1 Kristina Santana
From: Smitha c <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2025 7:34 PM
To: Chia Teng; Steve Tye; Ruth Low; Andrew Chou; Stan Liu Cc: Kristina Santana; Kristina Santana
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT: City Council Meeting Nov. 18, 2025, Public Hearing Item 7.1 -
OPPOSE ZONE ZERO
Attachments: CFAC and LAFDReport.pdf; zone0councilletter917.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
**DO NOT open unknown links or any attachments without confirming with IS or the sender directly.** CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
PUBLIC COMMENT: City Council Meeting Nov. 18, 2025,
Public Hearing Item 7.1 - OPPOSE ZONE ZERO
Dear Diamond Bar City Council,
I am deeply concerned about the new Zone Zero / Defensible Space rules now being advanced under AB 1455.
Many months ago, I joined a UCLA study group that has been tracking the rulemaking process of the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection. Most participants — including city officials — were unaware of these meetings until recently. The outreach has been minimal at best.
What we discovered is alarming. Members of the insurance industry appeared to be heavily involved in shaping these rules. It was frustrating, confusing, and frankly disturbing to see how little voice residents had in a process that could so profoundly affect our homes and neighborhoods.
It has become clear that Zone Zero is being shaped as a tool for insurance companies, not homeowners. The approach is one-size-fits-all — requiring residents to strip vegetation within five feet of structures without regard for local conditions or science.
Even more concerning, AB 1455 now grants emergency powers to insurers to raise rates, deny claims, or cancel policies without oversight, even when homeowners comply fully with Defensible Space requirements. Many residents mistakenly believe that following these rules guarantees coverage or lower premiums it does not.
Scientific studies also show that Zone Zero may not make homes safer. In fact, excessive vegetation removal can increase wildfire risk by raising local temperatures and removing natural fire buffers. 2 I strongly support effective building and safety codes, but I was surprised to learn that the upcoming building code updates quietly include Zone Zero requirements within the Wildland–Urban Interface section with no clear explanation to residents. This lack of transparency is not acceptable.
I respectfully ask: What will Diamond Bar do to protect homeowners living in fire-prone areas? Please review the Los Angeles City Council letter opposing Zone Zero and the supporting report from their Public Safety Committee. Their analysis concludes that the policy is unscientific, inequitable, and driven by insurance politics.
Diamond Bar has the power and the duty to stand with its residents. I urge the City Council to take a public position opposing Zone Zero, as Los Angeles has done, and to advocate for local control, scientific review, and homeowner protection.
Thank you for your time and leadership. This is a critical moment to protect our community from policies that serve corporations, not citizens.
Sincerely,
Smitha C
Diamond Bar Resident
#StopZone0 #DiamondBar #InsuranceFairness #FireSmartNotFireScorched links to details below if you want to know more...
https://www.citywatchla.com/neighborhood-politics/31662-zone-0-and-the-death-of-local-control-sacramentos-fire-experiment-in-ouryards
1 Kristina Santana
From: Megan Li <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2025 11:15 AM
To: Kristina Santana
Subject: Public Comment for Item 8.1 of council meeting on 11/28/25 Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
**DO NOT open unknown links or any attachments without confirming with IS or the sender directly.** CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
To whom it may concern,
Please consider the removal of Sec. 22.42.075 from the Diamond Bar MC. Live music is currently a draw for the people of Diamond Bar to frequent other local cities (karaoke bars in Rowland Heights, singersongwriters at the Haven in West Covina, jazz at Cedar Creek Inn in Brea.) These attractions thus detract from Diamond Bar's economy.
It is clear that this law is antiquated and was likely targeted at events that are no longer relevant.
Additionally, this law has not been well-enforced. Open Mic nights have been happening inside of restaurants since at least 2017. These are loudly publicized, and yet no one is trying to shut them down.
Sincerely,
Megan Li | Diamond Bar Resident of 25 years
1 Kristina Santana
From: Cynthia Robin Smith <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 3:20 PM
To: Kristina Santana
Subject: Public Comment Input Attached
Attachments: How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard.pdf
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
**DO NOT open unknown links or any attachments without confirming with IS or the sender directly.** CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
RE: Please Copy & Disseminate to City Council Tonight
Public Comment Agenda# 7.1
Dear Kristina,
Part of my input this evening, includes the attached article. "How the Insurance Companies are Rewriting CA Wildfire Laws" Is it possible to copy it for each council member for them tonight PLUS make one sample copy to display at the reception table?
I would appreciate it.
Thank you.
Cynthia Robin Smith
Cynthia Robin Smith, Urban Ecology-Conservation Strategist, Educator, Author California Native Trees, Landscapes; Wildlife Habitat & Watershed Conservation Diamond Bar Beautiful Project: Restoring Nature at Home Conejo Ridge Native Garden, Outdoor Classroom, Designer, Director Urban Ecological Conservation Strategies Co-Op
Zone Zero Watchdog Group
324 S. Diamond Bar Blvd., #230
Diamond Bar CA 91765
951-675-6760 Mobile
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 1 of 13 How the Insurance Industry Is
Rewriting California’s Wildfire
Rules — Starting in Your
Backyard
DIANA NICOLE / NOVEMBER 10 2025
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 2 of 13 BOARD
OF
FORESTRY
BIG
INSURANCE
ZONE
RICARDD
LARA
Comments
VIEWPOINT - Even before the ;res that turned Los Angeles neighborhoods to ash this year, California’s insurance industry had already seized control of the state’s wild;re narrative. Their message was simple: we can’t keep insuring homes unless you let us rewrite the rules.
Facebook Twitter EmailShare
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 3 of 13 Governor Gavin Newsom and Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara obliged. In September 2023, they announced what was hailed as an “historic compromise” — a deal that would supposedly stabilize the market by letting insurers charge higher rates in exchange for writing policies in high-risk areas.
But as the New York Times investigation, “California Promised Insurance Relief, But Delivered Loopholes” revealed last week, the compromise was a mirage. Behind closed doors, insurers quietly negotiated exemptions that gutted the deal’s central promise. They can now raise premiums and o[oad billions in costs to ratepayers while avoiding most of the communities actually designated by the State Fire Marshal as high-risk.
The number of homeowners forced onto the state’s last-resort FAIR Plan has nearly doubled, premiums have soared, and coverage has shrunk. So much for relief.
The Pattern of Capture
This is not a one-off failure; it’s a pattern. California’s wild;re and insurance policy apparatus has become a textbook case of regulatory capture — a system in which the regulated industry quietly dictates the terms of its own oversight.
We are watching the same pattern unfold right now at the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, the state agency writing the controversial “Zone 0” defensible-space regulations. Like the insurance deal, these rules are being sold as science-based ;re protection. In reality, they mirror the industry’s risk-modeling language and shift liability from insurers to homeowners.
What the Times uncovered about insurance regulation is the same playbook driving Zone 0: a policy born in crisis, negotiated in private, framed as reform, and delivered as a giveaway.
The Slow-Roll Strategy
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 4 of 13 Even as AB 1455 — the law that enshrines Zone 0, fast-tracks it through emergency regulation, exempts it from environmental review, and gives insurers new leverage over homeowners — nears its December 31 due date, the Board’s Zone 0 chair has announced the rule won’t be completed on time.
That’s not bureaucratic sluggishness — it’s strategy. By kicking the can down the road, the Board avoids a political ;restorm while allowing the insurance industry to shape public behavior.
Insurers are already using Safer from Wild;res scoring and premium incentives to enforce a de facto Zone 0 through the insurance marketplace. When the Board ;nally adopts its regulation, it will merely codify the insurer’s rulebook.
In other words, the public delay disguises a private acceleration: homeowners are being pressured into compliance by their insurers long before the state acts. This is what regulatory capture looks like in slow motion — a policy written by the industry, tested on the public, and later sancti;ed by the state.
The Insider Example
The capture isn’t hypothetical.
One of the Zone 0 committee Board members, Jose Lopez, even ;lmed a YouTube video at his own Southern California home showcasing his personal “Zone 0 conversion.” In it, he walks viewers through the “tremendous amount of trees and lower plants” he removed, and the insurance discount he received as a result — boasting that his 8 feet of gravel yard and metal mesh privacy fencing retro;ts helped him leave the state’s FAIR Plan for a private policy that “guarantees” him insurance.
That might seem harmless until you realize Mr. Lopez is helping write the very rules that will govern these same requirements statewide. When a regulator publicly markets his own property as a model for compliance, and ties that compliance to CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 5 of 13 insurance savings, he is no longer a neutral deliberator — he’s a living advertisement for the policy he’s supposed to evaluate.
And the guarantee he promises doesn’t exist. No, Zone 0 does not guarantee insurance — no matter how extensive or expensive. Insurers can still drop homeowners, raise rates, or deny coverage altogether. In fact, Zone 0 can just as easily become a tool to deny claims: a single potted plant, a handful of windblown leaves, broom or out-of-place garden chair ;ve feet from your house at the time of a ;re could be cited as “noncompliance.”
What Zone 0 truly guarantees is cost — to the homeowner who pays for the retro;ts, to the landscape that’s destroyed in the process, and to the public trust that’s eroded when regulators sell policy as marketing.
It’s a telling window into how California’s wild;re governance has blurred the line between regulator and regulated. Industry messaging isn’t merely induencing the process; it’s speaking through the people inside it.
The Manufactured Science
If the Lopez example shows how capture works at the individual level, what has been happening at the Board’s meetings reveals it on an institutional scale.
The academic faces of wild;re policy whose research portfolios are densely interwoven with insurance-industry funded projects, present their familiar “demonstration models” to the public — the same narrow simulations and reductionist slides that have been repeated for months and paraded as science.
The Board’s November featured presentation was funded by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, a philanthropy that invests heavily in “;re resilience” research aligned with insurance-industry risk modeling. The event featured Yana Valachovic, CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 6 of 13 the Board’s designated technical advisor on Zone 0 and a University of California Cooperative Extension forester who collaborates with the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety (IBHS).
Yet the demonstration she presented — conducted with Dave Winnacker, founder of XyloPlan, a private consulting ;rm that models a wild-;re risk scoring system for the insurance industry — bore little resemblance to real-world conditions.
In Valachovic’s demonstration, a dame torch was used to ignite a stack of wooden shipping pallets meant to simulate a neighboring house, producing a bon;re of direct dame contact rather than an ember storm like the storms experienced in the 2025 Palisades and Eaton ;res. Although she claimed the purpose was to show “radiant heat,” Zone 0 is legally de;ned as an ember-resistant zone.
The use of pallets, open dame, and redective foil-wrapped around a potted hedge highlights the experiment’s arti;ciality — a stage-managed exercise in junk science that does more to advance the insurance industry’s narrative than to inform sound public policy.
The Moore Foundation’s funding of such demonstrations — which explicitly link home-hardening models to insurance availability — reinforces a feedback loop that blurs the line between public policy and market strategy.
Taken together, the pattern is unmistakable: The presenters are linked to insurancedriven wild;re initiatives; The funding source (the Moore Foundation) acts as a philanthropic intermediary for private-sector interests; The message mirrors the insurer narrative that vegetation — not breakdowns in emergency response — is the primary hazard.
This is not independent science; its industry marketing disguised as research, paid for by a foundation that launders private induence into the language of public safety.
California’s wild;re policy pipeline now runs straight from insurer models, through CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 7 of 13 foundation funding, into state regulation.
The Secret Tour
Just days before that meeting, on October 24, the Board of Forestry arranged a private tour of Los Angeles with a small, hand-picked group of “stakeholders.” No public notice, no livestream, no opportunity for broader participation — only a curated audience and a predetermined message.
According to one participant’s notes, the delegation included Board Chair Terry O’Brien, Executive Ojcer Tony Andersen, Rules Manager Jane Van Susteren, CAL FIRE’s John Morgan, LA City and County ;re ojcials, and familiar names like Yana Valachovic — who again pushed for a plant-free Zone 0 — along with community representatives from Brentwood, UCLA, Mandeville Canyon, Resource Conservation District of the Santa Monica Mountains and the Theodore Payne Foundation.
The group toured neighborhoods from Brentwood to Altadena, discussing which plants should be removed. One attendee described how ojcials “pointed at plants and trees for removal” while residents tried to defend them. Valachovic reportedly declared that even green, healthy plants posed a danger, holding up a handful of fallen dry leaves under a tree as proof. The conversation repeatedly returned to total clearance — no plants, and “move your potted plants” on red dag days.
When the talk turned to insurance, Valachovic admitted that insurers will have their own rules regardless of State policy. Perhaps the most revealing moment came when Executive Ojcer Tony Andersen turned to the group and said quietly, “We need to show we’re doing something.”
That single sentence captured the essence of the state’s wild;re bureaucracy: policy as theater, not governance.
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 8 of 13 This “tour” wasn’t about listening — it was about optics. The Board could now claim it had met with community members, checked the box of stakeholder engagement, and gathered “on-the-ground perspectives.” Transparency has been replaced with choreography, and participation reduced to props in the state’s performance of accountability.
The Tyranny of Politeness
How does this happen? Through what social theorists call the Tyranny of Politeness — the culture of “civility” that values comfort over truth and harmony over justice.
The idea has roots in colonial history. European powers imposed their own codes of “proper” conduct to silence colonized peoples: anger became “uncivilized,” passion “irrational.”
Today, that same dynamic persists in modern governance. Agencies invite “stakeholder engagement,” perform listening sessions, and praise constructive tone — all while ensuring that nothing truly disruptive is heard.
California’s wild;re bureaucracy has perfected this art. The Board’s Zone 0 meetings, like the state’s insurer negotiations, function less as deliberation than as performance. Stakeholders are encouraged to be courteous, concise, and collaborative. But every polite comment, every carefully worded letter, becomes evidence that the public was consulted.
Civility becomes the camoudage of capture.
When Politeness Becomes Complicity
The Los Angeles Times recently exposed how this culture of deference plays out on the ground:
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…E4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 9 of 13 “Fire;ghters Urged Mass Altadena Evacuations. It Took Three Hours for Command to Act.” “Texts Reveal Fire;ghters Warned Palisades Blaze Could Reignite.” In both cases, front-line crews sounded urgent alarms while command structures hesitated — valuing order over responsiveness, procedure over truth. The same pathology governs Sacramento’s relationship with industry: decision-makers fear disruption more than disaster.
The Board’s polite stakeholder process will produce the same outcome. Once Zone 0 is adopted, homeowners will pay the price, while regulators will congratulate themselves for their “balanced” approach. Politeness will have done its job: keeping everyone calm as the house burns.
The Real Emergency
California’s leaders continue to speak of “crisis mode,” but the crisis they’re managing isn’t ;re — it’s political legitimacy. Having ceded policy design to insurers, they now depend on the appearance of fairness to maintain public trust. The polite stakeholder becomes a crucial prop in that performance.
Meanwhile, the New York Times analysis shows the material consequences: insurers dumping tens of thousands of policies in the very ZIP codes that later burned; companies rewarded for abandoning customers; ratepayers now covering insurers’ reinsurance costs and FAIR Plan losses — a subsidy disguised as reform.
If this were any other industry, we would call it what it is: a transfer of public wealth to private power.
Breaking the Spell of Politeness
I’ve spent more than two decades in community advocacy and have seen this pattern before. Agencies that have already chosen a side rely on public restraint to ;nish the job. When residents stay measured and “reasonable,” their very politeness becomes CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 10 of 13 the proof of consensus.
To break that cycle, we must stop confusing diplomacy with progress. We don’t need to be louder — we need to be truer. That means calling out the insurance industry’s role in drafting public policy, rejecting the false narrative of stakeholder partnership, and demanding transparency in every arena where the state claims to act on our behalf.
The New York Times and Los Angeles Times have now provided the evidence. The question is whether Californians will have the courage to act on it. Politeness has bought us higher premiums, weaker coverage, and a policy regime that destroys shade, habitat, privacy and property rights. It’s time to stop being grateful for our seat at the table and start naming the harm being done.
The truth is not impolite. It’s the ;rst act of resistance. (Diana Nicole is an ecological horticulturist and community advocate in Los Angeles.
She writes about Are policy and landscapes that actually work for Are safety at dianaznicole.com. Previous columns are available at the citywatchla archives.) Sponsored
The Ultimate At-Home Solution for
Neuropathy in Carson
EMSense
ALSO ON CITYWATCH LOS ANGELES
FDR and Churchill
Never Asked the
Nazis to Form a …
9 days ago • 1 comment
To Thine Own
Self Be True
2 days ago • 1 comment
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 11 of 13 What do you think?
8 Responses
Share Best Newest Oldest
Upvote Funny Love Surprised Angry Sad
3 Comments 1 Login
LOG IN WITH OR SIGN UP WITH DISQUS
Name
Join the discussion…
?
Diana Nicole − ⚑
3 days ago
I want to dag something important from a recent conversation I had with a lawmaker's staffer about insurability. We know homeowners are being dropped because of wild;re risk — that part is 100% true. However, insurers in California are not using the State’s Wild;re Hazard Severity Map to make those decisions. They rely on their own internal ;re-risk maps and proprietary models, which the public never sees.
https://www.reinsurancene.ws/consumer-watchdog-opposes-proposal-for-black-boxmodels-in-wild;re-riskprediction/#:~:text=Consumer%20Watchdog%20opposes%20Californian%20Insurance,all%2 0factors%20affecting%20insurance%20prices
That creates a fundamental problem when people try to link Zone 0 to insurance availability, because Zone 0 only applies inside the State-designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). If insurers aren’t using that map — and they aren’t — then Zone 0 compliance cannot logically guarantee coverage. You can live outside the VHFHSZ and still be dropped, G
1
D
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 12 of 13 Reply
cannot logically guarantee coverage. You can live outside the VHFHSZ and still be dropped, or live inside it, fully comply with Zone 0, and still lose insurance. The two systems don’t talk to each other.
To be clear: I am not saying insurers ignore defensible space. Some insurance providers absolutely look at it. But insurers already use clearance for underwriting, for rate-setting, and sometimes to deny claims by arguing non-compliance — and they have done so long before Zone 0 existed. They don’t need Zone 0 to take those actions but Zone 0 certainly provides a convenient tool to the insurance deniability toolbox.
This is why it’s important not to condate vegetation rules with insurability. Insurance is the most critical issue for people living in the ;re zones, but the drivers of the crisis are corporate: exposure limits, reinsurance costs, catastrophe modeling, and ;nancial decisions at the company level. Even if every homeowner removed every plant around their homes tomorrow, the insurance crisis would still continue — because it’s not tied to Zone 0, it’s tied to insurers’ own models.
0 0
Diana Nicole
Reply
− ⚑
3 days ago
The link to the New York Times article referenced at the top of this article is broken. Please try this link. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/01/us/los-angeles-california-;re-insuranceregulations.html 0 0
Robin Smith − ⚑
6 days ago
Real investigative journalism, these days, falls to those rare, principled folks who care and who DO the work--usually without fame or fortune; fear or favor.
Getting to the "true-truth" is the only hope we have of ;nding a safe path forward.
Thank you Diana, for caring . . .and for sharing your wisdom and insight. ⥅
D
⥅
CityWatch LA - How the Insurance Industry Is Rewriting California’s Wildfire Rules — Starting in Your Backyard 11/18/25, 3:14 PM https://www.citywatchla.com/state-watch/31793-how-the-insuranc…4yMjIe3RGuCYSjH05fb3J44hpJFX5e5cZQ_aem_uQ9dgFfIoYapaAdxTIWHcg Page 13 of 13 Sponsored
The Ultimate At-Home Solution for
Neuropathy in Carson
EMSense
1 Kristina Santana
From: Golden Springs Plaza Admin <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2025 4:16 PM
To: Kristina Santana
Subject: Request for Consideration of Updates to Signage, Monument Height, and Business License Policies
**DO NOT open unknown links or any attachments without confirming with IS or the sender directly.** CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise caution when opening attachments or clicking links, especially from unknown senders.
Dear City Council Members,
I hope you are doing well. I am writing to respectfully request the City’s consideration of several updates to current commercial property regulations that have become increasingly challenging for building owners and tenants.
1. Building Signage for Stand-Alone Office/Medical Buildings We kindly request that the City allow exterior building signage for individual tenants within stand-alone office and medical buildings. Clear tenant identification is essential for patient and client navigation, and this update would greatly improve visibility and accessibility.
2. Monument Sign Height for Shopping Centers
For multi-tenant shopping centers, we ask that the City reevaluate the current 5-foot height restriction on monument signs. This limitation does not provide adequate street visibility for most tenants. Allowing additional height would support tenant success and improve business exposure.
3. Multiple Business Licenses per Unit
We also request that the City consider allowing multiple business licenses within a single tenant unit. Since COVID, the office market has shifted significantly toward co-working, executive suite, and shared office concepts. Limiting each unit to one business license no longer reflects current business models and creates operational challenges. Additionally, most tenants today work remotely from home or spend the majority of their time in the field instead of onsite at the office, so allowing multiple business licenses would not negatively affect parking availability. 2 Thank you very much for your time and consideration. We appreciate the City’s partnership in supporting local businesses and helping commercial properties remain competitive.
Warm regards,
Alicia Yu
GCM Asset LLC
626-831-7188