Santa Monica City Council
May 24, 2022

4.B.d
Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: Attachment D - Fire Fee Study (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital User Fee Study Summary Sheet
City of Santa Monica
Fire Department (190)
FY 2021/2022
Ord Service Name Fee Description Annual
Volume Current Fee Full Cost Full Cost with 3.1% COLA
Current
Recovery % Annual Cost Annual Revenue Annual Subsidy Recovery Level Fee @ Policy Level Fee with 3.1%
COLA
Annual
Revenue2
Increased
Revenue
Recommended
Subsidy
Annual
Current Recommendations
Per Unit Annual Per Unit
151 Outdoor Dining Inspection Fee New flat fee - $ - $ 180.89 $ 186.49 0% $ - $ - $ - 100% $ 180.89 $ 186.49 $ - $ - $ - 152 Special Event Planning Fee (each hour or fraction) New - Hourly - $ - $ 356.70 $ 367.76 0% $ - $ - $ - 100% $ 356.70 $ 367.76 $ - $ - $ - 153 Presubmittal Meetings with Building & Safety New - Hourly - $ - $ 178.35 $ 183.88 0% $ - $ - $ - 100% $ 178.35 $ 183.88 $ - $ - $ - Total User Fees $2,637,590 $2,606,041 $31,549 $2,637,590 $31,549 $0 % of Full Cost 99% 1% 100% 1% 0%
Footnotes
Fee #97 - Adding fee for large special event reviews requiring setup prior to event Fees #84 and #85 - Adding new fees for mixed-use occupancy types Fee #86 and #87 - Changed fee description to clarify that all occupancy types are included.

Fee #130 - This fee is for the final fire inspection of single family residential construction projects (R-3). This separates out single family homes (R-3) as the field inspection and office time is less than a commercial project captured under Final Building Inspection.

Fee #137 - Changing this from a flat fee to actual cost.

Fee #153 - Adding an hourly fee for presubmittal meetings in coordination with Building and Safety staff and their customers.

Fee #138 - Change from two Reinspection fees for specific positions to one generic Reinspection Fee at actual cost.

Fee #146 - Adding an hourly fee for CUPA Administrator so all Fire Prevention positions are listed and can be charged if needed.

Fee #150 - Fire Safety Officer is voluntary and not assigned to any specific position. Fee to be calculated at fully burdened hourly rate of employee assigned.

Fee #151 - Adding a fee for inspection of outdoor dining areas or establishments.

Fee #152 - Adding an hourly fee for planning of special events.

Fee #40 - This fee is for a new fire code construction permit type for the installation of a gas detection system inside buildings when required by the fire department.

Fee #42 - This fee has had no activity in recent years. Recommend keeping fee set at current amount.

Fee #44 - Inspections of candles and open flames are done concurrently with other inspections.

Fee #69 - Changing from a flat fee to actual cost.

Fee #13 - Changing from a flat fee to actual cost.

Fee #19 - This fee is for a fire sprinkler monitoring fire alarm system that is less complex than a general fire alarm system Fee #28 - This fee adds another category for aboveground tanks.

Fees #37 and #38 - These fees are for a new fire code construction permit type for the installation of an emergency responder radio system in new buildings when required by the fire department, plus a fee for the rental of the radio if needed.

Fee #39 - This fee is for a new fire code construction permit type for the installation of battery backup systems inside for commercial buildings.

Attachment D
D-7

4.B.d
Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: Attachment D - Fire Fee Study (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Proposed Cemetery Fee Changes Attachment E
E-1
Description (Fee
Name), Exhibit Title
or Notation
Current Fee
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Fee
FY 2022-23 Justification
New Fees
Chapel Fee 628.56 This fee used to be on the Comprehensive Price List in the past. If an outside firm wants to use the chapel for a
service, they will be charged for the use of the facility and equipment (podiums, microphones, AV, etc.).

Oversized Marker/
Upright Monument
Removal Fee
278.04 There is additional labor for second interments in locations where an upright or oversized marker is in place. Typically graves have a standard marker, but with the increase of upright and oversized markers staff determined the need to charge for this service.

Refrigeration of
Remains (Beyond
30 days, charged an
additional $21.86 per
day)

22.54 There has been an increase in storage of remains beyond 30 days. Disposition is normally completed within two
weeks. The extra time in the cooler takes up space,
requires the cooler to run, and in the event staff is busy it could result in contracting out for storage.

Temporary Marker
Placement

91.10 Markers are normally installed after the protective border has been fabricated. Families have been requesting to
temporarily place markers for special remembrances or
memorials. Due to the increase in requests, staff
determined the need to charge for this service.

Witness Marker
Installation
131.58 Markers are placed on graves in between staff's regular service schedule/workload. Witnessing the marker setting would mean the staff would need to pause their regular
work load and perform the installation at the required
time.

Adjustments (Increases)
Adult Grave (Double
Interment Privilege)
8,824.40 12,165.80 This item was overlooked in the FY 21-22 when the fees for single interment and double interment full-sized graves and cremation graves were adjusted. This fee is for
creating an additional grave in a gravesite, allowing for a second casketed interment. Proposed pricing is based on pricing structure of the fiscal years prior to FY 21-22 where the newly created second grave is equal in value to the cost of an adult grave single interment minus the
endowment care.

Cremation Grave
(Multiple Interment
Privilege)
3,880.37 5,979.80 This item was overlooked in the FY 21-22 when the fees for single interment and double interment full-sized graves and cremation graves were adjusted. This fee is for
creating the second additional grave in a cremation grave, allowing for the interment of a second set of cremated
remains. Proposed pricing is based on the pricing
structure of the fiscal years prior to FY 21-22 where this newly created second cremation grave is equal in value to the cost of a single cremation grave minus the
endowment care.

4.B.e
Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: Attachment E - Proposed Cemetery Fee Changes (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Proposed Cemetery Fee Changes Attachment E
E-2
Description (Fee
Name), Exhibit Title
or Notation
Current Fee
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Fee
FY 2022-23 Justification
Place Ashes in
Existing Crypt
Interment Privilege
882.43 1,216.58 This item was overlooked in the FY 21-22 when the fees for single interment and double interment full-sized graves and cremation graves were adjusted. This fee is for
adding a set of cremated remains to a previously
purchased crypt for one casketed interment. Proposed
pricing is based on the pricing structure of the fiscal years prior to FY 21-22 where the fee to add cremated remains to a crypt was one tenth of the cost of the adult grave double interment privilege. Fee is based on 1/10 of the single plot price.

Place Ashes in
Existing Full Size
Grave (Multiple
Interment Privilege)
882.43 1,216.58 This item was overlooked in the FY 21-22 when the fees for single interment and double interment full-sized graves and cremation graves were adjusted. This fee is for
adding a set of cremated remains to a previously
purchased adult grave single or double interment.

Proposed pricing is based on the pricing structure of the fiscal years prior to FY 21-22 where the fee to add
cremated remains to an adult grave for a casketed
interment was one tenth of the cost of the adult grave
double interment privilege. Fee is based on 1/10 of the single plot price.

Place Ashes in
Existing Green
Burial Plot
882.43 1,216.58 This item was overlooked in the FY 21-22 when the fees for single interment and double interment full-sized graves and cremation graves were adjusted. This fee is for
adding a set of cremated remains to a previously
purchased single green burial plot. Proposed pricing is based on the pricing structure of the fiscal years prior to FY 21-22 where the fee to add cremated remains to a single green burial plot for one casketed interment was one
tenth of the cost of the adult grave double interment
privilege. Fee is based on 1/10 of the single plot price.

Deletion
Adult Grave (Single
Interment) Financial
Hardship
1,552.14 Staff proposes removing this item from the
Comprehensive Price List. There is no longer inventory of these plots. There is dwindling inventory of cemetery plots in general. Also, staff has no way of determining if all financial records have been provided by clients claiming hardship. Loopholes exist where wealthy families can
claim someone as a hardship case because, for example,
the one person selected by the family as a client is not working, despite the wealth of the family. The City's
Finance Department has not provided guidelines for
determining which financial records should be obtained
from clients claiming hardship and for determining if all financial records have been provided by clients.
*A cemetery grave in designated cemetery blocks that
are intended for families facing financial hardships*

4.B.e
Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Attachment E - Proposed Cemetery Fee Changes (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Proposed Cemetery Fee Changes Attachment E
E-3
Description (Fee
Name), Exhibit Title
or Notation
Current Fee
FY 2021-22
Proposed
Fee
FY 2022-23 Justification
Description Revision
Delivery of casketed
remains to
residence for
viewing (Beyond 30
miles, charged at
$2.00 $3.00 per
mile)
388.03 400.05 The Cemetery has proposed an increase in mileage to cover the vendor’s increased fees. Due to the increase in fuel costs, the vendor raised their prices on mileage above 30 miles.

Transfer of remains
to funeral home
(Residence removal
or second
attendant, add
$95.00) (Beyond 30
miles, charged at
$2.00 $3.00 per
mile)
769.60 793.45 The Cemetery has proposed an increase in mileage to cover the vendor’s increased fees. Due to the increase in fuel costs, the vendor raised their prices on mileage above 30 miles.

4.B.e
Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Attachment E - Proposed Cemetery Fee Changes (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget)

POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

ATTACHMENT G

FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE 01 CAO 1.0 Deputy City Attorney III 01 CAO 1.0 Chief Deputy City Attorney 1 Add/Delete - 01 CAO 1.0 Special Counsel/Chief of Staff 01 CAO 1.0 Assistant City Attorney Title Change - 01 CDD 1.0 Assistant Planner (Limited Term) 01 CDD 1.0 Assistant Planner 2 Add/Delete - 01 CDD 1.0 Senior Park Planner (Limited Term) 01 PW 1.0 Senior Park Planner 2 Add/Delete - 01 CDD 1.0 Building and Safety Permit Specialist I
(Limited Term) 01 CDD 1.0 Building and Safety Permit Specialist I 2 Add/Delete - 01 CDD 1.0 Senior Plan Check Engineer (Limited
Term) 01 CDD 1.0 Senior Plan Check Engineer 2 Add/Delete - 53 CDD 1.0 Staff Assistant III 53 CDD 1.0 Business Assistant 1 Reclassification - 01 CMO 1.0 Administrative Staff Assistant - City
Manager's Office 01 CMO 1.0 Administrative Staff Assistant 2 Add/Delete - 01 CMO 1.0 Chief Communications Officer 01 CMO 1.0 Community Partnerships Manager (new classification) 1, 4 Add/Delete -
01 CMO 1.0 Public Information Officer 01 CMO 1.0 Public Information Manager (new classification) 1, 4 Add/Delete -
01 CMO 1.0 Assistant Administrative Analyst 1 Add 1.0
01 CSD 1.0 Aquatic Site Supervisor 01 CSD 1.0 Aquatics Program Coordinator 1 Add/Delete - 01 CSD 0.8 Aquatics Program Coordinator 01 CSD 1.0 Aquatics Program Coordinator 1 Add/Delete 0.2 60 DOT 1.0 Staff Assistant III Add 1.0
60 DOT 1.0 Assistant Administrative Analyst Add 1.0
60 DOT 1.0 Lead Customer Services Assistant Add 1.0

DELETE ADD NET FTE

CHANGE REASON
May 24, 2022 Page 1 of 4

4.B.g
Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: Attachment G - Position and Classification Changes [Revision 2] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed

POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

ATTACHMENT G

FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE

DELETE ADD NET FTE

CHANGE REASON
60 DOT 1.3 Customer Services Assistant 60 DOT 1.8 Customer Services Assistant Add/Delete 0.5 60 DOT 1.0 Transit Marketing Coordinator Add 1.0
60 DOT 1.0 Transit Mechanic II Add 1.0
60 DOT 14.0 Motor Coach Operator 1 Add 14.0
01 Finance 1.0 Business License Inspector 3 Add 1.0
75 Finance 1.0 Risk Management Analyst 75 Finance 1.0 Supervising Workers Compensation Claim Examiner 1 Add/Delete -
01 Fire 1.0 Fire Code Enforcement Officer II 3 Add 1.0
01 HR 1.0 Human Resources Technician - Limited
Term 01 HR 1.0 Human Resources Technician 2 Add/Delete - 01 HR 1.0 Volunteer Coordinator Add 1.0
01 ISD 1.0 Information Security Analyst Add 1.0
01 ISD 1.0 Software Systems Analyst 01 ISD 1.0 Business Process Technology Analyst 3 Add/Delete - 01 ISD 1.0 Business Process Technology Analyst 01 ISD 1.0 Principal Business Process Technology Analyst 3 Add/Delete -
01 ISD 1.0 GIS Analyst 3 Add 1.0
55 ISD 1.0 Broadband Services Engineer 1 Add 1.0
01 Library 0.5 Librarian I 01 Library 1.0 Librarian I Add/Delete 0.5 01 Police 1.0 Lead Public Services Officer 01 Police 1.0 Public Services Officer Supervisor 3 Add/Delete - May 24, 2022 Page 2 of 4

4.B.g
Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: Attachment G - Position and Classification Changes [Revision 2] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed

POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

ATTACHMENT G

FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE

DELETE ADD NET FTE

CHANGE REASON
01 PW 1.0 Civil Engineer 3 Add 1.0
01 PW 1.0 Civil Engineering Assistant 3 Add 1.0
01 PW 1.0 Administrative Analyst 1 Add 1.0
01 PW 2.0 Maintenance Worker 1 Add 2.0
01 PW 1.0 Facilities Supervisor 1 Add 1.0
11 PW 4.0 Maintenance Worker 1 Add 4.0
50 PW 1.0 Senior Administrative Analyst 50 PW 1.0 Engineering Support Services Administrator 1 Reclassification -
50 PW 1.0 Sustainability Analyst 50 PW 1.0 Senior Sustainability Analyst 1 Reclassification - 54 PW 1.0 Customer Services Assistant 01 CMO 1.0 Customer Services Assistant 3 Add/Delete - 54 PW 1.0 Lead Customer Services Assistant 01 CMO 1.0 Lead Customer Services Assistant 3 Add/Delete - 54 PW 6.0 Maintenance Assistant Add 6.0
57 PW 1.0 Staff Assistant II 57 PW 1.0 Staff Assistant III (Limited Term) 5 Add/Delete - PERMANENT EMPLOYEES TOTAL 43.2 FTE
01 CSD 0.0 Guest Services Assistant Add 0.0
01 CSD 0.8 Chief Pool Lifeguard Add 0.8
01 CSD 3.2 Swim Instructor/Pool Lifeguard Add 3.2
May 24, 2022 Page 3 of 4

4.B.g
Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: Attachment G - Position and Classification Changes [Revision 2] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed

POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION CHANGES

ATTACHMENT G

FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE FUND DEPT FTE POSITION TITLE

DELETE ADD NET FTE

CHANGE REASON
11 CSD 0.7 Guest Services Assistant Add 0.7
11 CSD 0.2 Chief Pool Lifeguard Add 0.2
11 CSD 0.3 Swim Instructor/Pool Lifeguard Add 0.3
11 CSD 0.2 Beach Recreation Leader Add 0.2
01 CSD 4.6 Facilities Attendant (4.6)
01 Library 1.7 Library Page Add 1.7
01 Library 0.8 Library Assistant I (new classification) 4 Add 0.8 60 DOT 0.5 Customer Services Assistant Add 0.5
60 DOT 0.5 Staff Assistant III Add 0.5

4.1 FTE

47.3 FTE
5 Limited-term position through December 31, 2028.
4 Subject to Personnel Board approval.

TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES TOTAL
3 Cost of the position will be offset by additional revenues or is supported by funding from enterprise funds. 2 Position change has no net new impact to the budget.

GRAND TOTAL
1 Cost of the position/position change will be offset by savings and/or the reallocation of budgeted funds within department budgets, resulting in a net zero impact to the budget.

May 24, 2022 Page 4 of 4

4.B.g
Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: Attachment G - Position and Classification Changes [Revision 2] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed

ATTACHMENT H
FY 2021-22 FY 2020-21 FY 2019-20 FY 2018-19
Allocation Allocation Allocation Allocation
Typical Annual Allocations
4th of July Parade - Ocean Park Association & City expenses 1 $ - $ - $ 8,000 $ 7,139 Beautify Earth - - - 20,000
Business Improvement Districts 29,000 29,000 24,000 24,000 Grades for Green - - 30,000 30,000
Santa Monica Arts Parents Association - SAMOHI Orchestra - - 20,000 40,000 Santa Monica Science Magnet - - - 17,000
Scholarship - David B. Finkel Social Justice Scholarship - - 7,500 7,500 Westside Ballet of Santa Monica - - - 15,000
$ 29,000 $ 29,000 $ 89,500 $ 160,639
One-Time Allocations (through May 10, 2022)
Black Agenda - 25,000 -
Brunson Terrace Small Business Marketplace 25,000
Census Outreach - - 25,000 -
Church in Ocean Park for Trans Equity Scholarships 9,000 COAST Event - - - 75,000
DanceEssence - - 3,000 -
Early Childhood Education 20,000 - - -
Election Fees - - 40,000 -
Family Services of Santa Monica 10,000 - - -
Government Alliance on Race and Equity - - 5,000 -
Irish Arts Center - - 10,000 -
LAFLA - Domestic Violence Clinic 10,000 - - -
Latino Cultural Events 10,000
League of Cities Real Training 12,000 - - -
Meals on Wheels - - 10,000 -
Neighborhood Organizations 20,000
North Beach Play Area Study (CIP) - - - -
PAL - Rick Crocker 5K Walk Run Challenge event expenses 5,000 Parking Guidance System (CIP) - - - -
Pico Youth and Family Center Car Show 2
10,000
Pier Palisades Safety Signage - 10,000 -
Reed Park Ambassador Program - - 150,000 -
Rental Assistance 3
- - 21,535 -
St. Joseph Center YRT & SM Retention 20,000 - - -
Salvation Army - - - 20,000
Santa Monica Chamber Ensemble - - 6,000 -
Santa Monica High School Grad Nite 1,500 10,000
Santa Monica Music Educational Foundation - Mariachi Program - - 19,065 22,000 Santa Monica Pier Lessees' Association Feasibility Study - - - 27,000 Santa Monica Pony League - - 22,000 -
Santa Monica Sister City Foundation - Youth Travel to Sister Cities - - - 25,000 Santa Monica State of the City - - 10,000 -
Santa Monica Symphony Association - - - 15,000
Shopping Cart Tree at Edgemar Center 5,000
SOULstice Festival - - 17,000 17,000
Streets to Shelter - - - 1,000
Tenant Assistance Mailings 25,000
Virginia Avenue Park Food Pantry 20,000 - - -
Wellbeing Summit - - - 100,000
West Coast Care 10,000 20,000 - -
Westside Coalition for Martin Luther King Jr. Celebration 9,000 Westside Foodbank - - 10,000 -
Wise and Healthy Aging 20,000 - - -
TOTAL ALLOCATIONS $ 177,000 $ 186,000 $ 416,565 $ 464,139 FY 2021-22 Undesignated Council Discretionary Funds $ 82,959 FY 2022-23 Council Discretionary Fund Budget 122,696
Council Discretionary Funds Available $ 205,655
1 Based on actual costs. Generally not to exceed $20,000 between OPA and City expenses. 2 Reflects a $5,000 allocation approved on August 24, 2021 for the Fall 2021 car show and a $5,000 allocation approved on April 26, 2022 for the Fall 2022 car show. 3 Originally programmed in FY 2017-18 for DACA support. Unspent balance reprogrammed to rental assistance programs in FY 2019-20. * Allocations are reflected in the year first designated and typically spent in that year.

Council Discretionary Funds *
May 24, 2022

4.B.h
Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: Attachment H - Council Discretionary Funds (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Planning Commission
May 19, 2022
Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main St.

Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: City Council Meeting May 24, 2022; Agenda Item No. 4-B Financial Status Update, FY2022- 23 Proposed Budget, and FY2022-24 Biennial Capital Improvement Budget.

Honorable Councilmembers,
Item 4-B on your agenda is a study session regarding the City’s proposed budget for the next Fiscal Year 22/23. Given the City’s numerous priorities and limited resources, we understand that finalizing this City’s budget will be no simple task. However, it is essential for this City to provide the Planning Department the resources it needs to help us all build a stronger future for all residents.

The Planning Commission discussed and voted on recommendations which include the following priorities:
• Right size the Planning Department: The City Planning Department needs a stable and appropriately sized work force to complete its significant workload. This workload includes creating critical land use planning documents such as a compliant Housing Element and an approved Local Coastal Program, both of which enhance local land use control, while also processing permits critical to our economic commerce. The successful completion of these tasks alone strengthens Santa Monica. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council closely examine the Planning Department staffing levels to restore and fill key positions immediately to achieve these important tasks.

Item 4.B
05/24/22
1 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Current temporary positions should be made permanent, and remaining staff needs can be filled first by promoting within the City’s family and then consider adding new Staff. • Promote public participation: The pandemic presented numerous challenges for City governments. However, one positive aspect was the creation of remote public hearings.

This allowed a new, and for some easier, format for constituents to interact with City government. As the pandemic eases, good government dictates that public meetings return but not at the expense of remote public testimony. We urge the Council to approve a budget that permits in person City Planning Commission meetings at City Hall while also accommodating remote testimony.
• Code Enforcement: A strong Code enforcement presence is important to achieving many of our community’s goals ranging from fair housing to sustainability to responsible economic commerce. The value of any law, rule, and regulation is inhibited if compliance is not achieved. Code Enforcement staff allow us to achieve compliance through both voluntary and punitive measures. We recommend the City Council also review Code Enforcement staffing levels to ensure enforcement can occur 24 hours a day.

We appreciate this opportunity to provide our recommendations and urge you to consider them closely.

Sincerely
Planning Commission, Chair
Item 4.B
05/24/22
2 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Johanna Kracke <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 6:16 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Subject: Item 4B - libraries

EXTERNAL
Hello,
As a resident of Santa Monica with three small children who was devastated when our beloved librarians were fired during covid ‐ I would like to urge the council to reopen ALL our libraries, expand the hours, and rehire the staff needed to bring back our excellent programming of years past. The current hours are abysmal for working parents, and the idea that the Ocean Park library is being run on a "self serve" basis is appalling to me. Librarians are an irreplaceable resource and I hope that this idea was simply one of necessity during covid and not something that will continue. Some of my families' best memories were formed with the programming such as PJ storytimes and STEM activities led by Hanako at the Ocean Park branch, in addition to my kids just simply being excited to see her on our visits to the library.

Could we please see the budget estimations for what it would cost to get our library system up and running as it used to be? I hope that our city budget priorities this valuable resource and doesn't place it on a back burner. Our kids have had so much taken away from them, this is something we can and should give them back. Thank you, Johanna Kracke
[email protected]
Resident of 90404 (previously 90405)
Item 4.B
05/24/22
3 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
4 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
5 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
6 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
7 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jennifer Cowan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 9:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 5/24/22, Agenda Item 4B - FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
As the Council considers the FY 2022‐2023 budget and allocation to the Human Services Grants Program (HSGP), it must recognize that investments in early childhood are critical to advance lifelong learning, stability, and wellness across our community.

The pandemic has further increased the stressors that challenge families’ ability to cover their basic needs and to afford living in Santa Monica. Child care allows parents to participate in the workforce, continue their education, and secure housing—strengthening their family’s resiliency and economic mobility. Further, children’s access to quality early childhood development and learning opportunities lays the foundation for their optional development across a range of indicators including physical and mental health, educational attainment, and employment.

Through the HSGP, Connections for Children (CFC) provides financial assistance to low‐income families so that they can afford the high cost of child care. CFC also provides free child care information and referrals to families at all income levels to help them find child care solutions that meet their family’s needs. Further, we support the City’s network of child care providers through referrals, professional development, and distribution of stipends and supplies.

The HSGP‐funded subsidy program helps low‐income families bridge the financial gap between child care tuition and what they are able to afford. We are able to leverage City and other state‐funded subsidy programs to maximize the number of vulnerable Santa Monica residents served. This allows more Santa Monica families to remain in Santa Monica and access child care options within the City. The program also benefits local child care providers, as program enrollment and tuition impacts their economic sustainability.  This fiscal year to‐date, CFC has enrolled 189 low‐income Santa Monica children in our child care subsidy program.  85% percent of children enrolled in the subsidy program reside in the Pico neighborhood (90404/90405).  About 50% of the families receiving child care subsidies are supported with HSGP funds.  152 Santa Monica children are currently on the waitlist for subsidy – unable to be served due to limited funding.

Connections for Children is grateful for the support the City has historically provided Santa Monica’s children and families, and is committed to serving the growing needs of our community. It is imperative that the City recognize the rising costs and expanded needs among the early childhood sector and allocate sufficient resources to adequately address these challenges.

Sincerely,
Jennifer Cowan
Executive Director
Connections for Children
www.connectionsforchildren.org
Item 4.B
05/24/22
8 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
9 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
10 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
11 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
12 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
13 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
14 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
15 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
16 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
17 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
18 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
19 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
20 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
21 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
22 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
23 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
24 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Item 4.B
05/24/22
25 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Barbi Appelquist <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 3:13 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Public Comment May 24, 2022: Item 4.B. Financial Status Update, FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget, and FY 2022-24 Biennial Capital Improvement Program Budget

EXTERNAL
May 23, 2022
Re: Restoration of VAP staffing
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Esteemed City Councilmembers, and City Staff, I am writing to urge the restoration of services and staffing that were cut at Virginia Avenue Park's Teen Center at the onset of the pandemic in 2020.

Virginia Avenue Park (VAP) is one of Santa Monica's most beloved parks and is at the heart of the City of Santa Monica. VAP is known for its responsiveness to the needs of the Pico neighborhood and its socioeconomically diverse community members. Established in 2005, VAP's esteemed Teen Center—comprising five distinct, but connected work and activity spaces—is where our local 13‐18 year olds find a safe place to study, receive tutoring and mentoring, access supportive services, and pursue extracurricular activities like art and audio production. It is also where many under‐resourced Santa Monica teens take their first steps towards envisioning a future beyond high school. The Teen Center historically attracts well over 150 youth annually with an average daily attendance of 60. Since 2011, the VAP Teen Center has awarded over 50 Santa Monica seniors with scholarships to make their college dreams a reality.* (see below for more detail)  The City Council's past financial support of the Teen Center demonstrates our City's commitment to the lifelong learning of our residents, from cradle to career.

Unfortunately, since the budget cuts required letting go of staff members, and multiple adult staff are required by law for the Center to operate because the Teen Center works with youth, the Center has all but gone dark. High School students, many of whom come from vulnerable families with one or both parents working minimum wage jobs, have had no place to go after school for enrichment opportunities. As a result of the isolation and uncertainty, we have seen our youth struggle with mental health challenges. Seniors have missed out on assistance with college financial aid, grants, and scholarship applications. This jeopardizes their ability to plan for post‐secondary education at one of the most critical junctures in their young lives.

Now that Santa Monica is experiencing a significant increase in revenues, it is time to reinstate cut positions into the upcoming budget cycle and to accommodate the new staffing legal requirements. Currently the Teen Center is only open 4 to 6 hours a week and can only serve 20+ middle school youth. VAP desperately needs a full‐time coordinator and part‐time staffing in order to fully reopen the Teen Center for 30 hours a week (2:30 to 8:30, Monday through Friday), resume programs, and offer a range of services to over 150 teens, including additional programs that focus on student mental health and wellness. The coordinator will be responsible for Item 4.B
05/24/22
26 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 2 planning homework and enrichment programs, conducting outreach, engaging artists and enrichment instructors, and supervising additional on‐site staff.

VAP staff members are at the heart of our Teen Center and its programs. Without them, the program cannot exist nor operate fully or effectively. Likewise, many of the students who come to VAP face family or financial challenges—along with other significant barriers to success—despite their great potential. Indeed, many of our Teen Center youth begin coming to the Park as elementary students for afterschool care and enrichment.

By reinstating these important positions, the VAP Teen Center will continue to serve as a resource for Santa Monica youth and ensure that students from the Pico neighborhood and beyond thrive throughout their teenage years and into the next chapter in their lives.

With appreciation,
Barbi S. Appelquist
Santa Monica resident
Virginia Ave. Park Advisory Board, Chair
*As in the past, we will continue to raise over $5,000 in private scholarship funds each year for students who will be graduating from a Santa Monica‐based public high school each spring. VAP scholars have been accepted into a college, university or trade school with plans for matriculation. A scholarship in the $500 to $1,000 range helps subsidize things like food and housing, textbooks, computer supplies, and transportation costs such as bus fares or gas. We know from past recipients that this type of unrestricted funding can often be the difference between a student persisting in their studies or dropping out because of a minor setback.

Item 4.B
05/24/22
27 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ann Maggio <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 6:21 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 4B

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
FULLY FUND OUR LIBRARIES and OPEN THEM FULLY NOW.

You look and sound ridiculous for saying this can't happen now and now one believes you can't do this.

End the agenda to break up the community by sticking to your false narrative on this point.

Is this just another end goal to further Mayor Sue's three cheers for public private partnerships that will FOREVER remove our public spaces from the hands of the public? Fifty six staff members isn't enough. Plus we need police and security at each location.

Ann Maggio Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."  ‐ Albert Einstein Item 4.B
05/24/22
28 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: santa monica <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 9:41 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Clerk Mailbox; [email protected]
Subject: Item 4b confirm receipt

EXTERNAL

1.Residents want the parklets to stop being allowed by resident apartments as it interferes with Comfort & enjoyment of our residences.

2. Please add security gate and security cameras to structure 10.

The gate needs to close this structure to public at midnight latest as we have endless interrupted nights.  Residents have been subjected the loud crowds that return from the bars on 1200 block 3rd street nightly & weekends worse. Late nights we can’t even keep our windows open in our apartments. This is directly related to 1212 restaurant &  Casa Martin & Cabo Cantina loud music and the “ partying  crowds “they attract.

We need your assistance & appreciate your attention to this urgent matter.

Residents 1100 block 3rd ‐4th street.

Sara Lee
(310)428‐6232
Sent from my iPhone
Item 4.B
05/24/22
29 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Clerk Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 8:17 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Structure 10 safety. Urgent matter to residents 1100 block 3rd street.

From: santa monica <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 9:31 PM
To: Clerk Mailbox <[email protected]>; Stephanie Venegas <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Structure 10 safety. Urgent matter to residents 1100 block 3rd street.

EXTERNAL
Date: May 23, 2022
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Structure 10 safety. Urgent matter to residents 1100 block 3rd street.

We want this addressed at 5/23/22 meeting:

Re item 4B: We want to request “funding” for structure 10 security. As we were told  by SMPD there is no funding to provide security in this structure.

We want a security guard or cameras or closed off by metal gate by midnight so residents are not subjected the the  severe nightly  noise nuisance we currently experience from the public on our residential block.

We were told this is a city parking lot and we need it to be secured from the riff raff that party’s in it nightly.

We have endured enough,
Please add this in the Budget as closing this lot off at midnight will improve the quality of life for residents in the 1100 block 3 rd street.

Note: the new parklets all restaurants are getting right by resident living quarters is really not acceptable as they create more noise and take away too much parking. These restaurants don’t all need extra outdoor space. We want this addressed as it significantly impacting quality of life for residents. We did a survey and weee never  contacted  back about it.

We appreciate your assistance.
“ Santa Monica Residents matter.”
Item 4.B
05/24/22
30 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 2 Sara Lee
1100 block 3rd& 4th street residents
representative.
(310)428‐6232
Sent from my iPhone
Item 4.B
05/24/22
31 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Elan Glasser <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 10:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 5/24/22 Meeting, Item 4-B / Proposed Budget

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, City Council and City Manager:

As you recall, in 2020 the City of Santa Monica slashed its library budget by around 65%. Staffing in the library's Youth Services (children's) department was cut by around 80%.

Of all the departments cut in the city budget, the library was given some of the most severe cuts.

The library branches remained closed to in-person services until a few months ago. In February, the library budget was increased by a small amount, still a pale shadow of its former operating budget.

Many residents have expressed strong support for restoring library funding at numerous council meetings, and were assured that our libraries are a priority for Council. It has now been 2 long years.

To this day, the library branches are operating on a skeleton staff, with the Main library open—with limited hours—only 4 days a week, most branch libraries open only 2 days a week for a few hours, and the Fairview branch is still shuttered.

The current staff report notes that "only three locations have in-person service and one branch with self-service, overall operating at approximately 33% of previous levels” and that “youth programs are at 30% or less of previous levels.”
Libraries are not only a place to check out books and read. Among programs that have been cut are afterschool programs, tutoring programs, youth services, story times for children, and ESL. Some of the most vulnerable members of our community, such as seniors and low-income families rely on our library services.

The budget that staff is proposing for 2022-23 has only a budgetary error correction for the libraries, and no real increase in library funding nor staff, even as the overall city budget calls for adding about 47 FTE (full-time equivalent) positions across a variety of services in the City.

Surely the departments that were hit the very hardest should be at the top of the list for these 47 FTE positions.

Of a city budget of around 400 million dollars, a few million dollars—approximately 1%—would nearly restore our libraries to full service.

If there is a will, there is a way.

I urge the City Council to direct staff to reprioritize our beloved libraries and redirect funding to the libraries in the upcoming budget.

Thanks for your consideration!
Elan Glasser
Santa Monica Resident
Item 4.B
05/24/22
32 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 11:18 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Sue Himmelrich; David White
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: City Council 5/24 item 4-B -- FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget -- SMO and Fairview

EXTERNAL
May 24, 2022

To: Mayor Himmelrich and City Council members
From: Zina Josephs
RE: Agenda item 4-B -- FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget

I urge the City Council to increase support for two items essential to my neighborhood, Sunset Park:

1) The planning process for converting Santa Monica Airport to a Great Park when the airport closes in 2029, which is referred to in the staff report. Even if funds are not immediately available to implement such a plan, I get very tired of pilots trying to scare the community into keeping the Airport open with dire reports that City Council members are currently talking about putting thousands of houses on the Airport campus, creating another Playa Vista, etc., etc. We are sick of the noise and lead emissions from the thousands of prop plane landings and takeoffs every month, as well as black carbon and ultrafine particles from the jets.

2) Re-opening the Fairview Branch Library at least one day a week. While the current plan is to begin self-service in the Fall, this library also serves as a community center for our neighborhood, and self-service does not allow for that.

While Montana Avenue Branch, on the north side of town, is open Tuesdays and Thursdays -- https://smpl.org/MontanaBranch.aspx --

The Main Library downtown is open Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, and Saturdays. https://smpl.org/MainLibrary.aspx

The Pico Branch is open Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri, and 1st Saturdays of the month -- https://smpl.org/PicoBranch.aspx -- but it is a tiny library which does not really allow for social distancing, and it has very few books.

The Fairview Branch has been closed since the restructuring.

Fairview is spacious; it has large collections of children's, young adult, and adult books; a lovely patio; a community room which was well-used before the closure; and the library was updated to the tune of about $1 million around 2016.

Out in front are brick pavers inscribed with the names of many Sunset Park residents who purchased them to help fund the update. The brick paver fundraiser was chaired by one of our former FOSP Board members, Ellen Mark, who used to attend events in a brick paver costume that she had to crawl into, in order to publicize the fundraising effort. This is a library that the community cares about. Please allow us to use it again.

Thank you for your consideration of these two requests.

4B. Financial Status Update, FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget, and FY 2022-24 Biennial Capital Improvement Program Budget

Item 4.B
05/24/22
33 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 12:01 PM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White
Subject: City Council Mtg. 5/24/22- Item 4.B - Maintaining Clean and Safe Public Space -- Reed Park needs budget allocation to do exactly that

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
The budget outlines no support for Reed Park to ensure a clean and safe public space; one of three key strategies of the city.  Please place Reed Park on the Urgent Needs to address a park that has been in decline and certainly not clean and safe for the public for years.

Thank‐you
Elizabeth Van Denburgh
Wilmont Chair
Item 4.B
05/24/22
34 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Recreation and Parks Commission
May 24, 2022
Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street,
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Proposed Budget and Historic Belmar Park scoreboard Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,

On March 19th, 2022, the Recreation and Parks Commission studied the proposed budget and noted it contained no reference to a scoreboard for Historic Belmar Park.

The Historic Belmar Park field is a huge success. Among the unusual and fortunate things about it is it came in both ahead of schedule and under budget -- upwards of $1 million under! At the time the cost savings on the field was confirmed, talk began of adding the final piece to make the field a first-class athletic facility, a scoreboard. Intervening circumstances of the pandemic and city budget crisis led to the overage going back to the general fund or the public works budget. Hence, the comparatively modest cost of a scoreboard, approximately $75,000, was never allocated.

A scoreboard is a necessary part of a first-class sports facility shared by the entire community. It would also make the field more attractive to organizations who rent the field thereby making the field a greater source of revenue generation for the city,
The Recreation & Parks commission voted unanimously to request that $75,000 be added to its budget to purchase a scoreboard.

Sincerely,
Lori Brown
Lori Brown
Chair, Recreation and Parks Commission
cc: Recreation and Parks Commission
Andy Agle, Director of Community Services Department
Jeanette Gant, Community Recreation Manager
David White, City Manager
Item 4.B
05/24/22
35 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Recreation and Parks Commission
May 24, 2022
Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street,
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Recreation & Parks Commission Budget Proposal 2022 Letter Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
The Recreation and Parks Commission studied the proposed budget allocations for both Recreation & Parks and Public Works at its meeting on May 19, 2022.

Several things were painfully evident:
• There is a functional as well as a financial disconnect between Recreation & Parks and its needs as a result of Recreation being part of one city entity, Community Services, and Parks being part of an entirely different entity, Public Works. Hence, decisions were made without taking into consideration the interdependence of the two now-separated branches for recreations and parks facilities and services.
• In no area is this clearer than field/park maintenance’s need for $145,000 for bare-bones maintenance having been denied in the proposed Public Works budget. Without the necessary maintenance, the field facilities and other popular park areas will be negatively affected in terms of condition, utility and safety, thereby hindering or removing community recreation programs that rely on maintained sports fields and the permit fee revenue generated by their use. Moreover, unmaintained fields will continue to deteriorate, requiring restoration which is far more expensive than continued maintenance. The “savings” purportedly created by not maintaining the fields and parks are thus illusory. The risks to safety and health created by eliminating the maintenance function must also be considered, along with the community upset created by such lack of care. • This certainly is not the time to cut maintenance and support of outdoor space which will result in long term damage, health, and safety concerns, and ignoring the desires and needs of the residents for our outdoor, extremely limited greenspace.

Item 4.B
05/24/22
36 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) • In addition to granting $145,000 for the needed maintenance, although not directly or solely tied to field maintenance, Public Landscape’s separate need for one additional team crew leader should be granted as well.

With respect to the Recreation & Parks proposed budget and the Public Works/ Public Landscape proposed budget, the Recreation and Parks Commission had NO input into either, unlike in previous years. The city staff who presented the proposal for Community Services, were unable to explain how/why certain items were given priority for substantial funds, while other, seemingly more urgent uses for funds were ignored. For example, more than $1 million was allocated for Virginia Park, while other urgent matters received nothing or close to nothing. And within Virginia Park, there were substantial allocations for “improvements” (as opposed to necessary repairs) while safety defects in Virginia Ave Park’s children’s playground were not considered, nor funded for repair. We were told the budget allocations could not be revisited and could not be explained to us because the presenters didn’t know what they were specifically for or what they cost. Hence, the commission whose function it is to advise City Council on Recreation and Parks matters was presented with a budget proposal with NO opportunity to contribute our extensive knowledge.

The Recreation and Parks Commission voted to support the budget, but with stated misgivings to be expressed to City Council as set forth herein about the process, and lack of input and information which left us in a take it or leave it position. Among those misgivings was the mystery of why Thelma Terry building repairs, painting, and “improvements” for example, were Recreation and Parks budget items and not Public Works budget items.

Knowing it hasn’t been an easy year, we especially appreciate the hard work that staff put into preparing the respective budgets and are particularly grateful to Matthew Wells who attended our study session and provided valuable information about the role and needs of Public Landscape and how they relate to Recreation and Parks.

Respectfully,
Lori Brown
Lori Brown
Chair, Recreation and Parks Commission
cc: Recreation and Parks Commission
Andy Agle, Director of Community Services Department
Jeanette Gant, Community Recreation Manager
David White, City Manager
Item 4.B
05/24/22
37 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) Recreation and Parks Commission
May 24, 2022
Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street,
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: FSAC support for an additional budget allocation to the Public Landscape Division Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,

The Recreation and Parks Commission received the following motion from its advisory subcommittee, the Field Sports Advisory Council, which motion was unanimously passed at their meeting of May 18, 2022.

FSAC Motion:

The City of Santa Monica Field Sports Advisory Council recognizes the important role that youth sports have played in providing safe outdoor recreation opportunities for our community during the pandemic. As one of the only safe options for young people to come together during the pandemic, our parks and sports fields have gotten intensive use over the last few years and the impacts of this use are significant. While we have all worked together to manage the impacts of increased usage and decreased City staff and budget, the Field Sports Advisory Council would like to clearly express our support for an additional budget allocation to the Public Landscape Division so that the City can perform important sports field restoration and maintenance throughout our system. Additional staff and budget are essential to address the impact of the pandemic usage on our sports fields and ensure that we have adequate, well-maintained, and safe facilities in our community. The Field Sports Advisory Council recommends the City Council restore one park maintenance crew leader to support necessary daily field maintenance and restoration work and provide an additional $85,000 annually for critical field space maintenance and restoration needed.

Please note that the $85,000 number was obtained from information provided by Matthew Wells that deducted amounts that could be “saved” by forgoing other needed maintenance, such as cleaning the pond at Douglas Park.

The Recreation and Parks Commission is asking for the full $145,000 needed by Public Landscape for field and related park maintenance since the projects which would have to be forgone in order to supplement a portion of the unbudgeted field and park related park maintenance are needed projects in our parks that should not have to be sacrificed at all.

Sincerely,
Lori Brown
Lori Brown
Chair, Recreation and Parks Commission
cc: Recreation and Parks Commission
Andy Agle, Director of Community Services Department
Jeanette Gant, Community Recreation Manager
David White, City Manager
Item 4.B
05/24/22
38 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: Study Session Item 4.B. Financial Status Update, Attachment B, the Proposed FY 2022-24 Biennial CIP Budget - Santa Monica Airport
From: Sandra Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 11:23 AM
To: Phil Brock <[email protected]>; Sue Himmelrich <[email protected]>; Kristin McCowan <[email protected]>; Christine Parra <[email protected]>; Oscar de la Torre <[email protected]>; SANDRA SMITH <[email protected]>; sandra smith <[email protected]>
Cc: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>; David White <[email protected]> Subject: Study Session Item 4.B. Financial Status Update, Attachment B, the Proposed FY 2022‐24 Biennial CIP Budget ‐ Santa Monica Airport

EXTERNAL

Dear Council Members,
In anticipation of your Study Session Item 4.B. Financial Status Update, Attachment B, the Proposed FY 2022-24 Biennial CIP Budget, I (we) desire clarification regarding the following projects:
 Project C0828 ‐ Airport Conversion Planning ($4,350,000 from FY23 to FY26)  Project C0468 ‐ Airport Reconfiguration ($525,000 from FY23 to FY27) By proposing these significant capital projects at a time when the city is highly cash constrained that are specifically justified as requiring community input and involvement, the projects indicate that (1) the decision to close the airport has been made and (2) the airport will be developed and will not be the open space that was contemplated as the main selling point in passing Measure LC. Needless to say that such city-changing development runs completely counter to ALL voter and resident interests. And, if the airport is to be closed, then why spend any money out of the airport fund? Why would Project C0468 even be contemplated? These funds would represent stranded assets and a complete waste of resources which is unacceptable in this environment. They would best be kept in the airport fund and relinquished to the city once the airport fund is closed when the airport is closed. None of this makes any sense.

That approval for the expenditure of these funds is being requested without informing the voters of what major city-defining decisions that have apparently already been taken, then it’s clear that there is no mandate from the voters to approve, let alone spend, these monies. But more importantly, as the decision to close and develop the airport appears to have been taken without informing the public, who has an absolute right to know. And when is the council thinking of informing the voters of the Item 4.B
05/24/22
39 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 2 massive infrastructure, traffic, and potential subsidy costs inherent in such a decision and how such costs are going to be funded?
Let there be no mistake, the apparent decision to close the airport will have been made behind closed doors, and with an outcome that NONE of the voters want. One need only look at the Gelson’s project to understand where the voters stand on development. By not informing the voters of this development decision, the Council is acting not better than the developers who told the residents that since they comply with state law, none of the input matters. That is the experience residents get when dealing with unresponsive interests focused on their own well-being. This kind of treatment is NOT what the voters expect from their elected representatives.

Gelsons’s was only 4.4 acres. When faced with a choice of over 200 acres of similar development at the airport, the voters must have the right to debate and decide on what happens, including leaving the aviation use as is. The voters must have the option to preserve the existing irreplaceable low density land use that provides the critical quality of life throughout Sunset Park as well as prevents the city incurring massive spending liabilities that will burden all the city’s residents for decades to come. The residents just told the Council that they are in no mood for more direct taxes since they clearly rebuffed (by close to 60%!) the notion of a direct parcel tax to fund the libraries. This would generate direct costs and quality of life degradation that are orders of magnitude beyond anything the residents have seen. Frankly, it is why the voters thought they were approving LC – to avoid this exact scenario!
And, if the argument is to be made that a decision has not been taken to development the airport, then why is staff proposing to spend $4.35 million (or more) of very scarce General Fund money on C0828 with the justification that “With local control of the airport set to arrive in 2029, it is imperative that a planning and community outreach process begin as soon as possible.” Just as a reminder to the Council, under Measure LC, the City Council can approve the following uses of the Airport land without voter input:
 Development of parks
 Public open spaces
 Public recreational facilities
 Maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts and education uses Clearly, none of this is happening. This is a denial of the residents’ right to be appropriately represented and informed. We would not have expected such a unscrupulous developer-type move from the staff and Council.

This capital budget item should be denied until the decisions that have been reached are presented to the community for proper consideration.

For over thirty years, Santa Monica City has wasted millions on futile legal actions and dead end projects involving the airport. I want to know what decisions have been made and what scenarios are being modeled in the original budget item.

Sincerely, Sandra (by the Beach) Smith
Item 4.B
05/24/22
40 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Pauline McPeake <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 4:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 5/24/22, Agenda Item 4B - FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members:

As the Council considers the FY 2022-2023 budget and allocation to the Human Services Grants Program (HSGP), it must recognize that investments in early childhood are critical to our local workforce and ensure positive outcomes for children and families in our community.

Through the HSGP, the Growing Place Marine Park can provide infant and toddler childcare, the most underserved group in our City (children under three years) to full-time working Santa Monica families. More importantly, the HSGP-funded subsidy program gives low-income Santa Monica families access and opportunities to ensure a high-quality experience for their young children.

Access to childcare for children as young as three months allows working mothers to return to the workforce, continue their education, and contribute to secure housing. Moreover, the outcomes for children of a quality early childhood education program are immeasurable; jumpstarting lifelong learning, developing kindergarten readiness, and building prosocial behaviors.

Currently, the Growing Place Marine Park, with support from the HSGP:
 100% of families enrolled in the infant/toddler program are full-time working  93% of the children graduating from our program will enter SMMUSD schools  50% of the families enrolled reside in the Pico neighborhood (90404/90405) As the recovery from the pandemic continues, and the workforce gains momentum, availability and affordability are essential for working families in Santa Monica.

Growing Place Marine Park has committed to serving very young children of working families with exceptional care and early education for twenty years. We urge the City to continue its commitment to its young families so that Santa Monica remains a vibrant and inclusive city for its residents.

Sincerely,
Pauline McPeake
Executive Director
Growing Place
www.growingplace.org
‐‐
Item 4.B
05/24/22
41 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 2 To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. http://www.growingplace.org
Pauline McPeake
Executive Director | Growing Place
1802 4th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
310-434-3811
To help protect your
privacy, Micro so ft Office
prevented automatic
download of this picture
from the Internet.

To help protect your
privacy, Micro so ft Office
prevented automatic
download of this picture
from the Internet.

To help protect your
privacy, Micro so ft Office
prevented automatic
download of this picture
from the Internet.

For the privacy and protection of our families, this email is intended for the sole use of the original recipient(s). Images or documents contained within belong to Growing Place. If you are not the intended recipient, we request that you please notify us, by reply email, and destroy all copies of the message and any attachments. Thank you for your cooperation.

Item 4.B
05/24/22
42 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Sandra Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 5:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fwd: Study Session Item 4.B. Financial Status Update, Attachment B, the Proposed FY 2022-24 Biennial CIP Budget - Santa Monica Airport

EXTERNAL
Begin forwarded message:

From: Sandra Smith <[email protected]>
Subject: Study Session Item 4.B. Financial Status Update, Attachment B, the Proposed FY 2022-24 Biennial CIP Budget - Santa Monica Airport
Date: May 24, 2022 at 11:22:36 AM PDT
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], SANDRA SMITH <[email protected]>, sandra smith <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected], [email protected]

Dear Council Members,
In anticipation of your Study Session Item 4.B. Financial Status Update, Attachment B, the Proposed FY 2022-24 Biennial CIP Budget, I (we) desire clarification regarding the following projects:
 Project C0828 ‐ Airport Conversion Planning ($4,350,000 from FY23 to FY26)  Project C0468 ‐ Airport Reconfiguration ($525,000 from FY23 to FY27) By proposing these significant capital projects at a time when the city is highly cash constrained that are specifically justified as requiring community input and involvement, the projects indicate that (1) the decision to close the airport has been made and (2) the airport will be developed and will not be the open space that was contemplated as the main selling point in passing Measure LC. Needless to say that such city-changing development runs completely counter to ALL voter and resident interests. And, if the airport is to be closed, then why spend any money out of the airport fund? Why would Project C0468 even be contemplated? These funds would represent stranded assets and a complete waste of resources which is unacceptable in this environment. They would best be kept in the airport fund and relinquished to the city once the airport fund is closed when the airport is closed. None of this makes any sense.

That approval for the expenditure of these funds is being requested without informing the voters of what major city-defining decisions that have apparently already been Item 4.B
05/24/22
43 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 2 taken, then it’s clear that there is no mandate from the voters to approve, let alone spend, these monies. But more importantly, as the decision to close and develop the airport appears to have been taken without informing the public, who has an absolute right to know. And when is the council thinking of informing the voters of the massive infrastructure, traffic, and potential subsidy costs inherent in such a decision and how such costs are going to be funded?
Let there be no mistake, the apparent decision to close the airport will have been made behind closed doors, and with an outcome that NONE of the voters want. One need only look at the Gelson’s project to understand where the voters stand on development. By not informing the voters of this development decision, the Council is acting not better than the developers who told the residents that since they comply with state law, none of the input matters. That is the experience residents get when dealing with unresponsive interests focused on their own well-being. This kind of treatment is NOT what the voters expect from their elected representatives.

Gelsons’s was only 4.4 acres. When faced with a choice of over 200 acres of similar development at the airport, the voters must have the right to debate and decide on what happens, including leaving the aviation use as is. The voters must have the option to preserve the existing irreplaceable low density land use that provides the critical quality of life throughout Sunset Park as well as prevents the city incurring massive spending liabilities that will burden all the city’s residents for decades to come. The residents just told the Council that they are in no mood for more direct taxes since they clearly rebuffed (by close to 60%!) the notion of a direct parcel tax to fund the libraries. This would generate direct costs and quality of life degradation that are orders of magnitude beyond anything the residents have seen. Frankly, it is why the voters thought they were approving LC – to avoid this exact scenario!
And, if the argument is to be made that a decision has not been taken to development the airport, then why is staff proposing to spend $4.35 million (or more) of very scarce General Fund money on C0828 with the justification that “With local control of the airport set to arrive in 2029, it is imperative that a planning and community outreach process begin as soon as possible.”
Just as a reminder to the Council, under Measure LC, the City Council can approve the following uses of the Airport land without voter input:
 Development of parks
 Public open spaces
 Public recreational facilities
 Maintenance and replacement of existing cultural, arts and education uses Clearly, none of this is happening. This is a denial of the residents’ right to be appropriately represented and informed. We would not have expected such a unscrupulous developer-type move from the staff and Council.

This capital budget item should be denied until the decisions that have been reached are presented to the community for proper consideration.

Item 4.B
05/24/22
44 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) 3 For over thirty years, Santa Monica City has wasted millions on futile legal actions and dead end projects involving the airport. I want to know what decisions have been made and what scenarios are being modeled in the original budget item.

Sincerely, Sandra (by the Beach) Smith
Item 4.B
05/24/22
45 of 45 Item 4.B
05/24/22

4.B.j
Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget) City Council – May 24, 2022
Financial Status Update and Budget Study Session for the FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget and FY 2022-24 Biennial Capital Improvement Program

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Agenda – Budget Study Session

1. Proposed FY 2022-23 Budget / Financial Status Update

2. Capital Improvement Program FY 2022-24 Biennial Budget

3. City Fees and Rates

4. Revenue Measure Discussion
2 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Santa Monica's Budget Process
3 The Budget is the result of collaboration between the community, City Departments led by the City Manager’s Office, and the City Council June
Adoption of
the first year
of the Biennial
Budget and
Public Hearing
October
Staff reports on
year-end budget
performance,
proposes
adjustments
January/February
Staff reports on midyear
budget performance,
updated forecast,
proposes adjustments
May 24 • Proposed Biennial CIP
Budget document
available to the public • Proposed Budget
presented to City
Council
June 28
Adoption of
the second
year of the
Biennial
Budget and
Public Hearing

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget Overview – FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
4 FY 2022-23 Proposed Budget
Citywide Expenditures - $664.7 million* • FTE Change: • +43.2 Permanent • +4.1 As-needed General Fund - $393.5 million • FTE Change: • +14.7 Permanent • +1.9 As-needed *Citywide expenditures are net of reimbursements and transfers between funds

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Economic Climate
• Recovery is happening
• Unemployment rate has fallen sharply from pandemic levels • Inflation is highest in 40 years, rising interest rates • Supply chain issues, Ukraine disrupting market
• Uncertainty about COVID’s short and long term impact
• City labor negotiations with 9 employee bargaining units Staffing shortages
Higher costs
Delays
5 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Ongoing Challenge: General Fund Revenues Still Lagging

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement General Fund Financial Forecast Update
Fiscal Resiliency Components • Revenue and expenditure
projections reflect economic
climate • Including all we can to still keep a
balanced budget • Continue to leverage ARPA funds
to stay afloat • Gradual rebuilding of reserves • Capital budget restored in FY 2025-26 • Pay FY 2020-21 Measure GSH to
Housing Trust Fund • Resume pay down of unfunded
pension liability 7

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Status of City Services
8 Services continue to operate at reduced levels
• Library services at approximately 33%
• Youth programs at 30% or less
• Mobility on Demand program at 75%
• Miles Playhouse, Camera Obscura Art Lab closed
• Permitted park events - no Facilities Maintenance support • Graffiti removal, alley paving, tree pruning, and sports field maintenance at reduced frequencies • Capital projects continue to wait for funding

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement General Services:

Incremental Rebuilding Paired with New Needs
9 Using Federal CARES and ARPA funds, savings and revenue growth Support services as they reopened
• In-person services at Main Library and 3 branches, Permitting, Youth and Recreation programs Safe & Clean
• Personal protective equipment (PPE), Health restriction compliance, Trash collection, Downtown safety deployment, Pier Vending Task Force
Homelessness and prevention
• Therapeutic van and CRU, Multi-disciplinary street teams, Tenant counseling, Homeless services delivery audit Economic Recovery
• Outdoor dining, Rent abatement, Stipends and emergency assistance Furthering progress based on values
• Racial equity, GSH payments to affordable housing, 311

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Urgent Needs
• ~$2.5M One-Time Funds
• Pier Vending Task Force
• Volunteer Coordinator
Zero cost adjustments to strengthen
services in:
• Customer Service (311)
• Partnerships
• Permitting and Park Planning
• Cybersecurity
• Facility Maintenance
• Aquatics
• Public Safety Officer Program
• Fire Inspections
• Business License outreach and compliance
• Multi-modal Mobility Network
Corrections and Adjustments
• ~$674,000
• Revenue-sharing Measure GSH
• Increased Gas Tax funding
• Corrections to fully fund existing
staffing in City Manager's Office,
Community Services and Library
General Fund Expenditure Changes Total FTE Changes 16.6 Permanent 14.7
As-Needed 1.9

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Self Sufficient Funds • Water, Wastewater, Big Blue Bus • Airport, Housing Authority, Cemetery, Community Broadband • Stormwater Management Fund and Special Revenue Source Fund Funds Requiring Attention • Resource Recovery & Recycling (RRR) will remain self-sufficient through FY 2023-24 and is evaluating the need for rate changes in 2023
Non-Self Sufficient Funds • Beach Fund and Pier Fund were significantly impacted by the pandemic and rely on support from the General Fund, ARPA Funds, and Special Revenue Source Fund to maintain a positive fund balance
Other Funds Financial Forecast Update
11 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement • Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project Expenses (Wastewater, Clean Beaches & Water Funds)
• Transportation Capital Projects Management support position (Special Revenue Source Fund)
• Adjustment for revenue-sharing Measure GSH (Special Revenue Source Fund)
• Positions to enhance customer service, maintain and expand operations (BBB Fund, Community Broadband Fund, Beach Fund, and RRR Fund)
Other Funds Expenditure Changes
Total FTE Changes 30.7
Permanent 28.5
As-Needed 2.2

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Net increase of approximately $0.4 million: • Airport Fund – $1.2m increase from new leases • Beach Fund - $1.3m decrease in parking revenues • Big Blue Bus Fund - $0.8m reduction in grant reimbursement from decreased capital expenditures • Gas Tax Fund - $0.6m increase in State Gas Tax apportionment revenues • Miscellaneous Grants Fund - $2.3m increase from grant awards and reimbursements • Pier Fund – $0.6m increase from percentage rents • Wastewater Fund - $0.9m decrease in pass-through revenues for Capital Facilities Fees and Amalgamated System Sewerage Facilities Charges • Water Fund - $1.4m decrease in Capital Facilities Fees and Water Meter Installation Fees • Other Funds - $0.1m increase Other Funds Revenue Changes

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Capital Improvement Program
14 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement CIP Budget Process & Funding Sources
• CIP Budget Process
Biennial Budget – FY 2022-23 and FY 2023-24
Five-year planning period FY 2022-23 through FY 2026-27 CIP review and recommendations to Council
• Funding Sources
General Fund
Enterprise Funds
Grant Funds
Local Return Funds

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement CIP Budget Priorities *
• Mandated Activities
• Council / Community Priorities
• Fiscally Responsible Projects
*Proposed projects represent critical infrastructure needs, projects that cannot be deferred without compromising essential operations or public health and safety or generate revenue.

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Budget Summary by Fund
100 Projects in the Proposed Budget
Will bring the total CIP portfolio to 243 projects
All Funds (20)
FY 2022-23: $88.4 million
FY 2023-24: $96.1 million
General Fund
FY 2022-23: $13.8 million
FY 2023-24: $13.1 million

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Diverse Funding Sources

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement CIP Budget Trends (in millions)
$239
$186
$231
$94
$71
$101 $109
$146
$67 $75
$7 $9 $14 $13
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
FY 17-18 FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 FY 21-22 FY 22-23 FY 23-24 All Funds General Fund

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 444 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement CIP Program Areas of Focus
Maintaining Clean and Safe Public Spaces
Park Improvements and Planning
Water & Stormwater Projects
Modernization of critical City Infrastructure

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 445 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Maintaining Clean and Safe Public Spaces

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 446 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Park Improvements and Planning

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Water & Stormwater Projects

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Modernization of Critical City Infrastructure

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Unfunded CIP Categories
Estimated at
$300M
Infrastructure Maintenance
New Infrastructure
Parks
Pier and Beach
Planning
Streetscape and Lighting

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Unfunded CIP Projects (Not Comprehensive)
Unfunded Projects
• Parking Structure 1 Seismic Retrofit
• Memorial Park Expansion
• City Yards Modernization
• Lincoln Neighborhood Corridor
Streetscape
• Street Light Upgrades
• Vehicle and Computer
Replacement
• Airport ParkExpansion
• Memorial Park Phases 2-3
• Fire Station7
• Historic City Hall North Wing
Building System Upgrade
• Pier Deck Upgrades
• Pier West End Upgrade

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement City Fees and Rates • Parklet Program Fee Structure • Fire Department Fees • Cemetery Fees 27 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Transient Occupancy Tax
• 50% + 1 vote to pass
• Increase tax on hotel stays by
1%
• Increase tax on vacation rental
properties by 3%
Over $4M in new revenues
Library Parcel Tax
• 66.67% vote to pass
• $0.07 per square foot single
family
• Various fixed rates for multi-unit,
commercial and industrial
$4M in new revenues dedicated
to the Library
Revenue Measure Update

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement 2022 Santa Monica
Voter Survey Results
Conducted by Goodwin Simon Strategic Research
for the City of Santa Monica
May 2022

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Methodology
• The purpose of the survey was to explore the viability of two possible revenue measures for the November
ballot: • An increase in the city’s transient occupancy tax (TOT) • A parcel tax to support Santa Monica public
libraries
• Results are based on a representative sample of 700
Santa Monica voters likely to participate in the 11/22
general election
• The survey was fielded May 3 to May 9, 2022 online
via text and email invitations and by land and cell
phone
• Margin of error = +/- 3.67% at a 95% confidence level • 1% of interviews completed in Spanish 30 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement General attitudes
about the city and
its priorities
31 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Homelessness and crime are seen by voters
as the most urgent problems in Santa Monica
24%
25%
18%
11%
30%
33%
55%
82%
Traffic
Trash/litter in downtown/beach areas
Crime
Homelessness
Urgency of Problems Facing the City
1= not urgent, 5 = very urgent
4 rating 5 rating
32 93%
73%
58%
54%
4+5

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 457 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Priorities for the Post-Pandemic Period
33 27%
21%
27%
34%
36%
20%
41%
52%
49%
48%
49%
67%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Committing to racial equity and inclusion
Making the city more affordable
Making the city more sustainable
Helping community members and businesses with economic recovery Restoring public services that were reduced during the pandemic Enhancing public safety
Importance of Each as City Considers New Policies
Somewhat important Very important
73%
68%
76%
82%
85%
87%
Very + Somewhat Important

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 458 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Response to
Proposed Ballot
Measures
34 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 459 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement TOT measure:

Vote result:
70% definitely/probably yes
21% no
“To address homelessness, improve 911 emergency
response times and neighborhood police
protection, make public areas safer and cleaner,
including streets, sidewalks, parks, and the beach,
and provide other vital City services, shall the City
of Santa Monica increase the transient occupancy
tax – which is paid entirely by overnight visitors --
by 1% for hotels and motels, and by 3% for vacation
rental properties, providing approximately $4.1
million annually, until ended by voters, with all
funds benefiting Santa Monica?”
35 This measure would need 50%+1 vote to pass.

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Library Tax Measure:

Vote result:
41% Definitely or Probably Yes
51% no
“To restore funding needed to reopen Santa
Monica Public Library branches closed during the
pandemic, restore and expand library hours, add
books and other library materials, and expand
programs, services, and digital access for seniors,
students, and other residents, shall the City of
Santa Monica levy a tax of $0.09/square foot for
single-family homes, with different rates for other
property types, adjusted annually, raising about
$4,000,000 per year for 20 years, with all funds
used only for Santa Monica public libraries?”
36 This measure would need a 66.67% vote to pass. It starts with 41% of likely voters who would definitely or probably vote yes. Cutting the tax rate to 5 cents/square foot raises support to 48% who would definitely or probably vote yes, still far below the two-thirds threshold.

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Top Preferences for
uses of the TOT
funds
37 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Top responses to proposed uses of TOT
funds
38 Uses of TOT Funds
Strongly
favor
SW
favor
All
favor
All
oppose
Address homelessness in SM 70% 15% 85% 13%
Reduce crime and enhance safety in
SM neighborhoods 67% 20% 87% 9%
Make public areas including streets,
sidewalks, and parks safer and
cleaner
62% 26% 88% 9%
Reduce crime and enhance safety in
downtown area 62% 23% 85% 11%
Reduce crime and enhance safety in
beach areas 61% 27% 88% 11%

4.B.k
Packet Pg. 463 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement Recommendations

1. We do not suggest moving forward with the library
tax for the November, 2022 election. The poll finds
that a library parcel tax would not attain the
supermajority vote required for approval.

2. We do recommend that the City moves forward with
a measure on the November, 2022 ballot to increase
the TOT.

3. We suggest communicating to voters the need for
additional resources to enhance safety and address
homelessness.
39 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 464 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement June 28 – Public Hearing: Adoption of the FY 2022-23 Exception Budget • Final changes
• Resolutions
July – Formal approval to place tax on ballot
Next Steps
40 4.B.k
Packet Pg. 465 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (4754 : 22-23 Proposed Budget and 22-24 Capital Improvement City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: May 24, 2022
Agenda Item: 7.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cola, Interim City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.40.050 to Extend the Term of the Santa Monica Outdoors Pilot Program
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

Executive Summary
At its meeting of May 10, 2022, the City Council adopted for first reading an ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.40.050 to extend the term of the Santa Monica Outdoors Pilot Program.

The ordinance is now presented to the City Council for adoption.

Prepared By: Heidi Von Tongeln, Deputy City Attorney
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. 2022.05.24_Ordinance extending 6.40.050 2d read

7.A
Packet Pg. 466
1 City Council Meeting: May 24, 2022 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER ___________(CCS)
(City Council Series)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 6.40.050 TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE

SANTA MONICA OUTDOORS PILOT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, on June 8, 2021, the City Council adopted Emergency Ordinance No. 2673, establishing Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 6.40, which implemented the Santa Monica Outdoors Pilot Program and continued the authorization originally provided in the City’s supplements to its declaration of the existence of a local emergency for eligible businesses temporarily to use certain outdoor public property for dining and other business activities; and
WHEREAS, the Santa Monica Outdoors Pilot Program is set to expire on June 30, 2022; and
WHEREAS, staff is in the process of working on a permanent parklet program and anticipates returning to Council on June 28, 2022 with a new program to replace the Santa Monica Outdoors Pilot Program that would be adopted by ordinance and go into effect by late summer 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City has an important government interest in maintaining a thriving business community and protecting the health, safety, and economic welfare of its citizens and businesses; and
WHEREAS, extending the term of the Santa Monica Outdoors Pilot Program to September 30, 2022 will facilitate business recovery, generate increased sales tax

7.A.a
Packet Pg. 467 Attachment: 2022.05.24_Ordinance extending 6.40.050 2d read [Revision 2] (5146 : Second Reading Ordinance to Extend Santa Monica 2 revenue for the City, and provide City staff the time necessary to develop and bring to Council a permanent parklet program as well as transition interested businesses to, as applicable, the new parklet program or a sidewalk dining permit and license agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 6.40.050, Pilot program term, is hereby amended to read as follows:

6.40.050 Pilot program term.

Permits issued pursuant to this Chapter shall terminate and be of no further force or effect beyond September 30, 2022, unless otherwise extended or terminated earlier by the City at its discretion and consistent with any noticing requirements set forth in the administrative regulations or the licensing agreement between the City and the eligible business.

SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.

SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not

7.A.a
Packet Pg. 468 Attachment: 2022.05.24_Ordinance extending 6.40.050 2d read [Revision 2] (5146 : Second Reading Ordinance to Extend Santa Monica 3 declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from its adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
SUSAN Y. COLA
Interim City Attorney

7.A.a
Packet Pg. 469 Attachment: 2022.05.24_Ordinance extending 6.40.050 2d read [Revision 2] (5146 : Second Reading Ordinance to Extend Santa Monica City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: May 24, 2022
Agenda Item: 8.A
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David White, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works Department Subject: Approval to Rename Goose Egg Park Located at 600 Palisades Avenue to Bob Holbrook Park
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council consider the Recreation and Parks Commission's recommendation to officially rename Goose Egg Park to Bob Holbrook Park.

Summary
In honor of his many years of public service and contributions to the Santa Monica community, the Recreation and Parks Commission voted to recommend renaming Goose Egg Park to Bob Holbrook Park at its January 20, 2022 meeting (attachment A).

Former Santa Monica Mayor and Councilmember Bob Holbrook was the longest serving Councilmember, first elected in 1990 and retiring in 2014. Mayor Holbrook was a Santa Monica native who was particularly proud of his work to expand and invest in our City parks and who has a particular attachment to Goose Egg Park from when he was a child. In total, Mayor Holbrook dedicated 32 years to public service, serving both on the City Council and the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District School Board. Mayor Holbrook passed away December 11, 2020, at the age of 79. Final decisions on naming parks rests with the City Council. Therefore, staff now presents this recommendation to Council for its consideration.

8.A
Packet Pg. 470
2 of 5
Discussion
Bob Holbrook
A native son, Mayor Holbrook was born at St. Catherine’s Hospital on 4th Street and educated in Santa Monica schools: Roosevelt Elementary, John Muir Elementary, John Adams Middle, and Santa Monica High School. After graduating, Mayor Holbrook went on to study at Santa Monica College (SMC), while working at McCarthy Drug Store on Montana Avenue. After his time at SMC, Mayor Holbrook attended the University of Southern California and studied pharmacology. He later joined the California Air National Guard and returned to Santa Monica to work as a pharmacist at Thrifty Drug Store. In 1967, Mayor Holbrook married Jean Ann. Together, they raised three children in Santa Monica. As a lifelong Santa Monican who attended local schools, he remained a passionate advocate for education. He was also an ardent supporter of his alma mater, the USC Trojans.

Mayor Holbrook served on the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District Board from 1982 to 1990, when he was first elected to the Santa Monica City Council. He served as Mayor twice, first from December 1997 to December 1998 and then again from December 2005 to November 2006. During his tenure on the City Council, Mayor Holbrook sought ways to address homelessness and improve the quality of Santa Monica’s public spaces. He was particularly proud of his work to expand and improve the City’s parks. Mayor Holbrook was instrumental in building Tongva Park in the Civic Center, and a memorial at Woodlawn Cemetery to honor local veterans, many of whom sacrificed themselves in service of this nation. He retired from the City Council in 2014 after thirty-two years in service to this City.

In February 2018, the City Council contributed seed funding for the Mayor Bob Holbrook Scholarship in honor of Mayor Holbrook to support the education of young Santa Monicans pursuing a career in public service. Mayor Holbrook died December 11, 2020 after a long illness.

8.A
Packet Pg. 471
3 of 5
Naming City Parks
In July 2002, the City Council approved a policy for naming City-owned land, buildings and facilities, including City parks (attachment B). The policy outlines the procedure to be taken and guidelines for naming.

Procedure
Requests for naming of City-owned land, buildings and facilities are to be submitted to the City Clerk and include a justification for the recommended name. All requests will be considered by staff and the appropriate Board(s) or Commission(s), who will evaluate the recommended name within six months following receipt of a request.

Upon completion of deliberations at a public hearing, the staff and advisory body will forward a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council will make its determination as to the naming or renaming of City-owned land, buildings and facilities at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Council.

Guidelines
Included in the adopted policies are a set of guidelines that Council, advisory bodies and staff should consider when naming City owned assets. These guidelines are:
• Commemorating persons who have served the City in an exceptional manner; • Commemorating persons who have served the State, Nation or World in an exceptional manner and who have an association with the City; • Commemorating persons who have served the State, Nation or World in an exceptional or distinguished manner where the contribution is of such major significance that a local association pales in importance; • Commemorating individuals or organizations who have made important donations of land, funds or materials, equipment and/ or facilities; • Avoiding recognition of those whose contribution has been appropriately recognized in other City venues or by other means.

8.A
Packet Pg. 472
4 of 5
Staff have reviewed this policy and believes all steps have been followed to now present this for Council consideration. The Recreation and Parks Commission held a public meeting and discussion on the renaming of Goose Egg Park at its January 20, 2022 meeting. The Commission unanimously supported the recommendation and submitted a letter to the City Council following the meeting.

Following receipt of that letter, staff examined the City naming policy and found procedures were properly followed and complied with the spirit of the guidelines.

Renaming Goose Egg Park to Bob Holbrook Park complies with all of the above guidelines. Given his considerable contributions and length of public service, staff believes it is appropriate to move forward with renaming the park at this time.

Goose Egg Park
View of Goose Egg Park encircled by Palisades Avenue
Believed to be named because of its oval shape, Goose Egg Park is located within the center of Palisades Avenue between 4th and 7th Streets in the North of Montana Neighborhood. The park was included in the original 1905 neighborhood subdivision as an aesthetic feature. It is approximately 0.7 acres and features turf and trees. It is commonly used by residents to exercise, meditate, visit with neighbors, and enjoy Santa Monica’s beautiful weather. Goose Egg Park was selected as the most appropriate for renaming because of Mayor Holbrook’s personal childhood attachment and fondness for the park.

8.A
Packet Pg. 473
5 of 5
Next Steps
Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.55.020 “Park and beach—Definitions” and Section 4.55.030 “Park and beach—Fitness or athletic instruction, classes or camps authorization” would be amended to reflect the change in park name, as would the City’s website. And the Community Services Department webpage with park information would be updated to reflect the new name. Replacement of the existing park rules sign to reflect the change in park name would cost $2,000-$3,500. Existing Public Works Department budget will be used to cover these nominal costs.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Description
7/9/2002
Attachment C
Adoption of a resolution establishing a policy regarding naming of City owned-land, buildings and facilities.

Financial Impacts
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of recommended action.

Prepared By: Christopher Smith, Assistant to the City Manager Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. RPC Letter to Council re Goose Egg Park
B. July 9, 2002 Staff Report on Naming City Public Facilities (Web Link) C. Resolution on Naming City Facilities
D. Written Comments

8.A
Packet Pg. 474
1685 Main Street, Room 240, Santa Monica, CA 90401 • (310) 458- 8310 • [email protected]
santamonica.gov • @cityofsantamonica • @santamonicacity Recreation and Parks Commission
February 2, 2022
Mayor Himmelrich and City Council Members
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street,
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Renaming of Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Council Members,
At its January 20, 2022 meeting, the Recreation & Parks Commission acted unanimously on the Motion and concluded to change the name of Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park.

This letter is to petition City Council to take action regarding Goose Egg Park, we are recommending changing the name to Holbrook Park in honor of our former Mayor Bob Holbrook and longest serving city council member who served as a strong advocate to improve our public parks within Santa Monica. Councilmember Holbrook said he was also proud of the of the parks that have been built or improved under his watch. We learned of his personal childhood attachment and fondness for Goose Egg and determined that Park most appropriate for renaming.

Thank you for your time and consideration
Lori Brown
Lori Brown
Chair, Recreation and Parks Commission
cc: Recreation and Parks Commission
Andy Agle, Director of Community Services Department

8.A.a
Packet Pg. 475 Attachment: RPC Letter to Council re Goose Egg Park (5116 : Renaming Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park) F:\ cmanager\ staff rpts\ reso naming public facilities. doc City Council Meeting: July 9, 2002 Santa Monica, CA
RESOLUTION NUMBER 9779 ( CCS)
City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA REGARDING

NAMING PUBLIC FACILITIES
WHEREAS, the Santa Monica City Council wishes to establish a policy regarding naming of City owned land, buildings and facilities,

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby establishes the following procedures for the naming of City-owned land, buildings and facilities:

A. Requests for naming City-owned land, buildings and facilities may be submitted by the public, City staff, and related advisory bodies such as the Recreations and Parks Commission, Library Board and Landmarks Commission. The requests may be to the City Clerk in writing, accompanied by a justification for the recommended name( s). All requests will be referred to the Department having jurisdiction over the land, building or facility and to the appropriate Boards( s) or Commission( s) for deliberation. Staff and related advisory bodies will evaluate the recommended name within six months following receipt of a request.
1 8.A.c
Packet Pg. 476 Attachment: Resolution on Naming City Facilities (5116 : Renaming Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park) B. Upon completion of deliberations at a public hearing, the staff and advisory body will forward a recommendation to the City Council.

C. The City Council will make its determination as to the naming or renaming of City- owned land, buildings and facilities at a
regularly scheduled meeting of the
Council at which staff, representatives of advisory bodies and civic organizations and the general public may offer testimony.

D. In naming public land and buildings, the City Council and its advisory bodies shall consider the following:

Incorporating " Santa Monica" in the name where it is
important for civic or other reasons for a building or facility to be identified with the City;
Recognizing geographic, topographic or historical features or events associated with Santa Monica;
Commemorating persons who have served the City in an
exceptional manner;
Commemorating persons who have served the State, Nation or World in an exceptional manner and who have an association with the City; Commemorating persons who have served the State, Nation or World in an exceptional or distinguished manner where the contribution is of such major significance that a local association pales in importance; Commemorating individuals or organizations who have made important donations of land, funds or materials, equipment and/ or facilities; 2 8.A.c
Packet Pg. 477 Attachment: Resolution on Naming City Facilities (5116 : Renaming Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park) Avoiding recognition of those whose contribution has been appropriately recognized in other City venues or by other means.

E. The City Council will not name any buildings, land or facilities after current office holders.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
3 8.A.c
Packet Pg. 478 Attachment: Resolution on Naming City Facilities (5116 : Renaming Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park) j'1/ I/
r
Y., < J/ t>tL.

Michael Feinstei"
Adopted and approved this 9th day of July, 2002.

I, Maria M. Stewart, City Clerk of the City of Santa Monica, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 9779 ( CCS) was duly adopted at a meeting of the Santa Monica City Council held on the 9th of July, 2002, by the following vote:

Ayes: Council members: Holbrook, O'Connor, Bloom, Genser Noes: Council members: Mayor Pro Tem McKeown, Mayor Feinstein Abstain: Council members: None

Absent: Council members: Katz

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 479 Attachment: Resolution on Naming City Facilities (5116 : Renaming Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Tom Larmore <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 11:03 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 8A

EXTERNAL
Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmembers:

We’re very pleased to be able to support the renaming of Goose Egg Park in honor of former Mayor and Councilmember Bob Holbrook.  Bob was not only the longest serving member of the Council but was born and raised, and lived almost all of his life, in Santa Monica and served his community in many ways, including the Council and the School Board.  We hope you will take favorable action on this item.

Tom and Karon Larmore
439 7th Street
Item 8.A
05/24/22
1 of 1 Item 8.A
05/24/22

8.A.d
Packet Pg. 480 Attachment: Written Comments (5116 : Renaming Goose Egg Park to Holbrook Park)

13.A
May 24, 2022
Council Meeting: May 24, 2022 Santa Monica, California
1 of 1
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE - MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records & Elections Services Department
Date: May 24, 2022

13.A Request of Councilmembers Brock and Davis that, in support of the annual Fourth of July parade along Main Street: (1) the City should co-produce the parade along with the Ocean Park Association; (2) the City should establish a pilot program that would allow the 2022 parade to be staged in the southernmost beach parking lots and then travel from those lots in a northern route on Main Street to the Civic Center; and (3) that the Council allocate $15,000 of its discretionary funds to the Ocean Park Association to help defray costs associated with producing the parade.

13.A
Packet Pg. 481

13.B
May 24, 2022
Council Meeting: May 24, 2022 Santa Monica, California
1 of 1
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE - MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records & Elections Services Department
Date: May 24, 2022

13.B Request of Councilmembers Negrete and Brock that the City Council direct the City Manager and City Attorney to return to the Council with an ordinance amending Section 3.12.600 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to allow a limited number of non-electric pedicabs on the beach bike-path.

13.B
Packet Pg. 482
1 Vernice Hankins
From: Yazmin Monet Watkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 3:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path Greetings,
My name is Yazmin Monét Watkins and I am a resident of North Hollywood who visits and enjoys the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path often. One of my favorite experiences on the bike path was in the creation of a queer skate that I helped put together to create safe space for queer skaters. The human powered pedicabs helped accomplish that goal and i hope that they can stay in the community. (please see video of said queer skate event here: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CQE3KobJwOa/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y= ) I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations*.” This is an effective, safe, fun and carbon neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. *from the webpage for Office of Sustainability and Environment; https://www.santamonica.gov/departments/public‐ works/office‐of‐sustainability‐and‐the‐environment
Walk in Balance,
Yazmin Monet Watkins
Item 13.B
05/24/22
1 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 483 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Marc Urrutia <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 4:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
I simply do not understand why pedicabs on the bike path at the beach is even an issue.  This is a great activity for southern Californians and tourists alike.

I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS
operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience.

They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more "sustainable" and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"‐SM Sustainability & Environment This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Sincerely,
Marc Urrutia.  Native Californian since 1972
Sent from my iPhone
Item 13.B
05/24/22
2 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 484 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Michael Duffy <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 4:13 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non-motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"-SM Sustainability & Environment This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path
Item 13.B
05/24/22
3 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 485 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jennifer Kaplan <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 4:40 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, (like me!!) handicapped, and elderly visitors access to the iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more "sustainable" and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"‐SM Sustainability & Environment This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path
Thank you,
Jennifer Kaplan
[email protected]
310‐945‐6035
JenniferKaplan.me
Item 13.B
05/24/22
4 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 486 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Mark Nestra <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 6:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non‐motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.

They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more "sustainable" and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐ being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"‐SM Sustainability & Environment This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Thank you and have a great day.

Sincerely,
Mark Nestra
415‐309‐2344
IG: mrk_san_francisco
mrksf.com

Item 13.B
05/24/22
5 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 487 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ellen Rowland <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 9:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
To the council,
RE: Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. *from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; https://www.santamonica.gov/departments/public‐works/office‐of‐sustainability‐and‐the‐environment Please take this seriously. Many people depend on this as their main source of income and by banning them you'll be increasing unemployment and depriving many people of a brilliant and sustainable mode of transport.

I thought California was a progressive state ‐ I would love to see you prove me right by allowing these amazing riders to do their jobs.

Best wishes,
Ellen Rowland
Item 13.B
05/24/22
6 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 488 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Meryl Goodwin <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 9:03 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Issue with New Bike Lane Construction on 17th - LOCAL BIKER

EXTERNAL
Hello,
My name is Meryl Goodwin and I am a resident of 1952 18th street in Santa Monica and an avid biker in the city.

Right now there is construction happening on 17th street near my apartment for a "new" dedicated/blocked‐off bike path. This is nice in theory, however, we already HAD a dedicated bike lane that was safe and wonderful for bikers.

Having now biked the finished sections of this new construction, I've noticed the path has become MORE unsafe for bikers; the asphalt/terrain has become torn up from construction, the lane doesn't allow for bikers to pass each other because of the cement dividers, debris/trash piles up blocking the path because street sweepers are unable to clean it anymore, rocks/gravel everywhere that pop holes in tires etc. I don't understand why we're wasting taxpayer dollars on something that was fully functional before only to deliver a WORSE option for bikers. If we are trying to protect bikers, at LEAST make the new "dedicated path" clean and functional, just like we do for drivers.

PLEASE fix this bike path; we should be adding lanes to roads that don't offer bike lanes NOT ruining perfectly functional ones.

Thank you,
Meryl
‐‐

MERYL GOODWIN
Video Editor
C: 361-658-8660
www.merylgoodwin.com
Item 13.B
05/24/22
7 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 489 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Joel Robinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 6:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
To whom it may concern,
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Additionally, you are stifling entrepreneurship, and we live in a capitalist society. *from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; https://www.santamonica.gov/departments/public‐works/office‐of‐sustainability‐and‐the‐environment Sent from my iPhone
Item 13.B
05/24/22
8 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 490 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Sarah Ramirez <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 2:15 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"‐SM Sustainability & Environment
This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
9 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 491 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 7:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path The pedicabs are so helpful to everyone. It helped me and my wife when she was not able to walk to see and get around everywhere. They become my friend. I support them.

I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. *from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; Sent from my iPhone
Item 13.B
05/24/22
10 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 492 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Valli <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, May 22, 2022 7:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Kumar
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I visited California a few weeks ago with a broken foot! Seeing the Santa Monica beach was one thing that I actually enjoyed because of these amazing non‐motorized pedicabs! I was able to enjoy each and every part of the beach and the board walk thanks to them. They are also super friendly with everyone and are so convenient.

I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. *from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; Item 13.B
05/24/22
11 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 493 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 3 Item 13.B
05/24/22
12 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 494 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 4 Item 13.B
05/24/22
13 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 495 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 5 Sincerely,
Valli Bhatter
Sent from my iPhone
Item 13.B
05/24/22
14 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 496 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Sushma Raghu <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 7:39 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code) Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
Dear Sir/Madam
I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. *from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment.

Thank you.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
15 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 497 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Grima Chavarkar <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 7:17 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code) Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Item 13.B
05/24/22
16 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 498 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: abhilash abhi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 7:13 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
17 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 499 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Brandon Rinaldi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 9:41 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code) Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations..

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and
Carbon Neutral option to help
solve the problem of transporting
the millions of guests, both local
and visiting, that come to this city
to enjov a day in the sun just like
they've seen in their favorite
movies and TV shows. Let's
move forward with allowing

HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS
on the Santa Monica Beach Bike
Path.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
18 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 500 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Cas Tro <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 12:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non-motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike.

They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.
*from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; https://www.santamonica.gov/departments/public-works/office-of-sustainability-and-the-environment Item 13.B
05/24/22
19 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 501 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Marvetta Evans <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 4:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda Item No. 13.B (Amending section 3.12.600 of Municipal Code)

EXTERNAL
To Whom It May Concern:

Please review the attachment to allow Human Powered Pedicabs in Santa Monica.

I totally support having the Human Powered Pedicabs in full operation in Santa Monica because it is safe, non‐motorized and thus an essential service for the City of Santa Monica's both local and international tourists alike. The benefits are too vast to mention,  but an example of their service enables the handicapped, disabled and the elderly to ride, enjoy the scenic route of Santa Monica.

Moreover, banning Pedicab service would be an injustice to the above‐mentioned protected class and group of people.

Certainly, the City of Santa Monica does not want to do that or be known for this type of cruelty.

Again, please do the right thing by allowing this essential service to continue.

Respectfully,
Marvetta R. Evans
Item 13.B
05/24/22
20 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 502 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Heather Murray <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 3:18 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Pedicabs in Santa Monica Agenda Item 13 B

EXTERNAL
To whom it may concern,
I support having human powered pedicabs.

I urge you not to remove the pedicabs from the bike path in Santa Monica or surrounding areas. They are in fact a wonderful addition to the bike path. They assist in safely transporting out of town guests and locals to and from places along the boardwalk. They allow family fun and a collective unity with the locals. They assist is helping elders have the opportunity to enjoy a bike ride by the beach without concern of how they may be able to do so. Again, I urge you to not remove this wonderful asset. It would be a sad, huge mistake.

Sincerely,
Heather Murray
Sent from my iPhone
Item 13.B
05/24/22
21 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 503 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: juan cas <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 23, 2022 12:45 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non-motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike.

They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.
*from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; https://www.santamonica.gov/departments/public-works/office-of-sustainability-and-the-environment Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
Item 13.B
05/24/22
22 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 504 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Val McCarthy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 6:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. *from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; Item 13.B
05/24/22
23 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 505 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Tracy Dempsey <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 6:29 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code) Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
24 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 506 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Jessica K <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 6:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code) Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non-motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
25 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 507 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Tafarai Bayne <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 1:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Keith Brown!
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code)

EXTERNAL
Greetings:

I am sending this letter in support of allowing human‐powered pedicabs on the Santa Monica Bike path. Pedi‐Cabs I've used have operated professionally, safely and have provided a carbon‐Neutral/sustainable way to get from Venice to Santa Monica and off the path to destinations in both cities. We've even included pedicabs at our open street and events and again have found them extremely safe.

I believe restricting these services is a step backward and make the beach less accessible, not more.

I've included an official petition below as well.

Chief Stategist
CicLAvia
Tafarai BAyne
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non-motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike.

They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.
*from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; https://www.santamonica.gov/departments/public-works/office-of-sustainability-and-theenvironment ‐‐
Item 13.B
05/24/22
26 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 508 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 2 "Please do not feel obligated to reply to this email outside of your normal working hours. I am aware my working day may not be your working day."
Tafarai Bayne (he,him,his), Chief Strategist
c: 310.743.2589 | o: 213.355.8500 |CicLAvia.org
facebook | twitter | instagram | linkedin
Contribute today or start a monthly donation to CicLAvia.

Getting rid of an old car? You can donate that in support of LA open streets too!

To help pr
privacy, M
prevented
download
from the In
Mailtrack Sender notified by
Mailtrack   05/24/22, 01:30:09 PM
To help protect your
privacy, Micro so ft Office
prevented automatic
download of this picture
from the Internet.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
27 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Shweta Sood <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 2:06 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item number 13. B. (Amending section 3.12.600 of municipal code) Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. They offer a safe, non‐ motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike. They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic.  They help Santa  Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well‐being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. *from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment; Item 13.B
05/24/22
28 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 510 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Val McCarthy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 4:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path

EXTERNAL
Petition To Allow Human Powered Pedicabs on The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path I support having HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS operating on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path. We offer a safe, non-motorized, and essential service for The City of Santa Monica's locals and international tourists alike.

They are also providing disabled, handicapped, and elderly visitors access to this iconic, globally recognized one of a kind destination; one they otherwise would not be able to experience. They help mothers and fathers enjoy the beach with children of all ages, senior relatives here for a visit or teenagers on crutches healing a broken bone without fear of separation or injury from passing bike or pedestrian traffic. They help Santa Monica in meeting its goal to become more “sustainable” and "use the power of community to enhance our resources, prevent harm to the natural environment and human health, and benefit the social and economic well-being of the community for the sake of current and future generations"*.

This is an Effective, Safe, Fun and Carbon Neutral option to help solve the problem of transporting the millions of guests, both local and visiting, that come to this city to enjoy a day in the sun just like they've seen in their favorite movies and TV shows. Let's move forward with allowing HUMAN POWERED PEDICABS on the Santa Monica Beach Bike Path.

*from the webpage for City of Santa Monica Office of Sustainability and Environment;

In addition to this, I would like to say in my own words that this is really not fair to people who are working off of low money supply. First off it's difficult as it is to market business but when it's your own business you want it to thrive to the best of its capacity as well as help others as much as you can. In many businesses they care only about the money but in this one it's not only the money that counts. It's the thrill of being able to push your limits physically using a bike to tow everyone around and also having the people being in the caddie enjoy the life around them to its fullest potential without polluting the environment unlike so many vehicles tend to do. It's not only fun but also safer for our planet. So many people talk about helping preserve what's left of our world and taking out pollution but doing it is completely different which is what all Human Powered Pedicabs are actually doing. Being able to ride on the beach in a pedicab is one things that is not replaceable to any other experience, especially in california. It's something I wish I could do and many others dream of on a romantic night or just to enjoy the sunset to its fullest. It's not only helping with tourism but it's also making life more vibrant and beautiful. Having this kind of entertainment on the beach is much more preferable than to have it from a road with other cars and motorized vehicles and honestly just doesn't make any sense to have a bike on the road when all the others get to use the bike path on the beach. It ruins the experience. Just think about wanting a peaceful evening ride but then having fumes of gasoline in your face from other vehicles and all that noise. It makes it undesirable and just a complete downer.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
29 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 511 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: samo_wayne1 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 5:32 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Kristin McCowan
Subject: Item 13.B

EXTERNAL
While I support human powered pedicabs on the bike beach path, what I don't support is rewarding bad behavior. There are some bad actors who routinely and willfully ignore the current regulations regarding pedicabs on the bike path and give code enforcement officers a hard time. If they have no regard for the rules now, why would they have regard when and if pedicabs are allowed on the bike path? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqMOxlD9Ul4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YNxrYJfteY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hl8e7rLAPSc
Sent with ProtonMail secure email.

Item 13.B
05/24/22
30 of 30 Item 13.B
05/24/22

13.B.a
Packet Pg. 512 Attachment: Written Comments (5155 : Pedicabs on the Bike path) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: May 24, 2022
Agenda Item: 14.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Written Comments
Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

14.A
Packet Pg. 513
1 Vernice Hankins
From: SM <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2022 5:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SM Airport noise impact of residents

EXTERNAL
We are hearing noise from footers and small planes all week snd  weekends  worse ‐ all dsy no breaks! (310)428‐6232
Sent from my iPhone
Item 14
05/24/22
1 of 4 Item 14
05/24/22

14.A.a
Packet Pg. 514 Attachment: Written Comments (5158 : Written Comments) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: FRANCINE LYNESS <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 11:09 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Hello

EXTERNAL
I have called the fairly new 311 # to get parking Dept info etc.  they put me on long holds and quite often cannot assist.

Can we just get the reception at city hall reinstated.  This is wasting citizens of SM time.

I am still holding now
Fran Lyness
Item 14
05/24/22
2 of 4 Item 14
05/24/22

14.A.a
Packet Pg. 515 Attachment: Written Comments (5158 : Written Comments) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: John Smith
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2022 1:58 PM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Kristin McCowan; David White; Douglas Sloan; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 14 - Public Comment - 5-24-22
Attachments: SM CC UNITY LETTER 052422.docx
I've embedded and attached my comments for this item.

Item 14 – Public Comment ‐‐ Unity
Good evening/morning, Mayor, Council, City Manager, City Attorney, I’m hoping to leave work by 11 p.m. tonight to deliver this message in person. If not, this will have to do.

I work in TV news so I see the divisiveness that drives and consumes politics in Washington DC every day.

It’s killing our country and hurting us here in Santa Monica.

We’re all tired of it, its holding us back and it’s up to you council members, along with our City Manager and City Attorney, to help end it.

If we don’t, we’ll fail.

Let’s all start looking in the mirror instead of the magnifying glass.

It’s an election year so politicians tend to pull back and retreat, careful to say non‐committal things that mean little, so essentially, nothing will change.

I say do the opposite. Work together, focus on big issues and lead the way on them instead of fighting over them.

That’s what real leaders do. And the greatest succeed because they bring people together.

Sounds a little “Rah‐rah” but it’s really just the plain, hard truth.

Too many of us go for the jugular too often and too quickly.

Good government starts with getting along. Make THAT your first pillar. Then maybe we stand half a chance at advancing on the others.

Thank you, and please watch your in‐box for my email about the Memorial Park Expansion, and how we can break ground within one year.

Item 14
05/24/22
3 of 4 Item 14
05/24/22

14.A.a
Packet Pg. 516 Attachment: Written Comments (5158 : Written Comments) 2 Let’s get busy.

Sincerely,
John C. Smith, Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commissioner Item 14
05/24/22
4 of 4 Item 14
05/24/22

14.A.a
Packet Pg. 517 Attachment: Written Comments (5158 : Written Comments)