1 Moore, Tania
From: Che Chereskin <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2023 11:56 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: city council agenda items for 10/17/23
Modification of library policy
I have reviewed the PowerPoint prepared by city government staff (I believe) and have no serious objections to it although I think that it is unnecessary. At a time when resources are limited, it seems like a waste of time and money to have two groups doing the same job: th e city librarians and the city government staff. In my opinion, the Huntington Beach Library staff already do a great job. I am very proud of our city library system and what it offers.
Procurement of books for the library
I have also reviewed 2023‐41 and strongly object to the proposals therein. Al though not stated, I assume that "child" is defined as someone under the age of 12 based upon the PowerPoint discussed above. However, young girls start to menstruate at around age 9 (or even younger) and thus, perhaps more than any other group, have a need for information on sexual ma
tters. Likewise boys also have a need for factual material on aspects of sexuality. The proposed restrictions would deprive young people of a reliable source of information on sexuality just when they need it most! They will likely be able to get information from the internet, bu t anyone can put something on the internet so information from that source is potentially less accurate.
Although it would still be possible to access material through an adult, some young people may not want to involve parents or other adults while they are figuring things out.
Changes to City Charter
Finally, I belie
ve putting the proposed changes to the city charter to a vote should be postponed until it can be done economically. There is nothing urgent proposed. Furthermore, the legality of requiring specific identification for voting seems to be in question. It seems that this issue should be resolved before putting it before our citi zens for a vote.
Sincerely,
Che Chereskin
10/17/2023
SS #9 (23-878)
1 Moore, Tania
From: Chris Varga <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 8:38 AM
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: City Council Meeting 10/17/23 comments
Comments on City Council Meeting 10/17/23
Agenda Item 9 (23‐878) & 20 (23‐879)
Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen, Listen. The four conservatives on the council apparently do not have ears. They never listen to the majority of public comments. Now you don’t even listen to staff recommendation!
NO on all these actions
that attempt to control our public libraries. Controlling the libraries should not be the concern of the City Council. We have professional library personnel that are empowered to handle these issues. This is political theater. MAGA agenda item. Stay out of our libraries.
Agenda Item 21 (23‐894) ‐ While we can all agree that what is going on in the Middle East is terrible, this agenda item is nothing more that poliƟcal theater. Van der Mark aƩempt to show that she is not anƟsemiƟc. This is not a concern of the day to day needs of the people that this council serves. Stop the show!
Sincerely,
Chris Varga
HunƟngton Beach
1 Moore, Tania
From: Karen McRae <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 10:46 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Comment re: Agenda item 23-878
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing today to voice my objection to the Huntington Beach City Council’s decision to censor books at the Huntington Beach Public Library. This library serves all residents of California, regardless of where they live, so long as they have an address in California. Books are tools for learning about and understanding complex issues. It’s important for people, young and old, to see themselves reflected in a library’s books. Individuals have a right to choose what books they want to read; parents have a right to guide their children’s reading and then support them through discussion. No individual has a right to make that decision for anyone else - no parent, no city council, has a right to dictate what books other people’s children are allowed to read.
Removing, banning, or censoring books from public libraries is a slippery slope to government censorship which goes against our nation’s democratic commitment to freedom of expression. Please reject any efforts to ban books. Allow individuals and families to make decisions about what they can read and believe.
Thank you,
~Karen McRae
Westminster, CA
1 Moore, Tania
From: K Carroll <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 10:50 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF)
Subject: City Council Meeting 10/17/2023
Dear Mayor Strictland, Pro Tem Gracey Van Der Mark, Pat Burns, Casey McKeon and others.
I support the following items and appreciate your efforts in a majority vote.
23‐871: Ballot Measures.
Voting system needs integrity. We know that dead people have voted and there has been evidence of
vote harvesting. You need an ID for everything of importance. Why not add integrity to our voting system. Many states already do it and I would recommend going a step further with e‐verify or fingerprinting i.d. I was just at DMV to get my DL renewed and had my fingerprint taken. Shouldn't everyone want to protect their identity and rights associated with you as an individual. The financial investment is well worth it. If you want to talk about wasted money, let's talk about the Pipeline Purchase and sale, OCPA Scam, Elan JPA..yes, the Council knew about forfeiting over 500 mil in tax dollars. Wow, how the City could have benefitted with those tax dollars!
Dan Kalmick, I‐9's (required for work authorization) require a photo I.D. No exceptions. Please stand corrected from your previous reference. I might add, that as an HR Director since the law went into effect in 1986 I have seen plenty of fake I.D.'s and Work Authorizations, and that is why I would like to reiterate that e‐verify or better yet fingerprinting should be used.
I have seen plenty of fake I.D.s, D.L.'s, and work Authorizations and that is why I would like to reiterate that e‐verify or fingerprinting should be used.
23‐894: Hands down support. Thank you Pro Tem Van Der Mark for bringing this forward.
23‐878: Thank you again for bringing this forward Pro Tem Van Der Mark. This is not a book ban
We need to protect our kids and parents need to be involved in books being available their minors. This was not in the libraries when my kids were growing up and we went to the library all the time. There is no way that I want my grandkids subject to this or available to other adult authorization availability of this other than the parent. This is a topic all over you tube ..the fight is on for the kids safety all over the U.S. Many of these books are pornographic. Even adult porno magazines have protections against distribution to kids. This is a parental right. Government should not making available porno to kids or gender identification, sexual preference without parental consent.
With respect, thank you.
Kris Carroll
1 Moore, Tania
From: Lynne Deakers <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 2:44 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Study session Oct 17 item #20 OPPOSED
I am aghast that certain city council members want HB to return to 20th century and before with regard to city government appointing an oversight board to review public library books and whether or not they are appropriate for my children!! I have a masters degree in Library Science and Information Technology (UCLA 2001.) I never thought I would see the day when my own community would resort to such archaic ideas about books. Let the professionals do their job. If you the parents do not want to let your children read certain books that is your right but do not ruin it for the majority who want freedom to read up held. We know how to talk to our children about what they are reading and believe it is our fundamental right to have full access to the books our library professional select.
Freedom to read is a fundamental right! How dare you propose a panel of community volunteers be the judge of what my family can and cannot read.
Lynne Deakers
Huntington Beach
1 Moore, Tania
From: Fikes, Cathy
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 11:03 AM
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: Public Comment Items 18 & 19, Tuesday, October 17, 2023
From: qw <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2023 10:11 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <city.council@surfcity‐hb.org> Subject: Public Comment Items 18 & 19, Tuesday, October 17, 2023
Dear City Council,
I support Item 18. Please, following visibility requirements & riding on the correct side of the road must be better enforced.
I oppose Item 19.
No. 1 - If there were forged signatures at a voting booth, investigators & counter-identity theft analysis should be at hand to the registrar of voters. Voter ID & monitors would much more easily be compromised at any time & drastically increase the possibility of large-scale voter fraud. According to the Heritage Foundation there were only 6 cases of voter fraud in California in 2022.
No. 2. - This item doesn't allow International Maritime Signal Flags to be flown on city hall.
No. 3 - This item allows the city charter to be summoned as an agreement to cancel meetings regardless of a city council vote. This increases the likelihood of mishandling core functions & states of emergency.
Non-agendized.
Please refill the empty Boston Market & surrounding commerce at Golden-Warner Centers accordingly, this is a content area. Not attending to basic commercial duties is a recurring question I have.
I oppose Items 9 & 20 - Please let the librarians do their jobs according to the law.
I oppose Item 21 - There's no executive order from the president for city councils to take positions on Israel vs Hamas. There could also be false information. Out of respect for our military operations, please stick to city matters.
Please don't limit prayers, education & ideas. Once again, I urge for a major increase in archaeological dig sites for undiscovered technology.
I hope for consensus to continue being established.
- Ben P.
1 Moore, Tania
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 4:59 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Item 2023-532
Importance: High
Terry Rose, Huntington Beach resident since November 1983, homeowner.
I am opposed to item 2023‐532.
To begin with, the 4 members of the city council, who are in favor of this item, needlessly spent our city’s money on a study that never needed to be conducted. The findings, themselves, indicate that this item should not be passed.
In the last 5 years, there has only been 5 challenges. In 2023, there has not been any to date. There is no valid reason to spend money setting up a review board, making children prove they were over the age of 12, and requiring parental permission for anyone under 18 to access any materials with “sexual” content. What is the fiscal impact to the citizens if this item passes? Who will monitor the ages of the children? How will someone under the age of 18 prove they have parental permission? And who will decide what books are allowed? Perhaps if Ms. Van Der Mark had some sexual education, she would not have been a teen mom. And not to mention the 21 political appointees…would the voters of HB get to choose them, or would they just be your buddies, Mayor Strickland? For a foursome who ran on less government intervention and no changes to our city charter, you definitely haven’t been true to your words…nor, in my opinion are you working for the good of the whole. It’s obvious from all of the council meetings I have attended and spoken at that you four certainly don’t “play nice in the sandbox.”
The fact that this item would allow the Review Board Members to simply remove books they don’t like is taking away our rights and bringing us back in history to when book burnings were conducted. The fact that “sexual content” is not defined, is also concerning to me. Who will define it? My definition of “sexual content” may be different from yours Mayor Strickland or yours Mayor Pro Tem , VanderMark….so, can I be on the committee?
Why are you determined to bankrupt our city?
1 Moore, Tania
From: Sue Welfringer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 8:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Correspondence regarding the Study Session
I applaud and appreciate our library staff for all the work they have conducted to accommodate this request from city council. I believe their soluƟon of creaƟng a new Parental Control Library Card is a simple and fair soluƟon. That gives parents the safeguards Mayor ProTem Vandermark has requested. CreaƟng a Parental Control Library card puts the responsibility back on the parent, where it should be and does not challenge the experƟse and professionalism of our library staff. This soluƟon also protects books from being arbitrarily banned from the collecƟon.
With this soluƟ
on in mind, clearly it makes sense to pull Item #20 – ResoluƟon 2023‐41 from the agenda.
With best regards,
Sue Welfringer
1 Moore, Tania
From: Paula Schaefer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 9:22 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: 10/17/2023 Study Session - Item # 23-878 and Agenda #20 (23-879) Mayor and City Council Members:
Why is the Study Session material NOT only presented at the Study Session and not also agendized for the City Council meeting? It would seem that the Study Session material should accompany Agenda Item 20 (23‐879) which asks
the City Council to vote on the
proposed "policy"?
I urge you to also have City Staff present the Study Session materials at the regularly scheduled City Council Meeting since Agenda Item # 20 (23‐879) addresses this issue. OR, postpone action on Agenda Item # 20 (23‐879) and reschedule it for a later City Council
meeting. Ideally, you are urged to forget this book banning nonsense altogether.
It is unacceptable to have a Study Session on this important topic and not have the same material presented at the City Council meeting at which the Council members are asked to vote on this significant topic.
This
is yet another example of the haphazard manner in which the City Council's agendas are prepared.
Paula A. Schaefer, HB resident
‐‐
Paula Schaefer
1 Moore, Tania
From: Scott Malabarba <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 11:12 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: in opposition to charter amendments and library book bans
Dear HB City Council,
Council members Kalmick, Bolton, and Moser, thank you as always for your efforts.
For the others, I have a few words.
Regarding 23‐894
I neither oppose nor support this item. If the council wants to condemn a horrific terrorist attack, okay then.
But are you going to condemn the antisemitic hatred that continues to plague Huntington Beach, such as that spoken at the June council meeting by supporters of Mayor Pro Tem Van Der Mark? And did you not just dismantle the statement of human dignity that was created to oppose such hate?
This resolution is obviously insincere and capitalizes on the deaths of thousands of people to drive your weird culture war.
In opposition to 23‐871
Much has been said about these proposed amendments, and after four rounds of special meetings I have little to add.
But let's review:
Inflammatory culture war triggers deceptively bundled with innocuous‐looking procedural changes that enable nepotism and corruption.
Ridiculous rhetoric about non‐existent voter fraud, expensive and illegal election procedures, and blatant voter suppression.
Flag restrictions clearly driven by hatred of queer people.
A mysterious and expensive push to get these items on the special election instead of just waiting for November.
Frequent, abrupt text changes and council meeting procedure irregularities.
Sweeping charter changes proposed by a group that campaigned against charter changes.
The re‐introduction of the very changes this group campaigned against.
Charter changes that take away from future councils the choices that this one made the moment you were elected. 2 What's the takeaway? Again, insincerity. Even the people who voted for you can't trust you, because you're manipulating them to give yourselves more power.
In opposition to 23‐878 and 23‐879
The attacks on the library and its staff were always gross, reckless, and in bad faith.
Deliberately exposing children to pornography ‐‐ or "infecting" them with it, in your words, is a serious crime. If there were any real suspicion of this, the police would be involved. So you don't really think that is going on at the library. If you did, the proposed measures would be completely inadequate.
You continue to insist that you aren't banning or censoring books, while simultaneously proposing to do exactly that.
Now you've proposed an entire board of censors, appointed by yourselves with no qualifications for the role. In fact you'll be challenged to find anyone knowledgeable about libraries or children's books for your censor board, because we all think it's an abomination and want no part of it.
You talk about "sexual content" and "obscenity" when it's clear that what you mean is "queer people". Even your supporters get that much ‐‐ they made their hatred clear at the nightmarish June meeting.
We all know who's next on your hit list. Once you're done erasing queer people from the library and making it harder for young people to learn how their own bodies work, you'll go after books by or about people of color, books that touch on racism or misogyny, books that attempt to tell an honest history of the United States. Because "CRT".
You talk about parental choice. Yet all you propose to do is take away choice. Parents who want to follow their children around the library and choose books for them can do that right now. Parents who want to monitor every book their child checks out can do that right now. Parents who want to sit next to the aquarium with their preschooler while letting their eleven‐year‐old browse the middle school section will not be able to, because you don't think they should have that choice.
Across town, Barnes and Noble has the same books on display, with no age restrictions. If you were at all sincere, you'd make an ordinance restricting how commercial bookstores stock and display their wares, because that would be necessary to "protect" children from the "pornography" sold there. But you won't, because a) Barnes and Noble would sue you into oblivion and b) you're not sincere.
Children are in fact threatened by exposure to pornography (the real kind, not books with gay people in them), to sexual predators (real ones, not people who disagree with you), to violent and extremist content, to peer bullying and other harmful influences ‐‐ on social media. We know that you know how vile and how readily available this content is (since one of your number, infamously, kept a collection of it for "research"). Yet you pretend that the internet doesn't exist, and instead of supporting the educators who teach children how to keep themselves safe online, you terrorize them.
The four of you are undoubtedly going to vote for the charter amendments and library nonsense no matter what your constituents have to say. Tomorrow's council meeting is going to be a trench war. And it won't end there ‐‐ you have a long
and bitter road to walk before these horrible ideas are made real. I can't imagine why you put yourselves or the city through this.
Sincerely,
Scott Malabarba
HB resident
3 1
Moore, Tania
From: Sydney Cook <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2023 8:07 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Study Session and Item 20
Dear Council Members:
I am writing in regards to Study Session (23‐878) and Agendized Item 20 (23‐879).
I have lived in Huntington Beach for a little over two years now. My family and I are happy to be a part of this community and I feel fortunate to
get to raise my children here. I am a mom to two young children and we visit the children's library on average twice per week. We have visited 4 out of the 5 branches and are beyond satisfied with the knowledgeable library staff, the diverse selection, and the amazing programming (that I know takes so much time and dedication). During my visits ‐ books are properly placed and organized. I do not fear my child will come across anything inappropriate. Granted, I am there to monitor and if there is something I do not want my child to read I will respectfully put it back. Even as my children grow I will continue to take responsibility for their access but I want them and myself to have the choice to make the decision about what we read.
After reviewing the research findings from the study session presentation regarding the rigorous publishing process and the Collection Development Policy/Request for Removal process on the city website I believe that there are existing safeguards in place. I trust our librarians, with their training and expertise, to make informed decisions regarding selection. And most importantly, I believe it is my responsibility (along with other parents/guardians) to monitor and take responsibility for the appropriateness of our children's choices.
Thank you,
Sydney Cook