09082026-Budget Hearing-19-Early PC — Long Beach City Council, September 8, 2026

1 From: Tammy Sargeant <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2026 1:30 PM
To: CityClerk
Subject: Proposed Elimination of Fire Station14 Engine
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
-EXTERNAL-

To Whom it May Concern,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed elimination of the Fire Engine at Station 14.

The removal of this essential resource would significantly impact emergency response times and compromise the safety of not only the immediate community but also the response times to surrounding communities especially in light of the increased housing included in the 3 developments near 2nd and PCH.

I stand with Councilmember Kristina Duggan and the Alamitos Heights Improvement Association in urging the City Council to preserve the Fire Engine at Station 14 and pursue alternative budget cuts for 2027.

Respectfully.

Tammy Sargeant

Long Beach CA 990814

2 Please keep Engine 14 operational at Station 14.

Sincerely,
The Turner Family,
Alamitos Heights Resident at , Long Beach CA 90814
To help p otect you p vacy M c osoft Off ce p evented automat c download of th s pictu e f om the In e net
Annika Turner
Powering Human Performance since 2005.

ELDOAUSA, Director
Beach Fitness, Inc.
eldoausa.com
beachfitness.com
NOTICE: This communication and any attachment(s) are intended to be confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately and delete this message from your system. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this message by an unintended recipient is prohibited and may be unlawful. E-mail communications are vulnerable to interception by unauthorized parties. If you are the intended recipient and you do not wish for the sender to communicate with you by e-mail, please notify the sender at your earliest convenience.

1 From: Rosemary Booth <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2026 3:28 PM
To: Mayor; CityClerk; Council District 3
Subject: Proposed Elimination of Engine 14 in District 3 Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
-EXTERNAL-

This comes to voice my deep concerns regarding the Proposed Elimination of Fire Engine 14 in Long Beach District 3.

For the purpose of identifying my demographic, I am 77 years old, widowed, living with my daughter in Belmont Heights. We are a three-generational home. As you are aware, the median age in are area is approximately 47.4 years, which is significantly older than the California and U.S. averages. District 3 features a high population of single adults, older residents, and empty nesters, alongside young professionals. Many of the homes in our neighborhoods were built in the early 1920-1930’s. In addition, home dwellings include boats in the marina, mobile homes and Accessory Dwelling Units and apartment
buildings.

I am opposed to the Proposed Elimination of Fire Engine 14 for the following reasons:
1) The Southeast area is growing - As per the Southeast Long Beach Specific Plan, the Plan proposed the development of a number of large, new mixed-use units that would increase the population by at least 1,200 new residents. This does not include additional employees and visitors new to the area. The influx of new residents will add to traffic conditions in and around District 3, moreover 2nd & PCH which also affects the 2nd Street corridor, especially during commute hours or when special events are in progress. These conditions will no doubt affect response times from both Fire Engine 14 and 8 to citizens in dire need of emergency fire services. Decreasing response times of critical services, like fire, undermines the general safety of our residents and property. We need the Fire Engine 14 personnel and resources that are keenly aware of our area specific neighborhoods, narrow or one-way only streets and utility infrastructure.
2) Topography and Natural Disasters - As parts of our area are at sea level and extreme global warming weather is expected to impact vulnerable neighborhoods in and around Station 14. Two years ago heavy rains overwhelmed 2nd Street and many of its side streets caused traffic delays and posed safety hazards for those who live, work and shop in the area. We need greater degrees of leadership, and service that Engine 14 is already efficiently providing. It behoves the City to maintain and support the highly trained personnel and equipment at this location for the safe of Southeast Long Beach residents.

The Southeast Area Specific Plan (SEASP) and Placeworks - Police/Fire Support 2 As outlined in the SEASP, and subsequent reports, key pillar elements of the Plan included Mobility, Environment, Design & Amenities. In reading the original SEASP I could not find information on Police and Fire as it corresponds to the proposed increased population density and how it will impact current residents. In addition, this area is experiencing growth with the addition of a new swimming pool complex and increased use of other water-sport venues such as the Marine Stadium, Alamitos Bay and expansion of the Colorado Lagoon/Nature Habitat areas. Southeast Long Beach residents need long term planning. Not acknowledging the complexity of this area is not only shortsighted but creates an added liability for the City.

In closing, I oppose the Elimination of Fire Engine 14, because District 3 needs to maintain current levels of service and also increase service exponentially along with land development within District 3.

Residents,
employees, shoppers and visitors should be able to depend upon the City to provide a measure of confidence that life and property saving resources will be available when they need them.

I respectfully ask our City representatives not to eliminate Fire Engine 14. Lives and property literally depend on the valuable resources of equipment, highly trained personnel and leadership in time of crisis that Fire Engine 14 provides.

Sent from my iPhone
1 From: Samih Abushousheh <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2026 6:02 PM
To: CityClerk
Cc: Samih Abushousheh; brian maginnis; Tom Mobil Chan Chiarenza Gracie; Robin Rix Subject: Request to Preserve Engine 14
-EXTERNAL-

Written Public Comment – Request to Preserve Engine 14
Dear City Clerk,
Please accept this email as my formal written public comment regarding the proposed budget reduction affecting Engine 14. I respectfully request that this correspondence be included in the appropriate public record and distributed to all Members of the Long Beach City Council and other appropriate City officials for their consideration before final action is taken on the proposed budget.

Dear Honorable Members of the Long Beach City Council:

I am writing to respectfully but strongly urge the City Council to oppose the proposed budget reduction affecting Engine 14 and to preserve Engine 14 as a fully funded and operational fire and emergency- response resource serving our community.

We previously communicated our concerns to Councilmember Kristina Duggan’s Office. We were advised that Councilmember Duggan does not support the proposed cut to Engine 14 and were encouraged to make our concerns known as part of the City’s budget discussions.

Engine 14 represents an important component of the fire, rescue, medical, and emergency-response resources serving this area. Any decision to reduce, relocate, eliminate, or otherwise diminish this resource should, in our respectful view, be made only after careful, documented, and transparent consideration of the potential consequences for public safety, emergency-response times, and the protection of the surrounding community.

The protection of human life and public safety must always come first. This principle is consistent with the City of Long Beach’s longstanding recognition of public safety as a highest priority, including the City Council’s stated priority for emergency 9-1-1 response, fire prevention and suppression, paramedic services, and ambulance services.

During a structure fire, medical emergency, hazardous-material incident, energy-related emergency, or other life-threatening event, even a relatively short increase in emergency-response time can have serious consequences. Property and economic considerations are important, but they should remain secondary to protecting human life, residents, first responders, and the community. 2 Our area presents several circumstances that warrant particular consideration. It includes significant power-generation and energy-storage facilities, as well as other critical infrastructure that may present specialized emergency-response needs. The surrounding community also includes schools serving young children, residential neighborhoods with many families and children, public recreational and picnic areas, densely populated neighborhoods, and a substantial senior population.

The surrounding area also contains a substantial concentration of homes, condominiums, businesses, and other real property representing significant private investment and taxable property within the City.

While the protection of life and public safety must always remain the first priority, protecting this substantial residential and commercial property base from avoidable fire and emergency losses is also an important long-term consideration for the City and the community.

Of particular importance, two significant condominium and commercial development projects are already under construction within approximately 3½ miles of Engine 14. Based upon the information presently available to us, the combined investment associated with these developments, including the underlying real estate, is estimated to exceed approximately $1 billion. Once completed and occupied, these developments are expected to bring additional residents, businesses, employees, visitors, and vehicular traffic into the same general area.

The fact that these substantial developments are already under construction should, in our respectful view, be an important consideration in evaluating any reduction in existing fire and emergency-response resources. The City should consider not only Engine 14’s historical and current service demands, but also the reasonably foreseeable increase in population, traffic, development density, property values, and demand for fire, medical, rescue, and other emergency services resulting from projects presently being built.

We also respectfully believe that the City’s recent substantial investment in Fire Station 14 deserves careful consideration. In March 2025, the City celebrated the reopening of the station following an approximately $5.5 million comprehensive renovation and modernization project, including approximately $4.7 million in voter-approved Measure A funding.

The City described this project as an investment intended to enhance public safety, firefighter safety, operational efficiency, emergency preparedness, and the ability of Fire Department personnel to respond effectively to emergencies. In our respectful view, this recent investment should be an important consideration in evaluating any proposal to reduce Engine 14.

We therefore respectfully ask the City Council to carefully consider whether reducing Engine 14 so soon after completing this substantial public investment is consistent with the public-safety objectives underlying that investment and the purposes for which Measure A funds were approved and allocated.

We further respectfully ask that full consideration be given to the City’s own operational and public- safety analysis concerning the potential effects of reducing Engine 14, including projected changes in response times, emergency-service capacity, and the resulting additional demands placed upon surrounding fire stations. The consequences of reducing one engine company may extend beyond the immediate Station 14 response area when neighboring stations are required to absorb additional emergency calls.
3 During a fire, medical emergency, hazardous-material incident, energy-related emergency, or other life- threatening event, response time can be critical. Maintaining adequate nearby emergency-response resources is therefore an important safeguard for residents, businesses, children, seniors, first responders, critical infrastructure, and the broader community.

Before any final budget action is taken that would reduce Engine 14, we respectfully request that the City Council carefully evaluate and publicly consider, at a minimum:
• Documented historical and current emergency call volumes involving Engine 14; • Existing response times and projected response times if Engine 14 is reduced, including the City’s own analysis concerning structure-fire and emergency-medical responses; • Current population density and reasonably anticipated population growth; • The substantial number and value of homes, condominiums, businesses, and other taxable properties within the surrounding area;
• Residential and commercial projects already under construction and anticipated future development; • Increased vehicular and pedestrian traffic associated with such development; • Nearby schools, children, senior residents, and other vulnerable populations; • Power-generation facilities, energy-storage facilities, and other critical infrastructure; • The fire, medical, rescue, and specialized emergency risks associated with these facilities and surrounding development;
• The actual staffing, equipment, availability, and response capacity of surrounding fire stations if Engine 14 is reduced;
• The potential effect upon neighboring fire-station response areas when those resources are required to compensate for the reduction of Engine 14; and
• The City’s recent approximately $5.5 million investment in renovating and modernizing Fire Station 14 and whether reducing Engine 14 is consistent with the public-safety purposes underlying that investment.

We also respectfully request that the City consider, in consultation with its appropriate public-safety, risk-management, and legal professionals, whether reducing Engine 14 could create additional foreseeable risk or potential exposure for the City if diminished emergency-response capacity or increased response times were later alleged to have contributed to loss of life, personal injury, or property damage.

We are not suggesting that any particular legal liability would necessarily result. Rather, we believe that the potential public-safety and risk-management consequences should be carefully evaluated and documented before an existing emergency-response resource is reduced, particularly while substantial new residential and commercial development is already under construction in the surrounding area. 4 We fully recognize that the City faces difficult budgetary decisions and competing financial priorities.

Nevertheless, the protection of human life and public safety must always come first. This position is consistent with the City’s own longstanding recognition of public safety as a highest priority.

Fire protection and emergency-response capability are fundamental public-safety functions, and any potential budget savings should be carefully weighed against the human, operational, property, and financial consequences that could result from diminished emergency-response capacity.

This consideration is particularly important given the City’s recent substantial investment in Fire Station 14 and the significant additional residential and commercial development already occurring in the surrounding community.

We further respectfully request that, before taking final action affecting Engine 14, the City Council give full consideration to the City’s own operational and public-safety analysis concerning the proposed reduction, including its findings regarding projected response times, emergency-service capacity, and the effects upon surrounding fire stations.

Where the City’s own analysis identifies measurable impacts to emergency response, we respectfully believe those findings deserve substantial consideration before an existing public-safety resource is reduced. Budgetary considerations are important, but where proposed savings could affect emergency- response capability, the City should proceed cautiously and ensure that its decision is supported by documented operational evidence and adequately protects the community.

Once an emergency-response resource is reduced, discovering after a serious incident that the remaining resources were insufficient may come too late for the residents, families, children, seniors, businesses, first responders, and others who depend upon those services.

For these reasons, we respectfully request that the Long Beach City Council preserve Engine 14 and work together to identify an alternative budget solution that does not unnecessarily diminish this important public-safety resource.

We further respectfully request that, before approving any reduction affecting Engine 14, the City make available the operational and public-safety analysis supporting its determination that the proposed reduction would not materially compromise emergency-response capability or create an unreasonable additional risk to the surrounding community.

Finally, we respectfully request that this correspondence and the concerns raised herein be made part of the appropriate public record relating to the proposed budget and Engine 14.

Thank you for accepting this correspondence as formal written public comment. We sincerely appreciate the City Council’s time, consideration, and public service, and respectfully request your support in preserving Engine 14.

Respectfully,
Samih Abushousheh

5 1
From: Susan Hyde <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2026 8:17 PM
To: CityClerk
Subject: Engine 14
-EXTERNAL-

GreeƟngs,
I’m a long Ɵme resident and homeowner of Long Beach. I am extremely concerned about the choices in cuts, and money spent elsewhere. Please do not cut emergency response services. I will be personally impacted by these cuts.

Please keep Engine 14 intact and emergency response vehicles. We pay incredibly high taxes in this surrounding area.

We need your support and we need to trust your judgment as a city employee.

Thank you,
Susan Hyde
1 From: Kayleigh Levitt <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2026 12:04 AM
To: Council District 9; Council District 7; Council District 2; Mayor; CityClerk; City Manager Subject: City Council Public Comment - Item 19.1
-EXTERNAL-

Dear Mayor Rex Richardson and Members of the City Council, We urge you to work with the City Manager’s Office and Budget Oversight Committee to identify structural funding which supports the mayor’s recommendation to restore 12 of the 14 positions: five library clerks, four library assistants, one general librarian and two part-time page positions. Although it is not included in the mayor’s proposal, we also urge you to also include funding for the mental health associate, because of their role in providing support for young patrons facing challenges such as homelessness, past time in juvenile detention, food insecurity, or isolation.

Donations and grants to the Foundation already fund many additional services that the City does not: the Family Learning Center Guides, the Studio Guides, as well as the Creativity Lab when the federal grant previously ended. To present continued reliance on the Foundation to support the Creativity Lab as responding to community feedback from this budget hearing process is disingenuous. We are asking for the City to use our tax dollars to represent the resources we want to see in our City.

During the community feedback portion of this budget process, City Council recognized that they have received the most public feedback in support of restoring funding for libraries. There were 92 comments in favor of preventing further cuts to the library (37 in person comments and 55 digital comments) as well as public comments throughout the budget community hearings.

Moreover, the Digital Comment Card placed ‘Access to libraries and library programs’ as the top community priority for the budget. Also in past Community Surveys, City Manager Tom Modica said ‘Education’ was among the top 3 priorities people voiced that th ey want the city to prioritize funding for in
the budget. Libraries are educational infrastructure that in the past year has provided over 1900 educational programs. Even though the City Council acknowledged that residents have consistently expressed that library funding is a top priority, the city has only dedicated 0.7% of the total proposed budget appropriations towards the library. Instead of using the library as a bargaining chip, and failing to live up to that promise, preventing cuts now shows that the City Council represents the political will of the people to keep our libraries funded.

As we seek to demonstrate our identity as a City, libraries are uniquely positioned to support this initiative. Libraries are thriving neighborhood hubs where library staff facilitate cultural preservation and celebrations. Libraries provide support to our economy by helping residents with skill-building programs and job seeking resources. Libraries help our youth by providing safe spaces such as the Teen Café programs. In the BARK reading programs, children practice reading aloud to certified therapy dogs. Some
parents have said that was the first time they heard their kid read aloud. There are Family Learning 2 Centers which provide homework help to kids and computer tutoring for senior citizens. Library staff help residents adapt and participate in our changing world.

In the past, the City Council would decree that in a moment like this, when a crisis is so stark, when a budget gap is so wide, that the first things cut should be libraries and cultural institutions. And yet we know that these services live at the heart of our city, that they give meaning to our lives. Please take a stand against cutting funding to these services.
1 From: Pamela Sojka <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2026 8:39 AM
To: CityClerk; City Manager; Mayor; Council District 2; Council District 7; Council District 9 Subject: City Council Public Comment - Item 19.1
-EXTERNAL-

Donations and grants to the Foundation already fund many additional services that the City does not: the Family Learning Center Guides, the Studio Guides, as well as the Creativity Lab when the federal grant previously ended. To present continued reliance on the Foundation to support the Creativity Lab as responding to community feedback from this budget hearing process is inappropriate. We are asking for the City to use our tax dollars to represent the resources we want to see in our City.

Libraries are educational infrastructure that in the past year has provided over 1900 educational programs.

Even though the City Council acknowledged that residents have consistently expressed that library funding is a
top priority, the city has only dedicated 0.7% of the total proposed budget appropriations towards the library.

Instead of using the library as a bargaining chip, and failing to live up to that promise, preventing cuts now shows that the City Council represents the political will of the people to keep our libraries funded.

As we seek to demonstrate our identity as a City, libraries are uniquely positioned to support this initiative.

Libraries are thriving neighborhood hubs where library staff facilitate cultural preservation and celebrations.

Libraries provide support to our economy by helping residents with skill-building programs and job seeking resources. Libraries help our youth by providing safe spaces such as the Teen Café programs. In the BARK reading programs, children practice reading aloud to certified therapy dogs. Some parents have said that was the first time they heard their kid read aloud. There are Family Learning Centers which provide homework help to kids and computer tutoring for senior citizens. Library staff help residents adapt and participate in our changing world.
2 In the past, the City Council would decree that in a moment like this, when a crisis is so stark, when a budget gap is so wide, that the first things cut should be libraries and cultural institutions. And yet we know that this stance does not reflect the needs or wants of our city residents. These services are vital for the wellbeing and growth of our community. Please take a stand against cutting funding to these services.

Respectfully,
Pamela Sojka
Long Beach Resident
1 From: Kristen Hernandez <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2026 12:27 PM
To: CityClerk
Subject: City Council Public Comment – Item 19 (FY 27 Budget) & Budget Oversight Committee – LBPLF Petition to Protect the Long Beach Public Library Attachments: LBPLF - Protect the Long Beach Public Library Petition.pdf; LBPLF FY27 Budget Petition Signature Summary 09.04.26.pdf; LBPLF FY27 Budget Petition Signatures 09.04.26.xlsx -EXTERNAL-

To the Office of the City Clerk,
Please accept the attached materials for entry into the public record in connection with:

1. The Budget Oversight Committee meeting on Tuesday, September 8, 2026 (Item 3, File No. 26-55980 – FY 27 Budget recommendations for Council consideration), and

2. The City Council meeting on Tuesday, September 8, 2026 (Item 19, File No. 26-55956 – FY 27 Budget public hearing).

Attached are three documents from the Long Beach Public Library Foundation's community petition, "Protect the Long Beach Public Library System in the FY 2027 Budget":

1. The full text of the petition as presented to signers, addressed to the Mayor and City Council

2. A signature summary showing 6,946 total signatures, including 4,741 from Long Beach residents across all nine Council Districts

3. The complete signature data supporting the summary
On behalf of the undersigned residents, parents, students, seniors, workers, and community stakeholders of Long Beach, we respectfully ask that the Mayor and City Council consider this petition as part of the FY 2027 budget deliberations, and that it be entered into the record for both the Budget Oversight Committee and the full City Council budget hearing.

Please let me know if any additional information or a different format is needed.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best,
Kristen Hernandez
Kristen Hernandez | Director of Communications and Public Affairs LONG BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION 궍궎궏궐궑궒
[email protected] | 562.628.2441
200 W. Broadway, Long Beach, CA 90802
Website | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Instagram
4693 of 6000 actions taken
A Community Petition to the Mayor and
City Council of Long Beach
First name
Last name
Email address
Street address
City Zipcode
PROTECT THE LONG BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY SYSTEM IN THE FY 2027 BUDGET Protect the Long Beach
Public Library System
in the FY 2027 Budget
Protect the Long Beach Public Library System
in the FY 2027 Budget

To the Mayor and Members of the Long
Beach City Council:

We, the undersigned residents, parents,
students, seniors, workers, and community
stakeholders of Long Beach, urge you to
protect the Long Beach Public Library system
as the City develops and adopts the Fiscal
Year 2027 budget.

We understand that Long Beach faces difficult
fiscal decisions and that every department
may be asked to identify savings. The library
department will participate in a thoughtful
budget process, but it should not be
subjected to across-the-board cuts that fail to
account for the essential services libraries
provide.

The Long Beach Public Library is not a luxury.

It is one of the City’s most accessible and
equitable public services. Libraries provide
free access to books, technology, internet
service, literacy programs, homework
support, workforce resources, cultural
programming, and safe public spaces for
residents of all ages and backgrounds.

For many families, libraries are essential
neighborhood anchors. They give children and
EG Strategies.co hosts
this campaign and will
keep you informed about
it and others. EG
Strategies.co will protect
your privacy.

SIGN THIS

PETITION
NOW
teens a safe and constructive place to go,
help seniors remain connected, support
students and job seekers, and provide
technology and internet access to residents
who may not have those resources at home.

The library system has already been asked to
do more with less. Branch hours reduced
during previous budget cuts have never been
fully restored. Additional reductions would
further limit access for the residents who
depend on these services most.

For these reasons, we call on the Mayor and
City Council to:

Prevent layoffs or the elimination of
filled library positions.

Prevent any further reduction in
branch operating hours.

Protect core public access, literacy
services, technology resources, and
essential neighborhood-serving functions.

Avoid across-the-board reductions that
would disproportionately harm the library
system.

Require a transparent public-impact
analysis before approving reductions to
library staffing, hours, safety, programs,
or services.

Consult with library leadership,
employees, residents, the Friends of the
Long Beach Public Library, and the Long
Beach Public Library Foundation before
making decisions that would materially
reduce public access or safety.

We recognize that some program adjustments
or administrative efficiencies may be
necessary. However, those savings should not
come through branch closures, further
reductions in hours, layoffs, the elimination of
filled positions, or cuts that compromise the
safety of library patrons and staff.

Long Beach should not balance its budget by
weakening one of the few public institutions
that serves every neighborhood and
welcomes every resident. A strong public
library system reflects the kind of city Long
Beach strives to be: educated, safe,
connected, inclusive, and committed to
opportunity for all.

As the Fiscal Year 2027 budget moves
through hearings and deliberations, we urge
the Mayor and City Council to stand with Long
Beach residents and protect the branches,
employees, safety officers, and services that
help hold our neighborhoods together.

Sign below to support and protect the
Long Beach Public Library system.

For more information on how to show your support for library funding, visit our Take Action page.

Address:
200 W. Broadway,
Long Beach, CA 90802
Phone:
(562) 628-2441
Email:
[email protected]

E-Newsletter Signup
Board Portal
Long Beach Public Library Foundation
FY2027 Petition Summary
Location Count
Long Beach 4741
LA County 903
Out of State 732
CA (not LA or OC) 324
Orange County 246
Grand Total 6946
City Council DistrictCount
1 460
2 831
3 788
4 656
5 702
6 312
7 430
8 298
9 264
Grand Total 4741
Long Beach
68%
LA County
13%
Out of State
10%
CA (not LA or OC)
5%
Orange County
4%
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Long Beach City Council Districts
Long Beach Public Library Foundation
FY2027 Petition Summary
Location Count
Long Beach 4741
LA County 903
Out of State 732
CA (not LA or OC) 324
Orange County 246
Grand Total 6946
City Council Distr Count
1 460
2 831
3 788
4 656
5 702
6 312
7 430
8 298
9 264
Grand Total 4741
Long Beach
68%
LA County
13%
Out of State
10%
CA (not LA or OC)
5%
Orange County
4%
Count
0 100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Long Beach City Council Districts
council_district
Count

Long Beach City CouncilSeptember 8, 2026

Long Beach City Council
September 8, 2026