CITY COUNCIL - June 09, 2026
1. CLOSED SESSION—CALL TO ORDER 5:00 PM
Public Comments:
2. ROLL CALL
Public Comments:
3. PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CLOSED SESSION AGENDA
Public Comments:
This Public Comment period is limited to Closed Session agenda items only. Public Comment is limited to three (3) minutes per speaker.
4. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
Public Comments:
4.a
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION
Public Comments:
Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2): One potential case involving the City's ownership, maintenance obligations, facility conditions, and risk allocation relating to the Hermosa Beach Lawn Bowling Club facilities at the Clark Complex.
5. OPEN SESSION—CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
Public Comments:
6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Public Comments:
7. ROLL CALL
Public Comments:
8. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Public Comments:
9. ANNOUNCEMENTS—UPCOMING CITY EVENTS
Public Comments:
10. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Public Comments:
This is the time for the City Council to discuss any changes to the order of agenda items.
Recommended Action:
To approve the order of the agenda.
11. PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS
Public Comments:
11.a
PROCLAMATION DECLARING JUNE AS PRIDE MONTH IN HERMOSA BEACH Public Comments:
12. PUBLIC COMMENT
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. ecomment report 6-9-26.pdf
th
Dear City Councii,
The real story about the Hermosa Pier...
For those younger folks that say we must rebuild the pier please consider the original construction of the current Hermosa Beach Pier in 1965 cost $589,600.
Exactly half of that total cost or $294,800 was covered by was covered by the state's California Wildlife Conservation Board..
The city covered the other half with reserve funds. Taxes were not raised.
Adjusting strictly for standard inflation, the original 1965 construction cost of $589,600 works out to $6.1 million today and the $294,800 the city paid with its reserves equates to $3 million to today's dollars.
However, rebuilding the exact same structure today is estimated by city officials to cost $44.5 million to $58.6 million.
And on top of that it will cost another 40 million dollars to pay for interest on 30 year bond .
The fairness of a parcel-tax that charges a senior living in hermosa on modest fixed income in a modest home the same pier-tax as will be paid by rich strand land owners or high value commercial parcels is questionable to say the least.
One alternative that has been bantered about is raising the local hotel/short-term rental TOT tax to help fund a new pier.
But each 1% increase in the Hermosa Beach Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) only generates approximately $364,000 annually.
So a TOT tax wont get us far.
To fund the pier 3/4% it would probably take a 3/4% sales tax increase and a 1-2% TOT tax increase.
And if we do that how will the city fund the other $50 million in existing UNFUNDED high priority capital projects like the 20 million dollars for the city yard or the approximately 20 million dollars in urgent, approved but unfunded capital projects like the years of deferred maintenance on the Civic Center, City Hall, the Police Station or existing parking lots
THE PIER CATCH:
If a ballot a measure explicitly guarantees the TOT or sales tax will only be used for a specific project like a pier, it becomes a special tax.
Under California law (Proposition 218), a special tax requires a tougher two-thirds (66.7%) voter majority to pass.
But without a Special Tax and the requisite 66.7% majority there is no way to guarantee funding actually goes for a specific purpose like a Pier or a City Yard or even public safety.
All this is above my pay grade but some things to consider.
Howard Lee
Re: the Commissioner appointments item, it should be rolled to the June 23rd meeting. The Interview item itself should occur either this evening or at least three days before the June 23rd meeting.
In years past applicants were interviewed in a meeting one day, and then not until at least three days later were the appointments made. That allowed councilmembers to have time to consult with others including members of the public to go over any of their concerns re: each applicant, or a specific applicant.
In recent years the process was essentially corrupted / railroaded to have the selection made by council immediately in a following meeting a few hours later. That is dead wrong. The applicants and the public deserve far better. There is no rush thus the appointments should for sure be made in Council’s second meeting of June. The Public Works Commission does not even meet next until mid-July as I understand it.
Further, due to the clear mix-up with the applications not even being posted until less than 24-hours before the 4-PM interviews meeting, that itself is enough in itself, imv to definitely not make the appointments until June 23, the 2nd Council meeting this month.
This is the time for members of the public to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction and on items where public comment will not be taken (City Manager Reports, City Councilmember Comments, Consent Calendar items not pulled for separate discussion, and Future Agenda Items). If public comment is provided on a Public Hearing or Municipal Matter item, public comment on the same item will not be accepted when the item is heard at a later part of the meeting.
The public is invited to attend and provide public comment. Public comments are limited to three minutes per speaker from those present in City Council Chambers and via the remote participation options listed on the agenda. This time allotment may be modified due to time constraints at the discretion of the Mayor or City Council.
No action will be taken on matters raised during public comment, except that the Council may take action to schedule issues raised during public comment for a future agenda. Speakers with comments regarding City management or departmental operations are encouraged to submit those comments directly to the City Manager. Members of the public will have a future opportunity to speak on items pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion, Public Hearings, and Municipal Matters when those items are heard.
13. CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Public Comments:
14. CONSENT CALENDAR
Public Comments:
The following matters will be acted upon collectively with a single motion and vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. Councilmembers may orally register a negative vote on any Consent Calendar item without pulling the item for separate consideration before the vote on the Consent Calendar. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember removes an item from the Consent Calendar, either under Approval of the Agenda or under this item before the vote on the Consent Calendar. Items removed for separate discussion will be provided a separate public comment period.
Recommended Action:
To approve the consent calendar.
14.a
WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ON THE AGENDA Public Comments:
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions on the agenda and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.
14.b
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. May 26, 2026 Regular Meeting .pdf
2. May 28, 2026 Adjourned Regular Meeting .pdf
tonyhiggins
Dear City Council,
Dear City Clerk,
Thank you for the substantial improvement in the quality of the CC meeting minutes. https://pub-hermosabeach.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=59155 I hope the city is taking advantage of AI to generate minutes and hopefully our agenda management system includes these modules.
With AI video files can be fed directly into an AI program trained to generate a final draft which can be edited by the clerk and then automatically sent to legal for review then the city manager for approval.
A couple of things.
Would the council please consider a policy that requires a 4/5th majority to reduce public speaker time allotments. If 2/5th of the council wants to give it's constiuents their full allotment of speak time that should be enough.
Finally, could the council look into making sure the councilman speaking in the captions document PDF identified? Currently the captions.pdf does not identify the councilman and its not at all clear who is speaking Note: Off-the-Shelf AI Handles This. You do not need to feed the AI thousands of hours of voice data to get results.
Depending on your technical background, you can use these capabilities in three different ways:
1. Ready-to-Use Software (No Coding)If you want a graphical interface where you just upload a file or record live, software utilities handle the separation automatically:
Otter.ai: Automatically separates voices and flags them as "Speaker 1," "Speaker 2," etc.
Once you tag a speaker's name once, its machine learning algorithm instantly updates that speaker's identity across the entire transcript.
Descript: Automatically detects speaker changes upon importing an audio file, prompting you to type in names to replace generic tags. thank you for considering
(City Clerk Martha Alvarez)
Recommended Action:
To approve the minutes of the May 26, 2026, Regular Meeting and the May 28, 2026, Adjourned Regular Meeting.
14.c
CHECK REGISTERS - 26-AS-062
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT - CHECK REGISTERS 6-9-2026 - 26-AS-062.pdf
2. Attachment 1. 5-20-26.pdf
3. Attachment 2. 5-27-26.pdf
(Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council receive and file the check registers for May 20, 2026 through May 27, 2026. The Administrative Services Director certifies the accuracy of the demands.
14.d
APPROVAL OF ROAD REPAIR AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2017 (SENATE BILL 1) PROJECT LIST FOR THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026–2027 - 26-PW-039 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. SB1 Projects - 26-PW-039.pdf
2. Attachment 2- SB1 Project List.pdf
3. Attachment 1 - SB1 Resolution.pdf
CEQA:
The Project is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15060(c)(3). (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Approve a resolution
(Attachment 1)
adopting a list of projects for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026–27 funded by Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017; and Direct staff to submit the project list
(Attachment 2)
and supporting documentation to the California Transportation Commission by July 1, 2026.
14.e
ROTARY CLUB OF HERMOSA BEACH FARMER’S MARKET AGREEMENT 2026 – 2028 - 26-PR-031 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT - ROTARY CLUB OF HERMOSA BEACH FARMERS MARKET AGREEMENT 2026 – 2028 - 26-PR-031.pdf
2. Attachment 1. Proposed New Farmers Market Agreement with the Rotary Club of Hermosa Beach for the Friday Farmers Market.pdf
3. Attachment 2. First Amendment to the Agreement with the Rotary Club of Hermosa Beach for the Friday Farmers Market.pdf
4. Attachment 3. 2022 to 2025 Agreement with the Rotary Club of Hermosa Beach for the Friday Farmers Market.pdf (Lead Special Events and Filming Coordinator Kalyn Kaemerle) Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Consider approval of the new drafted agreement for the Rotary Club of Hermosa Beach to provide its weekly Friday farmers market for a three-year term 2026-2028; and Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute and the City Clerk to attest to the proposed agreement, subject to approval by the City Attorney.
14.f
CONSIDERATION OF THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE HERMOSA BEACH FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY AGREEMENT - 26-PR-040 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT - THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE FRIENDS OF THE LIBRARY AGREEMENT - 26-PR-040.pdf
2. Attachment 1. Hermosa Beach Friends of the Library Agreement.pdf
3. Attachment 2. Proposed Third Amendment.pdf
(Parks and Recreation Director Lisa Nichols)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Approve the proposed third amendment to an agreement with the Hermosa Beach Friends of the Library and; Authorize the City Manager to execute and the City Clerk to attest the , subject to approval by the City Attorney.
14.g
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A LETTER TO THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE REGARDING THE LOS ANGELES COASTAL AREA SPECIAL RESOURCE STUDY - 26-CMO-036 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT-CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A LETTER TO NPS STUDY- 26-CMO-036.pdf
2. Attachment 1. National Park Service Draft Letter .pdf (City Manager Steve Napolitano)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Approve the letter to be submitted to the National Park Service on behalf of the City of Hermosa Beach regarding Los Angeles Coastal Area Special Resource Study.
15. UPDATES ON CITY COUNCIL ACTIVITIES
Public Comments:
This is the time for members of the City Council to report on their attendance at ad hoc subcommittees or standing committee meetings, conferences, or other official activities as City representatives.
16. PUBLIC HEARINGS—TO COMMENCE AT 6:30 P.M
Public Comments:
16.a
RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEES FROM A FEE STUDY
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. SUPPLEMENTAL Emailed Comment for Item 16.a.pdf
Michelle Crispin
Mayor Detoy and Members of the City Council,
The Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau supports the City's efforts to better understand the cost of providing services and to ensure public resources are being managed responsibly.
As the Fee Study moves forward, we encourage Council to consider not only the cost of providing services, but also the impact that fee increases will have on local businesses, property owners, entrepreneurs, and community organizations.
We encourage benchmarking against neighboring communities and consideration of phased implementation where significant increases are proposed. Maintaining a business-friendly environment remains essential to supporting local investment and economic activity.
We appreciate Council's continued evaluation of this matter and look forward to participating in future discussions.
Claudia Berman
This is not a comment on the fees specifically, but the process that led to the fees discussion on April 28, which I found problematic.
What occurred:
On April 28, the council voted 4-1 to approve most fee increases. They also pulled specific fees from that approval to discuss further at a later meeting.
Between that meeting and the May 12 follow-up, Council Member Francois, who had voted in favor of the original motion and even seconded it, privately contacted City Manager Napolitano and asked that five more fees be added to the list. When the May 12 meeting arrived, the list had quietly grown. After some council members noticed the change, Napolitano simply said that there was felt to be some confusion.
The Problem:
Napolitano’s implementation of a council member’s request to change what had been previously decided by a vote of the full Council, while not illegal, does violate the spirit of the Brown Act which is to ensure that public business is conducted in public.
Napolitano acquiescing to Francois’s private request does appear to violate the INTERNATIONAL CITY/COUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION (ICMA) code of ethics, particularly tenets 6 and 10.
Tenet 6: Recognize that elected representatives are accountable to their community for the decisions they make; members are responsible for implementing those decisions.
Tenet 10: Oppose efforts to interfere with professional responsibilities by consistently executing official duties, policies, and processes with an unwavering commitment to unbiased public service.
What should have occurred:
Francois should have raised any concerns about the April 28 vote publicly at the May 12 meeting, not privately with city staff. If he felt he was confused after he voted, the correct path was to make a motion on the record in public. Working around a public vote through back-channel contact with the City Manager undermined the integrity of the council's decision. As a bare minimum, Francois should have proactively come forward once his peers noticed the change, and state that he was confused about the vote and he was the council person that asked the city manager for the change.
Napolitano should have declined Francois's request and directed him to bring the matter back as a public agenda item. The City Manager serves the council as a body, not individual members.
Thank you for listening
(Continued from
the May 12
, 2026
, City Council Meeting)
(Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council c
ontinue the Public Hearing to the June 23, 2026, City Council Meeting.
16.b
CLARIFY KELLY PICKLEBALL COURTS POLICY ITEM AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO MODIFY THE ANNUAL PICKLEBALL MEMBERSHIP AND HOURLY RESERVATION FEES - 26-PR-032 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. CLARIFICATION OF PICKLEBALL POLICY ITEM AND ADOPTION OF PICKLEBALL FEE INCREASES - 26-PR-032.pdf
2. Attachment 1. Kelly Pickleball Courts Use Policy.pdf
3. Attachment 2. Proposed Resolution.pdf
4. SUPPLEMENTAL Presentation for Item 16.b.pdf
Cammie Herbert
Councilmembers,
I think the hours and the fees are fair since we are limited to 4 courts. The city does need to make sure that what P&R is spending for upkeep is what the fees are. And the Friday first available is worth trying out.
THANK YOU for funding the fix of these courts!
tony higgins
Dear City Council,
before you come hat in hand asking for a sales tax increase how about recovering the full costs of building, maintaining and staffing the pickle ball courts.
Where is the analysis on full cost recovery. im all for means tested subsidies for youth sports or even means tested subsidies resident after school programs of camps.
The fact that no pickleball FULL cost recovery analysis is simply outrageous in the face of the fiscal crisis we are facing.
Adjust the fees for full cost recovery first and give it a year to see how it plays out.
If the courts are underutilized after a year you can always lower costs.
CEQA:
The proposed resolution is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378 (b)(5) as it is an administrative activity of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (Parks and Recreation Director Lisa Nichols)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Approve staff’s recommendation to maintain the Kelly Pickleball Courts Use Policy that Courts 1–4 are available for reservation and walk-on play except on Fridays, when all courts are designated for walk-on play only and are not available for reservations; and Adopt a resolution amending the City’s Master Fee Schedule to modify the annual Pickleball Membership and hourly reservation fees.
16.c
INTRODUCTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 12.30 SPECIAL EVENTS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, 12.30.010 and 12.30.030 AND ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH NEW SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT PROGRAM FEES - 26-PR-038 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT- INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND HBMC CHAPTER 12.30 SPECIAL EVENTS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY - 26-PR-038.pdf
2. Attachment 1. Proposed Resolution .pdf
3. Attachment 2. Proposed Ordinance .pdf
4. SUPPLEMENTAL Presentation for Item 16.c.pdf
5. SUPPLEMENTAL Emailed Comment for Item 16.c.pdf
Michelle Crispin
Mayor and Members of the City Council,
The Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau recognizes the City's need to evaluate costs associated with processing and managing special events. However, before increasing fees, we encourage the City to thoroughly evaluate its own operational efficiencies and internal processes.
Community events are not simply permit applicants. They drive economic activity for local businesses, create opportunities for businesses to engage with new and existing customers, attract visitors, support tourism, and contribute significantly to the identity and vibrancy of Hermosa Beach.
As one of the City's largest event producers, we have experienced firsthand the increasing costs associated with producing community events. Additional permit and administrative fees ultimately make it more difficult for nonprofit organizations, community groups, and event producers to deliver the events that residents, visitors, and businesses enjoy and rely upon.
Before passing increased costs on to event organizers, we encourage the City to evaluate opportunities to streamline internal processes, improve permit workflows, reduce administrative redundancies, and leverage technology, including artificial intelligence and automation tools, where appropriate. The private sector is increasingly utilizing technology to improve efficiency and reduce costs, and local government should be exploring those same opportunities before asking event producers and community organizations to absorb additional expenses.
We also encourage the City to carefully evaluate whether the amount of staff time currently allocated to event review, processing, and administration is reasonable, efficient, and proportional to the complexity of each event.
Community events generate substantial value for Hermosa Beach. They support local businesses, create gathering opportunities for residents, drive visitation, and enhance the City's reputation as a destination. Fee structures should recognize those benefits and avoid creating barriers that could reduce future events, sponsorship opportunities, business participation, and community engagement.
We encourage continued collaboration with event organizers and stakeholders before implementing fee increases that could have unintended consequences for the events ecosystem that benefits our entire community.
Cammie Herbert
Councilmembers,
This is a 2 part “position”. I’m for the fees. But did notice there were 6 recommendations from the Commission and the last one is not listed and I think it’s an important one for the council weigh in on.
The current staff report (on page 6) lists five Commission recommendations from the April 16th Park and Recreation meeting. The Commission actually voted on and approved six (6) recommendations to the Special Event Policy Guide.
Its about whether the stronger language requiring event producers to detail positive economic impacts in their Special Event Applications should be restored to the Policy Guide.
That amendment matters because it requires event producers to detail the positive economic impacts of their events in town. “Including local business participation” has only sort of worked. Some Businesses don’t seem to be getting as much foot traffic as hoped, and some residents don’t want more events.
Requiring applicants to detail anticipated economic impacts helps the City and the residents see potential benefits of events, help the Commission narrow down benefits of one event over another— And hopefully support local business activity more intentionally. (Heck graduating students have to do this in college essays)! I think this help the nonprofits as well. Maybe they can get more small (i.e. impactful) events.
Hopefully it was just accidentally removed from the public record or report? If the Commission voted to add that language back, Council should be aware of it.
Thank you for your time.
tonyhiggins
Dear City Council,
1. Recreation Commission blocked from gathering Special Events workflow data:
The Recreation Commission requested staff track time spent on special event activities, but Legal determined the request exceeded the Commission’s authority.
2. Commissions need access to workflow information:
To fulfill their oversight and advisory responsibilities, commissions should be able to examine workflows, staffing effort, and resource use.
3. AI implementation requires process documentation:
Effective AI deployment depends on understanding and documenting existing workflows, staff responsibilities, approvals, systems, and costs.
4. Hermosa should develop an AI strategy now:
Despite current fiscal challenges, the city should assemble a small team of resident experts council members and staff to develop a practical roadmap for AI adoption.
5. Process mapping should come before purchasing AI tools:
The city should document major workflows such as permitting, public records requests, event approvals, and council agenda preparation before attempting automation.
6. Staff time tracking is essential for cost recovery:
Accurate cost recovery requires measuring actual staff hours spent across departments, particularly for activities such as special events and film permits.
7. A citywide workflow process library should be created Hermosa should maintain a central repository documenting procedures, systems, departments involved, costs, timelines, and pain points for major city functions.
8. AI can improve administrative efficiency:
High-value uses include public records processing, meeting preparation, permit screening, customer service, and budget analysis, with staff retaining final decision-making authority.
9. AI can improve indirect cost allocation and fee studies:
Rather than relying on broad departmental allocations, AI-supported activity-based costing could produce more transparent and defensible cost recovery models based on actual work performed.
10. Documenting workflows is a prerequisite for meaningful organizational improvement AI can increase individual productivity without documentation, but significant gains in cost reduction, service delivery, workflow optimization, and fee recovery require understanding how work flows across departments. The process-mapping exercise itself often identifies substantial efficiencies before any AI is deployed.
Laura Pena
Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Staff -
I noticed an error in the public record regarding the updated Special Event Policy Guide.
The current staff report (on page 6) lists five Commission recommendations from the April 16th Park and Recreation meeting. The Commission actually voted on and approved six (6) recommendations to the Special Event Policy Guide. The omitted item was an amendment to the Economic Benefit section, introduced by a Commissioner and unanimously approved as part of the final motion.
That amendment matters because it restored stronger language requiring event producers to detail the positive economic impacts of their events in their Special Event Applications. If that language was recommended by the Commission to be restored, but was then omitted from the proposed Policy Guide, Council should know that and have the opportunity to weigh in on whether it should be reinstated.
This is important because events are not just operational matters. They use public space, City staff time, public safety resources, and parking. If we are going to continue approving and in some cases subsidizing special events, the City should require event producers to “detail positive economic impacts as a result of the event,” not simply encourage local business participation in general terms.
Requiring applicants to detail anticipated economic impacts helps the City:
- evaluate whether an event is likely to provide measurable public value - compare the benefits of one event against another
- support local business activity more intentionally
- and make better decisions about fee waivers, long term agreements, and recurring use of scarce public space Without that requirement, the City risks weakening one of the few tools it has to connect event approvals to actual economic benefit. It appears to be accidentally removed from the public record and the updated Special Event Policy Guide.
I ask Council to do two things before final action is taken:
1. Ensure the staff report is corrected to reflect all six recommendations approved by the Commission on April 16th; and
2. Specifically weigh in on whether the stronger language requiring event producers to detail positive economic impacts in their Special Event Applications should be restored to the Policy Guide.
If the Commission voted to add that language back, Council should be aware of it and should have the opportunity to decide whether that stronger accountability standard belongs in the final policy.
As always, I appreciate your thoughtful consideration.
Laura Peña
CEQA:
The proposed ordinance is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378 (b)(5) as it is an organization or administrative activity of the City that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (Lead Special Events and Filming Coordinator Kalyn Kaemerle).
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Introduce by title only and waive the first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 12.30 Special Events on Public Property, 12.30.010 Special event regulations generally and 12.30.030 Special event approval and permit issuance to amend policies and fees related to special events on public property; and Adopt a resolution amending the City’s Master Fee Schedule to establish new special event permit program fees.
17. MUNICIPAL MATTERS
Public Comments:
17.a
2026 ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS - 26-CCO-007 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT - 2026 ANNUAL APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS - 26-CCO-007.pdf
2. SUPPLEMENT 2026 Boards and Commissions Applicants .pdf
3. SUPPLEMENTAL Emailed Comment for Item 17.a.pdf
tonyhiggins
Dear City Council,
A foundation purpose of our commissions is represent resident interests. Sometimes there is a tension between city employee needs and wants and resident needs and wants.
Its ridiculous to think you can pick the best commissioners after a 5 minute interview and 15 minutes of deliberation. 2 cents
Howard Lee
Re: the Commissioner appointments item, it should be rolled to the June 23rd meeting. The Interview item itself should occur either this evening or at least three days before the June 23rd meeting.
In years past applicants were interviewed in a meeting one day, and then not until at least three days later were the appointments made. That allowed councilmembers to have time to consult with others including members of the public to go over any of their concerns re: each applicant, or a specific applicant.
In recent years the process was essentially corrupted / railroaded to have the selection made by Council immediately in a following meeting a few hours later. That is dead wrong. The applicants and the public deserve far better. There is no rush thus the appointments should for sure be made in Council’s second meeting of June. The Public Works Commission does not even meet next until mid-July as I understand it.
Further, due to the clear mix-up with the applications not even being posted until less than 24-hours before the 4-PM interviews meeting, that itself is enough in itself, imv to definitely not make the appointments until June 23, the 2nd Council meeting this month. (City Clerk Martha Alvarez)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council appoint or reappoint to the following Boards and Commissions vacancies:
Public Works Commission:
Two Members-At-Large
Civil Service Board:
One Member-At-Large
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council appoint two applicants to the Public Works Commission and one applicant to the Civil Service Board.
If the City Council is not prepared to make appointments at this time, the City Clerk’s Office can be directed to reopen recruitment for the Public Works Commission and Civil Service Board vacancies, conduct an additional round of outreach and interviews, and return to the City Council at a later date with new recommendations for appointment.
17.b
FY 2026-2027 BUDGET DISCUSSION - 26-AS-065
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT-BUDGET DISCUSSION - 26-AS-065.pdf
2. Attachment 1 - FY 27 General Fund Budget Reductions.pdf
3. Attachment 2 - FY 27 General Fund Supplemental Requests.pdf
4. Attachment 3-Future Revenue Options.pdf
5. SUPPLEMENTAL Presentation for Item 17.b.pdf
Michelle Crispin
Mayor and Members of the City Council,
We appreciate staff's work in addressing the City's fiscal challenges and support the City's efforts to develop a balanced budget that maintains essential services while addressing long-term financial sustainability.
As the City evaluates budget priorities, the Chamber encourages Council to prioritize the services that most directly affect residents, businesses, and visitors, including permit processing, inspections, plan review, code compliance, economic development, and customer service.
Businesses consistently tell us that responsiveness, predictability, and turnaround times are among the most important factors when deciding to invest, expand, or operate in Hermosa Beach. We encourage the City to establish and publicly report performance metrics related to these services so the community can better understand service levels and outcomes.
As future revenue discussions continue, we encourage the City to evaluate visitor-generated revenue opportunities and enforcement of existing regulations before placing additional burdens on local businesses. Continued efforts to improve short-term rental compliance, thoughtfully manage parking resources, and identify sustainable funding solutions should remain part of the conversation.
As parking and mobility revenue strategies are evaluated, we encourage the City to carefully consider the economic impacts that changes to parking programs may have on local businesses, customers, and commercial districts. Parking policies should support accessibility, business activity, and a positive visitor experience while helping the City meet its financial objectives.
The Chamber also encourages the City to preserve investments that support the visitor experience, economic activity, and the overall appeal of our commercial districts. Projects such as downtown lighting improvements, beautification efforts, and other enhancements to our business corridors contribute to walkability, public perception, and the quality of place that benefits residents, businesses, and visitors alike.
Finally, if future revenue measures are considered, we encourage the City to clearly communicate how those funds will be used and what measurable outcomes the community can expect. Transparency, accountability, and demonstrated results will be critical to building public trust and support.
We appreciate Council's commitment to addressing the City's fiscal challenges and look forward to continuing to work collaboratively on solutions that support both fiscal sustainability and a strong local economy.
Ira Ellman
In the budget presentation, the City Manager states: "The FY27 budget process also reflects a broader strategic shift away from reliance on one-time funding solutions and toward achieving long-term structural balance." That is inaccurate, as most of the $3.2mm budget shortfall was again covered by one-time funding solutions. This year, Pausing Equipment Replacement Fund contributions, deferring vehicle purchases and Reducing 20% reserve allocations were utilized - creative accounting and likely mostly not cash related. Instead of proposing a bold plan, such as a 5-10% cut, only $270K or so of personnel reductions/change of job classifications are proposed. Despite the much improved 2026-2027 budget presentation by Brandon Walker and multiple budget meetings, the outcome is not bold enough. On a somewhat related note, the likely passage of Measure ER (1/2% sales tax increase) might make it harder for Hb to pass a sales tax hike. tonyhiggins
Dear City Council,
The city was facing a $3.2 million dollar deficit in FYE 26-27.
On the positive side this deficit has been addressed.
But i hope the council is equally clear about the negative side: The city still had to allocate on $3.2 million dollars worth of cash reserve and deferred expenses (eg delaying equipment & vehicle replacement) to meet the FY 26-27 balanced budget target.
Moreover, significant ongoing Operational budget deficits still exist for at least the next 5 years to the tune of at least $20 million dollars.
I hope the budget presentation makes this abundantly clear to residents.
AND in addition to these operating budget deficits the city still has NOT addressed the $50 million in unfunded but approved high priority capital projects. And that 50 million doesnt include a $100 million dollar Pier Replacement or even a $15 million dollar pool.
Its also worth noting that staff is recommending $340K in budget increases in the Item 3 Attachment:
https://pub-hermosabeach.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=59212 And the Council has identified millions of dollars in potential new fees and taxes in the Item 4 Attachment that will be considered in the June 9th City Council meeting:
https://pub-hermosabeach.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=59213 But there is a POSITIVE side: Staff identified $1.3 million in specific operations budget reductions in the Item 2 Attachment to the staff report. https://pub-hermosabeach.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=59211 tonyhiggins
Please click/tap on pdf above
(Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Receive and File Fiscal Year (FY) 2026-2027 Budget Presentation;
17.c
AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS FOR ON-CALL BROKER/DEALER SERVICES - 26-AS-063 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT-AWARD BROKER DEALER CONTRACTS - 26-AS-063.pdf
2. Attachment 1-RFQ-26-002-On-Call Broker Dealer Services.pdf
3. Attachment 2-Academy Securities City of Hermosa Beach_Broker Dealer Questionnaire.pdf
4. Attachment 3-Great Pacific CIty of Hermosa Beach.pdf
5. Attachment 4-Higgins Capital Hermosa Beach.pdf
6. Attachment 5-MBS City of Hermosa Beach_BrokerDealer Questionnaire.pdf
7. Attachment 6-RJ City of Hermosa Beach_BrokerDealer Questionnaire.pdf
8. Attachment 7-Stifel-City of Hermosa Beach_BrokerDealer Questionnaire.pdf
9. Attachment 8-US Bankcorp City of Hermosa Beach_BrokerDealer Questionnaire.pdf
10. SUPPLEMENTAL Presentaion for Item 17.c.pdf
(City Treasurer David Pedersen and Administrative Service Director Brandon Walker Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Award and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for on-call broker/dealer services with Academy Securities, Inc. for a term of three years ending June 30, 2029, and the option for two one-year extensions at the City's discretion; Award and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for on-call broker/dealer services with Great Pacific Securities for a term of three years ending June 30, 2029, and the option for two one-year extensions at the City's discretion; Award and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for on-call broker/dealer services with Higgins Capital Management, Inc. for a term of three years ending June 30, 2029, and the option for two one-year extensions at the City's discretion; Award and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for on-call broker/dealer services with Multi-Bank Securities, Inc. for a term of three years ending June 30, 2029, and the option for two one-year extensions at the City's discretion; Award and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for on-call broker/dealer services with Raymond James & Associates, Inc. for a term of three years ending June 30, 2029, and the option for two one-year extensions at the City's discretion; Award and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for on-call broker/dealer services with Stife Nicolaus & Company, Inc., for a term of three years ending June 30, 2029, and the option for two one-year extensions at the City's discretion; Award and authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement for on-call broker/dealer services with U.S. Bancorp Advisors, Inc., for a term of three years ending June 30, 2029, and the option for two one-year extensions at the City's discretion;
17.d
AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR CIP 107 CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL PROJECT - 26-PW-038 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT - AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CIP 107 CITYWIDE SLURRY SEAL - 26-PW-038.pdf
2. Attachment 1. Draft Contract Agreement.pdf
3. Attachment 2. Draft Resolution .pdf
4. Attachment 3. CIP107 Location Map.pdf
5. Attachment 4. Bid Summary Sheet.pdf
6. Attachment 5. Bid Documents for Pavement Coating Co.pdf
7. Attachment 6. CIP 107 Project Plans.pdf
8. Attachment 7. CIP 107 Project Specifications.pdf
9. SUPPLEMENTAL Presentation for Item 17.d.pdf
CEQA:
The Project is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (Existing Facilities). The project consists of surface improvements of an existing public roadway. The roadway will not be widened and work will be performed within the existing roadway footprint. (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Award a construction contract for the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) 107 – Citywide Slurry Seal Project to Pavement Coatings Co. in the amount of $222,310 (Attachment 1)
;
Authorize the Director of Public Works to establish a project contingency amount of $44,500 (approximately 20% of the contract amount) and approve contract change orders up to the amount of the approved project contingency; Adopt the attached resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach Approving the Construction of CIP 107 Citywide Slurry Seal Project Pursuant to Government Code Section 830.6 and Establishing a Project Payment Account” (Attachment
2 )
;
Authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract, approve minor modifications if necessary, and the City Clerk to attest, subject to approval by the City Attorney; Authorize the Director of Public Works to file a Notice of Completion following final completion of the Project; and Authorize the Director of Public Works, or designee, to file a Notice of Exemption with the Los Angeles County Clerk in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15062.
17.e
AWARD OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTS FOR ON-CALL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND TESTING SERVICES - 26-PW-016 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT - AWARD ON CALL ENV TEST - 26-PW-016.pdf
2. Attachment 1. Proposed Professional Services Agreement with AESCO Inc.pdf
3. Attachment 2. Proposed Professional Services Agreement with Panacea Inc.pdf
4. Attachment 3. RFQ 26-001 On-Call Environmental Monitoring and Testing Services.pdf
5. SUPPLEMENTAL Presentation for 17.e.pdf
(Public Works Director Joe SanClemente)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
Award a contract for on-call environmental monitoring and testing services to AESCO, Inc. at a not-to-exceed amount of $200,000 for a term of five years ending June 9, 2031 (At
tachment 1)
;
Award a contract for on-call environmental monitoring and testing services to Panacea, Inc. at a not-to-exceed amount of $200,000 for a term of five years ending June 9, 2031 (Attachment 2)
;
and
Authorize the City Manager to execute the proposed agreements, and approve minor modifications if necessary, with the City Clerk attesting the proposed agreements and subject to approval by the City Attorney.
18. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Public Comments:
This is the time for Councilmembers to schedule future agenda items and to ask questions about the status of previously approved future agenda items. No discussion, debate, or public comment will be taken. Councilmembers should consider the city's work plan when considering new items. The tentative future agenda items document is provided for information only.
18.a
TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - 26-CMO-038
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. STAFF REPORT - TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA - 26-CMO-038.pdf
2. Attachment 1. Tentative Future Agenda.pdf
Attached is the current list of tentative future agenda items for Council’s information.
19. CITY MANAGER REPORT
Public Comments:
20. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
Public Comments:
This is reserved for items that do not require City Council action. The City Council may request a future agenda item to discuss an informational item. Otherwise, discussion of informational items will not be taken.
20.a
ACTION MINUTES OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 16, 2026 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Action Minutes of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Meeting of April 16, 2026.pdf (Parks and Recreation Director Lisa Nichols)
20.b
ACTION MINUTES OF THE JOINT PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 5, 2026 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Action minutes of the Joint Parks and Recreation Advisory and Public Works Commission Meeting of May 5, 2026.pdf (Parks and Recreation Director Lisa Nichols)
20.c
PARKING CITATION AND METERED REVENUE REPORT - MAY 2025
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Parking Citation and Revenue Report - May 2026.pdf
(Senior Management Analyst Ken Bales)
21. ADJOURNMENT
Public Comments: