than three and one person isn't good. I love that Santa Monica has the ability for
[4:13:57] one person to do that. Great, thank you, um, Lynette, and then Jonathan
[4:14:06] Bosphor, Freddie Luis, Bernice, and Alfred Vazquez. Good evening. Sorry, I just
[4:14:11] had eye surgery, so I have trouble reading. Um, I, I oppose the agenda item 11b,
[4:14:18] and I don't understand why you don't want, you won't give us a chance to to
[4:14:27] say what we want to say. If there's more than one council person is required to approve
[4:14:35] something or talk about something, sorry, it's my first time here.
[4:14:43] It's kind of discriminant
[4:14:45] because everybody should have an opportunity. We voted for all seven of you.
[4:14:54] We voted
[4:14:55] to start listening to us, please.
[4:14:58] Thank you.
[4:15:00] Jonathan Poster.
[4:15:03] Hello, talking about homelessness, kind of, it's actually poverty here, 16B. And, you know, I've spoken a lot about the adjusted to inflation minimum wage at $120,000 a year, but what if somebody rips through $120,000 a year, overspends on a credit card and still ends up, several hundred thousand dollars in debt, it sounds like a really good way to fix stuff like this.
[4:15:29] and then all of a sudden the city wouldn't have to take taxpayer dollars and then redirect
[4:15:35] it to somebody who may have overspent or actually didn't really make much money, right?
[4:15:40] That's probably what's been going on here or it's elderly people.
[4:15:45] So I did read the report and I support what you're doing.
[4:15:49] This is a great idea to help people.
[4:15:51] That's really what you want to hear and not everything that I would say about some of
[4:15:55] this stuff.
[4:15:55] So it says a pledge for shared prosperity that that really is the paycheck by billionaires who are not paying.
[4:16:06] This is not mom and pop pizza shop stuff.
[4:16:10] Seven eleven can pay.
[4:16:12] We all know that guy Zuckerberg with a Z. I take away the Z and I put the S in. His name is Zuckerberg to me.
[4:16:20] You suck at what you pay your employees and that work comes down here a pledge for shared prosperity
[4:16:28] Elon Musk is hoping for like a billion dollars a year no a hundred billion dollars
[4:16:35] and in ten years he'll have a trillion but if you noticed he is not paying the janitor that wipes down
[4:16:41] the bathroom in a building he owns at least a hundred and twenty thousand dollars a year
[4:16:48] But he has the money and all the people that are like this, then the city wouldn't have to redirect.
[4:16:55] So what you're doing is taking paycheck money and giving it to somebody else,
[4:16:59] they should have just put it in the paychecks, the people who are the billionaires who can do this.
[4:17:04] So thank you.
[4:17:06] Thank you.
[4:17:08] Freddie Lee, Bernice and Alfred Vazquez, Samantha Motek, Keana Atroy.
[4:17:19] All right, yeah, go ahead.
[4:17:20] All right, council members, I have mayor.
[4:17:22] I'm here to oppose 11B.
[4:17:24] We're told that people need to get involved in local politics, and item 11b is a way to disenfranchise
[4:17:30] these voters, disenfranchise a council member if they're going against their status quo.
[4:17:36] If you're leaning yes towards this item, just think about how maybe one day you're going to be the
[4:17:41] only one to support something that your people want, and you can't bring it up because you're alone.
[4:17:51] It's wanting to get rid of any checks and balances in local government.
[4:17:58] Would you want to be known as the council member that took away people's voices and to
[4:18:03] do it at the same meeting that we're celebrating Juneteenth?
[4:18:07] It feels like a sick joke.
[4:18:09] This is why I'm here to implore you to vote no on this item.
[4:18:12] Voting for this is like cutting your nose despite your face.
[4:18:15] You have all agreed that we need more transparency in our government.
[4:18:18] Adding a 41-page item at the last hour goes against that transparency.
[4:18:24] Voting yes on 11B is un-American.
[4:18:26] This item should be voted no, but at the very least it should be pushed at least one
[4:18:31] more week.
[4:18:32] Thank you.
[4:18:32] Thank you.
[4:18:34] I think Dr. Vaska is not here so Samantha Mota, Kiana, Achoi, Eric, or Leslie.
[4:18:41] Okay, I'm sorry to hear too.
[4:18:42] Okay.
[4:18:43] Okay.
[4:18:45] No worries.
[4:18:45] I know it's late.
[4:18:46] Hello,
[4:18:51] City Council, City staff, and community members.
[4:18:53] Thank you for being here today.
[4:18:55] I'm Congressional Candidate Samantha Molta,
[4:18:58] urging City Council to oppose item 11B
[4:19:02] that require Council member to gather extra support
[4:19:04] before it can be publicly discussed.
[4:19:07] The reason you were elected was to ensure the wants, needs,
[4:19:09] and concerns are heard and represented,
[4:19:12] yet you are trying to build walls that limit our voice.
[4:19:15] You are slowly creating a corrupt echo chamber
[4:19:18] by maintaining a closed environment to reinforce your beliefs while shutting out voices, punishing
[4:19:24] dissenting views and manipulating trust, as leaders were meant to build bridges, not expand upon them.
[4:19:33] The future will not belong to leaders like you that build walls around their expertise and knowledge.
[4:19:38] It is going to belong to those who bridge the gaps between the people and ways of thinking.
[4:19:42] It's easy to build structures around what we know because we think it creates clarity
[4:19:48] and efficiency, but when you're not careful, it limits your field of vision.
[4:19:53] Walls feel protective, however pathways produce possibility.
[4:19:58] and it's upcoming.
[4:20:00] And instead, investor, energy, and connecting people and ideas that might otherwise remain separate from their own. Thank you for your time, your ears and your minds. Thank you. Good night. And congratulations.
[4:20:23] I hope you guys are doing well.
[4:20:27] I'm here to speak about 11B.
[4:20:30] I've watched this council, not just this council, but I've been here back and forth since 2012 was in public policy.
[4:20:38] There are times when we have a majority from smur.
[4:20:43] It's times when we have we don't have a majority from smur.
[4:20:46] This policy here does not work for anybody because we've had mayors that have not been
[4:20:52] in the majority.
[4:20:54] We've had two hemorrhitch that was not in the majority in the last few years.
[4:20:58] Now, we have Lana who's not in the majority.
[4:21:01] Each person here represents a part of this community, voices that want to be heard,
[4:21:06] and that's the reason why they voted for you because they thought that you represented
[4:21:09] what they wanted.
[4:21:11] You are their voice.
[4:21:12] Each one of you.
[4:21:13] So if you silence somebody that's not the majority, you silence thousands of residents here.
[4:21:21] So what I implore you to do is to not put this into action because this will not always be here.
[4:21:29] You will not always be on this diet, time changes, positive change.
[4:21:35] But what will remain is what you put in here right now today.
[4:21:38] Don't do this to our city. Thank you.
[4:21:40] Okay. Thank you. So it looks okay, Zoe and then Josh time I have two minutes. Okay. Good evening, council. I'm speaking item 11B.
[4:21:55] I'm part of Truth Lives in Controversy. And I spoke at the last city council meeting about my personal feelings towards our mayor.
[4:22:06] and I was expecting an apology that I never received and I understand that you think you
[4:22:12] should not apologize. But council member Dan Hall and I had had problems and he recognized
[4:22:20] that I did something kind that day to a person that could not speak the language that you spoke
[4:22:26] immediately wrote me an email telling me thank you for doing that. And he and I don't see
[4:22:32] I to I in policy. So there's a cognitive dissonance in this. The language is vague, is 41 pages of an
[4:22:46] amendment to our policies and the way we conduct business in this chamber and we haven't had time to
[4:22:55] read those 41 pages because it was posted on Friday and we have plans for the weekend. It's
[4:23:01] graduation, Samohaj graduation was tomorrow or yesterday, there's a lot of things, you know,
[4:23:08] there's a Russian, Polish-German, Polish-German economist that wrote, those who do not move,
[4:23:15] do not notice their chains. And I'm glad that one of the speakers spoke about Juneteenth because
[4:23:22] this is slavery in our voices, you're limiting people to do their job for the constituents
[4:23:29] in a time that we are on a lawsuit for a large elections versus district elections.
[4:23:35] Think strategically because the lawyers are watching and they're going to use this against you.
[4:23:43] And they're millions of dollars on stake. It's not your money, it's the people's money. So vote
[4:23:50] accordingly.
[4:23:53] Thank you, Ms. Mentonair. Yeah, transversal.
[4:23:59] Hey, folks, two minutes, correct?
[4:24:04] I'm looking at my YouTube stream of this chamber of this council meeting and there's 52 people watching tonight.
[4:24:15] I think we, whatever we do, whatever you guys do in terms of reorganizing the agenda, I think that we have to keep that in mind.
[4:24:24] You know, there should be 520 people watching at home.
[4:24:28] There should be, this chamber should be packed most times.
[4:24:33] And so, you know, we just came back from 90-minute break
[4:24:38] for closed session and there was one little mention
[4:24:41] of an item that was handled.
[4:24:43] So I'm going to start there.
[4:24:44] I think one, you guys should try to schedule
[4:24:47] your closed sessions on alternate Tuesdays.
[4:24:49] It just doesn't public discourse gets killed.
[4:25:08] I know a lot of people show up, but you can limit it to one minute because it's not on the agenda, but keep it at the start of the meetings. And, you know, keep it to one hour, if you have to, with the rest of it coming later. But I think that if you do that, that you should have, you should choose those questions.
[4:25:29] those 25 speakers randomly so you don't have 25 people showing up at 4.30 signing up and freezing everybody out.
[4:25:39] Just an idea.
[4:25:42] Three, let's leave the 16 items alone. I used to.
[4:25:45] I was here when Kevin McCune was here and he was the 6.1 vote and he inspired me to get involved in politics.
[4:25:54] You know, you guys have earned the right to express your opinions in a 16 item, and I think you should continue to be able to do that, even if you don't have a second.
[4:26:09] Okay, thank you so much, Mr Smith.
[4:26:12] For some reason, there seems to be a discrepancy on the public comments that I have on mine, but Diana, I don't have you on mine.
[4:26:19] And it's, yeah, that's so very bizarre because she's not online, but come on up, something's happening, yeah, that's so weird.
[4:26:29] Thank you.
[4:26:33] Okay, my name is Diana Flores.
[4:26:35] I'm speaking on agenda item 11b.
[4:26:39] Good evening, mayor and council members and public.
[4:26:43] agenda item 11b proposes significant changes to the process by which elective representatives
[4:26:49] bring matters forward to public discussion.
[4:26:52] Seek direction from staff and determine when and how the public may participate in those
[4:26:58] discussions.
[4:27:00] I am concerned that the proposal appears to be a response to council member Laenna Grete's
[4:27:06] efforts to advocate for the residents of Virginia Avenue rehabilitation project.
[4:27:12] to seek greater accountability and transparency regarding the use of public funds.
[4:27:17] It is important to note that on May 26 meeting, it's important that the May 26 meeting know their council members co-sponsored her 16-B item.
[4:27:28] Council member Negraté brought the matter forward independently and demonstrating her commitment to representing residents into ensuring appropriate oversight over the city actions and expenditures.
[4:27:39] For all residents, agenda item 11B raises concerns about limiting open dialogue, reducing opportunities for elected officials spring forward issues of public importance.
[4:27:49] It also raises questions about whether the proposal could make it more difficult for residents and the representatives to address concerns that may not align with the majority of the view of the council.
[4:27:59] I believe effective governance depends on transparency, accountability, and the ability
[4:28:05] of elected representatives to raise issues on behalf of their constituents through multiple
[4:28:11] avenues. Residents deserve a government that encourages open discussion rather than restricting
[4:28:16] it. Generations of Virginia Avenue stand firmly in support of transparency, public participation,
[4:28:23] and the ability of elected representatives to advocate for the people that they serve.
[4:28:28] even if there's only one. I respectfully argue, I respectfully urge the City Council to reject this item.
[4:28:37] Yeah, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. So that appears at least on mine. Yes, okay, the final commenter.
[4:28:47] So again, 10 A has been pulled. So we will move on to 11 A and Mr. Ramirez, I believe you are staffer for it. Yeah.
[4:28:55] Thank you.
[4:29:07] Good evening, Council. Mayor and the city team, I am back tonight providing an update on the council direction from January 27, 2026 to explore participation in the term in a roses parade and share the feasibility, the funding strategy, community engagement, opportunities and implementation requirements associated with the city sponsored float on this evening's presentation will provide an overview of the work completed to date.
[4:29:32] staff's recommended float builder the proposed funding and community engagement strategy and the recommended actions necessary to move forward with implementation.
[4:29:42] Participation in the Rose Parade represents a unique opportunity to showcase Santa Monica story, strength and destination marketing efforts and engage our community to support a broader economic revitalization.
[4:29:55] So the theme is welcome, the proposed float concept sensors on the
[4:30:00] The very identity is a community that welcomes residents, visitors, businesses, artists, entrepreneurs, and people from around the world. The flow would communicate that Santa Monica remains vibrant, innovative, diverse, and open for opportunity. The goal is to celebrate belonging, connection, optimism, or reinforces the unique coastal identity. The Tournament of Roses Parade has accepted the city's application and invited the city to participate to one of the most recognized events in the world.
[4:30:29] each year the parade reaches tens of millions of viewers, nationally and internationally through television, digital, and social media coverage.
[4:30:39] Participation offers that amount of an opportunity to showcase our city on a global stage while reinforcing our identity as a premier coastal destination known for innovation, sustainability, culture, wellness, and hospitality.
[4:30:53] This
[4:30:56] is also an opportunity for civic pride and engagement.
[4:30:59] In addition to the destination marketing benefits, this project creates opportunity for
[4:31:03] civic engagement, educational partnership, volunteerism, local business promotion, and
[4:31:09] regional collaboration.
[4:31:11] Importantly, participation aligns with ongoing efforts to strengthen economic activity, tourism
[4:31:18] recovery, and community pride.
[4:31:20] staff views this as an economic development and community engagement project. On
[4:31:25] January 1st, 2027, tens of millions of viewers will see the float. Just weeks
[4:31:31] later, the world eyes returned to us for Super Bowl Media Hub, followed by our
[4:31:36] events for the 2028 Olympics. This is the pre-show that will set the tone for our
[4:31:41] global presence. A major objective of this initiative, though, is really a lot of
[4:31:46] community participation, staff will create opportunities for residents, schools, nonprofits,
[4:31:52] cultural organizations, businesses, and volunteers to become involved.
[4:31:57] Our goal is to ensure that the flow becomes a citywide project that reflects Santa Monica's
[4:32:02] collective story.
[4:32:03] This isn't just a marketing asset, it's a community project.
[4:32:06] We anticipate over a thousand volunteer spots for decorating week, giving our residents
[4:32:11] a once in a lifetime chance to participate in this California tradition.
[4:32:15] So for our evaluation process for the builders, the Tournament of Roses rules,
[4:32:22] limit participation, authorize full builders approved by the Tournament.
[4:32:26] Staff evaluated, interviewed all three approved builders and
[4:32:30] has selected artistic entertainment services as the city's official floor builder.
[4:32:36] AES demonstrated strong capabilities in creative design, project management,
[4:32:40] volunteer engagement, sponsorship integration, and operational execution.
[4:32:46] The firm has significant experience supporting roast parade participants.
[4:32:50] They demonstrated a clear understanding of the city's objectives.
[4:32:53] Staff believes AES is best positioned to help San Monica deliver a successful and impactful
[4:32:59] flow program, along with its PR and media partner in the Pollack Group.
[4:33:07] So the financial program overview, the recommended authorization is not to exceed 650,000, but
[4:33:14] it really lands into two buckets and I want to go over with those two buckets include.
[4:33:18] So, 350,000 is for the base flow program.
[4:33:22] The base investment of 350 covers flow creative development and concept, professional flow
[4:33:28] design, 3D renderings, structural engineering, full fabrication, scenic build and finish
[4:33:35] work, all floral and natural materials sourcing an application, volunteer coordination platform,
[4:33:41] form, public relations and media via the Pollock Group.
[4:33:45] Interview scheduling, AES is on-site staff guiding, decorating, parade day, and
[4:33:51] dedicated project management throughout the entire process and phase.
[4:33:56] Now in this report, you'll also see a $300,000 contingency that provides
[4:34:01] flexibility for enhancements, animation features, sponsorship opportunities, and
[4:34:06] community programming.
[4:34:07] Some of these optional upgrades priced separately include transportation, parade date trailer, hospitality tent, premium float fest packages, and a GoPro time lapse video.
[4:34:20] Again, the base 300 and 50,000 investment is complete without these.
[4:34:25] but importantly, this other station represents a maximum project budget staff will actively pursue external funding sources and provide updates regarding fundraising performance and project expenditures.
[4:34:40] All donations and sponsorship revenues would be deposited into a restricted account, track separately in accordance with our city policies, but our objective is to offset project cost to the greatest extent feasible.
[4:34:53] Thank you very much.
[4:35:02] So we have a face project timeline following your approval tonight. We move into kickoff with the vendor to finalize our strategy launch community engagement fund raising program by late summer engineering begins. This leads up to decorating week and late December, where the flow becomes the life and fresh flowers and shared with the world on January 1st. Again, during that August and December time, we would be looking for community engagement and volunteer. We would not wait for December to start our volunteer
[4:35:32] your program. It would be a process throughout the rest of the time. Again, the anticipated
[4:35:39] benefits include media exposure, enhanced destination marketing, tourism promotion,
[4:35:45] community engagement, educational partnerships, business participation, civic pride, positive
[4:35:51] regional, and international visibility. Really, this project is intended to strengthen
[4:35:56] and Santa Monica's brand while creating opportunities for our community to participate.
[4:36:02] In conclusion, just to reiterate, staff have completed preliminary planning, evaluated
[4:36:07] the float builders, developed a proposed funding strategy, identified opportunities for community
[4:36:12] participation, staff believes participation in the 2027 Tournament of the Roses presents
[4:36:18] a unique opportunity to showcase Santa Monica, engage our community and support our broader economic
[4:36:24] the public development objectives.
[4:36:26] Accordingly, staff recommends the approval
[4:36:28] of the recommended actions above
[4:36:30] to proceed with implementation
[4:36:32] and that concludes the presentation.
[4:36:34] I'm not available for any questions.
[4:36:39] Councillor Rosaria.
[4:36:41] Thank you so much, this is super exciting.
[4:36:45] So, I know you had put up the timeline
[4:36:47] with the sponsorship opportunities
[4:36:49] and when that was launched.
[4:36:51] Would you be able to go into a little bit more detail
[4:36:53] about what those sponsorship opportunities
[4:36:56] could look like and potential sponsorship levels and if we've heard any
[4:37:02] interest from our community and potentially sponsoring. Yeah absolutely.
[4:37:08] With Council's approval we would launch really packaging a sponsorship package
[4:37:13] our sort of fundraising targets. We haven't put those together because the
[4:37:18] tournament of roses has so many rules about what is it that you can do and what
[4:37:22] you can put on the float. So we wanted to make sure we had our vendor, we had your
[4:37:26] approval and with that then we could package that on different thresholds, different amounts,
[4:37:30] but we're also looking at ways to engage the entire community. It doesn't have to be a $50,000
[4:37:35] donation, a million dollars, we'll take it. But they sell, every rose, every flower has vials
[4:37:43] that they put into the float. We could do an activation where somebody could just do a few
[4:37:49] dollars or five dollars and be involved and feel that they're part of this float. They didn't have
[4:37:52] to do a massive donation, who were looking to broaden the spectrum and our economic development
[4:37:56] team has reached out to some of our community members, our businesses, and they're definitely
[4:38:01] interested, but we were holding off on started getting your approval and definitely putting
[4:38:06] those packages according to the rules from the Chairman Rose. Thank you. And I understand
[4:38:12] this is a big financial outlay for us on the front end. Would you be able to speak to some of the
[4:38:19] maybe back in financial benefits and non-financial or intangible benefits to the city if we were to participate in this?
[4:38:28] Yeah, I mean, I think it's really hard to replicate sort of the opportunity of the springs.
[4:38:33] There is 40 million plus viewerships.
[4:38:38] There is 700,000 people seeing it live and then it's broadcast over a hundred different countries.
[4:38:45] I think just having that exposure provides an opportunity to just sort of put us back on the map and again we're going to have so many programs and really our economic development team was start measuring a lot of those benefits and counting all those media posts and shares with all their language.
[4:39:06] I'm also very excited about this in doing your analysis did you take a look at the history
[4:39:15] of Santa Monica's participation in the Rose Bowl?
[4:39:19] Great before.
[4:39:20] Not in the Rose Bowl, specifically, no.
[4:39:22] No?
[4:39:24] Okay.
[4:39:24] Well, I did.
[4:39:26] And, you know, in 1947, we came in first place in the roadboat, okay?
[4:39:32] And then, 74, I think it was 75, 76, we came in first place.
[4:39:39] You know, we talk about, you know, being leaders.
[4:39:45] And obviously, as you said, it's 52 million dollars of viewers.
[4:39:49] look at the Rose Bowl greater plus that we we believe that this at least I believe
[4:39:57] that this this event is one
[4:40:00] I know we're in a question period part, but I'm giving my observation as to why I supported this endeavor. And I'm hoping you'll get as much community participation. I hope that when we take a look at the vendor, that vendor will also understand the kind of community we have to be part of it. I mean, we have many individuals like to grow in our department and our gardening department. These are things that I'm hoping that
[4:40:29] community members will engage in, but bigger than that, as a community and what we're
[4:40:36] trying to put forth to show the world, like you said, with the Olympics coming and
[4:40:44] also what we're going to be doing in 2027 with the Super Bowl.
[4:40:48] I think this event would really put us in a situation where not only the world but our
[4:40:55] community will understand the kind of connectivity that we have in our community when it comes
[4:41:02] to something like this. So I'm very excited about it and I just wanted to make that statement.
[4:41:07] Thank you. Great. I don't see anyone else in the queue so I'm just going to say
[4:41:11] do people have comments questions really quickly. I hope that when we consider sponsorships at
[4:41:18] this isn't anything I think other jurisdictions have done, we consider selling opportunities for
[4:41:21] people to ride on the float because this is obviously an international television audience
[4:41:26] and I think that that is quite meaningful. Ride on or walk with the float. I am hoping
[4:41:32] that we're able to raise the entirety of what we're looking for. I know we've talked
[4:41:38] about this as a city manager. I think hopefully you make it clear and we can start getting
[4:41:43] like that because this is building the buzz where people go to make those donations.
[4:41:51] If
[4:41:51] fun before, but if there's like a 5-1-C-3 that we've set up to take these.
[4:41:56] And then I would just say, oh, Councillor Residents, okay, I would just say I think one thing
[4:42:01] that we didn't mention is that the 2027 theme is welcome.
[4:42:05] And how apropos for us as Santa Monica, as we implement our realignment plan and renaissance
[4:42:13] that we are welcoming people back to our city, we are welcoming the world, we are welcoming
[4:42:19] the global games of FIFA and the Olympics and I just think it's absolutely the message
[4:42:23] that we want to send and it is just going to be part of this larger package of
[4:42:30] celebrating Santa Monica and so my understanding is that the tournament of roses parade in
[4:42:34] Rose Bowl generates about a quarter of a billion dollars in regional economic impact.
[4:42:40] It's important obviously I don't take this lightly that we're putting an outlay of cash out
[4:42:45] here but I think you have to spend money to make money and I think that this is really important
[4:42:48] for us. And I just want to make sure that we have some feedback on ensuring the float looks
[4:42:55] like us. Are we celebrating the peer, the sustainability, the culture of sustainability in the
[4:43:01] city, the ferris wheel, our coastline, public, our diversity. I just hope we celebrate everything
[4:43:06] that's uniquely Santa Monica because we're going to be on everyone's screens. And we want to get
[4:43:12] at this right. So, I agree with Councillor Russell. And I just think this is an amazing volunteer
[4:43:19] engagement project here and let's build community. And thank you for taking this on. We really
[4:43:23] appreciate it. Councillor Roserna's guy. Thank you. I just wanted to make a very quick
[4:43:29] comment. And outside of the fact that I've already had friends ask me how they could sign up
[4:43:35] to volunteer to work on the float. I just wanted to say that I recognize it's a big commitment
[4:43:42] and a relatively high price tag, but I see this as an opportunity, as part of our continued efforts to rebuild our city's image,
[4:43:54] help provide an outlet for community members to showcase pride in our community, celebrate the qualities that make Santa Monica, Santa Monica, and showcase the values that matter to us.
[4:44:06] So recognizing that this is kind of a unique thing I am so excited to support this item and unless anybody has any comments
[4:44:16] I would love to move the item.
[4:44:18] I'll second it.
[4:44:23] Okay.
[4:44:24] Council members are Nick Skyen.
[4:44:26] Yes.
[4:44:27] Council member Snow.
[4:44:28] Yes.
[4:44:29] Mayor Pro Tem.
[4:44:30] Swake is absent.
[4:44:31] Council member Asian.
[4:44:32] Yes.
[4:44:33] Council member Hall.
[4:44:34] Yes.
[4:44:35] Council member Negrette.
[4:44:36] Yes.
[4:44:36] and near trusses yes and we will now move on to 11b
[4:45:14] Item 11 be is adoption of resolution, amending the council rolls of order to implement Senate Bill 707, 2025, amending the Ralph M. Brown Act and making additional procedure of changes. Thank you. So good, good evening, council, Laramaria, Dackenye, Wozner, Assistant City Clerk, and I'm here with council's options to amend the rolls of order based on feedback from the January 27th meeting and new recommendations from staff, some of which
[4:45:43] comes from the amendments to the Brown Act by Senate Bill 707.
[4:45:50] So, back in January, staff was asked to explore meeting efficiency options such as scheduling
[4:45:57] separate closed session meetings on alternate Friday, alternate Tuesdays, and if the regular
[4:46:04] if the regular meeting runs long. During this discussion, there was interest in council compensation
[4:46:11] information from other jurisdictions that meet earlier or during the day.
[4:46:16] Other options explored were to increase collaboration when submitting Councilmember
[4:46:21] items or 16 items and hear general public input on non-agent items last.
[4:46:28] While public input was being discussed, alternative public comment opportunities outside of regular
[4:46:36] Council meetings were requested.
[4:46:38] And lastly, staff was asked to correct the rule, reducing speaking time for more than 25
[4:46:45] speakers per public input section to per agenda item.
[4:46:51] So back in October, the Council signed SB 707 to amend the Brown Act or the State's
[4:46:58] Open Meetings Law, which applies to City Council.
[4:47:02] Proposed items to incorporate in the rules are offering hybrid meetings for public participation,
[4:47:08] which includes a disruption policy for technology and public conduct, translating meeting information and making space for translations and interpretation services, outreach to encourage community members to participate in meetings and teleconferencing updates for council.
[4:47:28] SB 707 also allows eligible subsidiary bodies or some boards and commissions to hold remote
[4:47:34] teleconference meetings, but as we're discussing council rules and council must adopt a disruption
[4:47:40] policy by July 1st, we will return with boards and commissions recommendations later. And as the
[4:47:47] law is currently written, SB 707 will go into effect until 2030 unless otherwise amended.
[4:47:56] So going back to closed session options were posted in January and reviewing the rules
[4:48:04] to other options to hear closed session were available but were rarely exercised.
[4:48:09] The first is to schedule the regular meeting at an earlier time to hear closed session.
[4:48:15] And the second is to schedule a special meeting on another day if closed session requires more
[4:48:20] than 90 minutes.
[4:48:23] Here are other options, so the first we went over.
[4:48:27] The second option is to keep the same start time of 5.30 and hear closed session first.
[4:48:34] Open session can either resume whenever closed session is completed or after a sent amount
[4:48:40] of time or at a specified time.
[4:48:44] The third is a combination of the current rules and our practice, which is keeping it within
[4:48:49] in the meeting but setting a time limit if not completed
[4:48:52] and then hearing the rest after,
[4:48:55] hearing the rest of the item prior to adjournment.
[4:48:59] The fourth is to just hear the item last, move it towards the end.
[4:49:04] And the final item is the other option in the rules
[4:49:07] which is to that is,
[4:49:10] which is if counts close session is expected to
[4:49:13] or does run long,
[4:49:15] then it would be scheduled on a separate day
[4:49:17] when a quorum is available and before I continue if the first option is considered to meet
[4:49:26] earlier we can return with council compensation information if they're still interested in this.
[4:49:34] So council member discussion items so the topic of increased collaboration on council member
[4:49:40] discussion items was suggested and this is to show adequate support for approval save discussion
[4:49:47] time on an idea that may not receive a second or a majority vote.
[4:49:52] Council's ability to collaborate on items is only limited by the Brown Act and prohibits
[4:49:57] some majority in this case for.
[4:50:00] Council meeting. So the Brown Act and current rules allow one, two, three council members to submit items together. To increase collaboration, the first option is to have more council members a minimum of two for submission. This other option here, this is just it back in January and is similar to state's practice, which is two designated times in the fiscal year for council members to submit items.
[4:50:31] Council members can submit proposals to the city manager.
[4:50:34] The manager can then collaborate with city staff to provide feedback to council and
[4:50:40] this would then allow council to prioritize and refine items that council can formally
[4:50:46] submit later.
[4:50:49] And if the first option is chosen, we do recommend an exception for discretionary spending
[4:50:56] items.
[4:51:00] So general public input options currently general public input is only heard at regular meetings and is the first item on the agenda.
[4:51:11] This is a part of the meeting when topics that are not on the agenda, but within this jurisdiction of this city can be raised.
[4:51:18] The Brown Act Prohibits Council from taking any actions on items not listed on the agenda, including items raised during this item.
[4:51:26] And so, depending on the issue or the number of speakers, public comment and deliberation on scheduled items can be pushed back later in the evening or continue to the following meeting and affect that agenda.
[4:51:39] Options to balance general public input and agenda items are to keep it as a first item and either hear a set number of speakers or your comments for a set amount of time.
[4:51:52] and then hear remaining speakers prior to adjournment.
[4:51:56] The second option here is to hear the item last,
[4:52:01] and either at regular meetings only
[4:52:03] or hold additional meetings specifically for general public input.
[4:52:11] I didn't want to go over other options
[4:52:14] that are already available for the public in the roles.
[4:52:22] So, back in January, concerns were expressed over speakers in ability to stay until the
[4:52:27] end of meetings and the roles provide options to contact council in and outside of meetings.
[4:52:34] During the meeting and option for community members who can't wait until the end can submit
[4:52:38] written comments prior to council voting on items and forms are available with city clerk
[4:52:44] staff at meetings and comments are distributed on the
[4:52:47] dius because council cannot take action on items raised under general public input.
[4:52:56] Other options are to submit written communication to propose an item under item 15.
[4:53:02] Forms are also available in our office and would be referred to the city manager's office
[4:53:08] to either address administratively or to place on an upcoming agenda if appropriate.
[4:53:14] And if placed on the agenda, then more time would be available to present the item,
[4:53:19] hear comments, and for council to deliberate.
[4:53:23] The remaining option is for the public to raise issues of concern is by email,
[4:53:31] by emailing the council and requesting an appointment.
[4:53:36] So, here are other roles that we are proposing and we are proposing amendments to nine rules
[4:53:45] from meeting efficiency and those required by SB 707.
[4:53:49] Rule one just elaborates on the description of the rules, we're clarifying that it applies
[4:53:56] to subcommittees such as the audit subcommittee and new board and commissions as guidelines
[4:54:03] lines before they adopt bylaws.
[4:54:06] Rule two, time and place for meetings, refers council to the latest version of the Brown
[4:54:11] Act for teleconferencing options.
[4:54:17] Rule five on the agenda is city staff and council's procedures to submit discussion items
[4:54:25] and distribute the agenda, where our office, city quicks office, is adding a backup agenda
[4:54:31] a posting location in case our primary location is unavailable and another location for publicly
[4:54:37] translated agendas for SB 707.
[4:54:42] SB 707 also sets the threshold for agenda translations but as
[4:54:48] the city currently does not reach this threshold the clerk will conduct annual reviews should require
[4:55:00] Bill also requires outreach efforts. Two groups that do not traditionally participate in meetings. So, we will be working with the city manager's office to translate public facing council web pages and agendas and with the office of communications on outreach. The last two bullets here just cleans up two rules for ease of reference. They were duplicate procedures for council to submit discussion items and for speakers to submit PowerPoints or visuals.
[4:55:29] for public comment and so the rule to submit council discussion items will be merged
[4:55:36] here on roll five and the one regarding visuals will be moved to public testimony.
[4:55:45] Rule six categories in orders of business provides councils agenda outline and general
[4:55:51] descriptions of each category. We recommend moving council travel reports, the mayor's
[4:55:58] Highlight and City Manager's report on the agenda.
[4:56:01] Council will be asked for travel reports
[4:56:02] after being asked for the VNAC disclosures.
[4:56:05] And the Highlight and Manager's report
[4:56:07] would be heard with other special agenda items
[4:56:10] such as proclamations and commendations.
[4:56:14] Additionally, we're recommending
[4:56:15] deleting the resolution's category,
[4:56:19] which is item 14 and hearing substantive resolutions
[4:56:24] where public input is advisable
[4:56:26] under staff administrative items under item 11 and further rules routine resolutions can continue to be placed under consent.
[4:56:37] And the last bullet is that cleanup item regarding council member discussion items.
[4:56:45] Rule 15, public testimony.
[4:56:49] Our council's public comment rules and we recommend this continuing the formative
[4:56:55] option to speak on only one agenda item as it has been difficult to explain to speakers
[4:57:00] and track and enforce with the limitations of our public speaker system.
[4:57:05] We're also clarifying rules providing space for interpretation, services and devices and
[4:57:13] and remote attendance and public comment through a two-way
[4:57:16] telephonic platform per SB 707.
[4:57:20] And this is what it's currently offered
[4:57:21] to speakers who comment by phone.
[4:57:24] And that does not require internet
[4:57:26] that some community members might not have access to.
[4:57:32] This last slide are, again, clean up items
[4:57:35] under public testimony.
[4:57:38] We're removing that duplicate reference
[4:57:40] on electronic presentations.
[4:57:41] We're clarifying the rule that in a regular meeting with a special meeting items or joint
[4:57:51] meeting items that they are considered as one meeting.
[4:57:55] So we can only offer the general public input sections offered at regular meetings.
[4:58:03] And also if there is a regular meeting agenda and a special meeting agenda and we're
[4:58:11] concurrently hearing them again we're limited to the public input sections that are available
[4:58:16] during the general that a regular meeting. And then that last bullet we're just transferring
[4:58:24] the rule on speaking order and prioritizing students to subsection beyond registration so we're just
[4:58:30] moving that higher in the rule so it's not buried.
[4:58:36] Rule 16, conduct and safety
[4:58:40] has seven SB 707 requirements for a disruption policy, defining disruptions, and allowing
[4:58:47] the mayor to warn, limit, or remove disruptive individuals, participating in person or over
[4:58:54] the phone.
[4:58:56] Rule 19, again, another cleanup item where,
[4:59:00] if, so, a rule 19 is on voting, and its council's
[4:59:05] voting procedures on various motions and items, including boards and commissions.
[4:59:08] appointment, and for ease of reference, we're moving up the language to the beginning of
[4:59:14] this section to allow roll call votes when there are only two nominees for boarding commission
[4:59:18] appointments.
[4:59:23] Okay, last year rules, rule 27, use of technology as SB 707 requirements to establish service
[4:59:32] restoration procedures during a telephone or internet service disruption, and procedures
[4:59:38] teachers include calling a recess to restore services for at least an hour, documenting
[4:59:43] the nature time of occurrence and restoration efforts of the disruption in the meeting
[4:59:51] minutes, and adopting a finding that if services cannot be restored, then...
[5:00:01] The last item here is another formatting change where we're moving up the roll and council
[5:00:07] briefings higher into the resolution so that we conclude with the typical rolls that
[5:00:15] are passed resolutions and with.
[5:00:21] So now, I know that was a lot, but this goes over
[5:00:24] or possibly a proposed order of business,
[5:00:29] or at least gives you a higher level overview
[5:00:32] of how the agenda could change.
[5:00:35] So this could change at the next meeting
[5:00:37] unless we get other direction,
[5:00:39] but the underlying items are staff recommendations
[5:00:44] and the items in red are what we will be seeking direction on.
[5:00:48] So after the land acknowledgement,
[5:00:50] council will be asked for disclosures
[5:00:51] on Libby and Act and Travel. Item one, journal public input and input on special agenda items
[5:00:58] may be separated. Item two on special agenda items will include the mayor's highlight and
[5:01:04] seat measures report. Item three, public input on consent and closed session may be separated
[5:01:11] if item five on closed session is moved. And if move then input on closed session would go
[5:01:20] to the nearest consolidated public input section.
[5:01:25] And then skipping to item 11, staff administrative items
[5:01:30] will include substantive resolutions
[5:01:33] if public comment is advisable.
[5:01:36] Item 12 public hearings will have no changes
[5:01:39] to public comment rules.
[5:01:41] And then prior to adjournment,
[5:01:43] all or remaining general public input
[5:01:48] but, or close session, could be heard.
[5:01:53] And then I just wanna go back to our proposed changes
[5:01:57] to public comment.
[5:01:59] The first was council direction
[5:02:04] to reduce speaking time for more than 25 speakers
[5:02:06] for agenda item.
[5:02:08] The public speaker kiosk can be structured
[5:02:11] so that speakers can register for the items
[5:02:14] that they wish to speak on.
[5:02:16] And then the mayor can call speakers
[5:02:18] by agenda item order. And then the second item is the recommendation to discontinue four
[5:02:25] minutes if registering for only one item. I also just wanted to go over what won't change
[5:02:32] in public testimony rules. So speakers would still have one or two items except for consent
[5:02:42] because that's consolidated one minute for late speakers and speakers on written communication,
[5:02:48] which is item 15. We'll still have the maximum of six minutes per speaker and per meeting.
[5:02:55] The twice the time will be given to speakers requiring interpretation and five minutes for
[5:03:01] authorized board and commission representatives. Because we sometimes get this question,
[5:03:07] just wanted to clarify that time donation is discontinued
[5:03:12] and
[5:03:17] so I know that was a lot but I
[5:03:21] think it might be easier just to split it up this way just so that you can see our SB 707
[5:03:29] policies and visions this must be adopted by July 1st and this is a list of those items and I can
[5:03:37] go back to this if that's helpful when we take questions and discussion. These are proposed
[5:03:44] modifications. This is all of the cleanup language that we were moving around and these
[5:03:55] are the exploratory items that we were asked to return with. And so that ends my presentation
[5:04:03] and I am available for questions.
[5:04:07] Thank you so much. I think in the future it would be helpful to see everything that we need to make decisions on,
[5:04:12] on like one screen or something like that, but appreciate it. Thanks so much.
[5:04:17] We have to have these questions, guys, or comments? Okay.
[5:04:21] Councillor Renegrette.
[5:04:23] I know when we were giving direction, thank you for that.
[5:04:27] We also discussed and I saw you talking about starting meetings a little bit earlier.
[5:04:33] slightly in there, but ultimately you landed on closed session still being in the middle
[5:04:40] as an option, as opposed to having it. I know we have to eat dinner, but like at the beginning
[5:04:46] of the meeting, I don't even, so there is no option up there to have it on an alternate
[5:04:52] day.
[5:04:54] It's still the last one.
[5:05:00] I agree, Tuesday was mentioned, but in case the quorum isn't available. I just thought it would just like to throw it to that. Like, if eating dinner is a part of it, because people are coming from work and not having dinner, you know, even having it before the meeting and limiting it to 130 could potentially be an option, just throwing it out there, even though I know that's not on this list. And then I would just say that this is a lot of pages, and we did get it really late. And I think that the meetings are for public.
[5:05:29] And so the public didn't get, I mean, myself included didn't get a lot of time to go through over 2000 pages of this agenda packet, including this.
[5:05:38] So it would have liked more time and still would like more time to be honest with you to consume all of this.
[5:05:45] Because I know we're just being asked three or four items, but I think there's a little bit more to this and maybe more discussion.
[5:05:53] and I would almost like to have the discussion and maybe even table it for a final decision
[5:05:59] in the next meeting.
[5:06:00] I'm sort of proposing that question to my colleagues, but the other question I had was, I'm sorry,
[5:06:07] you had the early before, these are the policy just meeting after, and then, I had suggested
[5:06:15] at one point, and I know, especially on this council with our work schedules, I mean, work
[5:06:21] work out this way, but having one council meeting a month during the day and
[5:06:25] angle it in other places, they do that.
[5:06:28] I just want to remind people, at least for myself, not everybody works during the day.
[5:06:33] There are jobs where people work at night and on the weekends.
[5:06:36] And there are constituencies that cannot come at night for a variety of reasons.
[5:06:42] I also do feel that because we make such huge decisions and
[5:06:46] we're discussing millions and millions of dollars often that
[5:06:50] I would prefer to make those decisions not at one o'clock in the morning, or even 11 o'clock at night, and I didn't see that
[5:06:58] Discussion item even up there as an as an option like alternating a daytime meeting for city council
[5:07:06] I left it early. I'm just before 530, but yes, it could be if you are as it could be earlier in in the day, but
[5:07:14] this first action was
[5:07:17] to say before 5.30, but is there an option where it would be an evening like we have two meetings a month, one is a day, one is evening so that it serves that purpose and the events that people can only make themselves available early a one time a month or were you just saying every meeting would start earlier as your option up there.
[5:07:36] here. Here it was to change the regular meeting time to an earlier time. So was your suggestion
[5:07:45] yeah just as you're regular in an early right is there any city that I don't know if you looked at
[5:07:50] other cities when you're doing this that does alternate like maybe they do one daytime meaning
[5:07:55] and one evening meeting within their months of meetings for example we have two a month so maybe the
[5:08:00] first Tuesday is an earlier daytime meeting the second Tuesday is a new meeting I don't know that
[5:08:05] So does that make sense? I'm just asking if how you came up with that solution if you looked at other cities at all.
[5:08:12] It was not here. We did not look at other cities. And I mean, the last time we conducted a study was in 2021.
[5:08:21] So I don't think that information is current. So so no, we have not looked into other cities.
[5:08:28] Okay. That's it for questions. At least.
[5:08:37] I just have two questions and the first one sorry this is quite pointed but Madam City clerk or maybe the city manager can answer why was this staff report delayed so much and then dropped on a Friday afternoon.
[5:08:52] Well, one of the reasons was that we did still need to come back with SB707 changes.
[5:09:01] So rather than having two separate reports, proposing a change early in the year and then
[5:09:08] adding another change, just having one made more sense and as for posting later in the
[5:09:18] And it just was not ready by Tuesday and our normal practices to post the remaining packet on the Thursday or the Friday.
[5:09:29] And moving forward that's ultimately my responsibility to make sure we get everything published on time so as we move forward we'll make sure we get things coordinated we publish a week out in advance, especially for complex issues like this.
[5:09:43] I think as we were working through all of the processes last week, the city clerk's office was trying to balance some of the new state regulations with, you know, interpreting some of the office.
[5:10:00] To make sure we do this a little bit better and ultimately that falls on my shoulders will make sure we do better. Thank you. Second question. If we were to choose to add meetings to alternate Tuesdays, Tuesday evenings to hear close session. Maybe this is for the city attorney. Can we can we put the public comment item one with the closed session meeting on on the alternate Tuesdays? Since that likely would be a
[5:10:29] shorter meeting, I assume? Or do we have to have it for every meeting? Every regular meeting,
[5:10:34] under the brown act, every regular meeting requires the general public comment. So special meetings
[5:10:39] is where you have that flexibility. Got it. Thank you.
[5:10:44] Councilor Ruskin.
[5:10:47] Thanks. I'll have more in a discussion, Ms. One question for now. Can you help us understand
[5:10:52] how we're monitoring disruptions in the two-way teleconferencing system and how we know that there
[5:10:58] would be disruption, you know, sometimes it might appear as if a caller might fall off.
[5:11:05] I mean, do we have ways in which we can tell whether it's actually really a disruption
[5:11:09] of technology or somebody who's just not there in the line?
[5:11:13] Well, there's two disruption policies, one for public conduct, one for technology.
[5:11:19] In the cases that we've had, it's that a person hangs up.
[5:11:25] We do try to call them back, we do have their contact information, but if we're not able
[5:11:31] to get a hold of them before it's time to give comments, then we feel like we've done
[5:11:37] whatever, everything that we can, so we do try to keep them online and give them an update
[5:11:44] if the way it's going to be a little longer.
[5:11:48] Did that answer your question, or were there?
[5:11:51] Okay.
[5:11:51] Okay.
[5:11:54] Okay. Council members are in its way.
[5:11:56] And I'll try to go kind of quickly. So I'll start with questions first, to be clear.
[5:12:04] Okay, so this might be a silly one. There was a slide with the proposed order of business. And I think it was missing consent calendar item four.
[5:12:12] So we would still have consent calendar items this four. Is that correct? Yes. Okay, and then under the SB 707 amendments to the Brown Act.
[5:12:21] Are there any changes to remote agenda posting requirements?
[5:12:27] No.
[5:12:28] There isn't.
[5:12:30] And to make sure I'm understanding the teleconferencing and accessibility requirements,
[5:12:38] do those amendments to the Brown Act allow for increased remote participation by boards and
[5:12:44] commissions? Because I understand the particularly the disability's commission has been
[5:12:49] and sharing
[5:12:54] their thoughts on the need for the remote participation for some of their
[5:13:01] board members, or board commission members, are you?
[5:13:04] It does for some, and we would need to work with the attorney's office to determine which
[5:13:08] boards and commissions can qualify, and if there are, then we would come back to Council.
[5:13:15] And it would need to be authorized by Council to allow boards and commissions to have hybrid
[5:13:21] meetings. Is there anything that you want to add?
[5:13:26] That is correct. SB 7-7 is specific that the requirement is only for a city of this
[5:13:33] size. It's only for the city council at this time and it's optional for boards and commissions
[5:13:36] and so we would work through that process with the clerk's office and bring back options
[5:13:40] for council.
[5:13:41] Okay. Got it. In city attorney, I have one other question for you just from a first amendment
[5:13:49] legal perspective on general non-agentized public comment, would it be permissible for us to prioritize general non-agentized public comment by minors and people who may need disability related accommodation or something of the like if we limit the total time at the beginning of the meeting for those types of comments and then hear the remainder before adjournment.
[5:14:17] As I understand it, you already currently prioritized minors at the beginning of the meeting.
[5:14:22] I think persons with disability would probably be something that you could do as well.
[5:14:28] The primary concern would be if it was based on the content of what they would be speaking
[5:14:34] to.
[5:14:35] This sounds like it would be content neutral and the reasoning would be that these folks
[5:14:41] would have an easier would have more of a need to leave the meeting sooner which has nothing to
[5:14:46] do with the message that they're that they're trying to convey to the city. And there may potentially
[5:14:51] be other accommodations that folks may need, like if they...
[5:15:00] I don't drive and need to take public transit and need to leave earlier so they can catch a bus if it's not running very later. Things like that. Sure. So that is something the council could consider. I would say that's probably fairly difficult to start administering. And you may end up almost in the same place just because you, depending on the number that you're choosing, right? So it's an option, but it may get complicated.
[5:15:28] But definitely understand that there's going to be a lot of concern about how to if you were to kind of split up the general public comment, how that looks and how best to administer that.
[5:15:39] Okay, thank you.
[5:15:40] Sorry, my question.
[5:15:41] Councilor Rousseau.
[5:15:44] I just have one question.
[5:15:46] SB 707 must be adopted by July 1st.
[5:15:50] If the direction of council would be to postpone and push this forward, would you have enough time at our next meeting to be able to bring back the item and for us to directly accelerate about the item and to implement it before your livers.
[5:16:10] But I guess it would depend on the direction that you would like, if you want to provide direction so that we know what to come back with.
[5:16:19] I think it depends on that.
[5:16:22] Another option would be to come back with just the 707 policies at the next meeting so that it would give us more time to work on the other recommendations.
[5:16:33] questions? Thank you.
[5:16:37] Councilmember Negrete.
[5:16:40] Oh, okay. I just, it
[5:16:45] seems as though there was like some sort of like interpretive discretion
[5:16:51] taken and putting some of this forward.
[5:16:54] And I would just say like, the way that it's organized for me is making it very hard to digest
[5:17:01] and the fact that we got it on a Friday is making it very difficult for me. And I would just
[5:17:06] say I'm deeply opposed to only having to require two people on an item from a policy standpoint
[5:17:12] like I don't even know why we thought that was a good idea so yeah well anyways I would
[5:17:18] just say concerned about some of the stuff I'm seeing here so and not and and I think a
[5:17:23] review of best practices is pretty important so yeah anyway Councilor Integrity well I appreciate
[5:17:33] using the, it came forward because it was proposed to and so I have my thoughts and feelings
[5:17:39] about that part explicitly and feel that for all the reasons that were stated, individuals
[5:17:45] are elected. We just saw in the last meeting that even though council members like myself
[5:17:50] had tried to get support or collaborate with other members ultimately ended up bringing
[5:17:55] something forward that the unanimously got voted on. So for a variety of reasons that I don't
[5:18:02] need to go in the labor right now. I think that is one that is should definitely not be supporting.
[5:18:10] But I will agree that while I appreciate that there's 40 plus pages of
[5:18:17] in this report to look at the rules and there's lots of changes and making sure there's
[5:18:22] the language is agreeable because once these are in here they affect all the meetings going forward.
[5:18:28] I just don't feel like it's enough time, so I would love to hear what everyone has to say,
[5:18:34] but propose that we go forward, as Council members know, I think was possibly trying to
[5:18:38] suggest with what needs to be done so that we're compliant, but that we take a little bit
[5:18:43] more time to digest this and maybe give some more comments about the framework of how we move
[5:18:52] forward to make sure that my biggest goal is these meetings I know for us, we take on this
[5:18:58] job it's we talk a lot about all the work it does we work during the day everyone has a different
[5:19:05] life stuff going on and what they go home to and out their work schedule is so it's a lot
[5:19:10] of an undertaking this is not a full-time council job it's a full-time staff so
[5:19:15] understanding that though we all took this on we chose no one forced us to run
[5:19:19] and we all said that we were here to serve the community and at the end of the day this space
[5:19:24] is a moment for people to talk to all seven of us.
[5:19:28] Yes, they can email us, yes, they can write us.
[5:19:30] But oftentimes, we all know that there's thousands of emails
[5:19:33] and I feel that people feel they don't get responses.
[5:19:36] And the best way is when you can look people in the face
[5:19:38] and they can hear and see your emotion
[5:19:41] and your frustration or happiness with an item
[5:19:43] they can catch us in the hall on the way to close session.
[5:19:47] Those are the moments that make City Hall feel like
[5:19:49] it's participatory for the entire community.
[5:19:52] A lot of people aren't part of large organizations that are involved in all the things.
[5:20:00] In Santa Monica and their moment to be involved is to come and line up and speak. And I also have thoughts and feelings I understand that we can't be heard all night for public comment, but for some people to maybe take public transit and spend hours to then only get a minute. I always feel really bad for people who are sitting here and it's really nerve wrecking to get up here and talk to us. So I would like more time to see how we can best do a meeting.
[5:20:29] I just also wanted to point out that when I was first on here, we had changed the rules like 21-22
[5:20:34] because I was here when everyone got public comment before every item and I didn't think,
[5:20:39] I know people say they want that because they feel like they're talking right before the item,
[5:20:43] but I have to say that that made the meetings go really long and that process of doing public comment
[5:20:48] and reading names, you know, had to happen multiple times. I do feel that earlier the public can make
[5:20:54] their comments the better. We are the ones that took on being elected officials to stay here all
[5:20:59] night. That's our problem. I don't think it's the community's problem to have to sit here and
[5:21:03] wait for us to try to talk about something at midnight. So and however we can organize things,
[5:21:10] whether it's earlier, I'm just saying my comments, but I think we should be accommodating people being
[5:21:16] able to speak publicly to all of us here and the most accessible and easy way. I appreciate your
[5:21:22] concerns council members on sky don't I think it would be really hard to discern who has disabilities
[5:21:28] that are not obvious or needs to get on the bus or whatever so that might be difficult but of
[5:21:34] course when there's students here and there's other obvious circumstances I think the mayors have
[5:21:40] always been accommodating of everyone coming up to speak but I would just urge this council to allow
[5:21:46] every independent voice that's elected here be able to bring an item forward I think we ran to
[5:21:51] represent a constituency and we should have the ability to do that.
[5:21:55] Often times if you're not part of a block you might bring something forward that everybody
[5:21:59] ends up getting to hear that discussion around and because we can only speak to two other
[5:22:03] council members if you don't get collaboration then now you have an opportunity to have it
[5:22:09] heard by the balance of the council and then lastly I really want to emphasize meeting as
[5:22:15] early as possible or moving close session and maybe there's times where we don't have
[5:22:21] items and we don't have to have an additional meeting as much as possible so that the public can
[5:22:27] participate and they can speak here and their voices can be heard on that mic every other Tuesday
[5:22:33] whenever we have to come to meet. Great Council Member Hall.
[5:22:43] Thank you, bear.
[5:22:48] I think I'll start with the maybe the delay of the staff report on this item and on most
[5:22:56] of our agenda for this week, long before I got here and certainly long before I was
[5:23:03] on this dius, but when I started watching council meetings, it seemed like our agendas
[5:23:10] were published like at least a week in advance and I would love and encourage staff that we push back
[5:23:16] towards that direction because they have started sliding and I think we've tried to give some grace
[5:23:22] for that and have carried some water for that amongst community members and stakeholders to
[5:23:29] to to allow y'all to to do a lot of the great work that we're doing but I would like to see us
[5:23:36] ratchet that in and lock in a little more around a week in advance if we can and use emergency
[5:23:44] and urgency ordinances for emergencies and emergencies.
[5:23:53] And I think we can also potentially
[5:23:56] do a better job around bringing in key stakeholders and community members for controversial items.
[5:24:00] And I know city manager, we've got some ideas around on that. So hopefully we can move forward
[5:24:05] on some of that. I agree with my colleagues, Council Member Snell and Council Member Degrette,
[5:24:13] I think this is a lot to digest and maybe we could bifurcate this into what we need to do tonight
[5:24:18] for SB 707 and what now that we're in an open session, we can have a dialogue and get a
[5:24:25] temperature for each other's opinions on some of these things. So maybe I'll just go through the
[5:24:31] list of where my head's at right now, at least. On closed session scheduling, I'm pretty
[5:24:39] interested in scheduling special meetings on alternate Tuesdays for our closed sessions.
[5:24:46] If folks are able to accommodate that, these meetings just get so long and I know we don't
[5:24:52] want to do closed session at the end of the meetings. Public meetings are for the public
[5:24:57] and or
[5:25:01] And I think that's an important distinction to make, but we often make some of our most consequential decisions in closed session that constitute hundreds of millions of dollars sometimes. And I don't like making those decisions at 1 a.m. So I think the only reasonable kind of alternative here that we have is to have those on alternate days. And since Tuesdays are generally protected in our calendars, because we have these alternate Tuesdays, maybe the second and fourth or whatever we're on now, I don't even know.
[5:25:30] But next policy decision.
[5:25:35] So collaboration on councilmember discussion items.
[5:25:38] So I know this is controversial.
[5:25:40] I will take ownership of the idea on proposing how to increase collaboration.
[5:25:46] One of the concepts I proposed was including multiple council members on an item.
[5:25:51] I strongly believe that collaboration sharpens ideas and proposals.
[5:25:57] And I do think that it's great to see when we bring forward proposals having multiple
[5:26:05] people on the items because that increases confidence that, you know, there's a need
[5:26:11] for things.
[5:26:11] There's ideas that have been balanced and sharpened off of each other, but it does also create
[5:26:16] situations where, you know, some residents or stakeholders may feel they can only trust
[5:26:21] one of us.
[5:26:22] And I acknowledge that and recognize that and the May 26 meeting apologies for not being there.
[5:26:27] I was entering my grandfather, but watching the video of that meeting, it was, if we were to propose,
[5:26:36] if we were to implement this proposal, it would have put us in a, you know, council member to grant
[5:26:41] they had brought forward an item. She had attempted to bring along two additional council members.
[5:26:46] They couldn't find an agreement on what the item should say.
[5:26:49] And at that point, you know, obviously the Brown Act was blocking it, but if we were to do this, it would implement or it would set us up in a situation where we're like, we get in Brown Act situation.
[5:27:00] So then that item could have never been heard.
[5:27:04] So I don't think that that is a good proposal to move forward with.
[5:27:09] Um, on timing of general public input, I mean, these meetings are like balloons, you know, we can inflate the balloon and the meeting gets longer, but that also increases staff time that increases over time for our protection or security that's here increases costs increases, you know, it delays tough decisions into late night, and that has transparency issues.
[5:27:40] So I don't know what the right answer for that is, I guess if we have to do something and try something new because this isn't working, I'd be open to keeping item one at the start of the meeting.
[5:27:55] Setting a time limit of maybe 20 minutes and hearing the remainder of it at the end of the meeting before adjournment.
[5:28:05] like I said I think in January the 25 or sorry 26 or more speakers I think
[5:28:13] should be purge and item and I believe that was our original guidance and then
[5:28:21] I have no issues with any of the cleanup or clarifying amendments that I saw so
[5:28:25] I'll in my comments there. Council members are in sky. Thank you
[5:28:34] all right there
[5:28:35] this. Sorry, sometimes it doesn't want to work. So I'm comfortable if the council consensus
[5:28:43] is that we want to bifurcate it, but I would like to provide my feedback on the proposed
[5:28:51] changes to the council rules, just so should we bifurcate it, the feedback could be worked
[5:28:57] into what comes back to us.
[5:29:00] So on the closed session options,
[5:29:03] I would be comfortable having continuing to have closed session
[5:29:08] within the meeting but setting the time limit of 60 minutes
[5:29:11] and either continuing the remainder prior to adjournment,
[5:29:15] if not completed within time limit
[5:29:17] or having it on the alternate days.
[5:29:20] So maybe we keep 60 minutes for a closed session
[5:29:23] and everything else we handle on the alternate days.
[5:29:25] on the council member discussion item and collaboration, I appreciate the intent of trying to promote collaboration, but I do think that there can be situations where there may be issues that are time sensitive or have unique considerations that would limit the ability to get additional council members to join a particular item.
[5:29:47] And even when there are disagreements about the best path to address an underlying issue whether a council member and whether a council member discussion.
[5:30:00] Okay, and the option for one council member to bring forward a council member discussion item. And to use the example of the prior council meeting in the 16 item, that council member Negrette brought at the last meeting. While ultimately neither council member Raskin nor I ended up signing on to it, we did help provide some feedback for the language that I think ultimately strengthen the item. So there was still collaboration even if there was only one council member's name on the item.
[5:30:29] at the council meeting, and I think, you know, there's always considerations as to why someone may or may not choose to sign on to it.
[5:30:39] And I appreciate, again, the opportunity to be part of that.
[5:30:46] On the general non-agentized public comment, I would support a combination of kind of options two and four, so retaining up to 20 minutes of general for general public input at the beginning of a meeting.
[5:30:58] excluding time needed for translation if such if that's needed and I think if we're able
[5:31:06] to prioritize speakers who are minors or speakers who may need accommodation for disability
[5:31:11] related concerns and the like putting them at the allowing them to go at the beginning
[5:31:17] of the meeting would be my my preference as well as providing opportunity for the remaining
[5:31:28] I do think we can continue to provide opportunity for people to submit written public comment if they can't stay until the end of the meeting.
[5:31:39] And I think that we should also offer quarterly council listening sessions for other general public input because I think at regular meetings.
[5:31:48] that's kind of, oh, something is very time sensitive.
[5:31:51] I need to bring it to the council,
[5:31:53] but if there's general thoughts that people have,
[5:31:56] you know, about the direction the city is going
[5:31:58] or whatever policy decisions we're making
[5:32:01] or how we're doing as a council,
[5:32:02] I think quarterly listening sessions would be a good option.
[5:32:05] And just quick note for folks who might be listening,
[5:32:10] a number of us actually offer office hours.
[5:32:13] So, we try to be accessible to the public, people can book one-on-one time with us, some of us do in-person office hours, some do combination of in-person, virtual, and wagging walk-in chats if you want to go for a walk with my dog and I, and let me know what's what's important to you.
[5:32:35] And on the managing speaking time for 25 plus speakers, I would agree with reducing from two minutes to one minute for more than 25 speakers per item rather than section.
[5:32:46] So that's, that's where I'm at. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Raskin.
[5:32:54] Thank you. Yeah, I'm also okay with by for creating this item and proceeding with just what we have to tonight. I mean, I don't think we should
[5:33:05] to delay the 707 implementation, but on the rules changes, I mean, obviously, we'll
[5:33:13] have to align that with 707, but on the other step, I'm fine holding off on that.
[5:33:20] Yeah, I'm also very much not interested in requiring two people to sign on to a 60 item.
[5:33:28] I mean, there are times when I'm the only person who's interested in doing something.
[5:33:31] thing. I think we're all sometimes in that vote. But, you know, it's just part of the
[5:33:37] legislative process and sometimes, you know, you can get up there and, you know, in this
[5:33:41] context we can convince people and, you know, that's the dialogue. So, I'd like to keep
[5:33:49] that as it is.
[5:33:53] You know, at some point we got to think about broader, like, structural
[5:33:57] and how we do this legislative process and bring 60 items.
[5:34:01] You know, I've been critical of the way that we bring 60 items in general.
[5:34:06] You know, I think, you know, I've been hesitant to sign on to 60 items
[5:34:10] because of the workload that we have been adding onto staff
[5:34:13] and I think it's important for us to recognize that.
[5:34:16] You know, I've been interested in exploring legislative models
[5:34:19] that kind of mirror what they do with the state legislature
[5:34:21] where you do it on an annual cycle that mirrors the fiscal year.
[5:34:26] where, say, for example, you start off in the winter where each of us can get like 10
[5:34:31] bills or something like that, carry it through the year, then work it up through a calendar
[5:34:36] process and still have opportunities for emergency items through the year. But, I think we
[5:34:40] should think creatively about other ways to do this 16 item thing that has just become an
[5:34:47] allotross of sorts for the way in which we conduct business.
[5:34:53] I echo the concerns to you about the way that we do that.
[5:35:00] The way in which agendas are posted and information comes out. I can see both sides of this. I work as an agency attorney for agencies that have to review and do due diligence for agendas and for staff reports.
[5:35:20] I want to give credit to our teams with the city attorney's office, the manager's office, the clerk's office, for the amount of scrutiny that goes into every staff report.
[5:35:29] everything against published publicly. It's really incredibly fun wrong, but it's like a two or
[5:35:36] three-week process that goes into preparing these items. And on the back end, on the front end
[5:35:41] for all of this stuff, it's something where you've got to have so much lead time. I'd be interested
[5:35:48] in exploring ways in which we can deliver that to the public with more time for the public review.
[5:35:56] But, you know, certainly I wouldn't want to sacrifice the quality that goes into that process.
[5:36:02] I think we can find the sweet spot. I think we can find ways to do it.
[5:36:05] You know, it's going to require, I think, some brainstorming from all the stakeholders involved.
[5:36:10] But, you know, we've gotten into the habit of other folks that recognize over the past two years where, you know, on the Tuesday,
[5:36:16] before the meeting, we'll get like the first agenda.
[5:36:18] There's like the first package of things that come up.
[5:36:21] And then sometimes folks, the public will say, okay, well, that's the agenda, they won't
[5:36:24] check them again.
[5:36:25] You know, then Friday rolls around and we have a new dump of things that are added to
[5:36:28] the agenda.
[5:36:29] And sometimes folks miss that because they saw what was posted on Tuesday, they don't know
[5:36:32] that more stuff is going to come out on Friday.
[5:36:35] So, you know, let's, you know, when we come back with this, assuming we hope to come bring
[5:36:40] this back, you know, I'd like to explore some options for, like, agenda rollout in a way
[5:36:46] the facility's public participation while also maintaining the schedule on, you know,
[5:36:52] the staff side of the review and process that goes into preparing this.
[5:36:59] On the structure of public comment, you know, I've always been against getting rid of
[5:37:06] the donation of time.
[5:37:08] I've always thought that folks really have their first amendment right to have their advocates
[5:37:12] and representatives speak for them.
[5:37:14] I was disappointed when we got rid of that.
[5:37:17] I don't know if I'm going to have the votes to put it back, but I'd be interested in putting that back.
[5:37:22] I think that there's also merit to keeping at least some portion of the general public comments at the beginning.
[5:37:28] Obviously, they're trade-offs. I think, you know, maybe we can cap it.
[5:37:31] I don't know.
[5:37:32] You know, Councilman Hall said it's like it was like a balloon.
[5:37:36] Where it's like a moon.
[5:37:37] Yeah, exactly. You know, it's difficult.
[5:37:40] But you know, I was here back today as we did public or general public comment at the end, and it really measurably diminished public participation.
[5:37:50] And I actually remember the last meeting before COVID was in the civic center in the East Wing, and Chad and JT came up meeting last minute they were at and they stayed all the way until the end, but they were there for like six hours.
[5:38:04] And yeah, you know, it's it's it's hard for people. So I'd like to keep at least some
[5:38:12] portion of general public comment in the beginning. You know, I obviously they're
[5:38:16] trade-offs for the master's time to give people it's one minute is tough. And so I
[5:38:24] would really urge my colleagues to think about, you know, if we're gonna have that
[5:38:28] one minute threshold, you know, think about whether it makes sense to donate time again.
[5:38:34] You know, if there are going to be three people speaking on the same subject anyway, they're
[5:38:37] all going to say the same thing.
[5:38:39] You know, why not just combine that and let persons, what let a person speak for three minutes
[5:38:44] or four minutes and have more coherent and robust presentation so that you're not hearing
[5:38:48] the same thing from four people over and over and over again.
[5:38:53] I, on the way in which we schedule meetings, I don't think that day-time meetings are
[5:39:03] going to be feasible.
[5:39:04] I mean, I would be curious to bring back that compensation study.
[5:39:07] I mean, obviously there are trade-offs there too because then you get professional politicians
[5:39:11] and not people who bring the experience of having day jobs and having experience out in the community.
[5:39:16] And, you know, that's obviously going to be a charter forum question for the voters is to whether they want, you know, professional politicians or people in our roles who, you know, contributes to the community through day jobs.
[5:39:31] And, yeah, I would like to figure out ways to maybe schedule more meetings on alternate Tuesdays or something like that.
[5:39:39] I'm sure I missed the stuff, but I'm going to jump in here and say that our city attorney's
[5:39:44] in the queue.
[5:39:44] And I'd also like to remember that we, I don't see the timer up, but we have a ten-minute
[5:39:48] time limit for a person.
[5:39:51] Okay.
[5:39:54] Councilmember.
[5:39:55] Do you have an urgent issue that you need to get in the queue for?
[5:39:59] It's just a procedure.
[5:40:00] Is there a general suggestion when you're ready to vote? Okay. So I want to be brief. So yeah, brief because what I hear from my councilmembers, I think there's a general consensus is to bifurcate everything tonight and allow the public to be able to digest what we are trying to digest here on the dias. So that would be my first recommendation. Obviously items dealing with SB 707.
[5:40:28] If we can get to some kind of consensus on those items tonight, that'd be great if not
[5:40:34] bring it back.
[5:40:35] And then I just, just from a personal standpoint, and I do believe that having meetings
[5:40:45] during the day based on our makeup of our council positions is very difficult.
[5:40:54] I mean, so I'm not really very supportive of looking at that item to be able to have meetings.
[5:41:02] During the day, but I would be receptive to maybe looking at having an additional meeting
[5:41:09] and a primary meeting for closed session items which, but I'd like to hear from the public
[5:41:16] as to what they feel with respect to how we should be represented.
[5:41:19] been. One of the things I've always said, I mean, I want to have as much transparency
[5:41:24] and as much time for the public to digest this information that we go over. And on the
[5:41:35] other hand, I've always believed in, maybe I'm in minority here, is that these are our
[5:41:44] meetings held in the public eye okay and at the end of the day we have a job to do to move
[5:41:51] things forward to direct staff and direct our city manager on policy decisions that we
[5:41:59] may come up with and so as much time as we can give to the public is very important but I also
[5:42:06] believe that it should not impede on us doing our job as council members and I think we need
[5:42:13] I need to think about that and we all agree, at least I agree, making decisions and I heard this one councilman all at one or two o'clock in the morning that are really vital.
[5:42:23] Don't sit very comfortably with me based on it, so anything that we can do to minimize that I think is important but I would like to maybe after I hear from our mayor to make a recommendation as to move this thing to our next council meeting if possible.
[5:42:43] Yeah, we have two people who want to talk again, but I haven't had the opportunity to have so I just want to say a couple of things.
[5:42:49] I am going to make a motion that we approved the 707 policies tonight.
[5:42:56] We unequivocally say that we are not in favor of having two council members need to sign onto an item before bringing it forward.
[5:43:03] That's undemocratic.
[5:43:04] People elected us individually.
[5:43:07] and request that the presentation come back at a future meeting with more detail on some
[5:43:13] with some of the feedback that you received tonight with options that are a little bit more
[5:43:18] flushed out, but that's where I'm headed at this point. Councillor Ember, Hall and
[5:43:22] Integrity. Yeah, I was just going to see if we could do any of the cleanup stuff tonight, too.
[5:43:26] Would you mind pulling up the slide on the clean-ups? Oh, yeah, we could do that, too.
[5:43:31] I was going to make the same motion. Great. Yeah, let's move along.
[5:43:37] I mean, I think, sorry, if you wanted to talk, I mean, I guess we're both talking at this point, all of those seem fine to me.
[5:43:50] No, this is just the cleanup in like reordering of the-
[5:43:54] No, policy decision is just cleaning up.
[5:43:57] There's another one. This is cleanup, so-
[5:44:04] Is that also-
[5:44:05] These are policy decisions.
[5:44:11] What is on the slide are clean up languages, we're trying to clarify things or move things
[5:44:17] around just so it's a little easier for people to refer to.
[5:44:21] Let's just leave it as is.
[5:44:22] Yeah, I was going to say because the clean up language is much easier.
[5:44:24] Yeah, it's not bifurcated in a way that's not clean enough.
[5:44:28] Yeah.
[5:44:29] I'll second the motion.
[5:44:31] So one option, if I may, is to bring back a, because 707 is kind of interspersed with
[5:44:39] this document that is in front of you.
[5:44:41] One option is, based on this direction,
[5:44:43] if this is the direction you'd like to go in,
[5:44:45] is we could bring back a separate 707 resolution,
[5:44:50] at place it on consent at the next agenda,
[5:44:52] and then come back later after we've done all the legwork
[5:44:56] that you would like for us to do.
[5:44:58] So that was kind of what-
[5:45:00] What we're thinking could be an option for you if you'd like to do that, because I think we have clear direction on 707. We can bring that back as a separate resolution with your direction that it gets placed on consent at the next meeting. And then you all give direction and we can do the larger discussion later. So moved. Would that be, yeah, I mean, that doesn't mean we need to vote on it, but guys, would that be continuing the remaining like what's the procedural motion that we need to make here? Yes, continue this item with direction to bring back
[5:45:29] a separate, continue the item for the rules of order with direction to bring back a separate
[5:45:34] resolution for just the 707 to be placed on the on the consent agenda for June 23rd.
[5:45:42] Okay. Council moved. Yeah, great. Councilor Integrity.
[5:45:46] Now I was just so when it comes back then I want to make sure that well now we have time with that
[5:45:52] but now we've publicly discussed it so I guess my question is how we sort of mull over it ourselves
[5:45:57] and submit our own comments.
[5:46:01] I'm not really sure how that's going to work moving for,
[5:46:03] but I just, in the spirit of what,
[5:46:05] and it's not about it going back and forth,
[5:46:07] I just wanted to just remind us,
[5:46:09] I was listening to Council Member Ruskin,
[5:46:11] and I appreciate like the idea between
[5:46:13] behind being strategic and thoughtful with the agenda and items.
[5:46:17] But you mentioned like the way they do it in higher office,
[5:46:21] and I just, I don't want to unintentionally get away
[5:46:24] from the balance of being sort of,
[5:46:26] I know you guys may not feel this way, but like a community forum.
[5:46:29] We are not Congress people, we're not senators.
[5:46:32] We are more boots on the ground closer to our community.
[5:46:36] And the farther we move away from that, we just go away from being a community-facing
[5:46:40] body where residents can hear us work out these issues.
[5:46:43] So just as you guys are formulating the ideas as we move forward, I think we have to be mindful
[5:46:48] of that.
[5:46:49] And I do want to reiterate that not everybody works nine to five.
[5:46:52] And I appreciate that this is not on here, but there are people who would like to be up here sound about getting a full-time salary and being a full-time politician.
[5:47:01] It's about being able to step away from your kids, from your job, to be able to afford to be up here.
[5:47:08] So just mindful that we are not. Some of us may have aspirations to go higher enough.
[5:47:13] Some of us are just here to serve our community. And that's what's so great about this process.
[5:47:18] that's not everyone is lining up to speak
[5:47:19] a public comment to a Congressperson
[5:47:22] they're here to talk to other Council members.
[5:47:24] So as we go forward and think about that,
[5:47:26] I just wanted to be mindful about that.
[5:47:29] Yes, 16 items are gonna come forward for public discussion.
[5:47:32] I'm not really sure how we're coming back with this stuff.
[5:47:36] I mean, I guess it'll come back on a future meeting
[5:47:38] after the June 23rd meeting is what we're saying.
[5:47:41] We're just gonna address.
[5:47:42] I think when it's like ready for prime time,
[5:47:44] I think this presentation needs some work.
[5:47:46] We need to think about like there was questions that were asked about how other jurisdictions do things if there are like additional options that folks considered.
[5:47:55] I know that's why I'm wondering if there's direction to go back to come back with it.
[5:48:00] Maybe more filled out presentation that has some of those things like it would be nice to look at some of our neighboring cities and see how they function.
[5:48:09] And our note, our discussion around a separate closed session meeting and all of that stuff maybe looking at comparative cities that do the same thing that would be nice.
[5:48:19] And then I agree just I know for me like it's really nice to look at it for the public to when they're looking if we can put that out beforehand.
[5:48:28] So people, the public knows what we're looking at, like these are options so we can have those discussions in our brown acts before we come forward.
[5:48:38] Councilmember Raskin, I think you were talking about charter reform also when you talked about that stuff, but I'm not correct.
[5:48:43] Yeah, I mean, I was just going to brainstorming.
[5:48:45] No, I agree. I've been bringing that up forever. Hey, I mean, I'm not talking about a six-figure salary, just a part.
[5:48:51] Other cities neighboring to get paid 50, 60 to be, is that what you're talking about? That's a charter reform.
[5:48:57] I didn't have a specific idea. I was just brainstorming, but so there are a few motions that were made.
[5:49:05] I don't know, I think I moved Tidy's suggestion, Dan's second move.
[5:49:11] Okay, great.
[5:49:12] So let's vote.
[5:49:15] Voice folks, since there's not money.
[5:49:18] So, um, two roses is a maker and Hall is a seconder.
[5:49:24] And, uh, I'll do a roll call.
[5:49:27] Councilmember Nguethe.
[5:49:28] Yes.
[5:49:30] Councilmember Hall.
[5:49:31] Yes.
[5:49:32] Councilmember Raskin. Yes. Mayor Potomacic is absent. Councilmember Snell. Yes. Councilmember
[5:49:39] Surneskaya. Yes. Mayor Churrosis. Yes.
[5:49:43] So we'll have something on the consent calendar
[5:49:45] of the next session to deal with the legislative changes and then we'll have a more flush
[5:49:51] out presentation later in the summer. Great. Okay, moving on to apologies for all the staff
[5:49:57] and members of the public that are still here.
[5:50:00] We'll try to make this as quick as possible, 12 a. All right.
[5:50:08] Good evening, Mayor, city council members,
[5:50:10] and city team. My name is Zinaz Krushy. I am the Civil Engineering Associate in the Water
[5:50:16] Resources Division. And tonight, I'm just going to give a quick presentation on our 2026
[5:50:21] annual water supply and demand assessment.
[5:50:27] So this assessment is required by the California
[5:50:30] on your water code as of 2022.
[5:50:32] It helps cities identify potential water shortages.
[5:50:36] And for this assessment, we are required to assess
[5:50:38] dry, hot conditions as our projected year.
[5:50:42] And for this assessment, our projected year
[5:50:43] is July 1st of 2026 through June 30th of 2027.
[5:50:50] Two terms I quickly want to touch on
[5:50:52] because they will come up later in the presentation.
[5:50:54] Our constrained versus unconstrained demand.
[5:50:58] So our unconstrained demand is our water demand
[5:51:00] without any water conservation and then our constraint demand is potable water demand with conservation reduction included
[5:51:08] which is 20% and I do just want to note that the city has been achieving this since 2014.
[5:51:17] So looking at our projected supply in the assessment so we are assuming that we only have tier one allocation
[5:51:24] from the metropolitan water district and then we're also assuming that our local supplies
[5:51:29] our 6,755 acre feet. This number was taken from our 2020 urban water
[5:51:37] management plan, the drought risk assessment. So this is looking at a worst-case
[5:51:40] scenario for the city, if we had low local groundwater supplies. So this puts
[5:51:46] our total projected supply at 14,161 acre feet.
[5:51:52] So looking at our assessment
[5:51:54] results without conservation, you see that we have a 14% surplus and that puts
[5:52:00] us in a level zero state standard shortage level, which means that we do not have any shortage of water.
[5:52:08] Now moving on to our stage recommendation. We are recommending to stay in stage two. Again,
[5:52:15] this is that 20% water reduction that I touched on earlier, which the city has been achieving since 2014.
[5:52:22] Additionally, staying in the stage two helps us meet some stakeholders. Meeting conservation targets
[5:52:29] It also helps with the city's broader water goals with conservation and an increased demand
[5:52:35] without stage two would result in more imported water and therefore higher rates.
[5:52:41] So now going back and looking at our assessment results with that conservation with the constraint
[5:52:46] demand, you can see that that revised surplus has now jumped to 34% showing that we do have
[5:52:52] an abundance of water.
[5:52:54] So, a requested action from the council today, so staff recommends the council motion to
[5:52:59] adopt the 2026 annual water supply and demand assessment.
[5:53:04] And that's all I have.
[5:53:06] Thank you, and I don't take any questions.
[5:53:08] Thank you, council member Hall.
[5:53:11] Sorry, would you mind going back to slides?
[5:53:13] Yes.
[5:53:17] So, just to clarify, this is stating that we have water, the water supply we need for all of
[5:53:25] the zoning and the planned building and everything.
[5:53:30] So this, so this is only looking at the projected year, so we don't go past that June 30th of
[5:53:36] 2027. And this is just a state requirement, so this is not something we do for our own
[5:53:41] city planning. We have other plans that do tackle that. This is just to meet the state legislation
[5:53:46] requirement just for that projected year, looking at a scenario in which we have a hot dry year
[5:53:51] with the lowest amount of supplies of water.
[5:53:55] Got it.
[5:53:56] Thank you.
[5:53:56] Councilor Raskin.
[5:53:59] I think maybe this is a question, I don't know if you can answer this or maybe other people
[5:54:03] want to answer it, but to follow up by Council Member Hall's question, we have done environmental
[5:54:09] studies for things like the build out and our six cycle housing element that have looked
[5:54:12] at future growth projections, right?
[5:54:14] We have.
[5:54:18] Council, yeah.
[5:54:20] Sorry.
[5:54:21] I don't know what happened.
[5:54:24] I just want to be clear, I think what's being asked is, are you saying that this is also
[5:54:30] taking to account the projected development that is going to happen like all the new apartments?
[5:54:36] I think, is that not what's being, that's what I'm trying to ask.
[5:54:38] Okay, yeah, I see. So this document is only taking into account for the next year, so we're not
[5:54:45] looking at long-term growth. It's a little hard to just know just in the next year how much development
[5:54:51] we're going to have, but like I said, it's some of our other plans that we're doing for the water
[5:54:55] resources division. Dusty can take into account the regional housing needs assessment.
[5:55:00] The way you're doing amazing. I love seeing you in this element because she usually does all the tours. It's extremely smart. I'm just blown away. But just to be very specific, I think folks that are watching the myself included, I look at all the development that is happening and I wonder if we have the infrastructure to support it. So I know you're saying generally, but when we look at Santa Monica's development and we say I'm just making up a number, however many thousands of units are being built, do these numbers reflect support?
[5:55:29] supporting that for this next year,
[5:55:32] this next year, okay.
[5:55:34] Thank you.
[5:55:36] Great, I'm just saying I want to move the item.
[5:55:40] Oh, my apology, my sincere apologies.
[5:55:47] We only have speakers on 12B at this time.
[5:55:51] I just, an abundance of caution,
[5:55:53] are there any members of the public
[5:55:55] who want to come and give comment on the item?
[5:55:58] Okay, thank you.
[5:55:59] I'll make a motion moving the item.
[5:56:00] Great.
[5:56:01] Second.
[5:56:03] Council members are in it's
[5:56:04] going?
[5:56:06] Yes.
[5:56:07] Council member Sel,
[5:56:09] Mayor Pro Temswick is absent.
[5:56:11] Council member Raskin.
[5:56:12] Yes.
[5:56:13] Council member Hall.
[5:56:14] Yes.
[5:56:14] Council member Nugurte.
[5:56:15] Yes.
[5:56:16] Mayor Trozos.
[5:56:18] Yes.
[5:56:19] Thank you.
[5:56:21] We now have 12 B.
[5:56:24] We do have a speaker.
[5:56:28] I see that.
[5:56:29] do we want to call the public speaker first or hear the item first. Okay. Hear the item
[5:56:36] first before the speaker. Okay. Okay. Dana and team.
[5:56:44] Oh great.
[5:56:48] No, we love to see the HR
[5:56:49] team. We don't get to see you often. So great to see you.
[5:56:55] No, it will be nice.
[5:57:00] Just wondering
[5:57:01] like I said, oh, there it is. Okay. Bear with me, and I usually not up this late.
[5:57:08] Sorry. Good evening, everybody. I'm Stephanie Sofford, and the Human Resources Manager
[5:57:13] over recruitment. Thank you for being here tonight.
[5:57:19] So tonight we're going to talk about the status
[5:57:21] of the city's vacancies and recruitment and retention efforts for the calendar year 2025,
[5:57:26] as obligated under Assembly Bill 2561 in government code section 35 point sorry
[5:57:33] 3502.3 of the MMBA.
[5:57:39] So our agenda tonight we're gonna have an overview then we'll
[5:57:44] talk about our vacancy rates as of December 31st of 2025. Okay
[5:57:53] and then am I touching
[5:57:59] I just put it back up.
[5:58:02] Okay.
[5:58:03] Sorry, I just want to make sure I'm not doing anything.
[5:58:05] Okay.
[5:58:06] And then we'll talk about an overview of our recruitment
[5:58:08] and retention efforts and any of our challenges.
[5:58:12] Okay.
[5:58:12] So for an overview, the government code section does require
[5:58:16] that all public agencies prevent information on an annual basis
[5:58:20] regarding the status of our vacancies, recruitment and retention efforts
[5:58:24] and any necessary changes to policies, procedures,
[5:58:27] and recruitment activities that may lead to obstacles
[5:58:30] in the hiring process.
[5:58:32] If the governing board will be adopting an annual or multi-year budget during the fiscal
[5:58:37] year, the presentation shall be made prior to the adoption of the final budget, which
[5:58:41] is why we're here tonight.
[5:58:44] Additionally, if the vacancy rate in a single bargaining unit is 20% or more, the employee
[5:58:49] organization representing the bargaining unit may request that the agency present additional
[5:58:54] information at the public hearing.
[5:58:56] So if you take a look at this slide, this talks about our vacancy rate and just kind of
[5:59:01] looking at the last column, only one group had over the 20% for 2025.
[5:59:08] It was the executive pay plan or if we refer to as EPP, they are in nonrepresented groups
[5:59:14] so they did not trigger our additional reporting obligations under the government code section.
[5:59:22] As you can kind of see from this list, we have pretty low vacancy rates and overall we were
[5:59:27] at 7.54 for the end of the year.
[5:59:34] In 2025, there was a total of 417 vacancies.
[5:59:39] 22% of these vacancies were attributed
[5:59:42] to newly budgeted positions.
[5:59:44] We did add 92.5 positions in the fall of last year,
[5:59:49] so that created a good portion of these vacancies.
[5:59:53] The rest of the vacancies were due,
[6:00:00] Allentary and voluntary.
[6:00:05] Of those vacancies, 134 were filled, 40 of them through competitive recruitment and 94 of them were promotional. Some things to highlight over the year last year. We did hire 85 motor coach operator trainees. We put them through nine training classes over the year. And as a result, 42 were promoted to actual motor coach operators. And then another thing that we'd like to highlight is that the police department
[6:00:33] actually streamed line some of their recruitment efforts,
[6:00:37] got some new software that actually allows for the applicants to engage more with the city
[6:00:43] and so kind of falling out during the process. So our vacancies are really low in PD.
[6:00:51] Okay so for our challenges, obviously it's a continuously evolving labor market. There's a
[6:00:58] growing competition for talent. It's pretty brutal out there right now if anybody's
[6:01:03] taking a look at it. There is that changing perception related to the benefits of public sector
[6:01:09] employment. We're obviously competing often with the private sector and then obviously financial
[6:01:14] constraints impacting salaries and staffing levels. For our strategies, we have collaboration
[6:01:21] with the operating departments and prioritized and planned for our upcoming recruitment needs.
[6:01:27] We're reviewing and refining minimum qualification requirements to ensure they are job related.
[6:01:31] benefit enhancements, enhancements hanged at supporting employee health and financial
[6:01:36] security.
[6:01:38] We have the winter closure program that enhances our retention appeal, telework options
[6:01:44] for eligible positions to promote work-life balance, equity increases for selected positions
[6:01:49] to support internal alignment and external competitiveness, and a citywide classification and compensation
[6:01:57] that will provide a comprehensive review of job classifications,
[6:02:01] compensation structures, and internal pay relationships across the organization.
[6:02:08] And that's it.
[6:02:10] We'll take any questions.
[6:02:11] Councilor Negretta.
[6:02:13] You seem to have.
[6:02:15] Okay, sorry.
[6:02:17] I mean, I'll ask a really quick question.
[6:02:20] Councilor Marcel, do you have a question?
[6:02:22] Oh, my apologies. We do have a public comment.
[6:02:25] Yeah, Denise Burton.
[6:02:27] Good
[6:02:39] evening and item 12b. Is this our city manager? I would be trying to make the city look like it has less city employees than it actually does.
[6:02:47] Here he claims 21 city, 21 hundred city employees which equals 43 city residents per city employee or transit campaign head over 25 hundred city employees in 2024, which equals 36 residents per city employee.
[6:03:03] or more recently, I've seen numbers of over 2,800 which would equal 32 residents per city employee and city hall is still not open to the residents or it's decided to show the city is still understaffed with generality dealing basis understaffed as the police department.
[6:03:19] But instead of safety, you're you're prioritizing a million dollars to have a rose rose fruit float.
[6:03:25] So again, like employees who use taxpayers as your personal credit card for your special interest, not the best interest of the residents or anyone else in the city.
[6:03:35] Or maybe you should get rid of the DEI department and properly thank
[6:03:43] you, Councillor Rohall.
[6:03:48] Thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of quick questions for the city manager. When are we planning to do our class and comp study?
[6:03:54] The kickoff is actually coming up in June, it will continue through the rest of this calendar year, we're targeting having the class and comp study finalized the early part Q1 likely of 2027.
[6:04:11] Okay, and forgive me if I missed it, but I think in some of your reports and maybe the
[6:04:21] realignment plan we had talked about in engagement surveys, the plan, when is the plan to do
[6:04:25] that?
[6:04:26] Will it be annual?
[6:04:26] Will there be more frequent pulse surveys?
[6:04:30] What data will be shared with the managers and what department heads?
[6:04:34] Yeah, absolutely.
[6:04:35] The HR department right now, Damien and Team, we're putting together the overall organizational
[6:04:43] survey, organizational health survey, to be deployed in the next couple of months.
[6:04:49] It will be something we do continuously, we're trying to identify at what...
[6:05:00] Frequency will be doing sort of the comprehensive survey. And certainly, I think how do we get some quick reactions from folks on how things are going. There's a variety of different tools for engaging in developing and gathering that type of data. So all of that's part of the assessment here moving forward. Got it. Thank you. And then we did hear from some of our construction inspectors and local contractors tonight. Any initial reactions or insights that you can share on that?
[6:05:27] or will you do plan to take that back and assess the situation with your H.R. director?
[6:05:32] Yeah, we have been assessing that situation internally. There is absolutely a problem with
[6:05:39] the compensation structure right now in the building inspector operation. That reason, though,
[6:05:45] that it'll be important to do a comprehensive citywide compensation study and classification and
[6:05:52] compensation study. One, any time you make an adjustment in one part of an organization
[6:05:57] it will bump up against others. There are internal salary relationships that think through.
[6:06:02] That being said, we're working through a system there's a dire need in the building operation
[6:06:08] to think about how we adjust some of the salaries there. There are three different bargaining
[6:06:13] units though representing all of the folks that work within the building operation that
[6:06:18] We need to coordinate and work with, we've got meetings set up the next couple of weeks both internally and with the impacted employees were confident we'll come up with a solution here within the next month or two.
[6:06:32] Great. Thank you.
[6:06:34] Councillor O'Rourke.
[6:06:36] Thank you.
[6:06:38] I had a couple of questions at the first, would we be able to go back to the slide that had the percentages of vacancies, please?
[6:06:52] That one, yeah.
[6:06:54] So I recognize that there are certain bargaining units that have a much higher number of budgeted FTs.
[6:07:02] And so they, even though they have like higher absolute numbers of vacancies, they may have lower percentage vacancies.
[6:07:10] is for those do we have by any chance I break down of what of by department like vacancies
[6:07:16] by department or by type of role.
[6:07:22] I don't know that we necessarily think if it's easy to
[6:07:26] pull it up that would be awesome if not. Thank you.
[6:07:31] Are you okay? Are you okay?
[6:07:33] Okay, that's step, yeah, no that's step gets everyone I have band-aids that I've done many times before
[6:07:55] don't you worry at all I fall going up the stairs
[6:07:58] There's my mark, right?
[6:07:59] Okay, everybody.
[6:08:02] Welcome.
[6:08:05] Yeah, I don't know.
[6:08:07] I don't know.
[6:08:08] I don't know.
[6:08:08] I don't know if there's a.
[6:08:08] We plug in maybe.
[6:08:11] Or if like, I don't know, you could also just verbally tell us, like which departments have
[6:08:15] kind of the highest number of vacancies that we may need to address.
[6:08:20] By the classification.
[6:08:23] Oh, by classifications.
[6:08:25] And apologies for not asking this ahead of time.
[6:08:35] So we have it by classification, not by department.
[6:08:39] Okay, so in terms of the classifications, then which ones have the highest vacancies?
[6:08:44] Okay,
[6:08:49] maintenance worker,
[6:08:53] maintenance worker, a bin truck driver,
[6:09:03] public works.
[6:09:04] Okay.
[6:09:16] Oh, and the public service is officer, so not police officer, but the health services.
[6:09:20] Okay, got it.
[6:09:21] So in how are we addressing recruitment and retention efforts within those specific
[6:09:36] classifications, or do we have a plan to address that?
[6:09:40] So not maybe someone else can speak a little bit for the public,
[6:09:44] yeah, for the public work. So this report goes through December of 25.
[6:09:51] So these are not the current.
[6:09:54] Yes, so we have been working with public works to identify recruitment.
[6:10:00] And strategies in order to lower, you know, in order to fill these positions. And I know for sure been, so been truck operator, for example, had a new list. And I know public works was able to use that list successfully. I don't know if I have the, do we have the current vacancy rate in public works right now? Yeah. So, yeah, so these, these numbers are from December 31st, 25 to in order to meet the requirements.
[6:10:29] requirements of the assembly bill. But today, I mean, certainly, I mean, every month makes
[6:10:36] a big difference here in HR because we have been just really working our butts off to
[6:10:41] try to, you know, provide the employees necessary to meet our realignment goals. And so we are,
[6:10:48] you know, working with every city department head so that we can, you know, meet that challenge.
[6:10:55] and so my estimation is that this is not current, this is just in line with the requirements
[6:11:03] of that.
[6:11:04] Thank you.
[6:11:06] And then question, so are we utilizing apprenticeship programs or anything else to either work with
[6:11:16] our partners like SMC or through other avenues, I'm sorry, I know you're about to sit down.
[6:11:24] You know, it's interesting that you should bring that up because, you know, when discussing
[6:11:28] some of the problems we're having in the building department and, you know, some of the challenges
[6:11:34] that Jane is facing with filling those positions, that's what comes up, you know, like homegrown,
[6:11:40] let's, you know, get people who are interested and let's train them.
[6:11:43] But part of the problem in those trades and sort of the areas where apprenticeships would
[6:11:48] be so useful. We're just two short staffed, but more like we don't have the bench to do the work
[6:11:59] and train. But that is definitely something that is a workable solution once we get to that place.
[6:12:06] So everybody's open to it. Everybody loves apprenticeships. I know we had a very, I was just talking
[6:12:12] across the other day about the one that we had years ago that was very successful and we just need
[6:12:18] to get to a place where we have the expertise and the time in house to train another group of
[6:12:26] employees. So that is definitely on our radar though. Okay, it sounds like we're working on capacity,
[6:12:32] we're working on trying to hire up so that we have fewer vacancies and it sounds like overall we're
[6:12:39] working out strategies going forward to
[6:12:44] to improve these these things.
[6:12:46] Absolutely.
[6:12:47] Awesome. Thank you.
[6:12:49] That's all my questions.
[6:12:50] Great.
[6:12:53] Although I had a movie item or sorry,
[6:12:55] did anyone want to talk about this?
[6:12:57] No, I'll psyched it.
[6:12:59] Okay.
[6:13:01] Council member Migritte?
[6:13:05] Yes.
[6:13:06] Council member Hall?
[6:13:07] Yes.
[6:13:08] Council member Raskin?
[6:13:09] Yes.
[6:13:09] Yes.
[6:13:09] Mayor Pro Temswick is absent.
[6:13:11] Councilmember Snell?
[6:13:12] Yes.
[6:13:13] Councilmember Zagin?
[6:13:14] Yes.
[6:13:15] Mayor Trozos.
[6:13:16] Yes.
[6:13:16] Motion passes.
[6:13:17] Thank you.
[6:13:19] Thank you.
[6:13:19] Thank you.
[6:13:20] We're asked on your first presentation.
[6:13:25] 12 C.
[6:13:26] All right.
[6:13:27] And we have two public commenters.
[6:13:31] Yes.
[6:13:31] Go ahead.
[6:13:33] So I just wanted to know.
[6:13:35] I will be refusing myself from item 12 C.
[6:13:39] On May 8th, 2026, the Fair Political Practices Commission issued a no-action closure letter
[6:13:46] related to complaints on a vote that I took in December of 2024 to approve the DDA for
[6:13:54] this project, alleging a violation of the Libyan Act.
[6:13:58] The letter has been made available to the public on the FPPC's website.
[6:14:02] And although the investigations have been closed with no action taken by the FPPC in
[6:14:07] in order to avoid even the appearance of impropriety,
[6:14:10] I will still be recusing myself from this matter.
[6:14:13] So I will leave the dies.
[6:14:14] Thank you.
[6:14:15] Great.
[6:14:18] I think we'll go ahead and hear the staff report,
[6:14:20] and then have an opportunity for public comments.
[6:14:26] Good evening, council.
[6:14:28] Aileen Reynolds, Director of Housing Human Services.
[6:14:30] I'm here to introduce the public hearing
[6:14:32] for the Tierra Apartments Teffer Hearing.
[6:14:36] As a reminder of tear apartments, this is a proposed 82-unit affordable senior housing development,
[6:14:45] which includes 40 residences for permanent supportive housing for seniors, located at 1402 Wilshire Boulevard,
[6:14:54] and 1211 and 1217, 14th Street. The developer is housing
[6:15:00] As we approach closing, just to note that this month, we issued notice of the city parking lot. We'll be closed and construction should begin in July. With an extra expected completion date in spring of 2028, where we would be leasing up the residences.
[6:15:20] So the purpose of a teffra hearing is required under the IRS and tax equity and fiscal responsibility act. So otherwise, no teffra for taxes and bonds.
[6:15:30] This allows the California Municipal Finance Authority or CMFA to issue up to $28 million in revenue bonds.
[6:15:38] The city approval is procedural.
[6:15:40] There's no financial obligation or liability to the city, and the bonds are solely the responsibility of the borrower.
[6:15:51] So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions.
[6:15:53] We provided a lot of detail on the staff forward, but what we're recommending today is that a determination,
[6:16:00] that the development of the affordable housing was previously analyzed under the 6th cycle housing element environmental impact report and therefore the issuance of the taffa bonds does not have any possibility of significant effect requiring a sequa review.
[6:16:19] To hold a public hearing under the requirements of taffa as we're doing now and to ultimately adopt a resolution approving the issuance of bonds by the CMFA in an amount.
[6:16:30] amount not to exceed $28 million for the benefits of tier apartment LP to finance and refinance the acquisition construction development and equipping of an affordable housing multi-family rental housing development to be located at 14 or two will share both art and 12 11 to 12 12 17 14th street and just to put a fine point on it as a reminder, the council approve this project on December 17th, 2024.
[6:16:57] So this is just a procedure a matter for the purposes of the bonds which are under
[6:17:02] into the project at that time. Thank you.
[6:17:05] Great.
[6:17:07] We will now hear from the members of the public who have signed up to speak.
[6:17:10] We have Denise Barton and Michael Solof.
[6:17:21] Good evening, Adam Tulsi.
[6:17:23] These both look a lot.
[6:17:24] This bond looks a lot like the ones that were issued to step upon second in 2017.
[6:17:29] For renovation of the property on second street which never happened.
[6:17:32] due to along with their partner,
[6:17:34] Schengler, while ended up with state charges for fraud,
[6:17:37] of over $100 million.
[6:17:39] So did step upon second repay the bond amount
[6:17:42] or the taxpayers continuing to pay interest
[6:17:44] due to the bond being involved in the fraud and the money lost?
[6:17:48] Just so you understand my concerns about the release
[6:17:50] into the same sort of revenue bonds
[6:17:52] now in a similar situation.
[6:17:54] As well as because by our cities not reporting on all debt
[6:17:59] that had been held by the city.
[6:18:01] What appears though, you are using the resident taxpayers
[6:18:04] to use a personal credit card for your special interest.
[6:18:07] And isn't there a little business if you can't afford it?
[6:18:09] You think you shouldn't do it?
[6:18:11] Thank you.
[6:18:13] Thank you, Michael Solof.
[6:18:18] Good evening, council members.
[6:18:20] I'm here tonight on behalf of Santa Monica's For Entries, right?
[6:18:23] We are celebrating and happy that this is moving forward tonight.
[6:18:28] We talked earlier tonight about what makes Santa Monica,
[6:18:31] Santa Monica and the Rose Bowl parade.
[6:18:34] Well, one of the things that makes Santa Monica, Santa Monica,
[6:18:37] is that we have committed our public land
[6:18:40] and our dollars to try and keep this place
[6:18:43] an economically diverse community,
[6:18:45] to send the message to the world,
[6:18:47] that the best being next to the beach,
[6:18:50] having a great economy, having jobs,
[6:18:56] having great schools is for everybody,
[6:18:59] not just for the wealthy.
[6:19:00] and this is another step in that direction. The City Council must have you weren't here at that time, but committed in the prior housing element that we were going to make public landsites available for 2000 units of affordable housing.
[6:19:16] This is one of those projects. We're finally getting some traction. This one's going forward. The other Hollywood housing corporation they've gotten their state financing as well.
[6:19:25] and now finally the Fourth Street Garage project has gotten it.
[6:19:29] So this is a night to celebrate and please be sure to do what you need to do proceed
[6:19:33] really so we can get these units built and get people off the streets in some cases and
[6:19:38] in other cases out of unaffordable situations into our city to enjoy all the best and to remind
[6:19:44] the world that this is what everybody should be doing.
[6:19:47] Thank you.
[6:19:48] Thank you.
[6:19:51] I don't see any comments and I'd like to move this item.
[6:20:00] Clarify, we're moving the staff recommendation. Yes. We're moving the three items here. And adopting the resolution for the $20 bond. And roll call vote. Council members are going to sky is absent. Council members now. Yes. Mayor Proton's wake is absent. Council member Raskin. Yes. Council member Hall. Yes. Council member Negrete. Yes. And near trusses. Yes.
[6:20:30] Thank you.
[6:20:43] We now move on to, so I would just say normally we, oh, Councilor Reservant's Guide, please
[6:20:49] return yourself.
[6:20:52] Can someone ask Councilor Reservant's Guide to come back, please?
[6:20:57] They're not listening to me.
[6:21:07] I'll just say that normally we approve these as consent, but I'll make the announcement now
[6:21:14] on 16B. I am recusing myself out of an abundance of caution. The pledge for shared prosperity is a program initiated by an implemented by my employer, L.A. County.
[6:21:27] And although signing the pledge will not have any direct impact on my salary or my employment at the county, I will recuse in order to put even the appearance of a complex.
[6:21:34] So, we will start with 16 A and then I will ask Council Member Hall to share out the meeting while I'm recused from 16 B.
[6:21:47] I'd like to move 16 A.
[6:21:54] Okay, so that was Hall and seconded by Negretti?
[6:21:58] Yeah. Okay, Council Member Negretti?
[6:22:00] Yes.
[6:22:01] Council Member Hall?
[6:22:04] Yes.
[6:22:05] Council Member Reskin?
[6:22:07] Yes.
[6:22:07] Yes.
[6:22:08] Mayor Pro Temsweig is absent.
[6:22:10] Council Member Snell?
[6:22:11] Yes.
[6:22:12] Council Member Zurnitz-Gaya?
[6:22:13] Yes.
[6:22:14] And Mayor Trozos?
[6:22:15] Yes.
[6:22:21] Team B.
[6:22:26] A request of Council Members Hall Zurnitz-Gaya and Snell that Council Director City Manager
[6:22:31] to sign a pledge for shared prosperity.
[6:22:39] Thank you Madam Clerk.
[6:22:40] I'll give Mayor Trozos a second to lead the Chambers.
[6:22:47] Do any of my colleagues have any questions or emotions?
[6:22:50] With
[6:22:54] thanks everyone who worked on this, I'll move the item.
[6:22:58] Second.
[6:22:59] Okay, we have a motion by Council Member Raskin, is second by Council Member Zergetskaya.
[6:23:06] This is a voice vote, so all in favor?
[6:23:08] Hi.
[6:23:09] Hi.
[6:23:10] Eyes have it.
[6:23:11] For the record, Mayor Pro Temsweig and Mayor Trussis are absent from the vote.
[6:23:16] Correct.
[6:23:17] I did not hear any opposition or abstentions.
[6:23:23] Just checking over the mayor's agenda here, and it does not appear we have any adjournments.
[6:23:29] So we will adjourn the meeting at 11.53pm, we will see you in two weeks, thank you.