9/5 Sup Com — City Council/Public Financing Authority, September 5, 2023

Moore, Tania
From: Ted Ross <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 12:31 PM
To: Strickland, Tony; [email protected]
Cc: McKeon, Casey; Van Der Mark, Gracey; Burns, Pat
Subject: City Council/Public Financing Authority Tuesday, September 5, 2023 SUCCESSOR

AGENCY SPECIAL MEETING
Mayor Strickland,
Noting that this referenced agenda makes possible significant expenditures I need to point out that the public has yet to see the completed FY 23- FY 24 HB City Budget. I been told by city staff that the finalized budget had not yet been published nor been made available on the city website. This publication is now very late and certainly delinquent. How can we proceed with new expenditures without a budget to evaluate the appropriateness of these proposed actions.

By the way, I'm a big supporter of your initiative to create a TWO YEAR CITY BUDGET! Sent from my iPhone.........Ted Ross

SUPPLEMENTAL

COMMUNICATION
Meeting Date:. 9/5/2023
Agenda ltem No: 30(23-700)
1 Moore, Tania
From: Maria Sugranes < [email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 4:53 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Charter Amendments
Stop this! What problems are being solved here? The amendments would be costly and draw us into more lawsuits. Stop grabbing power and work on real issues in our city. --
Maria Sugranes
HB resident since 1972
Moore, Tania
From: David Rynerson <[email protected]>
Sent: aturday, September 2, 2023 5:46 PM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL, CMO STAFF Subject: Ad Hoc Committee on Declaration on Human Rights City Council Majority -
When I wrote to you previously, I did so because of the of the absolute lack of explanation for why you thought the declaration on human rights needed changing and the opaqueness of your intended It is now abundantly clear why you refused to publicly disclose your planned "modifications" to the existing declaration. While acknowledging that everyone should be treated with respect and dignity, you turn around in the very next paragraph and decide to marginalize those who don't identify as either male or female, and then turn around again and say to treat all people equally. You say that the sexes must be separated in sports. Have you never heard of mixed doubles tennis? Equestrian events? How do you propose to treat those who identify as non-binary? What sports do they get to play? Is that treating them with respect and dignity? No one is asking you to endorse their life choices - just not to treat them like they don't exist and have no right to being treated with respect and dignity.

You then had the audacity to plan to censure Councilwoman Moser for asking a straightforward question about one of the people being appointed to that ad hoc committee. Councilwoman Van Der Mark took great umbrage at being asked the simple question of whether or not she believed the holocaust was real - which seems to be a pretty relevant question for someone being appointed to rewrite the existing declaration on human rights. Especially in view of some of the reporting about her -- see the linked reporting here:
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=6b8d9a790b67bc35JmltdHM9MTY5MzYxMjgwMCZpZ3VpZD0xYjE 4ZTkzNy05N2E0LTZiOWYtMjcxMC1mODg30TY0YTZhMTImaW5zaWQ9NTE40Q&ptn=3&hsh=3&f clid=1b18e937-97a4-6b9f-2710-
{887964a6a12&psq=gracie+van+der+mark&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cub2N3ZWVrbHkuY29tL2dyYW NleS12YW4tZGVyLW1hcmstcGVkZGxlci1vZi1yYWNpc3QtY29uc3BpcmFjaWVzLXJ1bnMtZm9yLXNj aG9vbC1ib2FyZC1pbi1oYi8&ntb=1
If anyone was disrespectful in the exchange between the two councilwomen, it was Councilwoman Van Der Mark, so if anyone is censured, it should be her. 1 Thus far, your tenure has been marked by a lack of transparency, unpreparedness, and the appearance that you think being in the majority allows you to totally discount anyone who does not agree with you. You are proposing charter amendments without explanation or discussion, pursuing lawsuits costing the city significant amounts of money, while settling with the promoter who backed your campaigns without a whimper, and then being less than transparent about that settlement and the follow-on lawsuit against Amplify Energy.

By now you've been treated to enough council meetings that you should clearly understand that not everyone in Huntington Beach agrees with you - quite the contrary. It's time that you start operating with that understanding, rather than looking like a junior high school student council bent on enforcing your personal beliefs. I know that at least some of you can do it. I've had reasonable and productive exchanges with Councilman McKeon. You can do better, and I hope to see you do so.

Sincerely,
David Rynerson
6272 Newbury Drive
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
2 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 6:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Charter Amendments
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Maria Sugranes < [email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 4:51:04 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Charter Amendments
Do not even propose this. The amendments would result in extra costs to the city, would curtail voting rights that would engender more lawsuits, would make our city become a symbol of right wing paranoia. Who are you trying to protect? What problems are you trying to solve? Your overreach is outrageous.

Maria Sugranes
HB resident since 1972
1 Moore, Tania
From: Diana Lithgow <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 7:08 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Vote NO on both the Charter Review Proposals and the "Policy on Human Dignity" City Council Members and Supplemental Committees:

I strongly OPPOSE the items drafted in the TWO ad hoc committees that are up for a vote this Tuesday, Sept 5th:

1. Charter Review Ad Hoc Committee Proposals

2. Policy on Human Dignity
Charter Review:
-Item #7: The Charter Review proposals are thinly disguised Voter Suppression attempts and must not be adopted. There are NO concerns by the OC Registrar of Voters as to the security of our county elections--and limiting the voter polling locations AND requiring city monitoring of ballot drop boxes is an attempt to INTIMIDATE voters ... not secure validity of voters. Shame on you--copying Texas and Florida shenanigans.

We MUST NOT make changes to fix a problem that does not exist--only to suppress voters. NO! -Item #2: The ONLY reason a City Council Meeting should be cancelled is a lack of quorum (due to illness or other matters)--not at the whim of the Mayor or Majority of Council Members (who are currently Republican, by the way). Again, shameless attempt to suppress Democracy. NO! -Item #6: We must NOT "dumb down" our City Clerk Qualifications. Making these changes to possibly "hand pick" a candidate for the position that does not currently hold qualifications (such as a family member) is despotic. NO!
Policy on Human Dignity:

All paragraphs EXCEPT the paragraph on "genetic differences between a male and a female" are in support of Human Dignity--I support the paragraphs that do not address gender. Shame on your for again attempting to copy Texas and Florida's intolerance of people within a document actually titled "Policy on Human Dignity" -- shameful and sneaky is what this is. You are not even being secretive--but saying the quiet part out loud--you have NO RESPECT for people who are gender different than you. I OPPOSE this paragraph wholeheartedly. NO!
(Not to mention that the grammar in this Policy is something out of an elementary school--PLEASE learn to write properly if you are going to draft policy! My double doctorate degrees cringed reading this poorly edited "Policy on Human Dignity".

Again, I urge a NO vote on both the Charter Review Proposals and the "Policy on Human Dignity".

Dr. Diana Lithgow
19841 Flagstone Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
1 HUNTINGTON BEACH HOMEOWNER SINCE 1983
Diana Lithgow, PhD, DNP, RN, FNP-BC, FAANP
rofessor of Nursin
ollege of Graduate Nursin
Western University of Health Science
909-469-5523 (CGN Office)
[email protected]
2 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 7:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Opposition to Charter Amendments
From: pacj < [email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 6:38 PM
To: Estanislau, Robin <[email protected]>; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < city.council@surfcity- hb.org>
Subject: Opposition to Charter Amendments
Dear Councilmembers,
We were opposed to the city charter being amended last year.

We remain opposed to amending the city charter and any related election.

Sincerely,
Julio and Patricia Quintana
1 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 7:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Charter Review and Policy on Human Dignity votes 9/5/23 From: Diana Lithgow <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 7:06 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Charter Review and Policy on Human Dignity votes 9/5/23 HB City Council,
I strongly OPPOSE the items drafted in the TWO ad hoc committees that are up for a vote this Tuesday, Sept Sth:

1. Charter Review Ad Hoc Committee Proposals

All paragraphs EXCEPT the paragraph on "genetic differences between a male and a female" are in support of Human Dignity--I support the paragraphs that do not address gender. Shame on your for again attempting to copy Texas and Florida's intolerance of people within a document actually titled "Policy on Human Dignity"-- shameful and sneaky is what this is. You are not even being secretive--but saying the quiet part out loud--you have NO RESPECT for people who are gender different than you. I OPPOSE this paragraph wholeheartedly. NO!
(Not to mention that the grammar in this Policy is something out of an elementary school--PLEASE learn to write properly if you are going to draft policy! My double doctorate degrees cringed reading this poorly edited "Policy on Human Dignity".
1 Again, I urge a NO vote on both the Charter Review Proposals and the "Policy on Human Dignity".

Dr. Diana Lithgow
19841 Flagstone Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
HUNTINGTON BEACH HOMEOWNER SINCE 1983
Diana Lithgow, PhD, DNP, RN, FNP-BC, FAANP
Professor of Nursing
College of Graduate Nursing
Western University of Health Science
909-469-5523 (CGN Office)
[email protected]
Moore, Tania
From: Nikki Reidt <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 2, 2023 10:00 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Appalled...

This city council majority is attempting to make changes that have no purpose. Instead of solving REAL problems, you are creating more and making faceless claims and suggestions. You are using your power to feed social discord and creating more tension and anger in our community. Shame on you! Re: Elections -
Orange County elections are known to be exceptionally safe. If someone is coming to you with questions about this, there are many facts you can provide them...but instead you are choosing to fan the flame and encourage questions. You are creating MORE regulations and making life more difficult for our residents based on your emotions and personal opinions rather than facts and evidence. Requiring ID for voting does NOT increase the integrity of our elections. It does the opposite and is shown to make it MORE difficult for people to vote. Many people do not have a driver's license or passport, government identifications get lost, have wrong addresses when people move and cost money that people may not have. What purpose do cameras at drop boxes serve? Was there any issues at drop boxes in Huntington Beach? Is this really a good use of public funds?
You are not solving a problem, you are creating one. Requiring voter ID, placing cameras at election sites or drop boxes or changing anything about our elections is unnecessary and will do nothing more than cost our city MORE money. You have already wasted enough. There is no need to alter elections in Huntington Beach.

Re: Olympic Flag -
When your original oppressive flag ban was being voted on, many people brought up "what about the sister city flag" and "what about an Olympic flag" but you were so focused on forcing through a flag ban before June so you wouldn't need to consider the PRIDE flag. The hypocrisy and homophobia of this city council majority is disgusting. The time and energy spent on these social battles is a waste. If you would have left the flag policies alone to begin with, we wouldn't need to be wasting more time on this now.

Re: Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity -
The Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity was created as a statement to what Huntington Beach aspires to be. Who could possibly disagree or question the goal that everyone ought to be treated with dignity and respect? Do you believe that people ought to be safe from hate crimes in our community? Is your intention to send a loud message to the white supremecists around that we accept them and their danger to our community? That's what you're doing. This document was created after two heinous hate crimes in our city - a man was brutally murdered in our community and another attempted. Hate crimes are on the rise in Huntington Beach...is this what you want to encourage? The actions of this city council are abhorrent. The timing if this is disgusting. You are not making our city better. You are creating more issues.

You are dismantling policies and programs for no reason other than your personal social agendas. Council member Moser's questions about the appropriateness of Council member Van der Mark sitting on a committee for human dignity was absolutely appropriate and a question many of us have. This council majority is not even pretending to be fair and instead cramming through discriminatory and, likely, unconstitutional policies left and right.

It is no secret that Council member Van der Mark is alleged to be antisemetic and to support white supremecists. If these rumors are not true, she ought to have made a public statement months (years) ago. Council member Moser was bringing up an excellent point and was not accusatory or offensive in any way. She simply asked a question. Can see Mark could have listened and reaponded. Instead. She became hostile and defensive. Unfortunately, this council 1 majority can't handle questions because they don't do any research or base decisions on facts and are functioning from purely emotional stances. What was inappropriate in this instance was the Mayor and City Attorney chiming in and instead of allowing Moser to complete her statement, interrupting and attaching Moser while siding with Van der Mark.

We all have a right to know if there is an antisemetic, white supremecist sympathizer on our city council.

Re: No Mask/No Vaccine Mandate.

I don't believe that any of you are doctors, scientists or public health experts. This has no place in the agenda. This is ridiculous. You already have a choice about wearing a mask or getting vaccinated or not. No one is forcing this on you.

Again, you are creating problems that do NOT exist. Stop wasting our time with your politicized drama.

Re: Dissolving of city boards and committees.

It's is incomprehensible that 4 people think that they, alone, know what is best for an entire community. What do you fear about committees and discussion? Do facts and research scare you? This council was not elected to steamroll decisions and disregard other opinions. The responsibility of a city council is to listen to the people. To consider FACTS, as well as alternate opinions. Instead you have chosen for your small group to meet behind closed doors and make decisions for our entire city without talking to those with actual knowledge and experience in the areas you are altering.

Making decisions behind closed doors without facts or discussions with the people actually involved in the real life, day to day, experiences is unethical. You continue to destroy our city and cost us ridiculous amounts of money in law suits.

What are you trying to do? Do you have no compassion for those of us living here and raising children here or are you just on a personal mission to destroy our city and waste our hard earned money? You have gone to some lows in the past 9 months but surely there are actual issues you could be addressing rather than dismantling declarations that do nothing more than help people feel safe. Stop wasting our time and money with your culture wars.

Disappointed,
Nichole Reidt
Resident of Huntington Beach
2 Moore, Tania
Sent: Betty Kanne < [email protected]>
Sunday, September 3, 2023 9:54 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Supplement- September 5, 2023 City Council Meeting September 3, 2023
City Council Members,
I ask that you abandon all efforts to place items on the March 2024 Ballot that would change our City Charter. The four majority members mislead voters by pledging not to alter the City Charter and are now poised to utterly transform it for their own benefit.

The Charter Review Ad Hoc Committee Proposals should be soundly rejected with varying levels of outrage and vehemence starting with the most cynically crafted Numbers Five and Six shamefully designed as a customized pair serving to slide the wife of our city attorney into a "forever" job as City Clerk with key and crucial election responsibilities. That feat fits nicely into the even more abhorrent Number Seven that is in fact an overt attempt of voter suppression. It is intended to reduce voting participation by the most vulnerable in our community. This includes young and/or newly franchised voters or those with language obstacles or disabilities. These items must be soundly rejected.

Reject the cynically written new "Policy on Human Dignity" that drips with homophobic and transphobic tropes.

It's an embarrassment to the open minded, humanity embracing, tolerant people of this community. It is shameful.

I propose we reinstate the previous Human Dignity Statement crafted thirty years ago by the highly respected, formidable leaders Shirley Dettloff and Ralph Bauer in a time of great trial in our community when we then faced violence and hatred from virulent skinhead neo-nazis. That was a powerful and meaningful statement worthy of this community. This "revision", ", this vile statement is not. Reject it.

Remove the agenda item to Censure Council Member Natalie Moser. This wholly unnecessary addition to the agenda is an obvious distraction from the real issues that should be of concern to this Council and taxpayers of Huntington Beach. The move to censure is every bit as unseemly as the very behavior it questions. Drop it from the Focus on the true problems in our community and cease sowing discord needlessly. Stop the meaningless distractions.

Betty Kanne
16331 Woodstock Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
[email protected]
(40+ year HB resident, homeowner and voter)
Moore, Tania
From: Sheila Ellis < [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 10:33 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); Van Der Mark, Gracey; Moser, Natalie; McKeon, Casey; Kalmick, Dan; Burns, Pat; Bolton, Rhonda; Strickland, Tony
Subject: Tuesday city council meeting agenda
After reviewing the agenda for Tuesday's city council meeting, I am urging all council members to vote no on agenda item numbers 15, 16, 22, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35.

Sheila Ellis
(She/Her)
1 Switzer, Donna
From: Estanislau, Robin
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 2:59 PM
To: ellen riley
Cc: Moore, Tania; Switzer, Donna
Subject: RE: Thank you
Thank you for your comments!!
From: ellen riley <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 12:02 AM
To: Estanislau, Robin <[email protected]> Subject: Thank you
for having the courage to speak at the last City Council meeting about attempts to "de-professionalize" your office and other attempts to lead our city back to the 1950's.

They also insulted our fine Registrar of Voters and seem bent on having our elections follow the model of some mid-western states where voters are the suspects, where they must be monitored, questioned, etc..

Ellen Riley
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 11:37 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Three Requests - September 5, 2023 City Council Meeting Get Outlook for iOS
From: Betty Kanne <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 9:51:35 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Three Requests - September 5, 2023 City Council Meeting September 3, 2023
City Council Members,
I ask that you abandon all efforts to place items on the March 2024 Ballot that would change our City Charter. The four majority members mislead voters by pledging not to alter the City Charter and are now poised to utterly transform it for their own benefit.

Reject the cynically written new "Policy on Human Dignity" that drips with homophobic and transphobic tropes.

It's an embarrassment to the open minded, humanity embracing, tolerant people of this community. It is shameful.

Focus on the true problems in our community and cease sowing discord needlessly. Stop the meaningless distractions.

Betty Kanne
16331 Woodstock Lane
1 Huntington Beach, CA 92647
[email protected]
(40+ year HB resident, homeowner and voter)
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 11:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: wd: City council meeting coming up ib 9/5/23 and what is being planne Get Outlook for ios
From: Valli Febbraro <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 10:07:49 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: City council meeting coming up ib 9/5/23 and what is being planned Hello City Council Members:

I thought I would let you know what is being text to Registered Democrates and what is being planned by the Democratic Party of Orange County.

The following paragraph is text that is being sent to registered Democrats.
"Stand up, fight back, for Huntington Beach! Extreme Republicans want to radically amend the City Charter to stay in power, ban the Pride Flag/books & more. (Recipient's Name ): can you attend City Council mtg. Tues., 9/5, @ 6pm & let them hear your voice. Reply stop to end - Democartic Party of Orange County."
I am certainly not for flying any flag with any specific interest groups on any government buildings. I have no problem if anyone wants to put up whatever flag they want if it at their own home or their business. With regards to banning books, I am not a fan of banning books and have seen a lot of childrens books banned on some of the retail sites that are books I grew up with good messages. I don't believe that is what they are really talking about. I believe that 1 it is about allowing inappropriate content for kids, radical race therory, or indoctrination of kids. I believe parents need to be informed of what is being taught in schools and have a choice to decide what their kids will be exposed to. This is insane!. I believe that our schools are failing because of this and teachers need to teach, reading, writing arithmetic and actual history good or bad! Thank you for reading this email. I will be out of town that day but may be back in time to attend the City Council Meeting.

Thank you for reading this email.

Sincerely,
Valli K. Febbraro
Moore, Tania
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 2:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Oppose Charter Review Ad Hoc Committee Proposals Dear Huntington Beach City Council Members,
I strongly oppose several of the charter review committee proposals.

On the proposal for Section 310, I cannot understand why we would lower the qualifications for the Clerk position. This makes no sense to me.

The proposal for Section 702 for Local Control over Elections comes across as a waste of taxpayer money to monitor ballot drop boxes. Just how they are monitored could come across as voter intimidation. I also see no reason for removing reliance on the state election code. We should have continuity for how we run our elections across the state.

I see no reason to "update" the Policy on Human Dignity. Leave it as it is. Please! Thank you,
Douglas Lithgow
10841 Flagstone Ln
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
1 Moore, Tania
From: Fran Delaney < [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 2:51 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Current City Council Agenda Items
City Council Members,
I am a Huntington Beach resident and have lived at my home for 33 years. I am shocked and embarrassed on behalf of all residents by the outlandish and dangerous proposals put forth in the August 1, 2023 meeting and items on the agenda for the September 5th meeting.

I emphatically ask that you vote against these agenda items on September 5, 2023, City Council Meeting:
724-240
$ 20 23-700 and all recommended actions
23-683 and all recommendations
23-734 and all recommended actions
23-731
23-738
I highly disapprove of the censure Councilwoman Moser for her comments made as concern for who would be placed on an Ad Hoc committee for changes to the Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity. She questioned underlying associations with Neo-Nazis and Proud Boys which have never been addressed. Councilwoman Van Der Merck's response was out of order and hysterical and by far more deserving of a censure.

I am shocked at the proposed changes to the City's Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity and strongly oppose them. The verbiage is a direct attack on trans individuals, adults, and children and a veiled attempt to find reasons to ban books in the public library. These actions will also be found illegal and the City will become responsible for even more expensive court proceedings and fines.

In addition, the rapid and unstudied withdrawal from OCPA will result in a multmultimillion-dollar fine. This will be layered atop the unprecedented settlement to maintain partnerships for the air show, the legal fees to fight the State of California, the senseless and inflated salary increase for the City Attorney, and certainly the many fines and court proceedings that will take place, as a result, of the proposed actions in the September 5th meeting. All of these bloated expenses were unnecessary and made with little knowledge or care for fiscal responsibility and will most likely result in a needed tax increase for residents in the future. It's shameful both morally and fiscally.

Finally, an attempt to limit election access, and to attempt to stack elections to favor themselves and strip away the rights of particular groups of individuals is moving toward fascism, which I find atrocious and shameful for all of us who reside in this city. For those who don't see the similarity of these action to fascism, please read some of the descriptions of what these actions are, taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
"...severe economic and social regimentation and forcible oppression of the opposition. A tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control." If the City tampers with elections such as what is proposed, that is exactly where we are.

Please read my requests and vote against the proposals listed above.

Moore, Tania
From: Janna Koch <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 4:21 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fw: Vote no on Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 -- Forwarded Message --
From: Janna Koch <[email protected]>
To: City. [email protected]<[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 at 04:08:32 PM PDT
Subject: Vote no on Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 To the HB City Council,
RE: City council agenda. VOTE NO on Agenda items
15,16,22,29, 30, 31, 32, 34. 35!
I am unhappy with the job performance of this City Council. Your actual job is to represent ALL of the voters in HB. Also, to take care of city business and properly maintain the city resources and infrastructure. rou are not only not doing a good job of that, but it has come to_ my attention that you intend to squander 1.2 million of the City's dollars or an unnecessary special elenthile the Central Library has bathrooms not If you want to have a PAC. • • go out and raise YOUR OWN MONEY!
working, RATS, the parking lot is rapidly degrading, and a host of other maintenance issues abound including proper ADA access for seniors and disabled persons.

The City Council is breaking the CA State law by not completing the Housing Element. This is your JOB!
I vote to Censure the HB City Council for not doing it! It is past time to stop acting like a mimic of the dysfunctional House of Representatives in the us congress and get the job done! Her and it chers he are eter qualified to do so get on it the we expect to have the same responsiblities and opportunities to vote as every other citizen of the State of California...it is NOT your job to decide otherwise!
It is highly inappropriate to declare the City of Huntington Beach to be a Non-mask mandate city Again, we expect to have the same protections necessitated in a public health crisis as the rest of the citizens of Orange County. I am Covid At-Risk...my pandemic will NEvEr be over. I am also my sole support_and need my fellow residents to not make me sick. As to fiscal responsibility, I do not wish the City of HB to have to payout on lawsuits against the city for infecting people by public servants of the citv or have to pay for sick davs for the entire HB City Hall HBFD, etc. to infect themselves all again. There are areas of public 1 buildings that are NECESSARY to mask in during a public health crisis. This 15 because again, the City has FAILED to properly update them, namely places like the tiny, ventilation-impaired bathrooms at the Central Library!!!
Lastly, I value the service of Natalie Mosier on the HB City Council. epresents the People of HB better than any other person on the council.

If the City Council members did not have exposure for comments made regarding their integrity, then it would be much more difficult to do I would be much less successful than Natalie in keeping a proper demeanor in the same circumstances.

Thank you for your attention to these matters...get the job done! Janna Koch
Huntington Beach
[email protected]

2. Moore, Tania
From: Mark and Jean Erstling <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 4:58 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Council Majority Actions
As a taxpayer and voter I am angry that the council majority is taking steps that are costing the city millions of dollars, chasing away the U.S. Olympic Committee with bigoted flag decisions and trying to censure a colleague for asking what should be a simple question for Van der Mark to answer.

The idea of attempting to amend the charter with a March vote is expensive and unnecessary. If you all cared about improving the city you would support the recommendations of the non-partisan Charter Committee. Clearly improving the city is not your goal and we all understand that. The one good thing about the actions of this group is that they are motivating the public to vote them out when the time comes.

We don't need the culture wars in our city which chase tourists and businesses away and hurt local businesses. Just do a decent job running the city and stop these anti democratic and bigoted actions.
1 Mark Erstling
2 Moore, Tania
From: Linda Law < [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 6:48 PM
To: [email protected]; City Council
Subject: Vote No on Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 Dear Council Members,
Please vote no on agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 at the September 5, 2023 City Council meeting.

I don't even know where to start with my objections to these agenda items.

The proposed charter amendments are unnecessary and would be extremely costly. Over a million dollars to place these amendments on a March 2024 ballot is ridiculous.

There is no evidence of voter fraud that necessitates the city having a separate local election that requires voter id and requires the monitoring of ballot drop boxes.

The City has gotten itself involved in costly anti-housing lawsuits and settled with the Air Show operator for millions when the city is supposedly broke.

The City Council and or the City Attorney have no business determining what books are available in our public libraries.

That is the job of our librarians. Let them do their jobs.

Failing to recognize the transgender community in the revised Statement on Human Dignity is just shameful.

Censuring Council Member Moser for speaking the truth is beyond hypocritical. Having a known racist and anti-semite on the council should be called out every day. There are photos, tapes, and newspaper articles that prove that relationship.

Against staff recommendations, the mayor is recommending that the city choose the lowest ranked Federal Government Affairs lobbyist. Why is that happening?
Proposing that the city ban broad universal mask and vaccine mandates as a response to Covid 19 or its variants is just ill informed. Covid 19 continues to mutate and having mask and vaccine mandates available is just good public health policy.

Dissolving numerous boards with little or no public input is very troubling to say the least.

What's happening with the Climate Action Plan for the City? Our high standards for the City Clerk position and other positions should continue.

Thank you for your time.
1 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 7:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subiect: Fwd: Vote no on Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 Get Outlook for iOs
From: Janna Koch <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 4:08:31 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Vote no on Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 To the HB City Council,
RE: City council agenda. VOTE NO on Agenda items
15,16,22,29, 30, 31, 32, 34.35!
I am unhappy with the job performance of this City Council. Your actual ‚ is to represent ALL of the voters in HB. Also, to take care of city businéss and properly maintain the city resources and infrastructure. rou are not only not dong a good job ot that, but it has come to my attention that you intend to squander 1.2 million of the City's dollars or raise YOUR OUN MONEY! Meanwhile the central Library has bathrooms hand unnecessary special election. If you want to have a PAC. working, RATS, the parking lot is rapidly degrading, and a host of other maintenance issues abound including proper ADA access for Seniors and disabled persons.

The City Council is breaking the CA State law by not completing the Housing Element. This is your JOB!
I vote to Censure the HB City Council for not doing it! It is past time to stop acting like a mimic of the dysfunctional House of in the US Congress and get the job done! It you do not
vant to do the job, then please EXIT the HB Citv Council chambers like Tito and let others who are better qualified to do so get on with it! Ne expect to have the same responsiblities and opportunities to vote as every other cıtızen ot the State ot Calltorna...ıt 1s NoT your Job to decide otherwise!
It is highly inappropriate to declare the City of Huntington Beach to be a Neccessk ateda ie a pubtic heaith crxsis 5 he rest of the citizens of Non-mask mandate city.

Orange County. I am Covid At-Risk. • my pandemic will NEVER be over. I am also my sole Support and need my fellow residents to not make me sick. As to fiscal responsibility, I do not wish the City of HB to have to payout 1 on lawsuits against the city for infecting people by public servants ot _HBPD,
etc. to infect themselves all again.
bufidings that are NECESSARY to mask in during a public health Shamely pla be ause ane ticity ation impa red bathrooms dat the Central Library!!!
Lastly, I value the service of Natalie Mosier on the HB City Council. if the City coupeople of HB better than any other person on the council. members did not have exposure for comments made
regarding their integrity, then it would be much more difficult to do so. I would be much less successful than Natalie in keeping a proper demeanor in the same circumstances.

Thank you for your attention to these matters...get the job done! Janna Koch
Huntinaton Beach
[email protected]
2 Moore, Tania
From: martha bergman <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 7:19 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: One resident's opinion
Dear Huntington Beach Council Members,
I have been a resident of Huntington Beach for over sixty years. For the record, I would like to state that I FIRMLY OPPOSE the following:

Changing our voting process, specifically as suggested by the current proposals concerning the requirement of voter identification and monitoring of ballot boxes .

Changing the requirements to be the City Clerk.

Censure of Councilwoman Moser for doing her job and asking important questions about the appropriateness of Van der Mark's placement on the committee to change our city's Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity.

Changing our city's Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity as suggested by that same committee.

Sincerely,
Martha Bergman
1 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 7:20 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Opposing Council Actions
Get Outlook for ios
From: Mark and Jean Erstling <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 4:56:06 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Opposing Council Actions
As a taxpayer and voter I am angry that the council majority is taking steps that are costing the city millions of dollars, chasing away the U.S. Olympic Committee with bigoted flag decisions and trying to censure a colleague for asking what should be a simple question for Van der Mark to answer.

Reducing drop off mailing locations and requiring voter IDs is just an attempt to make voting more difficult. Having guards at dropoff locations is wasteful and an attempt to intimidate voters and not make elections more secure. It is likely the city will be sued over this and will cost taxpayers even more money. There is no evidence that our current voting system is a problem other than those like the council majority wanting to disenfranchise many voters.
1 We don't need the culture wars in our city which chase tourists and businesses away and hurt local businesses. Just do a decent job running the city and stop these anti democratic and bigoted actions.

Mark Erstling
2 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 7:20 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: One resident's opinion
Get Outlook for iOs
From: martha bergman < [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 7:18:35 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: One resident's opinion
Dear Huntington Beach Council Members,
I have been a resident of Huntington Beach for over sixty years. For the record, I would like to state that I FIRMLY OPPOSE the following:

Changing our voting process, specifically as suggested by the current proposals concerning the requirement of voter identification and monitoring of ballot boxes .

Changing the requirements to be the City Clerk.

Changing our city's Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity as suggested by that same committee.

Sincerely,
Martha Bergman
1 Moore, Tania
From: Carol Berk < [email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 10:58 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF)
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda for September 5, 2023
Dear HB City Council,
(In particular, the majority members)
I hardly know where to begin. Your agenda is so filled with items that are obviously on your "We're in the majority, so we have the power to force our extreme views on our city" to-do list rather than an agenda of what to do to protect our city and help it thrive.

First, I find the potential censuring of Councilwoman Natalie Moser for asking a simple question that should be very easy to answer and not at all disrespectful to be a sad example of this council majority's bullying behavior.

Secondly, the rewriting of the Statement of Human Dignity was totally unnecessary and now includes an indisputable and very troubling anti Trans and anti LGBTQ focus.

Finally, your questionable legal and financial agreements and settlements lead me to believe that you have less than honorable intentions and actions involving many programs, projects, and events. These will be affecting our city financially and practically including items relating to the Air Show, Special Election, and for some unknown reason, wanting to have our city powers-that-be demand oversight during regular elections when we all know that the county has that responsibility and has handled it in an outstanding fashion.

What I see is that this council's majority is working to push through choices that do NOT represent the majority of our residents, and will ultimately cost us extra money to implement unnecessary and unwanted contracts, elections, court settlements, and new unneeded responsibilities. Your narrow minded non-inclusive attitude is attempting to change our wonderful city into a hate filled, marginalizing entity despite your claims to the contrary. Remember this...council members will come and go during elections and you may cause damage to our wonderful city, but it will not be forever. Our city will survive you!
Carol Berk
HB resident, home owner, and voter since 1981
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:37 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Oppose Item #15B, #30, #31, #32, #34, #35 Get Outlook for iOs
From: [email protected] < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 6:10:16 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Oppose Item #15B, #30, #31, #32, #34, #35
I am apposed to our council majority and City Attorney attempting to change the very fabric of my city of 25 years.

Jessica Stone
"What if today we were just grateful for everything" Charlie Brown. 1 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:39 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Comment, 9-5-23 CC mtg., items 15, 16, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35.

Get Outlook for iOs
From: Dan Jamieson < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:36:12 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Comment, 9-5-23 CC mtg., items 15, 16, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35.

Dear HB City Council:

As a Huntington Beach resident, I appreciate the chance to comment in several items under consideration at the Sept. 5, 2023 council meeting:

Item 15
Please vote NO on item 15, a recommendation to contract with Kahn, Soares, & Conway LLP for State Legislative Advocacy Services and with Stapleton & Associates for Federal Legislative Advocacy Services. It is unclear why these firms were chosen. Stapleton was not highly rated by staff, and Kahn was not rated at all (and appears to focus on agricultural and water law).

HB residents deserve transparency in how lobbying firms are chosen, especially given that the mayor is a professional lobbyist and may have conflicts.
***
Item 16
Please vote NO on item 16, to redirect staff to develop policy options regarding city library materials and safeguards.

This item continues development of the unconstitutional book-banning proposals pushed by the council majority.

Having political actors review and restrict books would be an unconstitutional imposition of extreme religious views into the function of our public library, which is to serve all users regardless of faith or political views. Professional library staff are fully capable of choosing materials for our public library. Concerned parents can screen out anything they feel is unacceptable.

Please stop the book-banning efforts that HB residents clearly oppose. ***
Item 30
1 Please vote NO on Administrative Item 30.

The council majority promised HB voters they would refrain from charter amendments. With this item, they go back on that promise.

Charter amendments must be done with a thoughtful, even-handed, transparent process. The proposed batch of amendments in this item is anything but. The amendments were hatched behind closed doors by the council majority looking to consolidate power within the city attorney's office; prevent the council from investigating malfeasance; help the city attorney's wife get elected as city clerk; cement the anti-Pride flag ordinance into the charter; restrict the city's ability to create affordable housing; and improperly interfere with county-run elections in an attempt to cater to election-conspiracy believers.

If charter amendments are needed, they should be done with an open and rigorous process with public notice and comment, and voted on in a November general election, not the lower-turnout primary election. ***
Item 31
Please vote NO on item 31, dissolving the HB Human Relations Committee, and the Mobile Home Advisory Board.

The city's Human Relations Committee is needed more than ever. Hate incidents and crimes are a continuing problem in our city and county. Dissolving the committee is an affront to the diverse community that lives, works and visits our city.

The Mobile Home Advisory board also serves some of our most economically vulnerable citizens, many of them seniors on limited incomes who face rising rents from aggressive mobile-home park owners. The state Dept. of Housing and Community Development is too far removed from issues impacting local mobile-home residents, and our own advisory board can inform city leaders and HCD about HB-related park issues and violations. ***
Item 32
Please vote NO on item 32, the Ad Hoc Committee's proposed Policy on Human Dignity.

The proposed new statement on human dignity is a major step backward for the people of HB.

The existing Human Dignity statement promises respect for everyone, regardless of "actual or perceived racial background, their nation of origin, the religion they practice, their sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or gender expression, or disability status." The existing statement has clear definitions of hate incidents and crimes, and promises action against hate crimes. It encourages and instructs on how to report hate crimes, and notes the tragic history that gave rise to the Dignity statement.

The proposed new statement has none of this. It does not even mention hate crimes. Instead, it offers up a generic tough-on-crime policy, offering to pursue "all of those who participate in crimes in our community," warning specifically of child abuse, including "sexual grooming." This language is chilling--right-wing extremists have associated grooming with the LGBTQ community.

In a clumsy attempt to address the issue of trans athletes, the new policy seems to attack trans and non-binary people.

It says the city "will recognize from birth the genetic differences between male and female." Will trans and non-binary people be protected? If so, will that protection extend to athletics? 2 Respectfully, the proposed new Dignity statement is a farce. Instead of a robust statement of support for vulnerable groups, it targets trans and non-binary people and those who might "groom" children (the LGBTQ community). As written, the new statement will be an embarrassment for the city. ***
Item 34
Please vote NO on item 34, the Move to Censure Council Member Moser.

Councilmember Moser questioned the appointment of the Mayor Pro Tem, who has a history of associating with white nationalists and once shared Holocaust-denial posts, to the sensitive job of writing a new Dignity statement. This was not improper. The council majority knew they might get this reaction. They got it, and now they can engage in more performative posturing with a censure vote.
***
Item 35
Please vote NO on Councilmember Item 35.

This item submitted by Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark on mask and vaccine mandates, is not needed, and would be an infringement on the freedoms of private businesses to decide such policies for themselves. Likewise, the city of HB, through council, can decide for itself to impose mandates or not within its own facilities.

Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark attempts to justify this item by misrepresenting facts. The Chicago Sun Times story she quotes reported on the Cochrane study of masks. The Sun Times, along with other right-wing media, misquoted the study. The misreporting was debunked by Factcheck.org, and by Cochrane itself, which set the record straight (the effectiveness of masks is uncertain): "Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation," Dr. Karla Soares-Weiser, the editor-in-chief of the Cochrane Library, said in a March 10 statement. (https://www.factcheck.org/2023/03/scicheck- what-the-cochrane-review-says-about-masks-for-covid-19-and-what-it-doesnt/) The LA Times story Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark cites reported on a study of records of nearly 800,000 U.S. veterans and the persistence of covid vaccines. Vets protected by the worst performing vaccine, J&J's, were nevertheless 52% less likely to die than their peers who didn't get any shots, according to the story. Other covid vaccines were even more effective. (Because vaccines wear off, booster shots are recommended.) Vaccines have proven effective. The data are clear. It is troubling that HB's Mayor Pro Tem spouts such blatant misinformation.

Dan Jamieson
Huntington Beach
***
3 Moore, Tania
From: Mikel Hogan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 8:22 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Stop the Authoritarian Plans of Huntington Beach City Council AttentionHuntington Beach City Council Members,
As a 50 year tax paying resident of Huntington Beach, I request you remove the wasteful, distractive, and nondemocratic agenda items from the September 5, 2023 City Council meeting, namely

1. Remove and stop the censure of councilperson Natalie Moser

2.Stop the wasteful anti-housing policy that is costing the HB taxpayers ($4 million)

3. Stop the wasteful and costly special election ($1.2million) to place unnecessary Charter Amendments on the March 2024 ballot. These undemocratic amendments were designed in secrecy with no expert or community input and promote grossly harmful policies for our city governance.

4. Stop the Mayor's recommendation for the City Council to choose the lowest ranked Federal Government Affairs respondent against the staff recommendation.

For Huntington Beach to effectively face the challenges of global climate change and the many related social and economic issues, we need respectful, inclusive democratic, pro-active governing processes for a strong and resilient Huntington Beach community.

Dr. Mikel Hogan
Moore, Tania
From: H Meyers < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 8:35 AM
To: [email protected]
Subiect: Tuesday City Council meeting
I am a resident of Huntington Beach. I strongly oppose the agenda items related to the city charter amendments, the dissolution of various commissions, the changes to the statement on human dignity, and the proposal to review materials at the city library. The city charter amendments are an affront to democracy, especially the weakening of the requirements for city clerk.

Hildy Meyers
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 8:49 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: City council meeting
Get Outlook for ios
From: Bev Sansone <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 8:47:35 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: City council meeting
My name is Beverly Sansone, MD. I have been a resident of Huntington Beach since 1996. I disagree with the censuring of Natalie Moser. I believe she had a right to ask the question someone regarding their previous stated opinions when those opinions are so obviously anti-Semitic and fascist.

I am against the proposed amendments and I feel it is important for transparency to know about the air show settlement.

Beverly Sansone
201 20th St.

Huntington Beach.

Sent from my iPhone
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:26 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Meeting
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Louise Stewardson < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:00:15 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Meeting
Please don't change the charter. We don't need an ID to vote. Don't ban books at the library. Fully disclose the air show settlement.

Louise Stewardson
19741 Coastline Lane, HB
Sent from my iPhone
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:52 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Vote No on Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 Get Outlook for iOS
From: Linda Law <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:32:19 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Vote No on Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 Dear Council Members,
Please vote no on agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34,35 at the September 5, 2023 City Council meeting.

I don't even know where to start with my objections to these agenda items.

The proposed charter amendments are unnecessary and would be extremely costly. Over a million dollars to place these amendments on a March 2024 ballot is ridiculous.

There is no evidence of voter fraud that necessitates the city having a separate local election that requires voter id and requires the monitoring of ballot drop boxes.

The City has gotten itself involved in costly anti-housing lawsuits and settled with the Air Show operator for millions when the city is supposedly broke.

The City Council and or the City Attorney have no business determining what books are available in our public libraries.

That is the job of our librarians. Let them do their jobs.

Failing to recognize the transgender community in the revised Statement on Human Dignity is just shameful.

Dissolving numerous boards with little or no public input is very troubling to say the least.

What's happening with the Climate Action Plan for the City? 1 Our high standards for the City Clerk position and other positions should continue.

Thank you for your time.

Moore, Tania
From: Chris Varga < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 10:11 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: City Council Meeting 9-5-2023
Huntington Beach City Council,
The following is in regards to City Council Meeting scheduled for 9/5/23. I will predict that all of the controversial Agenda Items this week will pass 4-3 with the usual suspects on their side of the fence. The council will again sit through hours of Public Comment as well as many email comments that one would hope might sway at least one council member to vote outside the box. But not this council. The four block majority members of the council continue with their fascist anti-woke agenda even when it doesn't reflect the City of Huntington Beach. I hope they keep you up to 3 AM with public comments this week! Enough with this MAGA agenda playbook.

Anyway, here are my positions on some of the agenda items:

Agenda Item 30(23-700). NO to any charter changes. The four of you campaigned on NO changes to the charter. Stop the insanity. Stop the Gates family nepotism!
Agenda Item 31(23-693) NO to all these changes. There are a lot of good coming out of these committees with a lot of free volunteer labor! NO changes!
Agenda item 32 (23-734). NO on the changes to the dignity policy. It was just fine the previous version. No changes needed. Stop making work!
Agenda Item 33 (23-732) Agree with this agenda item. The E-Bikes are out of control! This is a start. But we also have a big problem with persons WITH driving licenses. The beach path is a highway with e-bikes going as fast as they can way too often. We also need fines and enforcement! There is signage at numerous places on the beach path that states "Prohibited: Motor Bicycles / Vehicle without permitted". I was taught in engineering school; electric motors are motors! Either changes the signs, law or enforcement. Right now, everything goes! Agenda Item 34(23-731) NO on this agenda item. Natalie Moser was right to question somethings that many in our city have questioned about Council person Van Der Mark.

Agenda Item 35 (27-738). Just stop with this anti safety ban. Mask work! NO on this agenda item. This is just another check mark in the anti-woke Republican agenda item. Wedge issue BS.

Sincerely,
Chris Varga
Huntington Beach
1 Moore, Tania
From: MEG ROBINSON <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 10:48 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Against Item 30 Charter Amendments on the CC agenda of 9/5/2023 This is a blatant attempt to consolidate power in the hands of 4 council members and the City Attorney. It is also fiscally irresponsible (and misleading since no financial impact is included). The only positive impact is that voters are waking up to your end game.

Margaret Robinson
8788 Coral Springs Ct, 206G, HB 92646
1 Moore, Tania
From: Marilyn Palomino <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:28 AM
To: [email protected]; +City. [email protected] Subject: September 5th City Council Meeting
City Council Members,
I am a Huntington Beach resident and have lived here for 37 years and worked in the community for 24 years. I am in total disagreement with the dangerous and precedent setting proposals put forth in the August 1, 2023 meeting and items on the agenda for the September 5th meeting.

As a concerned citizen I request that you vote against these agenda items on September 5, 2023, City Council Meeting:
724-240
# 23-700 and all recommended actions
23-683 and all recommendations
23-734 and all recommended actions
23-731
23-738
I highly disapprove of the censure of Councilwoman Moser for her comments made as concerned for who would be placed on an Ad Hoc committee for changes to the Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity. She questioned underlying associations with Neo-Nazis and Proud Boys which have never been addressed.

Councilwoman Van Der Merck's response was out of order and hysterical and by far more deserving of a censure.

I strongly disapprove of 1) streamlining, consolidating, and/or dissolving a select number of the City's Boards, Commissions, and Committees and Council Committees 2) the attempt to require voter ID's and monitoring on drop off ballot boxes, 3) changing the election cycles for the City Clerk and City Treasure, 4) changing the requirements for City Clerk. All of these actions are an attempt to control and limit the voice and votes of residents and are unnecessary and most likely illegal. Your role demands that you take all of the residents' input into consideration. This is a move to change that! The committees" ". were put in place for good reasons. You need to know their history. Don't dissolve them! I am shocked at the proposed changes to the City's Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity and strongly oppose them. The verbiage is a direct attack on trans individuals, adults, and children and a veiled attempt to find reasons to ban books in the public library. These actions will also be found illegal and the City will become responsible for even more expensive court proceedings and fines. Here again is a waste of public funds in favorpolitical agenda. I remind you that your position on City Council is not partisan! In addition, the rapid and unstudied withdrawal from OCPA will result in a multmultimillion-dollar fine. This will be layered atop the unprecedented settlement to maintain partnerships for the air show, the legal fees to fight the State of California, the senseless and inflated salary increase for the City Attorney, and certainly the many 1 fines and court proceedings that will take place, as a result, of the proposed actions in the September 5th meeting. All of these bloated expenses were unnecessary and made with little knowledge or care for fiscal responsibility and will most likely result in a needed tax increase for residents in the future. It's shameful both morally and fiscally. I am urging the press to become more transparent about this. Most citizens are not aware of this waste!
Finally, an attempt to limit election access, and to attempt to stack elections to favor themselves and strip away the rights of particular groups of individuals is moving closer to fascism and away from democracy. Is it not your role to protect our rights rather than strip us of them? Please read my requests and vote against the proposals listed above.

Marilyn Palomino
2 Moore, Tania
From: Julie Paik < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:34 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Opposition to Three Items on the September 5, 2023 agenda Dear Council Members,
I write to the City Council to express my opposition to three agenda items on the September 5, 2023 agenda.

Item 30: 23-700: I oppose the submission of three Charter amendments to the March 5, 2024 Statewide Primary Election. The current Charter serves the City well and the cost of $1,200,000 could be better used for other city services.

Item 32: 23-734: I oppose the Ad Hoc Committee's amended Policy on Human Dignity. The policy adopted on November 16, 2021 serves all residents of Huntington Beach. The proposed policy discriminates against certain classes of residents.

Item 33: 23-732: I oppose the censure of Councilperson Natalie Moser. Councilperson Moser's behavior was appropriate and acceptable for the discussion on August 1, 2023. Should this censure occur, all Council members should be afraid to have challenging, but needed, conversations at future Council meetings.

I have voted in every election for the last 40 years and I look forward to voting for the next City Council members. Your vote on these issues will be remembered.

Julie Paik
Moore, Tania
From: Cindy B <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:36 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: 9/5/23-City Council Meeting
TO: City Council Members,
1 am a Huntington Beach resident and have lived in the city for a total of 27 years. I am outraged on behalf of all residents by the anti-democratic and frightening proposals put forth in the August 1, 2023 meeting and items on the agenda for the September 5th meeting.

The following portion of this letter is a copy of what another kindred spirit and fellow Huntington Beach resident wrote to the city council. I agree with the ideas expressed here and completely support her view which articulately represents own my thoughts.
"I strongly urge you to vote against these agenda items on September 5, 2023, City Council Meeting:
724-240
#3D 23-700 and all recommended actions
23-683 and all recommendations
23-734 and all recommended actions
23-731
23-738
I highly disapprove of the censure of Councilwoman Moser for her comments made as concerned for who would be placed on an Ad Hoc committee for changes to the Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity. She questioned underlying associations with Neo-Nazis and Proud Boys which have never been addressed. Councilwoman Van Der Merck's response was out of order and hysterical and by far more deserving of a censure.

I strongly disapprove of 1) streamlining, consolidating, and/or dissolving a select number of the City's Boards, Clerk. All of these actions are an attempt to control and limit the voice and votes of residents and are unnecessary and most likely illegal.

Finally, an attempt to limit election access, and to attempt to stack elections to favor themselves and strip away the rights of particular groups of individuals is moving toward fascism, which I find atrocious and shameful for all of us who reside in this city. For those who don't see the similarity of these action to fascism, please read some of the descriptions of what these actions are, taken from Merriam Webster dictionary:
"... severe economic and social regimentation and forcible oppression of the opposition. A tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control." If the City tampers with elections such as what is proposed, that is exactly where we are.

Please read my requests and vote against the proposals listed above." Cynthia Bonnycastle
Huntington Beach Resident
2 Moore, Tania
From: Brad Bergeland <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:42 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: 05 September 2023 City Council/Public Financing Authority meeting - Agenda item 30 (23-700)
City Council members,
This is to document my opposition to the need for potential changes to election procedures, as proposed in Measure 1, in which City Charter section 702 would be changed. Section 702 indicates that all elections shall be held in accordance with the provisions of the Election Code of the State of California.

The proposed added language "In the event of such conflict, the provisions of this Charter shall control and prevail, in accordance with Section 103 of this charter" is not acceptable. This opens up the possibility of City officials changing election procedures that don't need to be changed, and may result in procedures that differ from the rest of Orange County and the state of California. Quite frankly, I don't trust the current city council to make any changes that would benefit all voters regarding accessibility to vote (mail-in, in-person early voting, in-person day of ballot box, drop boxes), or the integrity of the vote. The system isn't broken, so don't try to fix it.

Finally, there is the cost of putting unnecessary measures on the ballot. These estimated costs have been identified and should be avoided.

Brad Bergeland
37 year resident of Huntington Beach
1 Moore, Tania
From: Kirk Crawford <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:42 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Sept 5, 2023 Council Meeting
I ask the city council to vote NO on agenda item 30.

I ask the city council to vote YES on agenda items 34 and 35. #30: Changing the city charter should be completely transparent. This appears not to be the case with these proposed changes. Where is the background information needed to make informed decisions? Until all this information is made available to the public it is wrong to pass these amendments at this time. Vote NO. #34: The censure of council member Moser is appropriate considering how inappropriate her comments about a fellow council member were. It was an embarrassment to our city. Vote YES. #35: Looking back on the many Covid related actions/mandates forced on the public by governments and agencies, it is now clear how many of these proved to be harmful and prolong the effects of the virus. I think it is important that our city be proactive in saying that in the future these mask and vaccine mandates will not be accepted or enforced in Huntington Beach. Vote YES.

Kirk Crawford
50+ year resident of Huntington Beach
Virus-free.www.avast.com
Moore, Tania
From: Galassi, Cecelia < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 12:58 PM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Response to Sept. 5 City Council Agenda
September 4, 2023
To the Huntington Beach City Council:

I am writing to tell you that your latest planned actions are an outrage and that I will join other citizens of HB and Orange County in fighting your efforts now and as long as you try tooccupy your current positions.l'm a 12-year homeowner in this city, I work full time in the city, and I'm raising a child here.

As far as I can tell, this is part of what you want to do, starting on Sept. 5:
-Item 15—spendtaxpayer money to hire two sets of lobbyists for the city because you want different rules than any other town in the state.
....Item 16 - spendup to 2.8 million dollars to hire a medical management firm to fight and, it looks like, manipulate workers' compensation arrangements that are already in existence. •Item 19 -refuseto respond to the OC Grand Jury's report on drought. •...Item 22 - spend$3,831,000 to continue to fight the state of California in your ongoing, tax-guzzling lawsuit (again, as if HB goes by different rules than the rest of the state-uh, no). •Item 24-simplysteal funds from the Traffic Congestion relief Prop 42 fund to hire a grant writer. •_.Items 27, 28-In totally bad faith cancel a number of existing contracts and open up re-bidding (is that because you want to hire a friend's firm?).
•..Item 29 - Ina total attack on the democratic vote that denied you the opportunity to change City Charter Amendments, you want to fund and arrange a new March 5, 2024 election, so you can try to force your wishes on all of us again.
•Item 30 -Appropriate1.2 million dollars from taxpayer funds for.... "Business Unit." That's all the explanation you give: Business Unit.
1 • Item 16- I will join other citizens to fight your attack on freedom (Item 16) to censor the HB Library and its trained librarians so that citizens have less access to books that you-without training, without any definition of what youmean by "obscene" (there's an existing Supreme Court ruling on that, by the way) want to pick and choose. You also want to "part ways with the American Library Association." What the hell? You don't get to determine anybody's reading options. That's not your job, you aren't qualified to do it, and it is a complete attack on citizen freedoms. You want to deny the supportof experts and the recognized national organization joining libraries across the country.

We know you are attempting to copy what you have seen other power-greedy leaders do in Southern states. It appears you want HB to become like them, and that is a disaster. •Finally, the cowardly vote to rebuke Councilwoman Moser because she called out Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark'sdocumentedHolocaust denial record and racism. Van Der Mark's racism been publicly known since before 2018, and though she tries to cover it up and claim that her Latino background means she's not an anti- Semite, she has expressedracist views, and she has posted social media to that effect. In view of the fact that Moser has to watch her and most of you attack our civil liberties and use our money to do it, her frustration is understandable. Van der Mark has shown who she is, and slappingthe wrists of someone who calls it out is dishonest and petty.

We see you. We will continue to fight your actions and power grabs.

HB Resident Cecelia Galassi
Moore, Tania
From: Isabella Ford <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 1:13 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: What happened to common courtesy, respect for differences, keeping your word? City council meetings are such a circus that I know many don't feel safe enough to attend so we watch them online.

This link should remind you of the exchange that Mayor Strickland seems to warrant a censure of Ms. Moser. https://www.youtube.com/live/tepr01blp3Y?feature=shared Ms. Van Der Mark interrupts Ms. Moser with a very loud, harsh tone, and continues to yell in a very angry tone. Yet, Mr. Strickland wants to censure Ms. Moser?? This is the circus type of behavior that has made Huntington Beach such a sad example of an all-American city. Ms. Van Der Mark very rudely interrupts Ms Moser yet Mayor Strickland seems to only accuse Ms. Moser of attacking another member? Ms. Moser is trying to ask a very simple question to dispel rumors that came from multiple videos and photos of Ms. Van Der Mark denying the holocaust occurred. And, it really does NOT matter that her family fought in the war because they are not the ones that were elected to serve the City of Huntington Beach. Ms. Van Der Mark was, and she needs to be forthright with her knowledge and opinion of history, especially if she plans to work on a committee to unify our diverse city.

The new council majority also ran on the platform to not change the charter. Even when there were discussions to fix the very sections of the charter that outlined how to replace former council member Tito Ortiz. Yet, now you want to make changes? What is your hidden agenda with these changes? How do they benefit the city that now has a budget issue after the new majority has managed to gut the surplus we had? Finally, the new council majority seems to have no sympathy for others. I really like Mr. Kalmick's analogy in an article I read about how the council majority has "All Lives Mattered" the situation when there was a request to specifically state Huntington Beach does not condone anti-semitism after there were confirmed incidents of hate speech being spread among a specific community. The health of Huntington Beach is at stake and instead of fixing the broken pieces, you decide to say the city as a whole is important. No one denies that.

You had an opportunity to heal a pretty deep wound created by a very hateful act but you decided it was just a superficial scratch. Hate is your priority. You seem to say "Think exactly like me or you are sub-human." I know my emails don't matter to you but I feel compelled to get it on public record that you do not represent Huntington Beach and are very poor examples of public servants, which is what elected officials should be focused on - serving the public. HB has so many wonderful people that have different experiences and opinions and we have such amazing volunteers that take care of our city despite your hate.

Thank you Mr. Kalmick, Ms. Moser and Ms. Bolton for continuing to serve, keeping the city as a whole in your hearts, and putting up with such horrid and discriminatory behavior of the other members.

Isabella Ford
714-308-0660
Moore, Tania
From: Ginny C <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 2:06 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: City Council Meeting on September 5, 2023
I ask the city council to vote NO on agenda item 30.

Ginny Crawford
Huntington Beach resident for 50+ years
Virus-free.www.avast.com
1 Moore, Tania
StarsStripes < [email protected]>
Sent:)
Monday, September 4, 2023 2:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: City Council meeting 9-5-23 Re: Item # 30
I fully support Item 30 for the following reasons:
• Requires Voter ID
• Requires More in person Voting & Monitoring of drop boxes • Stops repeat of possible City Council Corruption or interference with the City Attorneys job • Clarifies vague language for Clerk qualifications
• Only allows City display of flags for US., County, City of HB, Armed forces & POW/MIA • Prevents City Council from engaging in more property transactions that forfeit tax revenue Sincerely,
Robert Cloyd
City of Huntington Beach Resident
Moore, Tania
From: Linda Moon < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 2:58 PM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: September 5,2023 City Council Agenda
I write in opposition to Agenda Items 16, 30 (A-E), 31(A-K), 32, 33, and 34.

16. The City Council has absolutely no business addressing or determining standards for selection of materials in the public library. The Library is managed and operated by well- educated professional librarians, who have done an outstanding job in selecting materials. There was no public call for council interference until Councilmember Vandermark created a false issue, using a list of materials provided by the radical conservative group Moms for Liberty. Statements that "young children have access to obscene materials" have been proven false. The questioned sexually explicit materials were in the Adult section of the library. Items in the Children's Library relating to homosexuality are age appropriate and subject to parental selection. No "young children" arrive at and select materials without an adult present and parents are notified by email regarding all materials checked out by their children. I've yet to see a toddler arrive at the library alone, and few have the ability to read any written text or understand the context of the items of concern.

30. The proposed charter amendments may not legally be put before the voters on a primary election ballot. Election Code 9255 specifically requires that any charter amendments proposed by the governing body be considered on the General Election ballot. There is no exception that would apply to the proposed action.

The proposed Amendments have been steamrolled through without the opportunity for full public scrutiny. The mostly self-serving amendments have been commingled in a confusing and insufficiently descriptive manner. While charter revision commissions are not mandated by the charter or state statute, they are provided for therein and have been the traditional manner of amending the charter in Huntington Beach. Review by the charter commission, empaneled pursuant to state law, allows input by the public and experts over an extended period of time. Submission on the General Election Ballot allows for their consideration by the largest voting population. The proponent councilmembers are obviously relying on a low-turnout Primary Election to ramrod through amendments that only facilitate their further concentration of control.

After making drastic budget cuts for city services due to reduced revenue and increased costs of litigation and judgments against the city, the expenditure of $1,200,000 is unconscionable.

31. The dissolution of boards and commissions which have provided important and significant input and expertise to the City over many decades is shameful and indicates an unjustified 1 arrogance of the proponent councilmembers in assuming that they know everything there is to know about everything and need no public input. The new council members all promised to listen to the public and invite their participation in decisions relating to the future of the city. This item flies in the face of those promises.

32. The proposed amendment of the City's well-crafted compassionate Policy on Human Dignity is an apparent attempt to diminish the importance of protecting traditionally targeted people of identified classifications. It further denies the existence of those who do not fit into a binary gender classification. An improper religious reference is also relied upon to justify its provisions. The city has no legal control over the limitation of gender participation in activities and the human dignity statement is without any legal significance to the enforcement of civil rights. However, it does identify the city as one that is either welcoming and protective to all or one in which the residents and their leaders are intolerant and discriminatory. I hope we will not be seen as the latter.

33. This item creates another costly bureaucracy that would improperly distinguish rules for the operation of e-bikes from those of surrounding cities in a manner that could not be easily enforced. If the City is concerned about e-bikes, the issues of concern and appropriate amendments to the California Vehicle Code should be discussed with our State Representatives.

34. This proposal to censure Councilmember Moser is outrageous. It highlights the vindictiveness and personal animosity of the proponent councilmembers. Those councilmembers have declined to support any standards of decorum for council meetings and have repeatedly condoned assaultive language being used in reference to Councilmembers Kalmick, Moser and Bolton by members of the public and themselves. The attempt to censure Councilmember Moser for asking that Councilmember Vandermark acknowledge the existence of the Holocaust before taking a position on the Human Relations Commission is absurd. It was Councilmember Vandermark who responded with a screaming nonresponsive diatribe. This item will likely be heard in the early hours of the morning when there will be little audience for this totally unwarranted action. A mature and reasonable action would be to request that staff draft a rational policy of council decorum.

Linda Sapiro Moon
[email protected]
2 Moore, Tania
From: JC <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 2:58 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda Item 30, 9-5-23
I support Agenda Item 30
There are far too many positive changes in this Agenda Item to not support it.

Thank you all for your hard work and the abuse you've had to endure.

Jean Cloyd
Huntington Beach resident
Moore, Tania
From: Roz Esposito <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 3:36 PM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Comments for the Council
You were elected to serve, not reign power over the residents of Huntington Beach. And as such, l will voice my comments here as I am absolutely certain I am in the majority.

I am outraged at the blatant power grab by some on the Council who are not living up to their oath in regards to the Constitution of the United States. By attempting to take away the rights of U.S. Citizens and police the residents of HB based of these member's personal beliefs. they are proposing ideas that are not aligned in any way, shape or form with the freedom we are ALL granted as U.S. Citizens.

And we, the majority of HB residents, will not stand for these draconian ideas! First of all let's be clear that anything called HUMAN DIGNITY would seek to recognize the DIGNITY of each and every human being to choose their own path. The proposal to exclude certain residents from being recognized does not have anything dignified about it.

Be advised that ANY ATTEMPT TO EXCLUDE OR NOT RECOGNIZE TRANSGENDER INDIVIDUALS WILL BE MET WITH SWIFT LEGAL ACTION.

As well, the banning of any books or library closings will be met with the same.

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs - but NO NONE is entitled to force those beliefs upon another.

Accordingly, I am also adamently against:
- Requiring Voter IDs and monitoring Drop Boxes - there is no problem to fix as this measure seeks only to disenfranchise.
- The banning of the Pride Flag on city property - The U.S., of which HB is a part, welcomes diversity and the majority of HB residents do as well.
- Financial maneuvers that add debt and spend down the surplus - we demand transparency and approval by AALL Council members on such expenditures.
- Making the city a "no mask/no vaccine city" - People and businesses shall have the right to make their own decisions!
- Formalizing the city's view of separating genders in sports.- This is a complicated issue and I don't believe the HB City Council ought to have anything to do with it.

Rev Roz Esposito
HB Resident
(she/her)
323-839-7903
"She who can see the invisible can do the impossible." Frank Gaines 1 Moore, Tania
From: laura sire <|[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:02 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: laura sire
Subject: Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34.35. (Agenda dated Sept 5, 2023) Dear Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark, and Councilmembers Bolton, Burns, Kalmick, and Moser,
My name is Laura Sire. I moved to Huntington Beach with my family when I was 14 years old. I am now 75 years old so I've been here a long time, and have witnessed many changes over the decades. I was a realtor in this city for about 10 years, and then made a career change to teaching and taught 1st grade for 16 years. The last decade or so I've enjoyed volunteering and being of service to HB.

Currently, I've been experiencing some health issues which have necessitated me stepping back from my activities. However, I am writing today out of the urgency of the crisis I see the governance of Huntington Beach facing.

I am appalled at what has occurred since the council majority Strickland, Van Der Mark, McKeon, and Burns were sworn in December 2022. Public comments are heard but not really heard.

The "Thank you for being here" mechanically repeated by Mayor Strickland rings hollow as the CC majority deconstructs all that is positive, inclusive, compassionate, and sound city government with their robotic, pre-determined and thoughtless 4-3 votes.

That said, still in hopes of being heard I strongly ask for a NO vote on Agenda items 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34, and 35.

Although ALL should be voted down, #'s 30,31,32,34 and 35 particularly warrant NO votes:
-30. VOTE NO. Introducing city charter amendment ballot measures for Mar 5, 2023 primary election. *This item is the epitome of hypocrisy as it was brought forward by councilmembers who have repeatedly stated that we should follow and not deviate from our City Charter. This is written as only ONE agenda item and did not involve the electorate of our city. There are 3 measures but actually include many negative impacts such as wasted $$$, voter ID requirement and other conditions that make voting less accessible especially to those whose voices specifically NEED to be heard. *This gives the Mayor alone the power to cancel city council meetings. *$1,200,000 to be spent from City's general fund which is $ taxpayer $.

It solidifies the removal of the Pride Flag flying on city property.g *Overall #30 must be a NO vote. If it is passed and these amendments are on the March ballot, it will be a HUGE waste of money. When folks understand what these measures truly mean they will be voted down.

There will be a campaign to educate and protect HB and ALL people living here by and before March 5th.

THIS WILL NOT PASS ON MARCH 5TH!
-31 VOTE NO -Approve the dissolution of the various and many boards, commissions, and committees of HB. This is a clear and dangerous move to silence the voice of the people. It reeks of authoritarianism.
-32 VOTE NO, NO NO! Consider adhoc's proposed policy on statement of human dignity. After reading this abhorrent and insulting so called statement of human dignity, I find myself agreeing with Councilmember Burns, however this is the version that should be cancelled. This draft excludes the LGBTQIA+ community with an emphasis on those who identify as transgender. The fear and suffering that this would cause those individuals including the youth in our city is immeasurable and this statement is shameful and reprehensible.
-34 NO on Censure of Councilmember Moser. I watched the exchange between Councilmember Moser and Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark multiple times. Why is this on the agenda? Councilmember Moser was in control and simply asked needed questions of Van Der Mark when Mayor Strickland announced that the ad-hoc committee to amend the human dignity statement would include her.

Considering Councilmember Van Der Mark's social media history, removal from a school board, and photos with white supremacists, Councilmember Moser was performing her due diligence in representing all of the people of Huntington Beach in making her best effort at obtaining the truth. Councilmember VDM was the one who attacked Councilmember Moser, interrupting her and yelling at her. She was the one who breached decorum. It is obvious to anyone who watches the clip.

You owe Councilmember Moser an apology. And because of her highly emotional and hostile denial (which is in opposition to data) we the people of HB are still left wondering and wanting only to know the truth concerning the Councilmember who is in this leadership position. #35 proposed by Councilmember Van Der Mark is ignorant, reckless, and dangerous to the health and safety of HB residents. VOTE NO!
Sincerely,
Laura Sire
(she/her)
PS I along with other residents will be watching Tuesday. 2 Moore, Tania
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:27 PM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: No To Anything the 4 and CA Approve Of!
Everything you 4 (Strickland, Burns, Van Der Mark and McKeon) and CA Gates are pushing through is NOT for the best interest of our city. There are better things the city needs done but you all are retusing to do what is best. You refuse to listen to the residents and are worse than what our last council was like. Its obvious you all have made up your minds ahead of meetings and will do whatever you desire despite what the residents say.

What happened to NOT changing the charter? Strickland? McKeon? Van Der Mark? Burns? Wasn't that part of what you 4 ran on and now you are going back on that but no surprise to those of us residents that see who you 4 are.

To censure Councilmember Moser for the truth is disgusting. More so when mayor Strickland has shown he can not even keep decorum in the meetings and lets those that agree/are pals with the 4 behave inappropriately during meetings. BTW, there is more than enough proof out there about Van Der Mark and that what was said is not lies but truth.

Anna
Moore, Tania
From: Stouts Momma <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:27 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF)
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Council's agendas for Tuesday's meeting
To the HB City Council,
I couldn't believe my ears when I heard that Natalie Moser is being censored for asking a valid question on Gracey's participation in a committee to amend the city's Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity because of her history of not commenting on allegations denying the Holocaust and friendships with Proud Boys. It's a well known fact that Gracey's best friend is even dating a Proud Boy. Gracey's words and actions have proven her to be discriminatory. Allowing her to be in the committee shows the rumors about the new council's bigotry to be factual and will continue to shame our city's reputation. And censoring Natalie, who happens to be highly educated and very intelligent (unlike Gracey the dropout), shows the council majority's bigotry. I do not think the council should allow Gracey on the committee or censor Natalie Moser.

I do not agree that the council should be changing the city's charter, which was something that the new 4 members ALL campaigned on! You promised your voters that you would NOT make changes to the charter!!! You're proving yourselves to be hypocrites! Huntington Beach should be a city ALL people feel comfortable visiting or residing in. Changing the city charter to make it impossible for future councils to fly the pride flag and adding anti LGBTQ comments tarnishes our city's reputation and makes our city a place people don't feel comfortable living in or visiting. It's bad enough that Vans pulled out of sponsoring the US Open because of the current council's decision to not fly the pride flag during pride month, costing the tax payers. Or how the horrible attack on the HB Library and the LGBTQIA books, led by Gracey, makes our city look homophobic.

Trying to add the requiring of voter identification and monitoring of ballot boxes will end up being fought against and end up costing the tax payers even MORE money towards losing court costs by Gates. It's bad enough we're paying millions for his fight against the state's housing mandate, AND his millions in payments to his buddies that put on the air show. Now you want us tax payers to front the cost of the inevitable fight against the state for your proposed unconstitutional voting changes.

I have never been embarrassed of living in Huntington Beach...until now. The current council's agendas bring shame to our city. Shame that will follow us for years to come. Shame that makes people decide to vacation in more inviting cities.

Bring compassion and respect back to our city!
Christy
1 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:38 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: City Council Meeting 9-5-23 re: Item 30
Get Outlook for iOs
From: StarsStripes <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 2:34:37 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: City Council Meeting 9-5-23 re: Item 30
I fully support Item 30 for the following reasons:
• Requires Voter ID
• Requires More in person Voting & Monitoring of drop boxes • Stops repeat of possible City Council Corruption or interference with the City Attorneys job • Clarifies vague language for Clerk qualifications
• Only allows City display of flags for US., County, City of HB, Armed forces & POW/MIA • Prevents City Council from engaging in more property transactions that forfeit tax revenue Sincerely,
Robert Cloyd
City of Huntington Beach Resident
1 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:41 PM
To: [email protected]
Subiect: Fwd: Agenda Item 30
Get Outlook for iOs
From: JC C<[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 2:55:22 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Agenda Item 30
I support Agenda Item 30
There are far too many positive changes in this Agenda Item to not support it.

Thank you all for your hard work and the abuse you've had to endure.

Jean Cloyd
Huntington Beach resident
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:43 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Here is a Yard Sign that was handed out in support of the New Fab-4 City Counci! Members. What is it? No Charter Amendments or Ignore what we stood for now that we are in Office? I am confused?
Attachments: IMG_1223.JPG
Get Outlook for ios
From: larry mcneely <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 3:27:24 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Here is a Yard Sign that was handed out in support of the New Fab-4 City Council Members. What is it? No Charter Amendments or Ignore what we stood for now that we are in Office? I am confused? How can you run on No Charter Amendments and within 8 Months do an About Face? NOT A GOOD LOOK. What is going on here? You are losing me, one issue at a time. Disappointing. Remember I warned You !!!!! 1 VOTE
Changes to
NO OUR
City Charter
Paid for by Huntington Beach People's Action Committee, FPPC# 1424235 Moore, Tania
From: george sire < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:55 PM
To: laura sire; [email protected]
Cc: laura sire
Subject: Re: Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34.35. (Agenda dated Sept 5, 2023) Nicely put together.

Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
On Monday, September 4, 2023, 4:02 PM, laura sire <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark, and Councilmembers Bolton, Burns, Kalmick, and Moser,
My name is Laura Sire. I moved to Huntington Beach with my family when I was 14 years old. I am now 75 years old so I've been here a long time, and have witnessed many changes over the decades. I was a realtor in this city for about 10 years, and then made a career change to teaching and taught 1st grade for 16 years. The last decade or so I've enjoyed volunteering and being of service to HB.

I am appalled at what has occurred since the council majority Strickland, Van Der Mark, McKeon, and Burns were sworn in December 2022. Public comments are heard but not really heard.

That said, still in hopes of being heard I strongly ask for a NO vote on Agenda items 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34, and 35.

Although ALL should be voted down, #'s 30,31,32,34 and 35 particularly warrant NO votes:
-30. VOTE NO. Introducing city charter amendment ballot measures for Mar 5, 2023 primary election.
*This item is the epitome of hypocrisy as it was brought forward by councilmembers who have repeatedly stated that we should follow and not deviate from our City Charter. This is written as only ONE agenda item and did not involve the electorate of our city. There are 3 measures but actually include many negative impacts such as wasted $$$, voter ID requirement and other conditions that make voting less accessible especially to those whose voices specifically NEED to be heard. *This gives the Mayor alone the power to cancel city council meetings. *$1,200,000 to be spent from City's general fund which is $ taxpayer $.

There will be a campaign to educate and protect HB and ALL people living here by and before March 5th.

You owe Councilmember Moser an apology. And because of her highly emotional and hostile denial (which is in opposition to data) we the people of HB are still left wondering and wanting only to know the truth concerning the Councilmember who is in this leadership position.
#35 proposed by Councilmember Van Der Mark is ignorant, reckless, and dangerous to the health and safety of HB residents. VOTE NO!
Sincerely,
Laura Sire
(she/her)
PS I along with other residents will be watching Tuesday. 2 Moore, Tania
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 4:47 PM
To: laura sire; [email protected]
Cc: laura sire
Subject: Re: Agenda items: 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34.35. (Agenda dated Sept 5, 2023) Laura, that is a great letter!! Thanks for letting me read it. I know you'll be there in spirit tomorrow night. V Sent from the all new AOL app for ios
On Monday, September 4, 2023, 4:02 PM, laura sire < [email protected]> wrote:

Dear Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark, and Councilmembers Bolton, Burns, Kalmick, and Moser,
My name is Laura Sire. I moved to Huntington Beach with my family when I was 14 years old. I am now 75 years old so I've been here a long time, and have witnessed many changes over the decades. I was a realtor in this city for about 10 years, and then made a career change to teaching and taught 1st grade for 16 years. The last decade or so l've enjoyed volunteering and being of service to HB.

I am appalled at what has occurred since the council majority Strickland, Van Der Mark, McKeon, and Burns were sworn in December 2022. Public comments are heard but not really heard.

That said, still in hopes of being heard I strongly ask for a NO vote on Agenda items 15,16,22,29,30,31,32,34, and 35.

Although ALL should be voted down, #'s 30,31,32,34 and 35 particularly warrant NO votes:
-30. VOTE NO. Introducing city charter amendment ballot measures for Mar 5, 2023 primary election.
*This item is the epitome of hypocrisy as it was brought forward by councilmembers who have repeatedly stated that we should follow and not deviate from our City Charter. This is written as only ONE agenda item and did not involve the electorate of our city. There are 3 measures but actually include many negative impacts such as wasted $$$, voter ID requirement and other conditions that make voting less accessible especially to those whose voices specifically NEED to be heard. *This gives the Mayor alone the power to cancel city council meetings. *$1,200,000 to be spent from City's general fund which is $ taxpayer $.

There will be a campaign to educate and protect HB and ALL people living here by and before March 5th.

You owe Councilmember Moser an apology. And because of her highly emotional and hostile denial (which is in opposition to data) we the people of HB are still left wondering and wanting only to know the truth concerning the Councilmember who is in this leadership position.
#35 proposed by Councilmember Van Der Mark is ignorant, reckless, and dangerous to the health and safety of HB residents. VOTE NO!
Sincerely,
Laura Sire
(she/her)
PS I along with other residents will be watching Tuesday. 2 Moore, Tania
From: Annilise Flanagan-Frankl <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 5:58 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subiect: Comments
As a resident of Huntington Beach I was to express my opinion in a public format since I cannot attend the meeting on September 5, 2023.

1. The Huntington Beach City Council SHOULD NOT CENSOR Councilwoman Natalie Moser for questioning Mayor Pro Tem Gracey Van Der Mark's ability to appropriately participate in a committee to amend the city's Declaration of Policy on Human Dignity. Gracey Van Der Mark has a long history of defending history on the atrocities of the Holocaust and her friendships with the terrorist organization - the Proud Boys.

2. 1 OPPOSE THE UNNECESSARY ELECTION IN MARCH 2024, TO ADD AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S CHARTER. THIS CITY COUNCIL IS SPENDING TAXPAYERS' HARD EARNED MONE.

3. I OPPOSE THE CONTINUED SPENDING OF MY MONEY TO THE KENNEDY COMMISSION. AGAINM, THIS CITY COUNCIL IS SPENDING TAXPAYERS' MONEY ON ISSUES

MAKING HUNTINGTON BEACH SEEM TO BE AN UNWELCOMING COMMUNITY TO ANYONE WHO DOESN'T "FIT" THE MAJORITY OF THOSE ON THE COUNCILS' DESCRIPTION OF "APPROPRIATE FOR THE COMMUNITY".

4. I oppose any action which would allow the City Attorney to expand his staff and to find a mechanism for his wife to become a city employee!! Nepotism is not tolerated!!!

5. I OPPOSE THE SPENDING OF MY TAX MONEY TO FUND THE AIRSHOW! THERE ARE BOTH ENVIRONMENTAL AND PRACTICAL REASONS TO NOT HAVE THE AIRSHOW. I AM

APPALLED AT THE SPENDING OF TAXPAYER MONEY FOR THE MAJORITY ON THE CITY

COUNCIL TO INGRATIATE THEMSELVES WITH FUTURE POTENTIAL DONORS TO THEIR POLITICAL CAREERS.

6. I OPPOSE THE DISBANDING OF COMMITTEES WITH CURRENT VOLUNTEERS PROVIDING FREE PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCES TO THE CITY. DISBANDING THESE COMMITTEES

MEANS IN THE FUTURE, THE CITY WILL HAVE TO PAY PROFESSIONALS IN AREAS IMPACTING THE COMMUNITY.

Lastly, I am frustrated by the majority of City Council Members. I strongly suggest reading the book "White Privilege"!
Annilise M. Flanagan-Frankl, M.A.
1 CounselingPsychologist
Nationally Certified School Psychologist
Remember - the past is over, the future is a mystery, and today is a gift. That is why it is called the PRESENT.

Make today count.

Call: 847-226-3119
2 Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 6:36 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Concerns over agenda items on the 9/5/2023 Get Outlook for ios
From: kate healy <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 5:07:59 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Concerns over agenda items on the 9/5/2023
I am writing to convey my concerns and disagreement with several agenda items on Tuesday night's city council meetings.

I am opposed to Council Member Natalie Moser being censured. Council Member Moser, as an elected official, has a responsibility to ask questions that the residents of Huntington Beach have concerning behaviors and associations of Council Member Van Der Mark, at no time was she unprofessional.

I do not agree with, nor do I condone the suggested city's Declaration of Policy of Human Dignity- the current one was about inclusion, the proposed one is transphobic, homophobic and in violation of the recent Supreme Court ruling, as Justice Gorsuch detailed in his majority opinion on the Title VII ruling, as well as excludes those who are non-binary, and intersex.

I am against the requiring of voter identification, it is against California voter laws, and disproportionately effects minorities as explained by the non-partisan group, The League of Women's Voter's https://www.lwv.org/blog/whats-so- bad-about-voter-id-laws
I am against Amendment No. 2. This issue has been covered at nauseum and is opposed by the majority of HB residents as seen at every Council meeting where this was brought up. As a City we have lost contacts and business due to this stance. As it has been pointed out, the Council already had the power to not fly any flags except the ones they vote on- this will limit flying our sister city's flag as well as the Olympic Flag. It is a thinly veiled message of "unwelcome" to the LGBTQ Community.

I am opposed to Amendment No. 3 where Council Members can cancel a regular City Council meeting. These are scheduled in advance, residents plan for them, Council Members are elected to do a job and meetings are part of that.

I also oppose the "No mask and no vaccine mandate' as a city- it is an over reach of the City to legislate, especially when science supports wearing masks to lower respiratory contamination - Council Member Van Der Mark's argument does not consider those who were at higher risk and needed those around them to protect them (much like those undergoing Cancer treatments will often need those around them to mask) nor does it take into consideration the future.

I believe these items will create even more legal problems as well as PR problems for our city... AND mostly, are not kind, and do not represent the majority of the residents of Huntington Beach. 1 As I have witnessed time and time again, the current majority of the City Council is not listening to the majority of the residents in HB and will vote how their extreme supporters have pressured them to vote, seemingly to forget that the City Council is a non-partisan role and policies should reflect the majority of their constituents.

Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:09 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: HB Council Meeting/9-5-2023
Get Outlook for ios
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 5:18:41 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: HB Council Meeting/9-5-2023
Re Agenda Items #30, #32, & #35
I oppose placing any of the proposed Charter Amendments on the upcoming ballot especially the Voter ID proposal which is a thinly-veiled and reprehensible attempt at voter suppression. All three proposed ballot items in the context of taxpayer expense and constitutionality appear to be unwarranted, unjustifiable, and untimely. I also question whether Amendment 2 is legal in that it shows three separate and distinct issues for consideration - flags, budget cycle, and elected terms of office. I thought Councilperson Burn's proposal to limit speech by codifying flag-flying restrictions had already been expanded to make an "Olympic" exception and I believe the other items have lost in previous elections.

The proposed city-wide ban on mask and vaccine mandates is yet another incoherent and unenforceable offering by the Mayor Pro Tem. Wouldn't this ban be in direct conflict with policies administered by local institutions of public education, public health, and public safety? How contradictory that the Mayor Pro Tem seems poised to approve other agenda items that effectively inoculate the City Attorney against any challenges to his decisions or authority. The proposal to censure Councilperson Moser is obviously highly partisan, vindictive, and hypocritical. The rewritten Policy on Human Dignity is an affront to human compassion and a slap in the face to the original authors and their intent. I view all of these proposals as insults to civility and beneath the dignity of any Councilperson who took an oath of office. I suspect that at least some of these proposals are designed to distract from the exorbitant amounts of litigation fees incurred by the City Council and its City Attorney. This all smacks of governing by lawsuit, obfuscation, and partisan fiat.

And, how ironic that the meeting will kick off by highlighting a recognition ceremony by the Friends of the Library in a chamber whose Council majority is anything but friendly to the City Library professionals and volunteers (and actively seeks to undermine their authority and judgment). I've lived in Huntington Beach since 1980 and have seen many rancorous meetings. However, I've never before seen so many citizens so willing to stand at the Council podium so often and say, "You should be ashamed of yourselves." I echo those sentiments and will be voting against all proposed Charter Amendments should they reach ballot status as well as the Council members who sponsored and supported them.

Cheryl Elliott (43-year resident of Huntington Beach)
Moore, Tania
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Unprecedented Majority Overreach
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Dee Turner < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 6:01:02 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Cc: Estanislau, Robin <[email protected]> Subject: Unprecedented Majority Overreach
First, I must urgently protest the attempt to censure Councilwoman Moser for asking whether Ms. Van Der Mark accepts the Holocaust as fact. Asking a simple question is everybody's 1st A. right, but it is compellingly correct when the council's majority is trying to amend our city's Human Rights Statement. I notice the new language clearly implies that some citizens are somehow less worthy than others. What the rest of us understand is, when somebody's rights are denied or questioned, soon NOBODY has any rights.

Indeed, given the majority's aspiration to limit voting access in Huntington Beach, that seems to be the clear intent.

Orange County's voting process is impeccable and has an esteemed record. That anyone would seek to limit voting suggests this majority is attempting, now that they're cozily in the barn, that they want to lock the barn gates so nobody else can get in—not the best representation of self-confidence, is it? You've made no investigation, not even a haphazard guess, of the potential costs involved, nor have you the slightest circumspection about its probable illegalities.

But corruption is also blatantly clear, here. First: the Pacific Air Show was canceled because higher authorities than this city council closed beach access due to 25,000+ gallons of leaked oil sludge. On the beach. Where Air Show viewers must sit. So the Air Show's lawsuit would never have reached a jury at all, being absolutely unsustainable on the merits. Yet our city attorney, Mr. Gates, decided to give $7 millions in settlement to the same company that made the majority's campaign posters. And he refuses to allow us to see why our taxes were so paid, claiming needed secrecy. Nothing should be secret which requires such a gross expenditure of taxpayer funds, unless it would reveal underlying shenanigans-and then it MUST be exposed. Is it that the Pacific Air Show knows something about this council majority the rest of us have yet to discover? Or should we expect your next campaign posters to be covered in gold leaf? Mr.

Gates should at least be sanctioned by the State Bar—if not criminally indicted-especially for settling plaintiffs' unwinnable case when such obvious conflicts of interest exist.

Then, too, there's the matter of his attempting to downgrade the requirements for City Clerk in order to shoehorn his wife into the position. This is nepotism and unspeakable grandiosity; perhaps Gates requires an evaluation for mental competence. Of course, if the majority could only have a City Clerk who is equally incompetent, perhaps they could then be more successful at railroading through their impractical, incredibly costly, and probably unlawful agenda.

Which brings us to the $4 millions already spent, along with the next $1-1/2 million currently proposed, in your feckless and frivolous lawsuit against the state's housing mandate. If you are uninformed on this issue, be advised that 17 jurisdictions before you have already lost in court. But then, you have the illitimable Mr. Gates representing you, a man so apparently fearful of losing a case which could not legally prevail that he donated $7 millions to it. What, first you 1 have no confidence in your confidence man—and then you have far too much?? Of course, you would not recognize any right in Huntington Beach employees to also live in the city in which they're employed-that would mean listening to the board actually representing the 3,000+ folk who live in 18 mobile home parks here, but they don't count, either, do they? Or you wouldn't think of shutting them down so you could simply ignore the people you think are less worthy citizens. And here we have Mayor Strickland, who so boldly and barefacedly lives in subsidized housing, himself! Shame on you.

I detest the two-facedness, the cronyism, the utter lack of financial competence, the culture wars you support, and the corruption you've brought-instead of simply doing the job for which you were elected! Most who voted for you probably still thought being Republican meant that you would be committed to conservation and keep our wetlands safe and pristine. They likely thought it meant you would repair our many, many pockmarked streets. They may have trusted that you'd employ experts who know that pollarding trees is a very poor arboricultural practice, and that lace pruning instead helps prevent infrastructure upheaval by root systems that grow exponentially when treetops are hacked off. They probably thought you would never think to alter our beautiful Human Rights Statement so that skinheads and their deadly menace might return.

But face it, you're just skinheads who dress better. I watched the 7+ hours of your recent council meeting. After, I was absolutely disgusted that you turned around at the start to pay lip service to a diverse nation you seek to infest with- shall we call it what it truly is?-FASCISM. Yes, you four, your patterns are distinctly fascist. Read up, educate yourselves! My sincere thanks to the many decent people who addressed these issues at the last meeting, especially to Robin Estanislau, who serves so well in her capacity as City Clerk-a job she is well educated to do, with ample years of exact experience, to boot—whose position I hope will not be at risk to this cockamamie attempt to lower the standards for someone who's "run a few businesses," as though that meant anything. (Why more than one? Did she run them into disaster? What has running a business to do with the complex matter of being City Clerk? How lame. If that's how Mr.

Gates presents an argument, dear gods let's recall him, FAST!) I dearly wish this to be read at the next council meeting. But I'm so not holding my breath.

I've lived in HB for 33 years. You don't deserve my name.

Moore, Tania
From: Seth Matson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:53 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Concerns and Dissent Regarding Recent City Council Actions Once more, the City Council continues to enact policies that do not align with the views of the majority of the residents of Huntington Beach.

Regarding the censure of Councilwoman Natalie Moser, it is widely known that Ms. Vandermark has affiliations with hate groups like the Proud Boys, and there is clear photographic and video evidence of her participating in their rallies. Ms.

Moser had every right to express her concerns about how Vandermark's associations might influence her opinions. Ms.

Moser was exercising her First Amendment rights, and we should not censure her.

The promotion of a trans and homophobic agenda through flags and the "right to dignity" is divisive and offensive. The use of coded language is apparent, and your intentions are clear.

The act of banning books parallels historical events like those during the time of Hitler and the Nazis.

Regarding the elimination of mask mandates, it is crucial to prioritize public health. Huntington Beach is a city in California, and those who disagree with this approach should consider relocating. Vandermark's views on Covid-19, based on conspiracy theories and false information, have led her to advocate for the removal of mandates.

The implementation of voter ID checks and ballot box monitoring is unnecessary and a misuse of taxpayer funds.

Lastly, Mayor Tony Strickland's history of paying $40,000.00 in fines for ethical violations in campaigning raises concerns about his suitability for his position. This City Council appears to lack genuine values and a commitment to the well-being of the city's residents.

As a homeowner for 21 years and a business owner in this city, and living here since the 70's, I strongly oppose the proposals outlined in this agenda. Spending over a million dollars on new policies and adding them to the voting agenda is a wasteful use of time and money. We must also address the issue of the missing seven million dollars and focus on addressing our homeless problem. Empty promises from our leaders do not benefit the residents of this city.

Sincerely, Seth Matson
Moore, Tania
From: Janet Michels < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:58 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Comments on Agenda items for September 5, 2023 Dear City Council,
I have concerns with both the content of this meeting's agenda and the lack of process this Council is using to put forth substantive changes to our City Charter and the structure the city has used to effectively run its business and represent a broad range of its citizens.

Charter Amendments - The Charter review and amendment process has followed a longstanding effort to use an experienced facilitator and a representative group of citizens to do a thorough review of the charter and recommend changes. This process is done on a regular basis and was just completed a little over a year ago. To put together an unskilled ad hoc committee to recommend a large number of changes intended to consolidate power and enable inexperienced candidates to run for office as they lack current qualifications is terrifying in its absolute lack of respecting the Charter's intent and representing the people of this city., Specifically,
Charter Amendment 1: I object to adding language that would essentially prevent the City Council, who runs the city, from making decisions regarding legal actions the city is facing, including to use outside legal counsel. Further I object to allowing the City Attorney to control his own budget without regard to the full budgetary demands of the city, and to give the City Attorney, not the Council final authority on budget increase or decreases. While the City Attorney can recommend budgetary requests, the final authority should rest with the City Council.

Further, the extensive language around voting controls simply is unnecessary and leaves citizens with an impression that oversight and monitoring is required, WHEN THERE HAS BEEN NO EVIDENCE OF FRAUD OR WRONGDOING. Inferring this in the actual language is misleading and fear mongering.

Finally, after years of City Clerk qualifications remaining unchanged, the timing of the recommendation to reduce the specific educational requirements seems quite convenient to coincide with a publicly announced candidate who lacks the current qualifications to run for this office. If candidates are so keen on this position, obtain the necessary qualifications. Don't change the qualifications to fit the candidate.

Charter Amendment 2: Not sure why the election cycle needs to be adjusted. The flag issue has already been ignored by the Council with respect to the wishes of the citizens.

Charter amendment 3: Beyond the language error (taxes not overtly stated), as a member of Finance Commission, I did not approve of this language as necessary to unduly hamper the ability of any City Council to make financial decisions to forego revenue of any kind (parking, property tax etc) in the scope of their effort to plan for a financially sound future.

Statement of Human Dignity- Beyond the fact that the statement is poorly crafted structurally and grammatically, it is offensive in its language and complete disregard of the instances that caused it to be drafted in the first place. Focusing on a narrow interpretation of gender, alluding to grooming and other key topics raised by Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark in the past months shows just whose statement this is. It is not reflective of what the city should do in its efforts to support the disenfranchised in our community.
1 And the topic of censure? I would suggest you all review videos of your prior meetings and listen to a number of statements/monologues made by Councilmember McKeon specifically before raising this. In my observation, Councilmember Moser has shown remarkable restraint and professionalism in the face of horrific language and attacks by the supporters of the majority, with nary a word about civility. What a double standard.

This agenda and its content is an embarrassment.

Sincerely,
Janet Michels
Janet Michels
714.448.3095
Moore, Tania
From: Juana Mueller < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 8:22 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Council Agenda, Sept. 5, 2023
Dear City Council of Huntington Beach,
Respectfully, I consider a number of items on this Sept. 5, 2023 Council Agenda dangerous to our City and I believe they lead toward a dismantling of a democratic way of governance.

Therefore I ask for a NO vote o the following items:
#30 (no charter amendments, no March 5, 2024 ballot)
#31 (no dissolving boards and committees)
#32 (no change to policy on human dignity)
#34 (no censure of Councilmember Moser)
#35 ((no resolution to be "no mask no vaccine" city)
Respectfully submitted,
Sincerely,
Juana Mueller.

Moore, Tania
From: Paula Shawa <[email protected]>
Sent:

To: Monter september a 3 pl
Subject:

I strongly oppose moving forward on the proposed charter amendments. This majority Far Right City Council has no problem spending taxpayer money... $1.2 million? This is crazy.

Paula Shawa, 16822 Edgewater Lane, HB
Switzer, Donna
From: Jessamyn Garner < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:33 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Please oppose agenda items 15, 16, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35 Dear Huntington Beach City Council,
I wish I could attend the meeting tonight, but unfortunately I was exposed to Covid over the weekend. I want to keep my neighbors safe so I plan to stay home.

As a resident of Huntington Beach, I am appalled by many items on tonight's agenda. The policies and decisions that are being considered are hurtful to minorities in this community and they do not represent my values of inclusion and integrity.

I urge you to oppose agenda items 15, 16, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, and 35.

Specifically, as a member of the LGBTQ+ community, I reject the statement of Human Dignity that has been warped to include transphobic rhetoric that will directly impact my ability to live in this community.

I know based on previous behavior and voting records from the council that this email and the hundreds of other comments you will receive in the next 18 hours will not likely change your minds. Just know that your onstituents are paying attention to your actions and we will vote accordingly. Making it harder for us to vot nd passing threatening policies will not deter us from showing up to the polls. On the contrary, it wi galvanize us and we will show up in even greater numbers.

We won't allow this city to continue to be led by hateful rhetoric and exclusionary policies.

Jessamyn Garner
(they/them)
#30
Switzer, Donna
From: Sumi Yata < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:31 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: 9/5 Agenda items
Dear City Council,
Sadly, I am writing to you again to express my outrage over proposed agenda items.

Regarding the charter amendments:

First, the charter amendments are the height of hypocrisy to be supported by the majority, who nade it a huge part of their campaign to never change the charter. Secondly, the proposed changes are solutions in search of a problem. We do not have any voter fraud problems in Orange County, or in California in general. The OC Registrar runs an impeccable election system and not once has Huntington Beach had a problem with any of it. Asking now for voter IDs and ballot box watching is solely to cater to right wing conspiracists! Additionally, these amendments themselves are going to cost the city over a million dollars just to have an election over! How can we be spending this money after our June meeting in which the majority said we didn't have enough money to run the city and threatened to close the libraries to make ends meet? Where is this million dollars going to come from? Where will the untold millions come from after the city is inevitably sued for these items that run against OC and California voter laws? How does the city plan to budget for implementing these items?? Should we expect more library and park closures to pay for these conspiracies? Lastly, changing the clerk qualifications smacks of cronyism! Why would we want an important office like City Clerk to be less qualified? It makes no sense other than to put someone in office that this majority will directly benefit from.

On the Human Dignity statement, I encourage the council to rewrite this horrendous statement.

Why are including statements about gender and keeping them separate? In addition to being scientifically inaccurate (since you used the word genetic in order to give it cover as having scientific value) it is harmful to more people than just trans individuals (who are less than 1% of the population) to seek to pigeon hole people into just one type of gender expression. The city On becoming a "No Mask and No Vaccine Mandate" city: Hopefully, we will never have a situation like we had with the early stages of the pandemic, which is still around, in case you haven't noticed!! But, if it should happen, why would we have this kind of mandate when masks and vaccines have been proven to be effective!!
Which brings me to my last point, on the censure of Councilwoman Moser: should the council censure Councilwoman Moser for asking a valid question? Councilwoman VanDerMark's own Youtube channel asked that question. How is Moser now to be punished for asking the same of VanDerMark? Why is Council Member Burns not being censured for inferring that librarians and library staff pedofiles and groomers at the June 20th meeting? How are we so far removed from human decency that we have to question strongly held beliefs of our council members? It is because the majority on this council continue to push items that are not only unnecessary and costly, but that lack compassion and understanding of our fellow 1 residents. Tonight's shameful agenda highlights just how far the majority of this council have strayed from their own promises, and from the will of the residents of Huntington Beach.

I am saddened and outraged when I read the many articles about Huntington Beach in the newspaper. What kind of city have we become? Sadly, I know the emails that you read about these items are going to fall on deaf ears. You DO NOT represent our city well! Jane Yata
7$30
Switzer, Donna
From: Erin Spivey < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:04 AN
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Tonight's agenda items
Dear City Council,
I am once again writing to city council to express my dismay and outrage over proposed agenda items.

On the charter amendments:

First, the charter amendments are the height of hypocrisy to be supported by the majority, who made it a huge part of their campaign to never change the charter. Secondly, the proposed changes are solutions in search of a problem. We do not have any voter fraud problems in Orange County, or in California in general. The OC Registrar runs an impeccable election system and not once has Huntington Beach had a problem with any of it. Asking now for voter IDs and ballot Additionally, these amendments themselves are going to cost the city over a million dollars just to have an election over! How can we be spending this money after our June meeting in which the majority said we didn't have enough money to run the city and threatened to close the libraries to make ends meet? Where is this million dollars going to come from? Where will the untold millions come from after the city is inevitably sued for these items that run against OC and California voter laws? How does the city plan to budget for implementing these items?? Should we expect more library and park closures to pay for these conspiracies? Lastly, changing the clerk qualifications smacks of cronyism! Why would we want an important office like City Clerk to be less qualified? It makes no sense other than to put someone in office that this majority will directly benefit from.

On the Human Dignity statement, I encourage the council to rewrite this horrendous statement. Why are including statements about gender and keeping them separate? In addition to being scientifically inaccurate (since you used the word genetic in order to give it cover as having scientific value) it is harmful to more people than just trans individuals (who are less than 1% of the population) to seek to pigeon hole people into just one type of gender expression. The city should focus on city business and leave trans people alone.

On becoming a "No Mask and No Vaccine Mandate" city, I hope and pray we never experience another pandemic in our lifetimes. But should that occur, why do we need to set ourselves up again as a place opposed to science and compassion?
Which brings me to my last point, on the censure of Councilwoman Moser: should the council censure Councilwoman Moser for asking a valid question? Councilwoman VanDerMark's own Youtube channel asked that question. How is Moser now to be punished for asking the same of VanDerMark? Why is Council Member Burns not being censured for inferring that librarians and library staff pedofiles and groomers at the June 20th meeting? How are we so far removed from human decency that we have to question strongly held beliefs of our council members? It is because the majority on this council continue to push items that are not only unnecessary and costly, but that lack compassion and understanding of our fellow residents. Tonight's shameful agenda highlights just how far the majority of this council have strayed from their own promises, and from the will of the residents of Huntington Beach.

Erin Spivey
30 year resident
1 Switzer, Donna
From: LISE MILLER < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:56 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Oppose 15B, 30, 31, 32, 34, and 35
Dear Council,
Please consider the following recommendations:

Oppose Item #15B
There is no explanation why the Council would hire the lowest rated advocacy firm when judged by our own Intergovernmental Relations Committee. A rubric was developed for evaluating the proposals that were submitted in response to the RFP and then the IRC recommended hiring the highest ranked firm, but the Council is poised to hire the lowest ranked firm instead. Without explanation, this seems to be a waste of our tax dollars.

Oppose Item #30
I strongly oppose moving any of the proposed charter amendments to the primary ballot. They were not drafted in accordance with our own rules or charter requirements. There was no citizen commission, only a 3 person ad hoc committee that developed these behind closed doors. None of them are needed for good governance of our city.

Oppose Item #31
I strongly oppose dissolving the city's commissions and committees. They are made up of citizens which allow the Council to have the most direct input from our citizens on varying topics of concern in our city.

Oppose Item #32
I strongly oppose the adoption of the ad hoc committee's "rewrite" of the Policy on Human Dignity. The 2021 version was thorough, complete and inclusive. Not only is this new version incomplete, it is actually exclusive and transphobic. I would be embarrassed for people to know that I live in a city that has published such a horrible document.

Oppose Item #34
I strongly oppose censuring Councilmember Moser for asking a relevant question. When Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark was selected to be part of the ad hoc committee to reevaluate a policy that addresses the Holocaust and hate crimes, it is certainly relevant to know if any of the 3 members charged with that task holds any biases. Van Der Mark has never publicly answered the questions that have been swirling around the community for years. I am more concerned that Van Der Mark responded to the reasonable query by shouting and calling Moser a liar. That seems a much more egregious offense.

Oppose Item #35
There have been no mask or vaccine mandates in place for months, if not years. This agenda item seems to be placed just to get people riled up (as if there isn't enough on this agenda). I oppose this waste of time.

Thank you!
Sent from my iPad
1 Switzer, Donna
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:01 AM
To: [email protected].

Subject: Comments - 9/5/23 Council agenda items
This evening's council meeting agenda contains a number of items of concern to me, a newer resident of California and Huntington Beach. The Council's recent trend toward tossing-out solid, carefully considered policies and traditions in favor of hastily drawn substitutes is troubling. Below are a few specifics:

Agenda #16: I oppose the City's attempt to involve itself in determining appropriate materials for its public libraries.
• Agenda #30: I oppose the City's attempt to hastily alter the City Charter. For many reasons, these resolutions should be tabled. Charter amendments deserve more thorough public discussion and opportunities for input before putting them before the electorate.

Agenda #31: I oppose the wholesale dissolution of long-standing boards and commissions based upon recommendations from a committee that met for a short time and in secret. Good government suffers when elected officials cut off channels for obtaining input from educated volunteers who thoroughly and thoughtfully offer advice and/or collect data on specialized topics.

Shirley Nixon
8655 Fresno Circle #501C
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
#30
Switzer, Donna
From: Melissa Amarillas <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:53 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Comments on Agenda 9/5/23
As a California resident with family in Huntington Beach, I find the current behavior of the city council appalling. I strongly oppose banning the pride flag in the city charter, changing the human dignity statement, and censuring Councilmember Moser. The conservative members of the city council (Strickland, McKeon, Burns, Van der Mark) are spreading and encouraging hateful rhetoric and creating a climate of anger, fear, and violence in the community. After the senseless act of violence in Lake Arrowhead, I find it shocking you would so blatantly stand on the side of discrimination and bigotry. Orange County residents are targeting your community members for hate and violence. It will, no, HAS come to your city. You have the opportunity to stand on the right side of history and denounce the messages that are being sent to your queer community members. You are discarding that opportunity by including heavily connotative phrases in your human dignity statement, essentially condoning violence against transgender individuals through the inclusion of the phrase "sexual grooming," which far-right radicals wrongfully accuse transgender individuals of doing. Paragraph 3 of the policy on human dignity is irrelevant and bigoted, flouting scientific knowledge.

You know what you're doing, and so do we. The world is watching you. Let your council members speak the truth without censure. WE WILL NOT BE SILENCED.
#30
Switzer, Donna
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: 'Charlie Jackson'
Subject: Item 23-700 against the proposed ballot initiatives on elections.

I would like to speak against the proposed ballot initiatives on elections.

Why are some members of the Huntington Beach City Council pushing for measures that will lead to voter suppression? There has been no evidence of voter fraud in Orange County (see links below).

No evidence of voter fraud. Our elections process protect voter integrity in Orange County.

The worst defense of the proposed changes is that if San Francisco can do something stupid, the so can we here in Huntington Beach. It is a silly argument.

The City Attorney was asked to make a legal assessment for the proposed law, but refused to take any responsibility for estimating the cost of the measures. Further more he asserted that it would not cost anything because private home garages would be used. It is totally irresponsible to ignore the cost of these proposed measures.

These proposed changes will cost the taxpayers of Huntington Beach a huge amount of money; multiple millions of dollars
But as far as I can tell there are only two reasons for the proposed voter ID and related items.

First, it is just a way to get extremist donors to support their re-election Second, it shows that they do not care about the residents of Huntington Beach, and will pursue their extremist values at our expense.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/12/us/politics/california-gop-drop-boxes.html California Republican Party Admits It Placed Misleading Ballot Boxes Around State https://www.ocregister.com/2022/01/25/new-group-raises-false-specter-of-election-fraud-in- orange-county/
New group raises false specter of election fraud in Orange County https://www.ocregister.com/2022/01/25/fact-check-breaking-down-false-claims-of-election- fraud-in-orange-county/
1 Fact check: Breaking down false claims of election fraud in Orange County But many of the new Huntington Beach City Council Memers have endorsed misinformation in the past.
https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/opinion/story/2021-08-27/commentary-save-surf- city-from-disinformation? gl=1*147oep3* gcl au*MTYyODExMjMxNy4xNikyMDQ1MDcO Commentary: Save Surf City from disinformation
Signed by many past City Council Members
Ralph Bauer served on the City Council from 1992 to 2000 and as mayor in 1996-97.

Connie Boardman served on the City Council from 2000 to 2004 and from 2010 to 2014 and as mayor in 2002-03 and 2012-13.

Keith Bohr served on the City Council from 2004 to 2012 and as mayor in 2008-09.

Patrick Brenden served on the City Council from 2016 to 2020.

Debbie Cook served on the City Council from 2000 to 2008 and as mayor in 2001 and 2007-08.

Shirley Dettloff served on the City Council from 1994 to 2000 and as mayor in 1997-98.

John Erskine served on the City Council from 1986 to 1990 and as mayor in 1987-88.

Peter Green served on the City Council from 1988 to 1992 and from 1996 to 2004 and as mayor in 1990-91 and 1998-99.

Jill Hardy served on the City Council from 2002 to 2010 and from 2012 to 2020 and as mayor in 2004-05 and 2014-15.

Tom Harman served on the City Council from 1994 to 2000.

Vic Leipzig served on the City Council from 1993 to 1996 and as mayor in 1994-95.

Linda Moulton-Patterson served on the City Council from 1990 to 1994 and as mayor in 1993-

94. Grace Winchell served on the City Council from 1986 to 1994 and as mayor in 1992-93. 2 #30
Switzer, Donna
From: Keith Ellis < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Resolution Nos. 2023-42, 2023-43, 2023-44 and 2023-45 No to holding a special election for the changes as written. (Agenda item 23-700 on Resolution Nos. 2023-42, 2023-43, 2023-44 and 2023-45) The three y/n questions are a hodge-podge of unrelated topics lumped together seemingly without logical reason.

Voting changes, City Attorney changes, Clerk Qualifications, handling of reported malfeasance...all together in one bundle? That should be split into at least two logical groups...as should Flags, two-year budgets, and clerk/treasurer election timing. If the council feels the suggested changes should be brought before the voters, fine, but do it with logically grouped changes that allow the informed voters to approve/disapprove individual topics as opposed to a deceptively worded bundle of changes. Trying to force these poorly and deceptively written changes through during a Special Municipal Election attached to a Primary Election creates the appearance of intent to confound the issues and deceive the public—in violation of the HB Code of Ethics and the public trust.

Moreover, there is nothing in this package time-sensitive enough to justify rushing them through as written. The changes for the attorney don't go into effect until 2027. The addition of polling places isn't until 2026. I suspect the proponents of these resolutions will argue that the voter id and ballot drop off monitoring are time-sensitive in the name of "election security." That, however, is seeking a remedy when there is no demonstrated harm. (The fact that these changes would be in place immediately while other changes are delayed for years is deceptively absent from the question description) All allegations of significant election fraud in recent elections at the local, state, and federal level have been found to be baseless by multiple courts as well as reviews by state and local jurisdictions-including reviews conducted by Republican election officials.

I urge the council to vote NO today in favor of clarifying the questions to encourage informed public engagement during a regular/planned election.
-Keith Ellis
#30
Switzer, Donna
From: Cathy Caston < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:49 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Re: City Council Meeting for Sept 5, 2023
Dear City Council Members:

I am a long time resident of Huntington Beach and am writing regarding the upcoming City Council Meeting on September 5, 2023.

I strongly oppose the agenda items proposing changes to the City Charter -- there were no public hearings on these items.

These changes to the city charter deny and severely limit our rights as Huntington Beach residents. They compromise voting rights anc make our elections less secure. These changes were done in direct contradiction to the process specified in the City Charter and the City Municipal Code for amending the charter.

The OC Registrar of Voters makes sure that our city and county elections are free and fair.

I objecț to the censure of Council Member Moser. I fully support Council Member Moser and the comments she made regarding the fitness of Gracey Van Der Mark to oversee the Huntington Beach Human Relations Task Force. Ms Mosher is a well-liked member of the City Council and an advocate for all Huntington Beach residents. This politically motivated censure harms the reputation of our city.

Sincerely,
Cathy Caston
Switzer, Donna
From: Hb Mill < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:50 AN
To: [email protected]
Subject: Sept 5th Agenda
Dear Council Members,
I write to the City Council to express my opposition to three agenda items on the September 5, 2023 agenda.

I have been a resident of Huntington Beach for 28 years and have sent 3 children through our public schools. I have voted in every election for the last 36 years and I look forward to voting for the next City Council members. Your vote on these issues will be remembered.

Millie Starks
#30
Switzer, Donna
From: Joanna Weiss < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 9:00 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: City Council Proposals
Dear HB City Councilmembers,
I am writing to express my opposition to the re-writing of the City's Statement of Human Dignity, the elimination of several citizen boards and commissions, the censure of Councilwoman Natalie Moser, ballot measures to ban flying the Pride Flag, and requiring voters to use IDs for city elections (among other voting rights revisions). These proposals are the latest attempts of a concerning trend from the Huntington Beach City Council.. As a champion of democracy and a fierce LGBTQ+ ally, I oppose these measures which would limit democratic participation in our local elections and only further inflict harm on our LGBTQ+ community.

Government has the power and responsibility to promote democracy and to create welcoming and safe environments for all of our citizens, especially those in marginalized communities. Instead, what we have seen from the Huntington Beach City Council is a relentless attack on our democratic norms and the trans and LGBTQ+ community.

I urge the board to reject the proposals to put these measures on the March 5th primary ballot, which would also save the city upwards of $1.5 million.

Sincerely,
Joanna Weiss
#30
Switzer, Donna
From: Lisa Angela Gibilie < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:47 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Vote- NO for the city to take over our elections There have been no credible issues with the way our elections have been handled. It is a very smooth system that people are used to doing. It will cost more than you anticipate, it will cause more confusion and complaints. Don't fix what is not Thank you,
Lisa Gibilie
When I started counting my blessings, my whole life turned around.

Willie Nelson
When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.

Jimi Hendrix
1 30
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Comments Re: 9/5 Meeting
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:07 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Comments Re: 9/5 Meeting
Please reword the fourth bullet as follows: Censuring a council member for questioning the suitability of a colleague to a very important role *destroys* appropriate and responsible oversight.

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 7:38 AM
To: '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: Comments Re: 9/5 Meeting
I'll make it brief:
• Dissolution of commissions that make Huntington Beach a more civil place to live makes residents wonder who you're serving. Please reconsider.
• Discouraging the use of masks and vaccines demonstrates a lack of lessons learned. • There is no demonstrated fact-based need to restrict voting in Huntington Beach. • Censuring a council member for questioning the suitability of a colleague to a very important role is called appropriate and responsible oversight.
• Any statement on human dignity should reflect the entire community, and should not reflect the particular religious or ideological views of individual council members.

I'd venture a guess the majority of registered voters in Huntington Beach don't approve of city council members who breach the public trust, ignore public health needs, restrict voting rights, censure oversight, or limit human dignity with personal views. Remember: We vote. And you will see a tremendous get out the vote effort for 2024.

Elaine Meigs
1 Switzer, Donna
From: Karen Marie Carroll < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:06 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda Items
Mayor Strickland and Members of the City Council
I am writing in opposition to or with serious concern regarding the following items on the 9/5/23 City Council Meeting Agenda: Item 30. 23-700, 31. 23-693, 26. 23-707, Item 27. 23-704, Item 28. 23-733, 15 23-700, and 16. 23-741
Item 30. 23-700- This item marks acceleration of a trajectory putting control of our city into the hands of extremists who are already providing their friends and associates opportunities to profit through secret settlements and now a re-do of bidding for contracts.

What is being proposed appears to build on actions already taken that clearly benefit the new majority - along with their friends and family. Financial gain and political ambition are equally apparent. point to the following:
1) At the outset of your terms, you upped the limits on campaign contributions that give you quite an advantage in campaigns to come. I contributed to several candidates in the last election, and it was difficult for me financially. But I gave the limit and thought it was fair because there were limitations in place for all candidates. The current majority, however, was strategically supported by investors and groups many of which are outside of our city. 2) You propose re-arranging election cycles that would permit City Attorney Michael Gates and his wife Kelly Gates to run together, without reasonable limits on what they could spend together in a very well financed campaign. Included is a reduction of the requirements for City Clerk, which would permit Ms. Gates to run. Moving election oversight from the County to the City Attorney and City Clerk is ridiculous, unnecessary, and expensive. The optics are terrible! Further, it plays to the myth that there is election fraud here, for which there is no evidence.

Items 31. 23-693, particularly points I), J), and K)
This agenda item would change the application requirements for local contracts that open the door for persons, agencies, or firms that organize our local events. Will Code Four and Kevin Elliot be selected to run the 4th of July Parade and other city events too? We have heard that the Blue Angels and other armed forces units arrange airshows without a middleman like Mr. Elliott. That is the way it is done in other locations, such as Seattle.

Item 15. 23-673
I question the change to accept the staff recommendations for federal lobbying consultants. Why accept the lowest ranked vendor to provide legislative analysis for our city? I understand that Mayor Strickland has received political contributions from that contractor. Really, this is the best that Huntington Beach deserves? Could there be any more evidence of political payback? Item 16. 23-741
Cultural issues outside of the those that actually matter to all residents were presented with a strategy of shock. Are you saying the extreme examples you found were in books in our library and schools in our city? I think not. I assure you, most of us do not want you to take on our parenting, just do the normal business of governing our city.
2 Switzer, Donna
From: Monika Calef <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 10:31 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: council meeting Sep 5, 2023
Dear City Council,
I was very disturbed to read in the paper about the three amendments to the charter you plan to discuss in today's meeting. Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend. I strongly oppose all your changes to the city charter. The city charter has worked just fine for many years and does not require your probably illegal changes.

I also strongly oppose the expensive and fruitless anti-housing lawsuits. If the city has that much money to throw away, please spend it on community centers, children's activities, and low income housing. Or how about a community pool? Last but not least I am absolutely appalled about your censuring of fellow council member Natalie Moser. What ever happened to free speech? If you do not wish to answer questions, don't run for city council but as long as Gracey Van Der Mark is our future mayor, she damn well better answer questions regarding the holocaust and her outrageous previous remarks.

Sincerely,
Monika Calef
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 10:23 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Comments on agenda items for 9/5/2023 Council Meeting From: [email protected]<[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 10:21 AM
To: City. [email protected].

Subject: Comments on agenda items for 9/5/2023 Council Meeting Dear Council Members & associated staff,
Please consider my comments, pasted below.

Thank you,
Shirley Nixon
8655 Fresno Circle #501C
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
This evening's council meeting agenda contains a number of items of concern to me, a newer resident of California and Huntington Beach. The Council's recent trend toward tossing-out solid, carefully considered policies and traditions in favor of hastily drawn substitutes is troubling. Below are a few specifics:
• Agenda #16: I oppose the City's attempt to involve itself in determining appropriate materials for its public libraries.
• Agenda #30: I oppose the City's attempt to hastily alter the City Charter. For many reasons, these resolutions should be tabled. Charter amendments deserve more thorough public discussion and opportunities for input before putting them before the electorate.
• Agenda #31: l oppose the wholesale dissolution of long-standing boards and commissions based upon recommendations from a committee that met for a short time and in secret. Good government suffers when elected officials cut off channels for obtaining input from educated volunteers who thoroughly and thoughtfully offer advice and/or collect data on specialized topics.

Switzer, Donna
From: Allie Plum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:31 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda opposition 9/5/23
I oppose #30...#34...#35
City Council please listen to the people who elected you.

Allison E. Plum

MHRC VP
Switzer, Donna
From: Ada Hand <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:31 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Vote No on #30
I am against all of the charter amendment ballot measures. The current City Council is not doing city business, instead taking stands on social issues that will set Huntington Beach back to the 1940s. Back off! --
Ada J. Hand, Secretary
H.B. Mobile Home Resident Coalition
714-717-1294 (cell)
[email protected]
1 Switzer, Donna
From: William Kerry <[email protected] >
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:29 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Huntington Beach City Council
Ladies and Gentlemen of the City Council:

My wife and I have owned our home in Huntington Beach for 39 years. We raised three children in this city. They all graduated from Huntington Beach High School. Huntington Beach has been a place of pride for our family until recently when the City Council began considering a law to ban books. (No library book ever harmed our children or any of their friends) Now it appears that the Council intends to change election laws by making it more difficult to vote. We do not want the Huntington Beach City Council making "moral" decisions about books in the library or "fixing" nonexistent voting "problems". We do not support the far-right agenda of the Huntington Beach City Council. We believe the passage of radical ordinances and laws is damaging to the culture of the City of Huntington and will result in a marked decrease in the value of property. Many future potential residents of the city will see that the schools, libraries, and the voting are controlled by politicians. As a result, many will choose to live in a different community.

Thank You.

William Kerry and Jill Kerry
1838 Lake Street
Huntington Beach, CA
1 Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:05 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: 9/5 City Council Feedback
From: Doug Schneider < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 8:04 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: 9/5 City Council Feedback
To Whom it May Concern:

I am a long-time resident of Huntington Beach and love the community, but have been troubled by the actions of the new City Council majority. The best qualities of our American democracy are justice, equality, and due process of law. Our government is made to represent the electorate. These qualities do not seem to be priorities of the council majority, judging by many recent actions and many more under consideration currently.

Secret ad hoc meetings, concealing the terms of major legal settlements and bypassing public comment on key issues suggest that the council majority does not want the public to know about their actions or to have a voice in them. Inviting more money into the political process as the majority has recently done sends a message that influence is for sale.

I don't have confidence that this council majority will do the right thing, but I am writing to include my voice in the public record. I am opposed to agenda items 16, 30, 31, 32, 34 and 35.

Sincerely,
Doug Schneider
Switzer, Donna
From: Celeste Rybicki < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 7:53 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Disgusted but not Defeated, NO on items 15,16, 22, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35 Dear City Council Majority,
I am sure I'm not the first to mention that the attempt to throw all these issues on the agenda today, the day after a holiday long weekend, is a slimy attempt to sneak them all in without giving the public adequate time to realize what you're doing. I don't believe this will change how you vote, you've proven time and time again you do not care how the residents of Huntington Beach really feel. However, I am writing to have it on record, so you cannot deny that your constituents have reached out in opposition.

I and strongly against censuring Councilwoman Moser. Nothing she said was incorrect or inappropriate, she repeated the same concerns many of us have about the Mayor Pro Tem. I do feel that GVDM lashing out against her, interrupting and calling her a liar was unprofessional and inappropriate. If you're going to consider censure I would direct that towards VanDerMark.

I am against the proposed amendments to the city charter. For a group that ran on keeping the city charter as is... I am so confused as to why this is even happening. I didn't vote for any of you so I'm not particularly shocked or disappointed but I assume many who voted for you do feel deceived.

I am so, so, so opposed to the modified Policy on Human Dignity. It is, to put it lightly, wholly undignified. If this offensive monstrosity passes I expect there to be so much public pushback causing embarrassment (and very likely loss of business) for our city. I can say from personal experience, in the past year I have had 3 pride flags stolen from my front yard and in the past 8 years I have had zero attempts at grooming or anything inappropriate towards my children by the HB librarians or public school system or drag queens, for that matter.

I'm writing this morning, not from a place of fear - because I am not afraid that you four (plus Gates, that's a whole other corrupt mess) can truly destroy our city. I'm writing because I have hope that the good, kind, honest and loving community I know here far far outnumbers you and your small-minded attempts. So here's one more email letting you know we see what you're trying to do. I oppose items 15,16, 22, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35. I oppose your fascist, bigoted power grabs.

Celeste Rybicki
HB resident and mother of 3
Switzer, Donna
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 7:34 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Cc:

Subject: City Council Meeting for Sept 5, 2023
Dear City Council Members,
I am a 25 year resident of Huntington Beach and am writing regarding the upcoming City Council Meeting on September 5, 2023. I strongly oppose the agenda items proposing changes to the City Charter. There were no public hearings on these items. I am curious to learn who proposed them and why.

As a whole the changes to the city charter deny and severely limit my rights as a Huntington Beach resident. They compromise my voting rights and make our elections less secure. Furthermore, these changes were done in direct contradiction to the process specified in the City Charter for making amendments as well as the City Municipal Code.

I have absolute confidence in the OC Registrar of Voters to conduct free and fair elections. If any city council member believes that the last election was anything other than free and fair, it follows that their election to the City Council or the office of the City Attorney was fraudulent and they should resign immediately.

Regarding the upcoming agenda item to censure Council Member Moser. I fully support Council Member Moser and the comments she made regarding the fitness of Gracey Van Der Mark to oversee the Huntington Beach Human Relations Task Force. Van Der Mark has long had relations with far-right groups and people. Van Der Mark participated in a violent protest in the Huntington Beach City Council chambers on April 2, 2018 in which Huntington Beach residents were shouted at, harassed, and intimidated. This very act alone makes Van Der Mark unfit to serve on the City Council much less on the Huntington Beach Human Relations Task Force. I expect no less than a censure of Gracey Van Der Mark at the upcoming City Council meeting.

Regards,
Mary Kyle
1 Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:48 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Sound Governance
Get Outlook for ios
From: Margaret Sloan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:44:44 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Sound Governance
Dear Members,
I believe that the current board majority is not acting in the best interests of the city of Huntington Beach and its citizens.

There are many pressing needs in this city including aging infrastructure, filthy beach restrooms, broken sinks at the beach restrooms, insufficient large tax paying commerce, and lack of police presence to deter street racing to name only a few.

We do not appreciate the self serving energy spent by the current majority to bring forth changes that do not serve the citizens.

It is mind boggling that these members opened the city coffers to pay the private air show cronies before the suit could play out in the courts. It is mind boggling that the city attorney, who seems to have his own political career first and foremost in his attention getting actions now proposes changes to the Charter that could result in even more cronyism in city government.

This same attorney continues to sue, then lose these suits at high cost fighting the housing needs of Huntington Beach.

A backlash is mounting and will surely continue until moderation returns to city government. Please serve the people, not the personal agendas which in fact do not serve the people.

Best,
Peggy Sloan
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Charter Amendments
Get Outlook for ios
From: Kathy Dowling <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 12:12:47 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Charter Amendments
I am opposed to the decisions reached by your so called Ad Hoc Committee! This self appointed group must have input from the community. You cannot lead in a vacuum. The "Fab Four" were against the previous council's Charter Amendments and now you are doing the same thing. Safe Surf City opposes this course of action and so do I.

There is no deliberation for the common good. The four of you vote as a block and do not want or regard input from your community.

This agenda is a travesty! You want to take over voting but you have not financed such a vast proposal. The Human Dignity is revised to your beliefs not the communities. You want to change the City Clerk's job description so that the City Attorney's wife can apply. Does that even sound right. In business, you write the Job Description qualifications based on the role and responsibilities, not the candidates qualifications.

Your plan to Censure a fellow council member is a foolish plan. Ms. Van Der Mark has created her own problems and now she wants the three of you to provide cover.

I will end with my thoughts on the No Masks/No Vaccine proposal. With all the problems we have in this City, this is the best you can come up with?
We will vote again and your actions will have consequences.

Sent from Mail for Windows
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: This makes me sad..

Get Outlook for iOS
From: Sara Walk - <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 12:23:25 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCO STAFF) <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: This makes me sad...

I am so frustrated with what has been going on and to watch it in real life was a disgrace.

I watched the youtube recording of the city council meeting on August 1st, and from a neutral perspective, it's baffling to me that Natalie was so quickly shut down for her question. Simply wanting to know somebody's belief on the Holocaust, and involvement with a racist organization, is NOT unparliamentary nor irrelevant. It's actually the opposite, lol. Why couldn't the question be raised, the answer be given, and things move forward professionally. Mr. Strickland, Mr. Gates and Mrs. Van Der Mark should be ashamed of their ignorance.

Also, Gracey Van Der Mark is causing so many problems for this city and I am sad to say, makes me embarrassed that I live in a place where she is on city council. Natalie Moser had EVERY right to question her. Gracey continues to show a disgusting display of ignorance and the fact that people on city council are wanting to silence Natalie for asking a VERY logical question about whether a person, who is extreme in her thinking, should be on a committee about human dignity doesn't make sense. Gracey's blatant display of disrespect to so many groups of people are well known, just in case you forgot (or turn a blind eye) I am citing some articles below. Just because she deleted any videos or comments online does not mean they did NOT exist.

I am not trying to silence anyone or "cancel" anyone... and if Gracey would have calmly answered or assured Natalie that her concerns are not an issue, that would have been fine... but for the three of you to attack Natalie, who had a valid point to question someone that is known for her extreme views that do NOT align with many in Huntington Beach, is a joke. And these concerns should have been looked at and actually taken seriously not shut down. But again, the majority does what they want, not what is good for this city and its people.

From a neutral perspective... looking at how the city is run, it looks like corruption. Like the majority bullying and doing whatever they want, and this issue of late, with Natalie, is merely a glimpse into the norm... the tip of the iceberg of what is really going on. Which, to be honest... is scary.

For example, what's up with these new amendments?
Why are we trying to digress from the county's approved voting process, and wasting my tax money on voter monitoring?
Why are we all of a sudden diluting the qualifications for city clerk? It sounds like you're trying to get certain people you want, which currently don't qualify, into that position. 1 Why are you trying to "censure" Natalie? Because she is sincerely concerned with potential bias from somebody who has questionable associations and a history of beliefs that may not be inclusive and respectful for all groups? C'mon guys. Please just do the right thing for this city. https://www.ocweekly.com/hb-finance-commissioner-called-blacks-colored-people-on-social-media-2/ https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/news/tn-dpt-me-hb-gracey-20180508-story.html https://ca.cair.com/losangeles/news/cair-la-condemns-orange-county-gop-endorsement-of-school-board-candidate- tied-to-white-supremacists-and-islamophobic-statements/ Sara - Huntington Beach resident
2 Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Oppose Agenda Items #30, #31, #32, #34 and #35 Get Outlook for ios
From: Anne Gollay <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:56:31 PM
To: [email protected]<[email protected]>; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]>
Subject: Oppose Agenda Items #30, #31, #32, #34 and #35 Dear Council Members,
Oppose Agenda Item #30
I am writing in opposition to all Charter amendments as proposed. The Orange County voting process is functioning exceptionally well, and there is no need for the City of Huntington Beach to insert itself into the process at all. There is no valid reason to spend money to "fix" what is not broken. The underlying message of these proposed voting process changes is clearly an attempt to impose the council majority's false beliefs of voter fraud onto the citizens of HB.

It is also clear that Michael Gates is unduly influencing policy and changes to the City Charter to serve his own interests. The citizens of HB need to pay attention here. The City Attorney is an employee of the City, and thereby serves all residents. He reports to the City Council and is not the final say on anything. Where are the checks and balances in these proposed changes to the City Attorney's role? Oppose Agenda Items #31, #32, and #34
Mr. Strickland has demonstrated a very biased and narrow-minded approach to his role as Mayor. He has had ample opportunity to bridge the divides that exist in this city. This is evidenced in his appointment of only his like-minded colleagues on the council to almost every committee, to the exclusion of the minority members. Although, thanks to Mr. Strickland, the minority on the council are not getting to do much on any committee, the minority retains an extremely strong base of support. We would like to see their expertise, intelligence and empathy put to good use on council matters, and not just be shoved aside.

Moser multiple times and didn't give her a chance to complete her thoughts. Also, I didn't catch which council member it was who told Ms. Moser, "well, don't think," but whoever that was deserves to be censured.

Mr. Strickland could have shown some open-mindedness by including one of the non-majority council members on the Ad-Hoc committee to revise the policy on Human Dignity. If he had, perhaps the tone of this entire council might have been changed for the better. Openness and willingness to see and hear others' points of view takes courage, and sadly I don't see that in Mr. Strickland. The dissolution of the Human Relations Committee also reflects a lack of courage on the part of Mr. Burns and Ms. Van Der Mark, and demonstrates that they don't really care about issues faced by ALL 1 residents, only those who agree with their opinions.

To follow up on that, the new draft policy on Human Dignity is appalling. It is clearly discriminating against LGBTQ+ residents and visitors, and in particular, transgender people. It also doesn't address hate incidents and crimes that DO occur in our city against all minorities. I do not understand the fixation on sexual grooming. Again, this is where the majority council members are imposing their beliefs on all residents. As much as you may not like it, minorities of all kinds live in our city, and all have the same rights. HB has a very bad reputation for intolerance and bigotry, and I would not be surprised if this goes against the city during the selection of host cities for the Olympic Games.

Oppose Agenda Item #35
I am also concerned with the ignorance exhibited in Ms. Van Der Mark's "No mask and vaccine mandate" proposal. There are no mandates in place, and there are unlikely to be any in the future. However, Covid-19 continues to take lives, and it has been scientifically proven that masks and vaccines help prevent infections, make them shorter, less serious and reduce fatalities. What is wrong with that? Respectfully,
Anne Gollay
2 Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Agenda Item 30
Get Outlook for ios
From: Jeanne Farrens <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 10:59:42 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Agenda Item 30
Dear Councilmembers:

I urge you to vote NO on Agenda Item 30, submission of 3 Charter amendment ballot measures for voter approval on a proposed March 5, 2024 Statewide Primary Election.

These amendments were created behind closed doors by a so-called ad hoc committee composed of Mayor Strickland, Maypr Pro Tem Van Der Mark and Council member Pat Burns with no expert or community input.

This entire agenda item and its proposals in fact run afoul of California's governing codes 34457 and 34458.

Code 34457 designates that a charter commission (not an ad hoc committee) must propose charter changes and submit such to the voters in a statewide general (not primary) election, and only after submitting copies of the charter changes to voters by mail. Code 34458 presents the other alternative to the process of approving charter amendments. Charter amendments may be voted on in a general election (again, not a primary election), but only after holding two public hearings, advertised in a newspaper and posted in 3 public places 21 days prior to the date of each public hearing. There are other requirements such as holding one public hearing outside of normal business hours. Finally, "the governing body shall not conduct a vote on whether to approve the submission to the voters of the proposal... until 21 days after the public hearing." None of this happened. Whether or not the Council majority who is proposing this amendment was aware of these governing codes or not remains unknown.

What is known, however, is that In their short time on the City Council, the majority council members, Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Gracie Van Der Mark, Casey McKeon and Pat Burns, have proposed some extreme policies, but the 3 charter amendment ballot measures being proposed for voter approval in a special 2024 Statewide Primary Election is the most extreme. At its core, it is a blatant odious attack on the right of every American to cast a vote that expresses his or her choice. One person. One vote. One choice. That is the essence of the sacred Constitutionally guaranteed right of every American.

But the Council majority proposes to take away that choice. The agenda falsely identifies 3 proposed ballot measures. Insidiously inserted in each individual "measure" are actually 3 or 4 ballot issues all of which are unrelated to each other. But the measure in its entirety calls for either a Yes or No vote. So if a voter supports one of the issues but not another there is no way to choose. This appears to have been purposely created by a self-serving Council majority precisely to sow confusion in order to pass the most autocratic - and possibly illegal - proposals in a most egregious and fraudulent attack on the very cornerstone of our democracy - each individual's Constitutionally guaranteed voter rights. 1 Furthermore, this agenda item presents a clear and present danger to the future of democratic elections in Huntington Beach. Not only are the proposals written in such a way as to deny true voter choice, but the proposals themselves present challenges to guaranteeing a free and fair election. In taking away County control of the election - which in fact again might be illegal - the proposals include municipal monitoring of ballot boxes with no explanation or understanding of cost or logistics of leaving the County voting platform and no explanation of the process. Where will those ballot boxes be? Up to now, ballot boxes have been conveniently available throughout the city. They are locked and secured and a voter can track his or her ballot.

Where will the proposed city controlled elections place their ballot boxes? In someone's garage? In a cardboard box? And who will be the election monitors? Proud Boys? The significance of this agenda item cannot be overstated. If passed, this amendment will not just impact any one political party or ideology. This is an attack on EVERY voter.

Agenda Item 30 is a deceptive and dangerous proposal. Every Council member who purports to truly believe in democracy and professes to serve the citizens of Huntington Beach should oppose and reject this item.

Sincerely,
Jeanne Farrens
30 Switzer, Donna
From: Melanie Bergeland < [email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:56 AN
To: [email protected]
Subject: September 05, 2023 City Council - Agenda items for meeting Dear City Council ~
I have the following comments for the amendments:
23-734 Human Dignity
I see no reason to amend the Policy on Human Dignity. The current policy addresses this subject matter in its entirety.
23-700 Measure 1 Voting and Election
I see no reason to change any of Huntington Beach's current voting policies. They have been proven safe and accurate. We should be encouraging people to vote as our right and not impeding the ability to vote.

To downgrade the City Clerk's education requirements to any four-year Bachelor's degree is a great disservice to the city.
23-700 Measure 3 section 303 - Please explain this further. I feel meeting commitments to regularly scheduled meetings is a show of transparency, dedication to office and commitment to the residents.
23-693 I am very concerned that dissolution of many of the citizen committees will negatively impact the citizens of this city. The value added to these groups are: Continue transparency between local government to residents, open communications and exchange of ideas, allow citizens an avenue to understand city operations, and the city is able to tap into experts in any given area for guidance.

Long time resident
Melanie Bergeland
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:07 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Proposed Agenda for Sept. 5
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jeanne Whitesell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 10:19:12 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Proposed Agenda for Sept. 5
Dear City Councils members,
I read the Agenda for the September 5 City Council meeting and want to state my concerns.

First I am appalled at Item 32, the Human Dignity document, which results in NO Dignity for some Huntington Beach citizens. Are we trying to take Huntington Beach back to the Dark Ages? Second, I'm also against Item 22, which will use reserve funds for lawyers' fees. Why are we supporting lawyers to bring more unnecessary lawsuits? There needs to be more information and openness on where this money is going.

Third, I'm concerned about Item 16 which seems to me to be an effort to damage one of the great institutions in HB, our wonderful libraries and librarians.

Other Agenda Items I'm opposed to are 15, 29, 30, 31, 34 and 35.

Sincerely,
Jeanne Whitesell
17922 Shoreham Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
714-846-8978
[email protected]
30 Switzer, Donna
From: Shammy Dingus <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 1:23 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Proposed Amendments to the City Charter
Dear Council,
When reading the agenda material on the proposed amendments to the City Charter, it's hard not to get the impression that either the ad hoc committee members don't know much about election law and how elections here in Orange County are run, or that they they simply didn't care enough to think this through.

The City Charter is foundational; much like a constitution, it specifies how the city's government is organized, assigns the responsibilities to the various departments, and establishes the balance of powers between officials.

Amending the Charter is not like changing a city ordinance — the changes will have far-reaching consequences and may be difficult or impossible to change.

As proposed, these changes would compromise residents' voting rights, make our elections less secure, and would significantly alter the balance of power in our city government. And the City Council majority has done this in direct contradiction to the process specified in the City Charter for making amendments as well as the City's Municipal Code.

The Charter itself specifies that the City Council shall convene a citizen's Charter Review Commission, to consider and recommend amendments as needed. But instead, the current City Council majority appointed an ad hoc Committee of three council members with less than a year's experience each, to draft these amendments. And the ad hoc committee did not hold open meetings or give any notice to the public during its deliberations on the proposed amendments, as required pursuant to Municipal Code section

2.100.110 Open Meetings, and the Brown Act. The citizens of Huntington Beach have been denied their right to meaningful participation in drafting of changes to the Charter.

Specific Problems include:
• Items 1 and 5, regarding the commencement of terms and changes in the political cycle that are purely political, and would have a negative effect in the city's ability to transition through the election of new officers. The elections need to be staggered in order to preserve institutional knowledge and ensure that transitions are not disruptive. • Item 2, which empowers the Mayor to cancel regularly scheduled meetings without good reason, combined with the ability to call unscheduled meetings without a published agenda can only result in less transparency. Residents would have little or no opportunity to review and comment on actions the Council is about to vote on. • Item 4, changing to a 2-year budget does not appear to have any good purpose, particularly in a city facing future deficits and high risks of damages and penalties from pending lawsuits. In fact, since funds the City receives the State are revised annually, it's hard to see how the City could avoid preparing a new budget each year. This past year, the public was only made aware of a deficit and severe cuts proposed in city services less than a month before the budget had to be finalized and adopted. Either the City Council didn't know about the financial problems, or intentionally hid them from the public. In either case, it demonstrates that more transparency in the budgeting process — not less — is required. • Item 6, reducing the qualifications of the City Clerk is ridiculous. Claims that there are problems in its subjectivity are specious. Similar language is used to describe a business degree throughout the business world — and the city has never been unable to find a Clerk using the qualifications currently in place. Declaring no specificity for the qualifications of this key city position, which would allow someone with no business background and a degree in Physical Education or Art History to qualify, cannot possibly be better than the current requirements. • Item 7, "local control" over elections is surely the worst of all the proposed changes. This is where the ad hoc committee's lack of experience, knowledge of election systems, and lack of regard for the logistical challenges and costs of running a municipal election is obvious. • Several of the recommended changes contradict California law, which is apparently a legal fight the council majority is eager to take on.
• Under California election laws, approaching a voter and asking for ID is voter intimidation, a serious criminal offense. Is the City prepared to indemnify and defend each of those poll workers? • Also under California law, changes to a City Charter are only allowed on the General Election ballot — does the City have some secret agreement with the OC Registrar to join the City in violating state election law?
• If these "local control" election protocols were approved, the City would then have to take on the entire burden of running the election — purchasing whatever equipment is required, hiring and training election workers, printing and mailing ballots and voter information, and all the other logistical issues. This process could never come near the proven security and integrity of the systems now in use by the OC Registrar. The proposed "local control" process would NOT make the elections more secure, it would make the city's elections MUCH MORE VULNERABLE TO FRAUD!
• It would also SUPPRESS VOTER TURNOUT. Historically, city- managed municipal elections have very low turnout — only 15-27% of registered voters actually vote, vs. over 60% in a general election.

People don't turn out for a variety of reasons including uncertainty about the date, the shift to polling sites that may be unfamiliar and which require voters to be in a specific precinct, and shortened voting hours which conflict with the person's work or other obligations.
• There would no doubt be lawsuits filed against the city by many of the groups that fight for free and fair elections on behalf of voters. • And it would obligate the city to take on an unnecessary expense of millions of taxpayer dollars for each election in future years. The ad hoc committee surely did NOT think these things through. • The proposed changes that would make the City Attorney's office virtually autonomous are especially dangerous. It's preposterous to consider taking away the City Council's rights to investigate problems independent of the City Attorney. We have already had at least one incident where the City Attorney had a clear conflict of interest. The Council must have the ability to act on its own as needed. And why would the City Attorney's department have protection from budget cuts that no other department has? These proposals amount to a restructuring of the balance of power in the city that completely contradicts the original intent of the City Charter in structuring a balanced system of government. • Other proposed changes — such as forbidding the city from entering into agreements where property taxes are waived in exchange for some other benefit; and incorporating the city's existing flag ordinance into the City Charter, are simply unnecessary and may prevent future City Councils from solving unforeseen problems.

To summarize, these proposed changes to the City Charter are not justified by any existing problem, they do not reflect any sort of citizen input or review (which probably would have exposed at least some of the various fallacies now evident), and moving forward with them now, without further explanation and justification could be disastrous.

Who could imagine that the newly-elected council members, who ran for office on the promise of not attempting to change the City Charter, would move so quickly to change the charter in such dramatic ways with so little thought or preparation?
Sincerely,
C "Shammy" Dingus
Huntington Beach
[email protected]
Switzer, Donna
From: Diane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 1:04 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Oppose Item #30
I strongly oppose moving any of the proposed charter amendments to the primary ballot. They were not drafted in accordance with the city's own rules or charter requirements. There was no citizen commission, only a 3 person ad hoc committee that developed these behind closed doors. None of the proposed charter changes are needed for good governance.
1 30
Switzer, Donna
From: Judy Cawley <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 6:53 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: City Council meeting. Sept. 5th, 2023
I DO NOT agree with the actions being considered by the City Council at tonight's meeting.

Huntington Beach boasts of being a city of "Freedoms". Free people do not negate other peoples views and rights. I have lived in this City for 22 years, and my Grandchildren for all their lives. This City Council is incurring unnecessary costs and wasting the people's time and money on their own narrow, biased, points of view. "We The People" means All the People. Stop mixing your religious beliefs and biases into the City's business. You were elected to serve the best interests of All The People.

Stop wasting our money!
Judy Cawley
19572 Sardinia Lane
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
Sent from Mail for Windows
Switzer, Donna
From: Anne Gollay < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:57 PM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Oppose Agenda Items #30, #31, #32, #34 and #35 Dear Council Members,
Oppose Agenda Item #30
I am writing in opposition to all Charter amendments as proposed. The Orange County voting process is functioning It is also clear that Michael Gates is unduly influencing policy and changes to the City Charter to serve his own interests.

The citizens of HB need to pay attention here. The City Attorney is an employee of the City, and thereby serves all residents. He reports to the City Council and is not the final say on anything. Where are the checks and balances in these proposed changes to the City Attorney's role?
Oppose Agenda Items #31, #32, and #34
Mr. Strickland has demonstrated a very biased and narrow-minded approach to his role as Mayor. He has had ample opportunity to bridge the divides that exist in this city. This is evidenced in his appointment of only his like-minded colleagues on the council to almost every committee, to the exclusion of the minority members. Although, thanks to Mr.

Strickland, the minority on the council are not getting to do much on any committee, the minority retains an extremely strong base of support. We would like to see their expertise, intelligence and empathy put to good use on council matters, and not just be shoved aside.

A prime example of Mr. Strickland's bias is wanting to censure Ms. Moser, after it was very clearly Ms. Van Der Mark who interrupted Ms. Moser to begin with, and began yelling at Ms. Moser. Mr. Strickland and others interrupted Ms. Moser multiple times and didn't give her a chance to complete her thoughts. Also, I didn't catch which council member it was who told Ms. Moser, "well, don't think," but whoever that was deserves to be censured.

Mr. Strickland could have shown some open-mindedness by including one of the non-majority council members on the Ad-Hoc committee to revise the policy on Human Dignity. If he had, perhaps the tone of this entire council might have been changed for the better. Openness and willingness to see and hear others' points of view takes courage, and sadly ! don't see that in Mr. Strickland. The dissolution of the Human Relations Committee also reflects a lack of courage on the part of Mr. Burns and Ms. Van Der Mark, and demonstrates that they don't really care about issues faced by ALL residents, only those who agree with their opinions.

Oppose Agenda Item #35
1 I am also concerned with the ignorance exhibited in Ms. Van Der Mark's "No mask and vaccine mandate" proposal.

There are no mandates in place, and there are unlikely to be any in the future. However, Covid-19 continues to take lives, and it has been scientifically proven that masks and vaccines help prevent infections, make them shorter, less serious and reduce fatalities. What is wrong with that?
Respectfully,
Anne Gollay
2 30
Switzer, Donna
From: Scott Malabarba < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:16 PM
To: regarding multie agent a tems for he sept uncil me MO STAFF, Subject:

Dear Huntington Beach City Council members,
Council members Moser, Kalmick, and Bolton, thank you for your ongoing courage and integrity.

For the council as a whole, my comments on a number of agenda items for September 5 follow.

In (wary) support of 23-732, e-bikes
This looks like a genuine effort to address a real problem that falls with the city council's purview. Excellent, please do more of that!
In opposition to 23-731, censure of Natalie Moser
The Proud Boys is an hate group that harbors criminals, terrorists, and traitors to this nation. Its purpose is to do harm to entire segments of the American population, including tens of thousands of citizens of the city you serve. So, yes, if an elected official has any association with this organization or espouses its beliefs, such as that the Holocaust was a hoax, that is relevant. And it is fair to ask if they are the right person to revise a policy that was authored to take a stand against those very beliefs.

This censure not about civility. It is a blatant attempt to silence a council member who asked a question that some don't want answered. (
In opposition to 23-734, revising the policy on human dignity. "Protect children!" Of course -- everyone wants to protect children.

If you were sincere, you would know that queer and trans youth face drastically elevated risk of bullying, harassment, sexual assault, and suicide, and you would use your position to support and protect them.

Most of us are not looking to the city government to tell us how gender roles should work or what they suppose the differences between the sexes to be. Furthermore, given the history of this city council in attacking librarians and educators, I find this wording around sports to be concerning. Will you next target PE teachers? I am not sure what to make of the paragraph stating that the council will "...vigorously fight criminal activity that risks some one's [sic] freedoms..." Does it mean to imply that the police and city authorities have not been pursuing the apprehension of criminals? Or perhaps, in light of the censure of Ms. Moser, it's a threat: violate our freedom to hurt queer people without consequence and we'll turn the law on you. "...lend your voice in support of treating and respecting all people equally." An admirable sentiment, and | look forward to you all joining me with your voice in support of treating and respecting queer and trans people equally. 1 Let's be honest -- this was never a good faith attempt. It was only ever about erasing the original intent of a policy on human dignity that has been in place for decades. You could just leave it alone and move on.

In opposition to 23-700, special election and charter amendment Prior to and during the June 26 special council meeting, we were told that the city was facing budget shortfalls in the upcoming years and that major cuts across most city departments would be necessary. The city will be paying out 8 million+ dollars in lawsuits. So how can the city afford 1.2 million for this election, plus ongoing and unspecified costs for items like running elections?
The structure of the proposed ballot measures is manipulative. Consistently, I see a prominent voter-baiting item (election takeover, ban Pride flags at City Hall) mixed in with completely unrelated items that look innocuous but add power and reduce accountability for the council majority and city attorney.

Every ballot item is a terrible idea (with the possible exception of the Measure C update, which sounds benign, but at this point who knows?).

Good-faith and well-authored ballot measures would be clearly and simply structured and allow voters to separately choose on unrelated items. This special election will probably happen, so I can only hope that HB votes smarter this time around.

Comment on 23-741, "safeguards" for library materials.

Of course the library staff has asked for more time - you have presented them with an insuperable problem.

The library contains thousands of books that many reasonable parents would agree are inappropriate for young readers: most of the horror, thriller, suspense, and true crime sections; much of fantasy, science fiction, and literature; some history; and the entire romance section (most of us, of course, just pay attention to our kids and don't expect these books to be locked up). If you were sincere, you would be concerned about all of these and not just Genderqueer.

If you were sincere, you would have also noted that commercial bookstores stock the same books. There's little point in "protecting" children from these books at the library if they can just read them at Barnes and Noble. So you'll need to go tell store management that they must rearrange their displays to meet your requirements. And then get sued (again).

I hope some of you have realized that this whole effort is a can of worms that will accomplish nothing and cost the city time, money, and people. You could just make a note to better publicize the library's existing policies and move on.

Comment on 23-726, payouts from litigation reserves
These lawsuits predate current leadership. However, I would hope that upon having to pay out millions of dollars in taxpayer money, the city would learn its lesson and not do it again. Yet, the city is constantly embroiled in lawsuits over housing; the current council has doubled down on its stubborn refusal to comply with decades-old state law. It's not "fighting for HB" if you keep losing.

In opposition to 23-738, anti-mask and anti-vax nonsense This is pure theater. Attempting to override any county or state policies will probably just get the city sued (again). What is most amusing about this item is that the people who are cheering for it never really cared, not even when people were dying of Covid in HB every day. They certainly are not waiting for permission from the city council to rip off their masks. This accomplishes nothing and makes HB look stupid. 2 Comment on 23-693, dissolve various committees and boards I have no background on this matter. Perhaps it is entirely benign. However, in the context of other activities of the current city council, such as 23-700, I am suspicious about the unexplained dissolution of the Environmental and Sustainability Board, the Smart Cities and Technology Committed, and the Youth Board.

Comment on 23-673, IRC contracts
I would never have noticed this were it not pointed out to me. "...staff proposes to recommend to the City Council to approve a 2-year professional services agreement for Federal legislative advocacy services with Van Scoyoc & Associations and another 2-year professional services agreement for State legislative advocacy services with Mercury"
But the plan is to "to execute a Professional Services Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and Stapleton & Associates for Federal Legislative Advocacy Services", the lowest- ranked vendor with just over half the overall score of the recommended vendor? I have no background on this matter. Again, however, in the context of other activities of the current city council, such as 23-700, it looks suspicious and I have to wonder what underlying motives might be at play.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Sincerely,
Scott Malabarba, HB resident
Switzer, Donna
From: Jeanne Farrens < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 11:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda Item 30
Dear Councilmembers:

I urge you to vote NO on Agenda Item 30, submission of 3 Charter amendment ballot measures for voter approval on a proposed March 5, 2024 Statewide Primary Election.

These amendments were created behind closed doors by a so-called ad hoc committee composed of Mayor Strickland, Maypr Pro Tem VanDer Mark and Council member Pat Burns with no expert or community input.

This entire agenda item and its proposals in fact run afoul of California's governing codes 34457 and 34458 Code 34457 designates that a charter commission (not an ad hoc committee) must propose charter change and submit such to the voters in a statewide general (not primary) election, and only after submitting copies of the charter changes to voters by mail. Code 34458 presents the other alternative to the process of approving charter amendments. Charter amendments may be voted on in a general election (again, not a primary election), but only after holding two public hearings, advertised in a newspaper and posted in 3 public places 21 days prior to the date of each public hearing. There are other requirements such as holding one public hearing outside of normal business hours. Finally, "the governing body shall not conduct a vote on whether to approve the submission to the voters of the proposal... until 21 days after the public hearing." None of this happened. Whether or not the Council majority who is proposing this amendment was aware of these governing codes or not remains unknown.

What is known, however, is that In their short time on the City Council, the majority council members, Mayor Strickland, Mayor Pro Tem Gracie VanDer Mark, Casey McKeon and Pat Burns, have proposed some extreme policies, but the 3 charter amendment ballot measures being proposed for voter approval in a special 2024 Statewide Primary Election is the most extreme. At its core, it is a blatant odious attack on the right of every American to cast a vote that expresses his or her choice. One person. One vote. One choice. That is the essence of the sacred Constitutionally guaranteed right of every American.

Furthermore, this agenda item presents a clear and present danger to the future of democratic elections in Huntington Beach. Not only are the proposals written in such a way as to deny true voter choice, but the proposals themselves present challenges to guaranteeing a free and fair election. In taking away County control of the election - which in fact again might be illegal - the proposals include municipal monitoring of ballot boxes with no explanation or understanding of cost or logistics of leaving the County voting platform and no explanation of the process. Where will those ballot boxes be? Up to now, ballot boxes have been conveniently available throughout the city. They are locked and secured and a voter can track his or her ballot.

Sincerely,
Jeanne Farrens
2 30
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 10:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: City Charter and Policy on Human Dignity Meeting: 05Sep3034 Get Outlook for ios
From: karen mundwiler < [email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:49:11 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: City Charter and Policy on Human Dignity Meeting: 05Sep3034 City Council Members for Huntington Beach,
I wish to express my sincere opposition to the items drafted in the two ad hoc committee items that are up for review and vote on 05Sep2023. Specifically:

Charter Review:

Item #7: approximately 25% of Huntington Beach is non-white. By adopting the proposed changes, without concern for the diverse make-up of Huntington Beach, and considering there have been no documented concerns expressed by the Orange County Registrar of Voters regarding the security of our elections, I find this proposal to limit voter polling locations and to require city monitoring to be nothing short of voter intimidation. Shame on you for disrespecting the citizens of Huntington Beach.

Furthermore, and without adequate investigation and justification, this proposal will increase costs to Huntington Beach residents. You must vote NO; this change is inappropriate, unjustified and disrespectful of our rights to a fair and equal election process.

Item #2: City Council Meetings must be cancelled when a quorum is not available. It is inappropriate for any group (majority, minority or otherwise), duly elected to represent the residents of Huntington Beach, to proceed without properly representing all citizens of Huntington Beach. You must vote NO; fair representation and democracy must be upheld.

Item #6: There is no room for nepotism in government. We have appropriate qualification requirements for the City Clerk in place already; there is no reason to make changes. Vote NO.

Policy on Human Dignity:

This policy, as written, suggests that the authors have no respect for people who are gender different. And to the person or persons who wrote this document, I suggest you go to the library and review proper grammar and rewrite this policy prior to calling for a vote.

With regards,
Karen Mundwiler (Huntington Beach homeowner)
8252 Tyler Circle
Huntington Beach, CA 92646
1 Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 10:00 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Oppose Items # 15, 16, 30, 32, 34, and 35 on the September 5, 2023 HB City Get Outlook for iOs
From: Pat Goodman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:26:33 PM
To: Strickland, Tony<Tony. [email protected]>; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Cc: Fikes, Cathy <[email protected]>
Subject: Oppose Items #15, 16, 30, 32, 34, and 35 on the September 5, 2023 HB City Council Agenda Dear Mayor Strickland and City Council,
I submit my comments in addition to my previous email to Oppose Agenda Items # 31 C and # 34, to you with the understanding that not one of you received a majority of eligible votes in the elections in which you were elected to office. With this consideration in mind, I hope that your votes on Tuesday night will reflect the best interest of all of the people who look to you to represent them, and do what is best to have a well-run American beach city in the 21st century.

Oppose # 15- Consider Intergovernmental Relations Committee (IRC) recommendation to approve and authorize execution of Professional Services Contracts with Kahn, Soares, & Conway LLP for State Legislative Advocacy Services and with Stapleton & Associates for Federal Legislative Advocacy Services
Why would the council approve a contract with the least qualified applicant, Stapleton & Associates, per the RFP analysis?
In addition there are 3 contracts identified in items # 26, 27, 28 that are to be rescinded. Why? The RFP process is very costly and time consuming, and in these cases for projects that will benefit residents. Why would the city go back to the beginning of the RFP process. Please explain the need to do this.

Oppose #16, 30, 32, and 35 these items have no place in the operation of a well-run American beach city in the 21st century. These items appear to be political statements addressed to a minority of people and political supporters in city that highlight ideological differences between neighbors and family members and will only serve to anger and agitate the community and stain the reputation of Huntington Beach. Please withdraw these items from the agenda.
1 Oppose # 16 - Redirect staff to return to City Council on October 17, 2023 with actionable policy options regarding City library materials and safeguards We are blessed with an excellent library system here in Huntington Beach with excellent staff, enthusiastic volunteers, and wonderful patrons. Our library has a system in place to review questionable items raised by members of the community. There is a library commission, responsive library staff and ways for parents to monitor their child's book selections. Use the tools in place to address any questions or concerns.

Oppose # 30 - Consider the submission of 3 Charter amendment ballot measures for voter approval at the March 5, 2024 Statewide Primary Election, and the adoption of Resolution Nos. 2023-42, 2023-43, 2023-44 and 2023-45
Please reconsider these charter amendments. You've not engaged the community to identify the citizens' concerns around these issues. Take the time needed to include the public in this process in order for a successful outcome.

Amendment # 1
Voter ID - what's wrong with the current system of signature verification? More In-person voting locations - will there be separate municipal ballots? Will voters be able to mail them to the City Clerk or OC Registrar of Voters? Monitoring (Ballot?) Drop Boxes - who monitors?
Several questions on the election administration, cost to the city, and coordination with the county. What benefit is derived from pursuing the administration of the municipal elections? What are the costs? What problems and challenges have occurred with the current administration of elections in Huntington Beach? How do these measures protect from voter intimidation?
Clarify voters elect the City Attorney as the city's legal counsel free from interference from city officials
I am most concerned with Amendment #1 office of City Attorney amendments.

This is a consolidation of power around the office of City Attorney and a blow to voter protections.

This is a tremendous overreach and consolidation of power including the issues of independence, transparency, accountability by the City Attorney. This office serves the legal interests of the city (the people) and by extension the city council. If there is a conflict of interest by the city attorney's office on a legal matter such as wrongful termination claims from employees and the City Attorney. How can the City Attorney represent and defend the city and her/himself in such a case? The council must solicit legal opinion from an independent attorney outside of the city's employees in order to defend itself. The City Attorney must take direction from the Council and be a resource to the City 2 Manager, Police and Fire chiefs and other city leadership, and if, for some reason he/she cannot fulfill their role to defend the city.

Amendment # 2
Provide that the only flags that shall be displayed by the City on City property are:
the U.S., County of Orange, City of HB flags, and the Pow, Armed Forces flags Adopt a Two -Year Budget
City Clerk * City Treasurer elections to the gubernatorial cycle These are mostly unnecessary, except the adoption of a Two Year Budget. Some economy will be realized. - enough said.

Amendment # 3
Require voter approval of any City transaction that forgives, etc. the collection of property (taxes) in excess of $100,000 per year, except acquisition of property for parks or infrastructure.

Why do we elect representatives? I hope to carry out the business of the city. Why handcuff councilmembers from resources to address inadequate housing opportunities for its residents. The two properties brought in to provide middle income housing and encourage the possibility of living - working - playing in the same city. Why not provide an opportunity for people to live according to their means and aspire to owning a home in the same city? Wouldn't that provide economic advantage to the city in the long term? The # 1 responsibility for the city is to address the housing needs of its residents. You do that through zoning and developer incentives. This action is not forced on any council.

Oppose Item # 31 B, C, D, E, F, and H - this sweeping agenda item to dissolve and consolidate boards and commissions. Huntington Beach takes pride in its citizen participation and volunteerism. Boards and commissions provide support and oversight functions to the city by interested citizens willing to volunteer their time and expertise on particular subjects.

Update exceptions to Sec. 612 (Measure C) to allow certain children's playground equipment, park-related utility structures and public restrooms be built or improved with limitation
Please be careful to not encroach on precious open space.

Update the procedures to cancel a regular City Council meeting 3 Another example of consolidation of power into the hands of one elected official.

Please don't approve this.

Oppose # 35 - Submitted by Mayor Pro Teem Van Der Mark - Resolution Declaring City to be a "No Mask and No Vaccine Mandate" City
The County of Orange has the responsibility, and resources to issue public health safe guards. Viruses don't have any bounds. Please don't meddle in an arena of public health that the city has no expertise or resources to manage.

Thank you for considering my comments.

Pat Goodman
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 20239:59 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Will wonders never cease!
Get Outlook for ios
From: Shirlee Krause <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:32:28 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Will wonders never cease!
City Council Members,
Just when you believe it's safe to attend and/or read City Council Agendas, somebody(ies) try to pull some "fast ones" past well-meaning Huntington Beach residents!
Vote NO on Agenda Item 34: File 23-731 Censure of Natalie Moser.

Seriously? Censuring a person who was merely trying to get the answer from the person appointed by our Mayor to review the Statement on Human Dignity. Come on, that's ridiculous! Since when are sincere questions by a person without malice or intent to harm now needing to be censured? I thought I lived in a democracy here in Huntington Beach, America, yet some wisenheimers who want to rule and dictate their beliefs are always, somehow, trying to sneak past already approved guidelines by professionals for their own personal benefit.

Case in point, The Orange County Health Care Agency is best qualified to decide for the public, not some "hot shot, know-it-alls" who apparently are acting out for self aggrandizing! Vote NO on Agenda Item 35: File 23-735 Re Masks and Vaccines.

Last, but most certainly not least, what's this nonsense about a three-person Ad Hoc Committee reviewing our City Charter? Since when does a minority--ad hoc or not--have the authority?! My goodness, what has our City Council become? I and a great number of seniors like me want to know! Please vote NO on Agenda Item 30 and congratulate yourselves on a great decision.

Respectfully submitted,
Shirlee Krause
[email protected]
1 Switzer, Donna
From: Paula Schaefer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 9:30 PM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Vote NO on Agenda Item # 30; File No. 23-700
Mayor and Members of the City Council:

It is urgent that you vote NO on EACH resolution. This Charter Amendment does not meet the necessary statutory requirements.

This is a poorly thought out and ridiculously expensive proposal that reeks of a power grab by the Ad Hoc Committee. There are multiple reasons to reject the proposed resolutions.

1. The City's Charter in Section 804 states that the City Council shall determine if there is a need to convene a citizen's Charter Review Commission to conduct a review of the City Charter no less frequently than every ten years.

How was this determination made such that an "Ad Hoc Committee" composed solely of 3 City Council members constituted a review of the City Charter resulting in these 9 proposed revisions to the City's Charter? If such a significant number of revisions to the Charter are warranted, why not convene a Charter Review Commission? At the very least involve more than 3 relatively new elected officials! Why weren't HB residents informed of the meetings and allowed to participate, as was done in the past?

2. The proposed Charter Amendments cannot be voted on at the March 2024 Statewide Primary Election because CA Elections Code section 1415 requires that "a city charter proposal proposed by the governing body of a city... on its own motion that qualifies pursuant to section 9255 shall be submitted to the voters at the next established statewide general election pursuant to Elec. Code Section 1200. Section 1200 defines the established statewide general election as the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November in each even-numbered year.

3. Also, CA Government Code section 34458 requires that the governing body of a city or city and county, on its own motion may propose or cause to be proposed, amend or cause to be amended, or repeal or cause to be repealed, a charter, and may submit the proposal for the adoption, amendment, or repeal thereof, to the voters at the next established statewide general election pursuant to Section 1200 of the Elections Code. This does not allow voting on a proposed Charter Amendment at the March 2024 primary election.

4. Further, the vast expansion of the City Attorney's authority within the City's structure, as proposed, creates significant potential problems for future City Councils. How would a future City Council be able to obtain a second opinion on a legal matter if this proposed change is enacted? This is just one example of poorly conceived revisions contained within this agenda item.

The proposed revisions to the City's Charter create problems where none - or minor ones exist and in doing so exposes the City to more litigation, and significant costs that were not budgeted for fiscal year 23/24. The statutory requirements have not been met. Therefore, this City Council must vote NO on each of the 4 Resolutions proposed in Agenda item # 30, file number 23-700 Paula Schaefer
Switzer, Donna
From: Paula Shawa <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 8:31 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Item 30 / Charter amendments / City Council Meeting Sept. 5 I strongly oppose moving forward on the proposed charter amendments. This majority Far Right City Council has no problem spending taxpayer money... $1.2 million? This is crazy.

Paula Shawa, 16822 Edgewater Lane, HB
Switzer, Donna
From: Levin, Shannon
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 8:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Subiect: Fwd: Agenda Item #30
Get Outlook for ios
From: Kathy McGuire <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 4, 2023 7:52:54 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) < [email protected]> Subject: Agenda Item #30
The city charter is working fine. None of the proposed changes are solutions to problems we actually have. Unnecessary. Vote no.

City Council/Public Financing AuthoritySeptember 5, 2023

City Council/Public Financing Authority
September 5, 2023