From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: item 25-454
Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 8:37:48 AM
Dear City Council We know that the HBCC won’t sell the library or its books.
However, based on what some city council members have said, they will allow the library to be “operated or managed by a private contractor” (text from Measure B).
To be “operated or managed by a private contractor”, means, in other words, “Outsource” or “Privatize”.
Don’t be fooled by promises that the HBCC will not sell the library. They will outsource the library operations as soon as they can.
Charlie Jackson
24 year HB resident
Cutting out extra text
No public library owned or operated by the City …, [or] any service provided by the Huntington Beach Public Library …., be operated or managed by a private contractor … unless:
(3) it is authorized by the affirmative votes of at least a majority of the total membership of the City
Council and by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the electors voting on such proposition at a general or special election at which such proposition is submitted Full text of the measure
No public library owned or operated by the City as of March 19, 2024, or hereafter owned or operated by the City, shall be sold, leased, exchanged or otherwise transferred or disposed of, nor shall any service provided by the Huntington Beach Public Library as of March 19, 2024, be operated or managed by a private contractor that employs library staff to achieve cost savings and/or any proposal that would change the
wholesale management of any Huntington Beach library unless: (1) such service was outsourced to a private organization or operated pursuant to a managed services agreement with a private entity during any period from January 1, 2018 through March 19, 2024; (2) the City declares a
fiscal emergency pursuant to Article XIIIC, Section 2(b) of the California Constitution; or (3) it is authorized by the affirmative votes of at least a majority of the total membership of the City Council and by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the electors voting on such proposition
at a general or special election at which such proposition is submitted
SUPPLEMENTAL
COMMUNICATION
Meeting Date:_____________
Agenda Item No. ___________
26 (25-454)
6-3-2025
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: item 25-454
Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 8:46:17 AM
Dear City Council
It is clear that this agenda item is intended to confuse Huntington Beach voters.
Please pledge that you will not outsource the library management to a for profit company.
Your pledge not to sell the library hides that fact that you will outsource the library if Measure B fails.
The word privatize means more than to sell. It means to change from public to private control or ownership.
We know that Butch Twining will not sell it, but he will privatize it if he can. If measure B fails.
Merriam-webster
to change from public to private control or ownership
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/privatize
https://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/privatize.html to change (as a business or industry) from public to private control or ownership
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/privatize to transfer from public or government control or ownership to private enterprise
Charlie Jackson
24 year resident of HB
From: Carol Daus
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Resolution 25-454
Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 2:30:09 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
Dear Council Members,
Your Agenda Item 25, pertaining to Resolution 25-454, is just another example of polarizing political theater. It's incredibly insincere since you have actively endorsed NO on Measures A and B. This resolution reminds me of your decision to install a MAGA plaque at the library. 1) If you're utilizing a book review board of random strangers, with no professional librarians, to determine which books are acquired or kept, it's book banning. Any First Amendment/civil rights attorney will tell you that. Giving total and non-appealable authority to a group of untrained book judges (with their only qualification being age 18 and up), would be considered book banning. In addition, the state of California will sue because this would be illegal in California. That means our city would face another costly lawsuit. 2) No one has ever said the library is being sold. But outsourcing is a whole different story.
Bringing in a for-profit corporation with outside investors to manage library operations, including staffing, book collection and programming does not involve "selling the library" but it essentially would destroy our efficiently run public library. A city council that cares about the will of its citizens would let them have a say in such an important matter. That's all Measure B is about. Huntington Beach taxpayers should be able to decide whether they want their taxes funneled to out-of-state investors and former Council Member Mike Posey's sales commission!
Voting Yes on Measures A and B prevents book banning and outsourcing of our public library.
Thank you,
Carol Daus
Huntington Beach resident
From: Carol Daus
To: [email protected]; CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF) Subject: Re: Resolution 25-454 Agenda item 26
Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 4:33:25 PM
Ms. Barnes: My error...It's Agenda item 26, not item 25 as written here.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 2:29 PM Carol Daus <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Council Members,
Your Agenda Item 25, pertaining to Resolution 25-454, is just another example of polarizing political theater. It's incredibly insincere since you have actively endorsed NO on Measures A and B. This resolution reminds me of your decision to install a MAGA plaque at the library.
1) If you're utilizing a book review board of random strangers, with no professional librarians, to determine which books are acquired or kept, it's book banning. Any First Amendment/civil rights attorney will tell you that. Giving total and non-appealable authority to a group of untrained book judges (with their only qualification being age 18 and up), would be considered book banning. In addition, the state of California will sue because this would be illegal in California. That means our city would face another costly lawsuit. 2) No one has ever said the library is being sold. But outsourcing is a whole different story.
Bringing in a for-profit corporation with outside investors to manage library operations, including staffing, book collection and programming does not involve "selling the library" but it essentially would destroy our efficiently run public library. A city council that cares about the will of its citizens would let them have a say in such an important matter. That's all Measure B is about. Huntington Beach taxpayers should be able to decide whether they want their taxes funneled to out-of-state investors and former Council Member Mike Posey's sales commission!
Voting Yes on Measures A and B prevents book banning and outsourcing of our public library.
Thank you,
Carol Daus
Huntington Beach resident
From: Natalie Moser
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Supplemental Comment on Agenda Item #26 – Resolution Regarding Library and Book Bans Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 4:45:36 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
I submit this comment regarding Agenda Item #26, specifically Resolution No. 2025-45, which claims the Huntington Beach Public Library “will not be sold” and that “books will not be banned.”
Let’s speak plainly: This is political posturing. The introduction of this non-binding resolution—one week before the June 10 special election—is an attempt to influence voters and cast doubt on the need for Measures A and B. While some may argue that this is merely an “informational” item, the timing, language, and messaging surrounding this resolution make the intent to sway the outcome of the election clear.
In fact, Government Code Section 54964 prohibits the use of public funds—including staff time—for the purpose of advocating for or against a ballot measure. This resolution required City Attorney resources and public staff time to draft and place on the agenda.
Given its clear political intent and proximity to the election, Item #26 violates the law. Any claim that this is neutral or educational falls apart when the resolution mirrors the language and talking points used in public “Vote No” campaign materials.
This Council—including many of the same members who passed Ordinance No. 4318—is now trying to deflect from its own actions. That ordinance created a 21-member “Community Parent-Guardian Review Board” with the authority to review, restrict, and reclassify books based on “sexual content” or “sexual references”—vaguely defined terms open to broad interpretation and ideological bias. The ordinance applies to all books accessible to anyone under 18, not just young children. It provides no meaningful appeal process. This is not community oversight. It is structural censorship.
While Councilmembers Chad Williams, Butch Twining, and Don Kennedy were not seated at the time the ordinance passed, all expressed public support for it. And Councilmember Andrew Gruel, since appointed, has made clear on social media that he favors both the ordinance and its effects.
And let’s not forget: the public was right to be concerned about the privatization of our public library. Though the resolution now insists the library “shall not be sold,” the Council previously pursued a contract with for-profit operator LS&S to take over its operations. That effort was dropped only after community outrage—not because of council initiative.
In recent weeks, Councilmember Don Kennedy has continued to post inflammatory content, claiming that LGBTQ+ books in libraries have led to a “DRAMATIC ALARMING RISE” in LGBTQ+ youth. His suggestion? That representation causes queerness. This is not only factually baseless, it’s dangerous, discriminatory, and rooted in bigotry. Our youth deserve respect and representation—not to be framed as the product of “indoctrination.” And let’s be real: this isn't just about books. This is about power. Former mayor Tony Strickland, a driving force behind this cultural panic, used it as a springboard to elevate himself to the State Senate. The public is now being asked to clean up the mess left behind—while political theater continues from the dais.
Let’s be clear about what this resolution and this council majority have done:
A politically appointed board with unchecked power over library content is a form of censorship and book banning.
A contract with a private vendor to run a public library is a form of selling out our public institutions.
A non-binding resolution placed on the agenda one week before an election is not just inappropriate—it is unlawful electioneering under Government Code Section 54964.
All of this has taken a toll. Since this manufactured controversy began, nine librarians have left. That’s not a coincidence. It’s a consequence. It’s hollow to say you support the library while dismantling the professional expertise that made it award-winning in the first place.
We don’t need performative resolutions. We need leaders who protect democratic values and respect our public institutions.
I strongly urge HB residents to Vote YES on Measures A and B—not because of what this council says at the last minute, but because of everything it’s done over the last few months and years.
Sincerely,
Natalie Moser
Former Huntington Beach City Council Member
From: Paula Schaefer
To: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: VOTE NO - Agenda Item # 26 Resolution re Library Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 4:54:50 PM
Mayor and Council Members:
This proposed resolution is hypocrisy at its best. At its worst, it is a potential violation of Government Codes prohibiting electioneering.
Since 2023 members of the City Council have been vilifying the library and its librarians by claiming that the children's library contains "inappropriate material" while the newest City Council members posed in front of the Library claiming their support for the library. In 2024 you solicited a proposal for privatizing the library but at the last minute the proposal was withdrawn.
The people who gathered thousands of signatures to get Measures A and B on the ballot have consistently said that Measure B refers to the outsourcing of staffing and management of the library. We did not say that the physical library would be sold. Also, the movement of books where they may be inaccessible by the intended age category of the reader is book banning.
Now, just days before the June 10 special election, you propose an Affirming Resolution re no sale of the library and no books will be banned.
For what purpose? it seems obvious that this was included to shore up your election efforts. --
Paula A. Schaefer
--
Paula A. Schaefer
From: [email protected]
To: CITY COUNCIL (INCL. CMO STAFF); [email protected] Subject: Oppose Item #26
Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 4:59:22 PM
Councilmembers Williams, Kennedy, and Twining are being extremely deceitful. The Council voted unanimously to move forward with a special election which is exactly what has created all the controversy in Huntington Beach with regard to the library.
While it is true that you are not considering selling the library, you left out that you may consider outsourcing the management of the library while retaining all the expenses and liability for owning the building. Maintenance expenses as the building ages will increase for the City while you may choose to allow a private company to reap profits by reducing access to materials and services that we have come to expect in our library.
The definition of a book ban according to Encyclopedia Brittanica is "book banning, the practice of prohibiting or restricting the reading of certain book" which is exactly what you will be doing if the Book Review Committee is not repealed.
Stop playing games.
Diane James
From: Tamara Colby
To: [email protected]
Subject: Budget and library items
Date: Monday, June 2, 2025 4:59:39 PM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important This CC exhibits characteristics of authoritarianism. This city council has move towards a strong central power and limited political freedoms. Only people that think like you matter.
Your MAGA elite and its affiliations with the Calvary Church on the harbor is unilaterally making policy and operational decisions, and have ushered in restrictions on civil liberties and political rights. For example, Tony Strickland broke with local norms and practices, when he took action to be mayor, suppressing the opposition by bumping Kalmick. Next this council rewrote the Human Dignity statute, did the corrupt airshow deal, charter amendments for voter ID and restrictions on flags, created a new cultural calendar, making up lies about the library’s and then passing the book review committee, the library privatization RFP, approved the light show in the park deal. And more. All these decisions were done in a vacuum and without much citizen input. This CC suppresses dissent with lawsuits, harassment, and limiting the time for public input.
Public input went first to 3 minutes, and now one minute. That is why the citizens put Measure A and B on the ballot to stop this corruption, censorship and attack on our freedoms.
The CC began to suppress dissent or criticism from residents by eliminating the mobile home park committee, the human relations committee, and the environmental committee, and it reduced the time allotted to speak at meetings. Both these actions reduced citizen participation, squashed dissent and criticism. That’s authoritarian! This started when the MAGA 4 got elected and the council led by Tony Strickland operated with limited accountability or transparency. Tony’s MO was to relaunch his political career, so it seems to me he looked for ways to get political campaign donors -- the airshow/Code 4, library privatization/ LSS, and the light show in central park/Cavalia.
Strickland needed money for his campaign for state senate, and likewise, Gracy VDM is looking for donors for her campaign for state office. The CC prioritizes its self-serving need to give deals to their friends in return for political donations, over the needs of the wider community. This self-serving CC is bankrupting our city and taking away our freedoms!
That is why I am proud to support Measure A & B to restore our freedoms and stop this rampant corruption. The passage of Measure A repeals the unnecessary book review committee ordinance and Measure B prohibits a private corporation from running the library.
The city would be better off if the MAGA CC would restore the norms, citizen participation and stop selling our city. Then the city could recover financially.
Thank you,
Tammy Colby