City Council on 2026-08-18 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER Meeting Time: 08-18-26 18:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council on 2026-08-18 6:00 PM -
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
08-18-26
18:00
61 5 0 2 1
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
City Council on 2026-08-18 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER 08-18-26 18:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
H.9. 26-0983 AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LETTER OF
SUPPORT FOR ASSEMBLY BILL 2296, WHICH IF APPROVED BY THE
STATE, WOULD PROVIDE CITIES MORE TIME TO PROCESS THEIR
HOUSING ELEMENTS
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN LETTERS OF OPPOSITION TO
ASSEMBLY BILL 1751, WHICH IF APPROVED BY THE STATE, WOULD
REQUIRE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO MINISTERIALLY APPROVE
TOWNHOMES THAT ARE LESS THAN THREE STORIES IN
MULTIFAMILY ZONES AND VACANT SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES
REGARDLESS OF COMPLIANCE WITH STATE CERTIFIED HOUSING
ELEMENTS; AND SENATE BILL 1117, WHICH IF APPROVED BY THE
STATE, WOULD LIMIT IMPACT FEES CITIES CAN COLLECT FOR
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS LARGER THAN 750 SQUARE FEET
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LETTER OF SUPPORT
ENCOURAGING THE GOVERNOR TO SIGN SENATE BILL 922, WHICH
IF APPROVED BY THE STATE, WOULD ALLOW CITIES TO RECOVER
STREET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR COSTS CAUSED BY HEAVY
ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES
1 0 0 0
H.11. 26-0994 APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT
WITH PEREGRINE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. TO INTEGRATE PARKING
CITATION DATA FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEARLY COST OF $7,400, FOR A NEW TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $103,900, FOR THE
EXISTING TERM THROUGH JULY 8, 2027
APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH TURBO
DATA SYSTEMS, INC FOR THE INTEGRATION OF PARKING CITATION
DATA WITH THE PEREGRINE PLATFORM FOR AN ADDITIONAL
YEARLY COST OF $1,250, AND A NEW ANNUAL EXPENDITURE
TOTAL ESTIMATED AT APPROXIMATELY $148,000, FOR THE
EXISTING TERM THROUGH AUGUST 4, 2028
2 0 2 0
J.1. 26-0992 For eComments and Emails Received from the Public 1 0 0 0 N.2. 26-1003 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE CITY'S
BUSINESS LICENSE TAX COLLECTION PROCESS AND FEE
STRUCTURE FOR SPECIAL EVENT VENDORS
1 0 0 1
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for H.9. 26-0983 AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR ASSEMBLY BILL 2296, WHICH IF APPROVED BY THE STATE, WOULD PROVIDE CITIES MORE TIME TO PROCESS THEIR HOUSING ELEMENTS AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN LETTERS OF OPPOSITION TO ASSEMBLY BILL 1751, WHICH IF APPROVED BY THE STATE,
WOULD REQUIRE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO MINISTERIALLY APPROVE TOWNHOMES THAT ARE LESS THAN THREE
STORIES IN MULTIFAMILY ZONES AND VACANT SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES REGARDLESS OF COMPLIANCE WITH STATE CERTIFIED HOUSING ELEMENTS; AND SENATE BILL 1117, WHICH IF APPROVED BY THE STATE, WOULD LIMIT IMPACT FEES CITIES CAN COLLECT FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS LARGER THAN 750 SQUARE FEET AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A LETTER OF SUPPORT ENCOURAGING THE GOVERNOR TO SIGN SENATE BILL 922,
WHICH IF APPROVED BY THE STATE, WOULD ALLOW CITIES TO RECOVER STREET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR COSTS
CAUSED BY HEAVY ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES
Overall Sentiment
Bryan Stone
Location:
Submitted At: 4:34pm 08-17-26
To the Mayor and Members of the City Council:
I write regarding the proposed letters of support and opposition on AB 2296, AB 1751, SB 1117, and SB 922.
Redondo Beach must consistently defend local control over land use, housing, and the costs of local services.
Decisions about what gets built in our neighborhoods, how it is reviewed, and who pays for the infrastructure it requires should be made by the people who live here and the officials we elect… not by Sacramento.
AB 1751 would force ministerial approval of certain townhome projects, stripping the City of meaningful discretion and public process. SB 1117 would further limit the impact fees the City can collect on larger accessory dwelling units, shifting more of the cost of growth onto existing residents. Both bills reduce the community’s ability to shape its own future and to ensure that new development pays its fair share.
By contrast, AB 2296 gives cities more time to prepare housing elements and respond to state requirements. SB 922 protects the City’s long-standing ability to recover street maintenance costs caused by heavy public-service vehicles. Both of these measures respect local authority and should be supported.
When the state repeatedly overrides local planning and fee authority, it weakens accountability. Residents lose the ability to influence decisions that directly affect their streets, schools, traffic, and quality of life. Neighborhood character, infrastructure capacity, and fiscal responsibility all suffer when distant mandates replace careful local judgment.
Local government is closest to the people and best positioned to balance the need for more housing with the realities of existing infrastructure, parking, and community character. Expanding state preemption in housing and land-use decisions moves power further from residents and makes it harder for cities to manage growth responsibly.
I urge the Council to:
• Support AB 2296 and SB 922
• Oppose AB 1751 and SB 1117
Please stand firmly for local control on these bills and on future legislation that would further erode the City’s authority over its own land and finances.
Bryan Stone
Redondo Beach Resident
Agenda Item: eComments for H.11. 26-0994 APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH PEREGRINE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. TO INTEGRATE PARKING CITATION DATA FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEARLY COST OF $7,400, FOR A NEW TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT OF $103,900, FOR THE EXISTING TERM THROUGH JULY 8, 2027
APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH TURBO DATA SYSTEMS, INC FOR THE INTEGRATION OF PARKING CITATION DATA WITH THE PEREGRINE PLATFORM FOR AN ADDITIONAL YEARLY COST OF $1,250, AND A NEW ANNUAL EXPENDITURE TOTAL ESTIMATED AT APPROXIMATELY $148,000, FOR THE EXISTING TERM THROUGH AUGUST 4, 2028 Overall Sentiment
Darryl Boyd
Location:
Submitted At: 6:43pm 08-17-26
The current situation & contract with Peregrine needs to be reviewed for possible conflict(s) of interest and potentially rescinded or canceled.
Bryan Stone
Location:
Submitted At: 4:27pm 08-17-26
To the Mayor and City Council:
I urge you to reject the proposed amendments that expand parking citation data into the Peregrine system and increase related costs.
We should not be expanding access to more location data. The City already collects substantial information on vehicles through license plate readers and other systems. Adding another stream of parking citation data into a centralized platform only increases the volume of information available about ordinary residents’ movements.
There is no demonstrated need for this additional spending. At a time when the City must carefully manage its budget, these cost increases, particularly the larger one tied to Peregrine, are not justified. The existing systems already provide the tools needed for legitimate enforcement and investigations.
Most importantly, we should not be sharing this data outside Redondo Beach’s direct control. Once information leaves our systems and becomes accessible to other agencies through a shared platform, we lose the ability to enforce our own retention rules. We have no reliable way to know whether other departments are making copies of our data or how long those copies are kept. What we limit to 30 days here could live far longer elsewhere.
Every data system can be compromised. Centralizing more information in one platform and then making portions of it available to outside agencies, expands the potential damage if a breach occurs. That risk sits outside our control and cannot be fully eliminated by contracts or technical safeguards.
Residents have a reasonable expectation that information collected about them will remain under tight local oversight. Expanding access and sharing undermines that expectation. It also raises deeper questions about how much government surveillance of daily movement a free community should accept, whether the benefits truly outweigh the costs, and whether the burdens of these systems fall evenly across the population.
Please vote no on these amendments. Keep the data under local control, avoid unnecessary spending, and do not expand the reach of these systems without far stronger public safeguards and transparency.
Bryan Stone
Redondo Beach Resident
Agenda Item: eComments for J.1. 26-0992 For eComments and Emails Received from the Public Overall Sentiment
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 10:01pm 08-17-26
I continue to find it odd that the Mayor and CM Obagi both made the case that the BCHD FAR 1.25 "Whereas" was completely unrelated to the voting action, yet, it was somehow needed. How can that be? CM Obagi demonstrated that based on a July action, the 2 ordinance had NOTHING TO DO with BCHD, FAR 1.25, or P-I.
Yet, that extraneous information could not be removed from the recitals. Why? It was certifiably UNNEEDED. And the Mayor was stronger yet. On at least two occasions he stated that the vote had nothing to do with BCHD, FAR
1.25 or P-I. Nothing. And while the Mayor stated that a completely unneeded recital was required, he stated that adding it wasn't an act of malfeasance. Really? Self declared. The City Attorney needs to investigate this. And if not, I'll go to the County. This is a matter or RIGHT AND WRONG. Including extraneous information in recitals with NO JUSTIFICATION since the recital was wholly unlinked to the vote probably is malfeasance. And we deserve to know.
Agenda Item: eComments for N.2. 26-1003 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE CITY'S BUSINESS LICENSE TAX
COLLECTION PROCESS AND FEE STRUCTURE FOR SPECIAL EVENT VENDORS Overall Sentiment
Darryl Boyd
Location:
Submitted At: 7:08pm 08-17-26
I see the word "Special Event" so maybe this should apply. Will this include the side deal Jim Light made for the "Cruzin The Lagoon" Friday car group with Brad Waller's help? There is a very specific package from the Waterfront Department regarding requirements for car show events which includes a event permit, business license, insurance, 200 pre-paid parking spots, etc. Pretty sure Jim and Brad's group pay for none of that. But since my Public Records Request has been stonewalled for 5 months now it's safe to assume they do not. So I guess the Mayor and Council Members can do whatever they want when it comes to business licenses and special event permits if you are friendly with them.