From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Item 19-24-551 subsection 8
Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:18:38 PM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Joe Bali <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 10:07:48 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Item 19-24-551 subsection 8
Hello HB CITY COUNCIL.
I object and do not approve item 19-24-551 and subsection 8 and the land use sub areas map.
Joe Balistreri
Huntington Beach, CA
9/3/2024
19 (24-551)
From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Agenda for Sept 3 meeting
Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:19:18 PM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Martha Lumia <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 12:22:01 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Agenda for Sept 3 meeting
My husband and I just moved to Huntington Beach, specifically to Huntington by the Sea, in November of 2023 to he closer to our kids. I can assure you this NOT affordable living!! We STRONGLY object to item 19 on the Agenda which would rezone Section 8 to commercial and possibly up to 3 story buildings, "in line with" down town. We are not downtown. There are wetlands here, which would be majorily impacted, as well as the residents, such as my self, who live here.
VOTE NO ON AGENDA ITEM 19
Martha Lumia
From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Please DO NOT APPROVE
Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:19:28 PM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Kathleen Alt <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 1:09:02 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Please DO NOT APPROVE
asking that the Council to not approve Subsection 8 (attached) shown on the LAND USE SUBAREAS MAP (attached) and not approve the LAND USE SUBAREAS MAP.
From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: No On Item #19, 24-551
Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:20:24 PM
Attachments: 2024-09-03 City_Council_Agenda.pdf
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Summer Jeter <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 10:13:35 AM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: No On Item #19, 24-551
Good Morning,
I am writing you all today to express my concern about the upcoming city council agenda on Tuesday the 3rd, specifically item #19, 24-551.
Cabrillo Mobile Home Park has been my home for over a decade and I am voicing myself against item #19, 24-551, and the proposal for subsection 8 for obvious reasons. One of those reasons is that this is our home, and it is not only ours but also the many endangered species.
As someone who grew up in Huntington Beach, I am extremely disheartened to hear that the displacing of long-time residents is on the table, and I ask the council to NOT approve either of the two proposals mentioned above.
I also suggest reaching out directly to the residents in the affected parks to learn about us rather than vote as if we aren't humans who have built our lives in this park.
I appreciate your time and consideration.
Thank you,
Summer Jeter
A resident of Cabrillo MHP for over a decade
From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Item 19
Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:20:34 PM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jane Jones <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 9:21:14 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Item 19
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have been a homeowner in Cabrillo since 2006. In considering this issue, please think about those of us who will not be able to relocate in Huntington Beach, which we love, because of prices. Many may have to leave California entirely, thus wiping out more tax revenue for the city and state.
California has lost many people already and should not have our city helping to push people out.
As to the cultural loss, the “look” of Huntington Beach will be forever changed. Greed will win and quality of a certain hang ten life style will be lost.
I hope you will be the bulldogs you have been when dealing with the State. Don’t back down from high density pushes.
Sincerely
Jane Jones
From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Opposition to Item 19 on Agenda for Council meeting on 9-3-24 Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:20:43 PM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Tim Geddes <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2024 10:24:21 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Opposition to Item 19 on Agenda for Council meeting on 9-3-24
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I have been a resident of Southeast Huntington Beach for over forty years. I served on the board of the Southeast Neighborhood Association twenty years ago to help preserve our quality of life and coastal environment. I have been involved in numerous issues since, including the Poseidon Desal Plant, the ASCON toxic waste dump, the Tank Farm property use, and resident issues along Pacific Coast Highway. I served on the city's Mobile Home Advisory Board which represented manufactured housing homeowners in both the Cabrillo and Huntington By The Sea mobile home parks at PCH and Newland. Both the quality of life and the coastal environment protection of these residents and homeowners would be adversely affected if Subsection 8 of the Item (especially Subarea #7) is implemented. As opposed to property near PCH and Beach Blvd. (Subarea #8), redesignation of Subarea 7 could eventually displace hundreds of homeowners whose dwellings are among the most affordable in the city and certainly along the coast from Beach Blvd. to Brookhurst St. There would be no place for many of these residents to go to acquire homeownership in the area. Many are seniors who have lived here for decades.
Would the City contemplate provisions of the city's Mobile Home Park Conversion Ordinance to assist any displaced manufactured housing homeowners? Would other facets of Subsection 8 allow for residential development despite restrictions imposed by the State and the California Coastal Commission along the stretch PCH in SEHB previously mentioned? Already, the CIty Council has refused to look before it leaps as far as violations of County and State laws. That is why we are fighting or dodging lawsuits from several directions.
I urge you to pull Item 19 from the Agenda for Tuesday or at least pull Subsection 8 until further review is initiated over its effects on coastal residents.
Plunging ahead and inviting further lawsuits and legal entanglements is not prudent decision-making when considering the best interests of our community.
Sincerely,
Tim Geddes
[email protected]
(714) 478-0168
From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Subsection 8 on the LAND USE SUBAREAS MAP - City Council Agenda for September 3, 2024-Item 19 24- 551
Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:21:01 PM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Jonathan Freeman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2024 1:02:38 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Subsection 8 on the LAND USE SUBAREAS MAP - City Council Agenda for September 3, 2024-Item 19 24-551
Dear Huntington Beach City Council:
As a concerned citizen, I request that you not approve Subsection 8 as it appears on the agenda for the September 3, 2024 meeting.
It is my understanding that approving Subsection 8 would eliminate the Huntington By The Sea, Cabrillo Beachfront Village, and the Waterfront RV Resort.
If approved, this surprise move will be devastating to the current residents. No time has been allotted to study the ramifications of this proposal and to allow dissenting opinions to be presented.
Please consider allowing additional time for further study and public comment before approving Subsection 8.
Sincerely,
Jonathan P. Freeman, Ph.D.
From: Levin, Shannon
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: City Council Agenda item #19
Date: Saturday, August 31, 2024 6:21:16 PM
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Allie Plum <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2024 1:47:09 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: City Council Agenda item #19
To all duly elected City Council members,
As a resident of HB and one of the 17 Housing that’s affordable MH communities, I respectfully request you pull the item for further examination. Also there needs to be more time for the residents to be able to attend a Public meeting.
Thank you for all the fair and just actions in the future for HB.
Sincerely,
Allison E Plum
Del Mar Estates
HB, CA
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: For the record - City Council Meeting 090324
Date: Monday, September 2, 2024 10:00:38 AM
Importance: High
Dear City Council Members,
It is obvious to me that our city attorney, Michael Gates, is the ringleader of the” posse” consisting of councilmembers Van der Mark, Burns, Strickland and McKeon…and it is obvious to me that what Mr. Gates is trying to do, does nothing to benefit our city and in fact, causes more unnecessary spending that only hurts the taxpaying citizens of Huntington Beach as well as our reputation as a friendly place to live and visit. I have walked past the parking spaces for our councilmembers, city clerk, city attorney, etc. at all times of the day and all days during the work week for over a year. Only once, have I seen Mr. Gates’ car parked in his spot. That leads me to question: does he really work? In addition, the debacle with the Air Show beginning with the lawsuit and more recently with the agreement looks like payola to a buddy or a big contributor. Why should the air show have greater benefits and concessions, at our cost, than any other event that takes place in Huntington Beach? Any why isn’t it called the Huntington Beach Pacific Air Show? Before Michael Gates, Jennifer McGrath, who served for 12 years, consistently received plaudits for her work to reduce outsourcing and save the city money, whereas Michael Gates has done just the opposite.
I would like to go on the record to say that Mr. Gates should resign his position so that the citizens of Huntington Beach can elect a City Attorney who will work for the good of the whole not for his or her own self-interests.
I would also like to go on the record in opposition to Items:
19: 24-551, the zoning map amendments
20: 24-622, the parents right to know
21: 24-617, establishing a flagpole at Baca Park in honor of Vietnam Veteran Medal of Honor Recipient John P. Baca
22: 24-624, establishing tobacco retailer regulations
In my opinion, Item 19 would change the current zones, would most likely cost the city money to do so and doesn’t really seem necessary. Item 20 infers that the city of Huntington Beach has authority over education policies and practices, which it doesn’t. It also gives the City Attorney the ability to represent individual and/or private plaintiffs against the state rather than representing the city as a whole which would not only be potentially very costly but also is in violation of our City Charter. Once again, this could open up more costly lawsuits from the state. When will Gates stop wasting our money?
Item 21 goes against what councilmembers Van der Mark, Strickland, Burns and McKeon voted on regarding flags flown on city property. If this item gets passed, it shows clear favoritism of one councilmember to pass his pet projects and also once again, shows how non diverse and non-inclusive these 4 members of our city council are: NO to the Pride flag for 6 weeks; YES, to a John Baca flag forever. And it seems only 2 people (out of almost 200,000 citizens of Huntington Beach), one definitely a buddy of the “posse” are requesting this. In addition, it will cost the city money that could be spent on more important things, like our infrastructure.
Item 22, proposed by councilmember McKeon goes from the ridiculous to the absurd. Did he come up with this idea in a dream? While it’s true that cigarette smoking is the most preventable cause of death in the US, it is a waste of time and money to even study this proposal. The state of California is already taking steps to reduce illegal sales of tobacco products to minors so, why are you wasting our time with this Casey? Don’t you have better things to do?
In conclusion, councilmembers Van der Mark, Strickland, Burns and McKeon, it would be great if you stopped serving yourselves and started serving the city you claim you love before you put us into complete bankruptcy.
Terry Rose
40+ year resident and homeowner
PS. Have you seen what our state Senate did this past week? August 30, 2024
(SACRAMENTO, CA) – Today, Senator Dave Min (D-Irvine) announced that the Assembly passed Senate Bill (SB) 1174, which places a ban on local governments imposing voter identification (ID) requirements in local elections. The legislation prevents a patchwork of varying election requirements across the state and reinforces the State of California’s exclusive jurisdiction on the issue.
“This legislation makes clear that election integrity and voter eligibility requirements are exclusively up to the State of California,” said State Senator Dave Min. “We cannot have 100 different charter cities making up 100 different sets of voting rules, based on fringe conspiracy theories. I have repeatedly told the Huntington Beach City Council members pushing this issue that if they were to produce any evidence of widespread voter fraud, I would lead efforts to change California’s voter eligibility rules. They have not produced any such evidence. I am grateful to my colleagues for their overwhelming support for this bill, and I am hopeful that the Governor will sign SB 1174 into law later this year.” In March, the City of Huntington Beach approved a charter amendment that would implement voter ID requirements in City elections starting in 2026. If signed into law by the Governor, SB 1174 would nullify Measure A before it is enacted.
State Senate Passes California Freedom to Read Act, Targeting Book Bans at Public Libraries
August 29, 2024
(SACRAMENTO, CA) – Yesterday, the California State Senate passed Assembly Bill (AB) 1825 authored by Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance) and coauthored by Senator Dave Min (D-Irvine). Known as the California Freedom to Read Act, the bill is designed to fight back against book bans that silence communities of color and LGBTQ voices. AB 1825 would prohibit public libraries from banning books based on partisan or political reasons, viewpoint discrimination, gender, sexual identity, religion, disability, or on the basis that the books contain inclusive and diverse perspectives.“California has an obligation to protect the fundamental right of access to diverse and inclusive books and library materials for everyone. The freedom to read is not only a fundamental right under our constitution, it’s at the heart of our nation’s democracy,” said Senator Min. “Censorship and book bans are not new in America. At an earlier, uglier time in our history, bans were placed on works by Shakespeare, the Diary of Anne Frank, and even Robin Hood. Today, in Huntington Beach and across the state, we’ve seen book bans take aim at the lived experiences and voices of LGBTQ and people of color. That’s why the passage of AB 1825 is so important, and I am so incredibly proud to work alongside my colleague Assemblymember Muratsuchi to defend the freedom to read and get this important bill to the Governor’s desk.”
“I am honored that the California Freedom to Read Act is now awaiting the Governor’s signature. Our freedom to read is a cornerstone of our democracy, and libraries provide a special place in the public's civic education. Unfortunately, there is a growing movement to ban books across the country, including in California,” said Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi. “Book banning proponents are disproportionately targeting materials containing the voices and lived experiences of LGBTQ and communities of color. We need to fight this movement to ensure that Californians have access to books that offer diverse perspectives from people of all backgrounds, ideas, and beliefs.”
According to the American Library Association's Office for Intellectual Freedom, challenges of unique titles in the United States increased 65% from 2022 to 2023, reaching the highest ever level recorded. In California last year, the ALA reported 52 challenges to 98 titles in public libraries and school libraries. A total of 47% of all book bans have primarily targeted LGBTQ+ and black indigenous people of color.
Please don’t get us into more lawsuits!!!!!!!!!!!!!
From: Chris Varga
To: [email protected]
Subject: City Council Meeting Comments for 9/3/24
Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 7:34:57 AM
Huntington Beach City Council: The following are comments to City Council Meeting on 9/2/24
Agenda Item 19 (24-551) – No to this agenda item. Come up with a state mandated housing plan to first!
Agenda Item 20 (34-622) – No to the Parents Right to Know – The City Council should stay out of the school. This is not in their roles and responsibilities. This is a non-problem. Quit with these MAGA agenda items
Agenda Item 21 (34-617) – No to another flag pole for the city to maintain. The war hero has a park named after him. This is an unnecessary expense in a city with budget issues.
Agenda Item 22,24-624) – No to more regulations on Tobacco sales. What’s next Alcohol? Stop the government overreach.
Agenda Item 23 (34-628) – I support the call for the resignation of Andrew Do for the Orange County board of Supervisors.
Sincerely,
Chris Varga
Huntington Beach
From: Fikes, Cathy
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: Shopoff is back at it. Making Changes and Spending Money to buy your support, are your votes For Sale? Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 9:10:35 AM
Attachments: MTF.PNG
MTF1.PNG
From: larry mcneely <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, September 1, 2024 6:47 PM
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) <[email protected]> Subject: Shopoff is back at it. Making Changes and Spending Money to buy your support, are your votes For Sale?
Shopoff is back at promoting his project, which the surrounding homeowners despise. Shopoff was able to buy the prior city council's seats, votes, and approval using campaign donations to secure his project, which does not fit in our HB Community. Shopoff, an HB Outsider, was able to join the HB Chamber of Commerce, Developers, and Hotel Operators as a "Signature Investor" to buy influence that led the Lobbiest Organization the HB Chamber of Developers and Consultants to form a PAC to support the city council elections of those who would take the Pay for Play money to enhance their chances to get elected, this while holding a City Council Election Forum/Debate in 2018 at the Hilton Hotel all while supporting a PAC for those who would help his project and accept his money to secure their votes. It also appears his influence $$$$$ got to our Community Development Director Ursula Luna-Reynosa, who guided Shopoff through the process and loopholes, and her last stand before fleeing our city employment was to attend the Coastal Commission to claim the need to approve this project for its "Affordable Aspects" of these Multi-Million Dollar Homes. Now we see Shopoff adding affordable apartments that will not be available to the Public but will be housing for his hotel workers.
Shopoff decided it was a good idea to build a housing development of 250 Mulit-Million Dollar Homes, a hotel on the banks of our environmentally sensitive Protected Natural Wetlands Preserve, and one of our city's last open areas. Let alone the fact it adjoins a Toxic Superfund Site that will never be wholly remedied but a cap placed over it, and this project is set next to TWO Major Industrial Power Generating Facilities that emit carbon into the atmosphere and have a constant hum that can be heard and felt thought-out this area.
Why would we submit to this developer's will to change the zoning from Semi-Public to open Public and allow a Specific Plan that overrides our General Plan and Set Zoning for a project despised by many?
We may see those on our city council who claim we need this development to meet the State's Demands.
The City of Irvine approved 59,000 new housing units just the week before because they have miles of open space. Would not those offset our requirements of 13,000 being in the same county? That is a question that we should raise with the Governor.