From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk; Michael Webb; Nils Nehrenheim; Paige Kaluderovic; Scott Behrendt; Todd Loewenstein; Zein Obagi; Kevin Cody
Subject: False Testimony of BCHD elected Board Member Poster on 10/1/24 to City Council Date: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 5:25:21 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
TESTIMONY OF MARK NELSON FOR 10-15-24 REDONDO BEACH CITY
COUNCIL MEETING
As the City Council and City Attorney are aware from correspondence, I have raised the issue of BCHD Board Member Poster misleading the Council at the October 1, 2024 meeting in her sworn testimony as an elected official of BCHD.
As a very brief recap, Board Member Poster asserted to the Council that the Redondo Beach City Attorney had admonished the Planning Commissioners ON THE RECORD to stop targeting BCHD. NO SUCH CITY ATTORNEY ACTION IS FOUND ON THE 9-19-24 Transcript of the City sponsored YouTube recording. The closest, yet NOT ALL THE SAME, action was the Planning Director relaying a message from the City Attorney's office following CEO Bakaly's testimony regarding BCHD for 3 minutes. The Planning Commissioner relayed that he was addressing the AUDIENCE (Bakaly for example) and explaining that the audience (Bakaly for example) should discuss the broader issues, not BCHD as Bakaly had done.
Further, a BCHD public records act response indicates that Board Member Poster relied on the Youtube recording of the 9-19-24 Planning Commission meeting to make her testimony.
Clearly, the intent of her testimony to indict the Planning Commissioners has NO SUPPORT in the recording. Based on BCHD's CPRA response on behalf of their Board member, we need look for no other source documents for Poster's accusation.
As a long term property owner, I cannot accept a City Council record where one public official has misled the Council. I believe that BCHD's testimony from Poster must be struck.
Further, it seems that testimony from BCHD Executives and elected officials should be vetted prior to acceptance into the record on a forward basis.
Thank you.
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: James Light; CityClerk
Subject: My comment is VANESSA POSTER FALSE STATEMENT
Date: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 7:10:13 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: James Light; Michael Webb; CityClerk
Subject: Re: Formal Complaint - Mayor Light Refused to let me address Poster"s issue during NON-AGENDA Date: Tuesday, October 15, 2024 7:15:06 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Please let me know what I need to do to reclaim my time.
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 7:11 PM Mark Nelson
wrote:
I was denied input
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk
Cc: James Light; Michael Webb; Kevin Cody; Marc Wiener
Subject: Public Comment and Communication to the City Attorney, Mayor and Planning Commissioners Date: Wednesday, October 16, 2024 2:41:54 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
At the October 15, 2024 City Council Meeting, I was refused my right to address the nonAgenda Item of BCHD Board Member Vanessa Poster providing apparently false and misleading public testimony during the October 1, 2024 Council meeting. This can be witnessed at the link of the meeting at: https://youtu.be/12pjmKfLa6M?t=10342 Through clairvoyance, prejudice or some other method, the Mayor determined that my comment was on an agenda item and never sought to clarify. It was not. It was defending the Planning Commissioners from BCHD Board Member Poster's accusation during the 10/1/24 City Council meeting. I had a full 3-minute comment and it was silenced.
I know Mayor Light in passing, as we both served on the BCHD Community Working Group from early 2017 through the end of 2020. I am concerned that the Mayor might harbor a proBCHD bias that will prevent advocates for the surrounding neighborhoods from receiving the input that they are entitled to. If that is shown to be the case, discussions may need to ensue regarding his recusal from BCHD matters.
The Discussion that I intended to have before being denied my time regarded these facts:
Board Member Poster's Under Oath Public Testimony to the City Council 10/1/24 BCHD Board Member Poster's false claim in her oral testimony is at the following link on the Official City of Redondo Beach Youtube site: https://youtu.be/5uxFc9rONWc? t=14695
Poster claimed, "your Planning Commission has demonstrated their inexplicable (thank you Dency) abhorrence for BCHD so much so that your own lawyers had to remind them during a public meeting and on the record to stop targeting BCHD in their remarks"
Planning Director Marc Wiener's Guidance to the Audience Member During the 9/19/24 Planning Commission Meeting
Immediately following BCHD CEO Bakaly's three minute public comment regarding BCHD, the Planning Director asked to provide the audience guidance from the City counsel as seen on the link: https://youtu.be/iZJ11jWf4g8?t=6151 Wiener stated, "I've been reminded by the City attorney to make statement to the audience just to remind the audience is the purpose of tonight's hearing is about the general Plan update. It's not on Beach Cities Health District so really the focus is more broad on the entire city and this policy document that we're working on so I just would like every everybody to keep that in mind. Thank you."
Based on transcript searches (transcript provided from Google AI Youtube of 9/19/24 Planning Commission on 10/1/24 and 10/2/24 by email) there is no time during the 9/19/24 Planning Commission meeting when counsel addresses the Planning Commissioners and admonishes them for "targeting" BCHD.
Board Member Poster's response to a California Public Records Request stating that she relied on the recording of the 9/19/24 Planning Commission meeting when making her statement. Clearly, if that was the case, Board Member Poster willfully mischaracterized the 9/19/24 meeting in an effort to mislead the Council.
BCHD PRR Response
Please see below (in red) for the District’s response to your public records request received 10/3/24 that reads:
Q. Speaking in her official capacity as an elected board member, Poster stated “your Planning Commission has demonstrated their inexplicable (thank you Dency) abhorrence for BCHD so much so that your own lawyers had to remind them during a public meeting and on the record to stop targeting BCHD in their remarks.”
Provide the documents relied upon by Board member Poster to make such an accusation regarding the Planning Commissioners.
A. Please see the September 19, 2024, Redondo Beach Planning Commission meeting video: Click Her
REQUESTED REMEDY FOR DENIAL OF NON-AGENDA COMMENT TIME
Due to my denied time for input, I was required to make my statement during the inappropriate time of the 1.25 FAR discussion. As a result, I was denied 3 minutes of valuable public testimony time.
I proposed that I be allowed during non-Agenda comments on 10/29/24 to have two 3-minutes periods as a remedy. The first period will be a full, 3-minute presentation of my planned discussion of Poster's actions. The second 3 minute period will be relevant to a non-Agenda item if used.
The City Council meetings are generally very fair and balanced. I have been in Council meetings since the 1990s until 4AM and have presented to the Council in my role as an executive at SCE and a consultant for Sempra, the parent of SoCal Gas. I was an ardent objector to the scale and lack of mitigation of the Heart of the City and had numerous Op-Ed and Letters published in the Copley papers.
This was generally an anomaly in my view, but, it had negative consequences and highlights a potential pro-BCHD implicit bias of the Mayor. We must be vigilant to assure that BCHD is not again treated in a preference manner, nor the public treated in a discriminatory manner.
Mark Nelson
Retired Executive, EIX Companies
Retired Executive Consultant, Sempra Companies
Expert Witness
From: James Light
To: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail); CityClerk
Cc: Michael Webb; Kevin Cody; Marc Wiener
Subject: Re: Public Comment and Communication to the City Attorney, Mayor and Planning Commissioners Date: Wednesday, October 16, 2024 3:29:04 PM
My apologies. You opened up with a statement about FAR which was on the agenda. Next time I will let the speaker get further into their statement.
VR
Jim
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2024 2:41:09 PM
To: CityClerk <[email protected]>
Cc: James Light <[email protected]>; Michael Webb <[email protected]>; Kevin Cody <[email protected]>; Marc Wiener <[email protected]> Subject: Public Comment and Communication to the City Attorney, Mayor and Planning Commissioners
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
At the October 15, 2024 City Council Meeting, I was refused my right to address the nonAgenda Item of BCHD Board Member Vanessa Poster providing apparently false and misleading public testimony during the October 1, 2024 Council meeting. This can be witnessed at the link of the meeting at: https://youtu.be/12pjmKfLa6M?t=10342 Through clairvoyance, prejudice or some other method, the Mayor determined that my comment was on an agenda item and never sought to clarify. It was not. It was defending the Planning Commissioners from BCHD Board Member Poster's accusation during the 10/1/24 City Council meeting. I had a full 3-minute comment and it was silenced.
I know Mayor Light in passing, as we both served on the BCHD Community Working Group from early 2017 through the end of 2020. I am concerned that the Mayor might harbor a proBCHD bias that will prevent advocates for the surrounding neighborhoods from receiving the input that they are entitled to. If that is shown to be the case, discussions may need to ensue regarding his recusal from BCHD matters.
The Discussion that I intended to have before being denied my time regarded these facts:
Board Member Poster's Under Oath Public Testimony to the City Council 10/1/24 BCHD Board Member Poster's false claim in her oral testimony is at the following link on the Official City of Redondo Beach Youtube site: https://youtu.be/5uxFc9rONWc? t=14695
Poster claimed, "your Planning Commission has demonstrated their inexplicable (thank you Dency) abhorrence for BCHD so much so that your own lawyers had to remind them during a public meeting and on the record to stop targeting BCHD in their remarks"
Planning Director Marc Wiener's Guidance to the Audience Member During the 9/19/24 Planning Commission Meeting
Immediately following BCHD CEO Bakaly's three minute public comment regarding BCHD, the Planning Director asked to provide the audience guidance from the City counsel as seen on the link: https://youtu.be/iZJ11jWf4g8?t=6151 Wiener stated, "I've been reminded by the City attorney to make statement to the audience just to remind the audience is the purpose of tonight's hearing is about the general Plan update. It's not on Beach Cities Health District so really the focus is more broad on the entire city and this policy document that we're working on so I just would like every everybody to keep that in mind. Thank you."
Based on transcript searches (transcript provided from Google AI Youtube of 9/19/24 Planning Commission on 10/1/24 and 10/2/24 by email) there is no time during the 9/19/24 Planning Commission meeting when counsel addresses the Planning Commissioners and admonishes them for "targeting" BCHD.
Board Member Poster's response to a California Public Records Request stating that she relied on the recording of the 9/19/24 Planning Commission meeting when making her statement. Clearly, if that was the case, Board Member Poster willfully mischaracterized the 9/19/24 meeting in an effort to mislead the Council.
BCHD PRR Response
Please see below (in red) for the District’s response to your public records request received 10/3/24 that reads:
Q. Speaking in her official capacity as an elected board member, Poster stated “your Planning Commission has demonstrated their inexplicable (thank you Dency) abhorrence for BCHD so much so that your own lawyers had to remind them during a public meeting and on the record to stop targeting BCHD in their remarks.”
Provide the documents relied upon by Board member Poster to make such an accusation regarding the Planning Commissioners.
A. Please see the September 19, 2024, Redondo Beach Planning Commission meeting video: Click Her
REQUESTED REMEDY FOR DENIAL OF NON-AGENDA COMMENT TIME
Due to my denied time for input, I was required to make my statement during the inappropriate time of the 1.25 FAR discussion. As a result, I was denied 3 minutes of valuable public testimony time.
I proposed that I be allowed during non-Agenda comments on 10/29/24 to have two 3-minutes periods as a remedy. The first period will be a full, 3-minute presentation of my planned discussion of Poster's actions. The second 3 minute period will be relevant to a non-Agenda item if used.
The City Council meetings are generally very fair and balanced. I have been in Council meetings since the 1990s until 4AM and have presented to the Council in my role as an executive at SCE and a consultant for Sempra, the parent of SoCal Gas. I was an ardent objector to the scale and lack of mitigation of the Heart of the City and had numerous Op-Ed and Letters published in the Copley papers.
This was generally an anomaly in my view, but, it had negative consequences and highlights a potential pro-BCHD implicit bias of the Mayor. We must be vigilant to assure that BCHD is not again treated in a preference manner, nor the public treated in a discriminatory manner.
Mark Nelson
Retired Executive, EIX Companies
Retired Executive Consultant, Sempra Companies
Expert Witness
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk
Cc: Kevin Cody
Subject: Public Comment: Subtitled Video of Mark Nelson 10/15/24 CC Meeting - Non-Agenda Items Date: Wednesday, October 16, 2024 4:49:41 PM
Attachments: Nelson-10-15-24-Non-Agenda-VEED.mp4
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
No mention WHATSOEVER of GPAC, General Plan, or FAR. Furthermore, there was NO ATTEMPT to clarify what I speaking on when I was censored. At this point, I still have to believe that there may be an implicit bias against opponents to BCHD and the BCHD private development project at the City Council.
See the attached file, or on Youtube at https://youtu.be/Yg4E7DUiZEg