Agenda packet — Santa Monica City Council, July 26, 2022 (part 5 of 5)

Thanks,
Pradeep Thiyanaratnam
Santa Monica City Councilmembers, at your meeting on July 26th regarding agenda items 11‐B and 11‐D we urge you to:
• Place on the November ballot a Charter Amendment to lower the General Adjustment Cap from 6% to 3% for the long term, but for the short term from January 1, 2023, to September 1, 2023, lower it to 2%, with an absolute dollar cap of $50,
• In addition, please support the other Charter Amendment requests of the Rent Control Board providing a rent registry for non‐controlled rental units, setting term limits at three terms, and, • Reject the developer‐backed Real Estate Transfer Tax measure sponsored by Councilmember Phil Brock because its purpose is to try to undercut the citizens’ initiative and because it provides no money for affordable housing or any meaningful or guaranteed money to protect struggling low‐income renters and seniors from homelessness.

Please do the right thing for Santa Monica residents and Santa Monica values today! Item 11.D
07/26/22
266 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1251 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: diane williams <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 10:05 AM
To: Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; [email protected]
Subject: Items 11-B and 11-D Protect Renters, Help Affordable Housing on July 26! I Santa Monica City Councilmembers, at your meeting on July 26th regarding agenda items 11‐B and 11‐D we urge you to:
• Place on the November ballot a Charter Amendment to lower the General Adjustment Cap from 6% to 3% for the long term, but for the short term from January 1, 2023, to September 1, 2023, lower it to 2%, with an absolute dollar cap of $50, • In addition, please support the other Charter Amendment requests of the Rent Control Board providing a rent registry for non‐controlled rental units, setting term limits at three terms, and, • Reject the developer‐backed Real Estate Transfer Tax measure sponsored by Councilmember Phil Brock because its purpose is to try to undercut the citizens’ initiative and because it provides no money for affordable housing or any meaningful or guaranteed money to protect struggling low‐income renters and seniors from homelessness.

Please do the right thing for Santa Monica residents and Santa Monica values today! Sent from my iPhone
Item 11.D
07/26/22
267 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1252 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment)

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES
AAGLA
“Great Apartments Start Here!”
621 S. WESTMORELAND AVE., LOS ANGELES, CA 90005 | 213.384.4131 | AAGLA.ORG Danielle Leidner-Peretz
Director, Government Affairs &
External Relations
[email protected]
213.384.4131; Ext. 309
July 26, 2022
Via Electronic Mail
Hon. Mayor Sue Himmelrich, and
Members of the Santa Monica City Council
City Hall – Council Chambers
685 Main Street, Room 250
Santa Monica, California 90401
Re: Adoption of Resolutions for Proposed Ballot Measures on the November 8, 2022 Election Amending Article XVII of the City Charter (Agenda Item 11.D) Dear Hon. Mayor Himmelrich and Members of the Santa Monica City Council:

At tonight’s Santa Monica City Council meeting, the Council will consider advancement of several proposed measures to revise the City Charter Rent Control provisions for placement on the November 2022 ballot. These proposed amendments would significantly reduce the current annual general adjustment limit of 6% by half to a mere 3% and apply that drastic reduction not only to future annual general adjustments but also to the current 2022 general adjustments for owners who are prohibited from issuing a rent increase until after January 1, 2022. Moreover, the Council will be reconsidering a ballot measure that would provide the City’s Rent Control Board (RCB) with unilateral authority to suspend or reduce allowable rent increases during any declared state of emergency. The Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles (Association) is strongly opposed to all of the proposed ballot measures and strongly urges the City Council to reject their placement on the November 2022 ballot.

As stated in a recent letter submitted by the Association to the City Council, rental housing providers are already reeling from the financial impacts caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, related government mandates and challenging rent collections over the last several years, and with many small business, “mom and pop” property owners already on the verge of selling or losing their property. This adverse financial situation has only been compounded by runaway inflationary pressures affecting the whole economy and a current inflation rate which is now at 9% or more. The loss of small business, “mom and pop” housing providers that furnish the bulk of the City’s naturally occurring affordable housing units, would be an enormous loss to the City and a potentially devastating reduction in much needed affordable housing.

Capping the Annual General Adjustment regardless of the current inflation rate is already extremely problematic but how can the City Council even consider cutting that cap by half, from 6% to 3%, thereby further guaranteeing that rental property owners cannot keep up with inflation? How would owners even ‘cover’ the very basic costs of operating and maintaining a building let alone meet the costs of their living expenses and basic needs? Moreover, the proposal would not only reduce future general adjustments, but Item 11.D
07/26/22
268 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1253 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment)

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES
AAGLA
“Great Apartments Start Here!”
621 S. WESTMORELAND AVE., LOS ANGELES, CA 90005 | 213.384.4131 | AAGLA.ORG it would also apply the current 2022 general adjustment unequally to City residents, as rental housing providers who, based on the general adjustment parameters, are precluded from issuing a rent increase until after January 1, 2023. The City has provided no rational basis for the unequal application of the 2022 general adjustment which will effectively result in two different permissible rent increase calculations being applied based solely upon portion of the year they are issued.

During highly inflationary periods, such as we are currently experiencing, where cost of all goods and services are rapidly escalating, it is critical that the rent increase formula provide independent “mom and pop” rental housing providers with the ability to properly maintain their buildings and the constitutionally mandated reasonable return. Extreme actions, as the ones being proposed by the City Council will most certainly cause small business rental housing providers to exit this business thereby drastically reducing the already scarce affordable housing and exacerbating the City’s housing availability and affordability problems.

We strongly urge the City Council to recognize the detrimental and devastating impacts this proposal will have on Santa Monica rental housing providers and the very renters that the City is seeking to protect and to reject this ballot measure’s placement on the November 2022 ballot. • Board Authority to Deny Rent Increases During States of Emergency The Association is strongly opposed to the proposed ballot measure which would grant the City’s Rent Control Board autonomous discretion to freeze rent increases during any declared state of emergency without qualification.

This proposal was discussed and rejected by the City Council at the July 12th Council meeting, in favor of placing such authority in the sole discretion of the City Council. City Staff are now indicating that due to issues identified relative to “the structure of the Charter and its delegation of authority; and 2) competing state law which would preclude suspension of rent increases by the City Council outside the rent control framework in Article XVIII of the City Charter” that the City Council should reconsider granting the Board unilateral authority. While the Association is strongly opposed to the City Council or the Board being provided such authority, the Rent Control Board is not the City’s governing body and should not be granted the proposed emergency powers.

The COVID-19 pandemic was an unprecedented event and one that resulted in government response that many would contend exceeded the scope of local emergency authority. The proposed ballot measure far exceeds the emergency powers that localities have exercised during the pandemic by providing the Board sole discretion to eliminate rent increases during any state of emergency regardless of a direct impact to Santa Monica residents. Accordingly, we strongly urge the City Council to reject advancement of this ballot measure proposal.

The Association has continually advocated for reasonable and equitable solutions. Unbalanced regulations such as those being proposed merely compel housing providers, particularly the small business, independent owners who have been the city’s provider of naturally occurring affordable housing, out of business through sale or foreclosure, and ultimately a further erosion of available rental housing occurs that adds to the city’s housing shortages. After more than four decades of similar regulations, Santa Monica has done little to solve its housing affordability and availability issues – it is time that the City Council puts the City on a new path towards achieving these critical objectives.

Item 11.D
07/26/22
269 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1254 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment)

APARTMENT ASSOCIATION OF GREATER LOS ANGELES
AAGLA
“Great Apartments Start Here!”
621 S. WESTMORELAND AVE., LOS ANGELES, CA 90005 | 213.384.4131 | AAGLA.ORG Thank you for your time and consideration of these matters. If you have any questions, please call me at (213) 384-4131; Ext. 309 or contact me via electronic mail at [email protected].

Very truly yours,
Danielle Leidner-Peretz
Danielle Leidner-Peretz
Item 11.D
07/26/22
270 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1255 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Brian O'Neil <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 2:08 PM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis
Cc: David White; Susan Cline; Anuj Gupta; PNA SM; Brian ONeil Subject: Approval of Article XXIV for November Ballot

EXTERNAL
To: City Council
From: The Board of the Pico Neighborhood Association
Re: Support for Placing Proposed Article XXIV on November Ballot, Council meeting of July 26, 2022 The Board of the Pico Neighborhood Association urges the City Council to approve that the proposed addition (Article XXIV) to the Charter of the City of Santa Monica be put before the voters on the November ballot so that the voters of Santa Monica can vote in November to add this necessary article to our City Charter.

The proposed addition (Article XXIV) – see below -- would provide for reasonable City oversight to ensure that future large-scale developments in our city provide as much real affordable housing as possible, a key goal not just for the Pico neighborhood, but for all of Santa Monica.

Highest Regards,
PNA Board

Add Article XXIV to the Charter of the City of Santa Monica Section 2400 - Purposes
The purposes of this Article are to: preserve and protect the character of housing, neighborhoods, and the community; maintain social and economic diversity; protect the health and safety of Santa Monica residents; encourage the development of affordable housing within the limitations and capacity of Santa Monica's infrastructure and geography; and ensure the payment of living wages to the construction workers working on large projects in the City so they may live where they work. This Article will thereby preserve the public health, safety and welfare.

Item 11.D
07/26/22
271 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1256 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 2 As a charter city, the City of Santa Monica has the authority to control its own housing plans and to establish minimum wages for various classes of workers. The residents of Santa Monica know what is best for their unique coastal city.

Section 2401 - Recitals
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica is experiencing serious traffic, transportation, pedestrian and vehicle safety, parking and density problems, which in a number of locations are unacceptable; WHEREAS, in recent years there has been a sharp increase in the planning and construction of major developments in Santa Monica;
WHEREAS, real property value in Santa Monica has increased at a rate far exceeding market wages in the construction industry; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for Santa Monica for 2021-2029 is 8,895 units, with 6,168 of those units being affordable to low-income and/or very-low-income households.

Section 2402 - Definitions and Effect on Other Laws
"Affordable Housing Unit" shall mean any housing unit that is subject to a deed restriction, enforceable by the City of Santa Monica, requiring that the rent charged for the unit may not exceed twenty-four percent (24%) of the Area Median Income for Los Angeles County
“Prevailing Wage” shall mean the prevailing wage determined by the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations, according to the type of work and location of the Project. “Project” shall mean any construction, erection, addition to or structural alteration of any building or structure, on a lot located in whole or in part within the City of Santa Monica which requires the issuance of any building permit, foundation permit or grading permit. Notwithstanding the definition above, “Project” shall not include:

Item 11.D
07/26/22
272 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1257 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 3 a) any construction, addition or structural alteration that does not result, in combination with any continuing existing uses, in more than 2,500 square feet of floor area. b) any construction, erection, addition to or structural alteration of any building or structure, on a single lot that is no greater than 7,500 square feet
Wherever this Article contains provisions which may conflict with the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and any other relevant ordinances, this Article shall prevail and supersede the applicable provisions of that Code.

Section 2403 – Standards for Construction and Improvements The City shall adopt ordinances and regulations that ensure sufficient parking, open and recreational space, and building heights consistent with the community and neighborhood character of Santa Monica’s diverse communities.

The City shall also adopt ordinances and regulations that encourage the ratification of Project Labor Agreements and Community Workforce Agreements.

Section 2404 – Prevailing Wages
All workers employed on any Project in the City of Santa Monica, which includes commercial space, mixeduse, or more than ten (10) residential units on any single parcel, must be paid at least the applicable wage set forth in the tables below:

For Projects that include 10-50 residential units:

Percentage Affordable Housing Units Minimum Wage
At least 70% 0.8 times the Prevailing Wage
At least 50%, but less than 70% 0.9 times the Prevailing Wage At least 30%, but less than 50% Prevailing Wage
At least 10%, but less than 30% 1.2 times the Prevailing Wage Less than 10% 1.5 times the Prevailing Wage
Item 11.D
07/26/22
273 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1258 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 4 For Projects that include 51-150 residential units:

Percentage Affordable Housing Units Minimum Wage
At least 70% 0.9 times the Prevailing Wage
At least 50%, but less than 70% Prevailing Wage
At least 30%, but less than 50% 1.2 times the Prevailing Wage At least 10%, but less than 30% 1.6 times the Prevailing Wage Less than 10% 2 times the Prevailing Wage
For Projects that include 151-500 residential units:

Percentage Affordable Housing Units Minimum Wage
At least 70% Prevailing Wage
At least 50%, but less than 70% 1.2 times the Prevailing Wage At least 30%, but less than 50% 1.6 times the Prevailing Wage At least 10%, but less than 30% 2 times the Prevailing Wage Less than 10% 2.5 times the Prevailing Wage
For Projects that include more than 500 residential units:

Percentage Affordable Housing Units Minimum Wage
At least 70% Prevailing Wage
At least 50%, but less than 70% 1.4 times the Prevailing Wage At least 30%, but less than 50% 1.8 times the Prevailing Wage At least 10%, but less than 30% 2.4 times the Prevailing Wage Less than 10% 2.7 times the Prevailing Wage
For Projects which include only commercial space or are mixed-use, workers employed on such Projects in the City of Santa Monica must be paid at least 1.5 times the Prevailing Wage, or the applicable amount set forth in the tables above, whichever is greater.

Item 11.D
07/26/22
274 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1259 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 5 A Project may not be split up into several sub-projects in order to reduce the minimum wages required as set forth above.

The City Attorney is authorized to enforce the minimum wages set forth in this Section on behalf of any underpaid workers, as are any underpaid workers themselves, through an action in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

Section 2405 – Severability
If any provision of this Article or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, clauses or applications thereof which can be implemented without the invalid provisions, clause or application, and, to this end, the provisions and clauses of this ordinance are declared to be severable.

Item 11.D
07/26/22
275 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1260 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: D Romo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 2:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Rent Control

EXTERNAL
My father has lived in the Pico Neighborhood since 1972. Now as a retired 73 year old with a fixed income he is struggling to make ends meet. This 6% increase in rent control impact low income, disabled, and seniors in our community. All I ask is that the city council prioritizes those communities that are most impacted and give the residents an opportunity to do the right thing. Thank you
Sent from my iPhone
Item 11.D
07/26/22
276 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1261 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jenny Lens <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 3:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Adoption of Resolutions for Proposed Ballot Measures on the November 8, 2022 Election Amending Article XVIII of the City Charter

EXTERNAL
Hello,
Re:

Adoption of Resolutions for Proposed Ballot Measures on the November 8, 2022 Election Amending Article XVIII of the City Charter
For many Santa Monica residents, 6% rent increase can be at least $100/month or more.

For those of us senior citizens, students, working folks, that’s a hefty rent raise.

So please do all you can to cap at 2 or 3%, as you have in the past.

Frankly, many of us do not require ANY maintenance, or if we do, it’s minimal. We live simply. Some don’t have cars, live in food from 99 cent store, buy clothes at thrift stores (which are also raising prices or closing down). We don’t eat out nor order in.

BUT we contribute to the community in other ways.

Any consideration is greatly appreciated!
What happened to the People’s Republic of Santa Monica? Can we get a better balance for tenants?
Thank you,
Jenny Lens, MFA, 25 year Santa Monica resident, dreaming of living here since I was a child in the 1950s.

Item 11.D
07/26/22
277 of 277 Item 11.D
07/26/22

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1262 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter Amendment) • The annual general adjustment will be ZERO for units with rents at or below the citywide median Maximum Allowable Rent (MAR) for 2021
o MAR reported by the Santa Monica Rent Control Board for each of the four unit-size classifications.
• This methodology would ELIMINATE ALL INCREASES for units with rents below the following:
o Zero-bedroom units with MAR’s at or below $1,528
o One-bedroom units with MAR’s at or below $1,995
o Two-bedroom units with MAR’s at or below $2,500
o Three-bedroom units with MAR’s at or below $2,791
• For controlled rental units above the MAR, the current Annual General Adjustment methodology would remain in effect.
• This charter amendment will sunset four (4) years after the date of enactment. Upon expiration, the annual general adjustment methodology will revert to the current methodology.

Tenant Income Inequality Relief Plan

KEY POINTS
1 11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1263 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter The TIIRP is an equity-based methodology that prioritizes protection for those arguably most in need while continuing to protect others based on the existing city charter • This plan allows Santa Monica to take a national lead in addressing the serious issue of growing inequality
• The City’s Rent Control methodology has failed to help mitigate the impact of the growing inequality that has developed since rent control was introduced in 1979. • TIIRP relies on housing providers to supply financial resources in the form of reduced increases and to administer the program through their own rent increase submission to the Rent Control Board
• TIIRP DOES NOT ADD either additional cost or administrative overhead to the city Tenant Income Inequality Relief Plan (TIIRP)

KEY BENEFITS
2 11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1264 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter • Under the TIIRP formula, housing providers sacrifice ALL annual increases for the bottom tier 50% of the city’s rental units
o 50% (13,741) of our controlled units will not be subject to an annual rent increase o These units have the lowest rent which is related to the longest term residents least able to afford changes in costs
o Housing providers would net roughly 2/3rds of what a 3% increase would generate under the current methodology and the same as what a 2% increase would generate • TIIRP protects roughly 4,156 (43%) more units/households than the even the 9,585-household number that has been claimed as rent burdened.
• Almost all of the top 50% of controlled units have been leased since 2016 at market rates o Units were leased under standard income qualification criteria of 3x monthly lease costs o Cap of $140 equates to $4.60 per day which is not a significant issue at these levels • The Sunset provision is intended to provide Council and Rent Board flexibility:
o Provide a financial bridge to cross the currently evolving economic uncertainty of the next several years.
o Provides a period of time to develop a thoughtful and robust and up to date rent control policy that permanently address the inequality trends in our community Tenant Income Inequality Relief Plan (TIIRP)

KEY ECONOMICS
3 11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1265 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5280 : 4 Rent Control Ballot Measure Charter City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: July 26, 2022
Agenda Item: 16.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Designation of voting delegate and alternate(s) for the League of California Cities Annual Conference and Business Meeting, to be held September 7 - 9, 2022, in Long Beach, California.

Prepared By: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council

16.A
Packet Pg. 1266
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: July 26, 2022
Agenda Item: 16.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Request of Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmembers Davis and de la Torre that the City Council adopt and promote the attached statement against hate and direct the City Manager and City Clerk to incorporate its language into the City’s Code of Ethics and the City Council’s Code of Civility for public meetings.

Prepared By: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Statement
B. Written Comments

16.B
Packet Pg. 1267
Statement Against Hate
Hate has no place in Santa Monica.

Across the nation and here in Santa Monica, we have witnessed an increase in antisemitic, transphobic, homophobic, racist and discriminatory hate speech targeted at both individuals and groups. Equity and inclusion remain at the core of Santa Monica’s values, and the City will not allow abusive or threatening hate speech, intolerance, or dehumanization to prevail over basic civil respect and human decency. We will continue to celebrate, include, and uplift the diverse communities who live, work, and play in Santa Monica.

To learn more about identifying hate, and resources for LA County residents, visit LA vs Hate at LAvsHate.org. <https://www.lavshate.org/> If you are in immediate danger, call 911. If you have experienced a hate crime in Santa Monica, call the Santa Monica Police Department at (310) 458-8491.

Hate has no place in Santa Monica.

16.B.a
Packet Pg. 1268 Attachment: Statement (5272 : Stop Hate) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: oz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 11:30 AM
To: Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Kristin McCowan; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; councilmtgitems
Cc: Douglas Sloan; David White; Clara Harter; Catanzaro Sam; Jorge Casuso; Santa Monica Observer Subject: 16:B— ACLU disagrees w Himmelrich, Davis, de la Torre

EXTERNAL
Item 16.B
07/26/22
1 of 3 Item 16.B
07/26/22

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 1269 Attachment: Written Comments (5272 : Stop Hate) From: OZ
To: councilmtgitems; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Kristin McCowan; Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich
Cc: Douglas Sloan; David White; Sam Catanzaro; Jorge Casuso; Clara Harter; Santa Monica Observer Subject: OBJECT to 16-B: Censorship has no place in Santa Monica! Date: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 12:00:53 PM

EXTERNAL
This item seeks to legitimize censorship of public comments under the guise of a “civility policy.”
Censorship has no place in Santa Monica!
The First Amendment to the US Constitution still stands.

An important reminder: the government may only impose content-neutral restrictions on public comments, e.g. it can limit the time or place where public comments can be delivered. It may not restrict the comments based on subject matter or point of view.

If you’d like to reduce hate speech, design an educational campaign instead of attempting censorship of public comments.

Here’s a quote from aclu.org:
“Since its founding in 1920, the ACLU has fought for the free expression of all ideas, popular or unpopular. Where racist, misogynist, homophobic, and transphobic speech is concerned, the ACLU believes that more speech — not less — is the answer most consistent with our constitutional values.”
Or, put more tersely: the remedy for bad speech is more speech, not censorship.

An excerpt from a video entitled, “Should the US government censor hate speech?” in which Nadine Strossen, Professor of Law at New York Law School and author of “HATE: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship,” explains why free speech is enshrined in US law and why censoring hate speech actually does more harm than good:
“The best arguments against regulating hate speech are that it does more harm than good. Censorship is completely inconsistent with individual liberty, equality, and, indeed, democracy itself. Censorship does more harm than good to the very causes that advocates of censoring hate speech hope to advance. Those goals are actually undermined through censorship rather than promoted by them. Freedom of speech is essential to our democratic self-government.”
Item 16.B
07/26/22
2 of 3 Item 16.B
07/26/22

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 1270 Attachment: Written Comments (5272 : Stop Hate) And a couple quotes from a New York Times article "White America's Age-Old, Misguided Obsession With Civility," by Thomas J. Sugrue, who is a professor of history and social and cultural analysis, and also an author. The first one is about Martin Luther King.
“King aimed some of his harshest words toward advocates of civility, whose concerns aligned with the hand-wringing of many of today's politicians and pundits. From his Birmingham jail cell, King wrote: "I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action'." King knew that whites' insistence on civility usually stymied civil rights. (...)” “(...) civility is in the eye of the beholder. And when the beholder wants to maintain an unequal status quo, it's easy to accuse picketers, protesters, and preachers alike of incivility, as much because of their message as their methods. For those upset by disruptive protests, the history of civil rights offers an unsettling reminder that the path to change is seldom polite.”
As a US citizen and a member of the First Amendment Coalition I am extremely disappointed by this item, which if approved, will likely lead to litigation.

Regards,
Olga Zurawska
Item 16.B
07/26/22
3 of 3 Item 16.B
07/26/22

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 1271 Attachment: Written Comments (5272 : Stop Hate) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: July 26, 2022
Agenda Item: 16.C
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Request of Mayor Pro Tem McCowan that the City Council allocate up to $3,500 of their Discretionary Funds to the Santa Monica Sister Cities Association in support of travel to Brighton, England for the official signing of a Friendship City agreement with the City of Santa Monica.

Prepared By: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. ADD TO: Discrectionary funds breakdown
B. Written Comments

16.C
Packet Pg. 1272
Council Discretionary Funds
As of July 26, 2022
Sources (All Available Funds are start of FY 2022-23):

Amount
Unspent funds from prior year $ 88,067.16
FY 2022-23 - New Appropriation 122,696.00
Total unspent funds and new appropriation $ 210,763.16
Uses (Programmed Discretionary Funds):

Description Amount Programmed Date
Pier Palisades Signage $ (5,107.21) Rollover programmed from prior year Pico Youth and Family Center (PYFC) Car Show (5,000.00) Rollover programmed from prior year Police Activities League (PAL) (5,000.00) Rollover programmed from prior year Legal review of the deed of March 3, 1888 by Arcadia Bandini (10,000.00) Budget Adoption FY 2022-23, 6/28/22 Business Improvement District (BID) Annual Support (29,000.00) Council meeting, 7/14/22, Item 16A Westside Coalition for Martin Luther King, Jr. Celebration (10,000.00) Council meeting, 7/14/22, Item 16A Santa Monica Little League to repair scoreboard at Los Amigos Park (5,000.00) Council meeting, 7/14/22, Item 16A Samohi for bilingual graduation celebration (3,000.00) Council meeting, 7/14/22, Item 16A Total Programmed $ (72,107.21)
Unprogrammed Balance Available $ 138,655.95
July 26, 2022

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1273 Attachment: ADD TO: Discrectionary funds breakdown (5281 : Discretionary funds to the Sister Cities Association) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Liz Slipko <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 3:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: AGENDA item 16.C

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
We need to make Santa Monica somewhere we can be proud of again, and every dollar should be judiciously accounted for towards this common goal.

I don’t think Santa Monica can spare even $1 on pointless programs such as a “sister city” when it is in such a state of disrepair and crime.

What does this Sister City program actually do other than give one of you a free trip to Brighton? I live in Santa Monica, and I’ve been to Brighton, we are presently an embarrassment in comparison.

Put this $3500 towards programming in Reed Park, or towards rehabbing & utilizing the boarded up Reed Park Playhouse. The park is covered in homeless, as is the playhouse.

Use the $3500 for power washing the playhouse & sidewalks and structures that presently stink of urine.

Reed Park Playhouse programming ideas:

Shakespeare in the park
Classical music
Art shows/art openings
Waive the fee for personal trainers to utilize the park. Go beyond that and subsidize/hire/host yoga events
$3500 could go a long way when applied towards cleaning up Santa Monica and providing family friendly & healthy park programming.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Slipko
Santa Monica homeowner
Item 16.C
07/26/22
1 of 4 Item 16.C
07/26/22

16.C.b
Packet Pg. 1274 Attachment: Written Comments (5281 : Discretionary funds to the Sister Cities Association) 2 Item 16.C
07/26/22
2 of 4 Item 16.C
07/26/22

16.C.b
Packet Pg. 1275 Attachment: Written Comments (5281 : Discretionary funds to the Sister Cities Association) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Liz Slipko <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 4:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 16.C

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
Re: Agenda Item 16.C
request for use of discretionary funds
We need to make Santa Monica somewhere we can all be proud of again, and every dollar should be judiciously accounted for towards this common goal.

I don’t think Santa Monica can spare even $1 on pointless fluff programs such as a “sister city” when it is in such a state of disrepair and crime.

What does this Sister City program actually do, other than [as directly stated in your funding request letter] give one of you a free trip to Brighton? I live in Santa Monica, and I’ve been to Brighton, we are presently an embarrassment in comparison.

Put this $3500 towards much-needed programming in Reed Park, or towards rehabbing & utilizing the boarded up Reed Park Playhouse. The park is lying idle & covered in homeless, as is the playhouse.

Use the $3500 for power washing the playhouse & sidewalks and structures that presently stink of urine.

Reed Park Playhouse programming ideas:

Shakespeare in the park
Music…classical, acoustic
Art shows/art openings
Family friendly movies in the Park
Food truck nights
Health & wellness events
Waive the fee for personal trainers to utilize the park. Go beyond that and subsidize/hire/host yoga, Pilates, meditation and wellness events.

In short:

Item 16.C
07/26/22
3 of 4 Item 16.C
07/26/22

16.C.b
Packet Pg. 1276 Attachment: Written Comments (5281 : Discretionary funds to the Sister Cities Association) 2 $3500 could go a long way when applied towards cleaning up Santa Monica and providing family friendly & healthy park programming.

We don’t need a “sister city” program with subsidized trips to England, we need those funds put to work creating resident programming here.

Sincerely,
Elizabeth Slipko
Santa Monica homeowner
Item 16.C
07/26/22
4 of 4 Item 16.C
07/26/22

16.C.b
Packet Pg. 1277 Attachment: Written Comments (5281 : Discretionary funds to the Sister Cities Association) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: July 26, 2022
Agenda Item: 16.D
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Request of Councilmembers de la Torre and Brock that the Council consider placing the attached proposed charter amendment, to encourage the payment of living wages, encourage the production of housing that is consistent with the proportion of affordable housing mandated by the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, and discourage irresponsible overdevelopment, on the November 2022 ballot for consideration by the voters.

Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. SM Charter amendment 7-22-22 (002)
B. Written Comments

16.D
Packet Pg. 1278
Add Article XXIV to the Charter of the City of Santa Monica Section 2400 - Purposes
The purposes of this Article are to: preserve and protect the character of housing, neighborhoods, and the community; maintain social and economic diversity; protect the health and safety of Santa Monica residents; encourage the development of affordable housing within the limitations and capacity of Santa Monica's infrastructure and geography; and ensure the payment of living wages to the construction workers working on large projects in the City so they may live where they work. This Article will thereby preserve the public health, safety and welfare.

As a charter city, the City of Santa Monica has the authority to control its own housing plans and to establish minimum wages for various classes of workers. The residents of Santa Monica know what is best for their unique coastal city.

Section 2401 - Recitals
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica is experiencing serious traffic, transportation, pedestrian and vehicle safety, parking and density problems, which in a number of locations are unacceptable;
WHEREAS, in recent years there has been a sharp increase in the planning and construction of major developments in Santa Monica;
WHEREAS, real property value in Santa Monica has increased at a rate far exceeding market wages in the construction industry; and
WHEREAS, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation for Santa Monica for 2021-2029 is 8,895 units, with 6,168 of those units being affordable to low-income and/or very-low-income households.

Section 2402 - Definitions and Effect on Other Laws
"Affordable Housing Unit" shall mean any housing unit that is subject to a deed restriction, enforceable by the City of Santa Monica, requiring that the rent charged for the unit may not exceed twenty-four percent (24%) of the Area Median Income for Los Angeles County “Prevailing Wage” shall mean the prevailing wage determined by the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations, according to the type of work and location of the Project. “Project” shall mean any construction, erection, addition to or structural alteration of any building or structure, on a lot located in whole or in part within the City of Santa Monica which requires the issuance of any building permit, foundation permit or grading permit.

Notwithstanding the definition above, “Project” shall not include:

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 1279 Attachment: SM Charter amendment 7-22-22 (002) (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) a) any construction, addition or structural alteration that does not result, in combination with any continuing existing uses, in more than 2,500 square feet of floor area. b) any construction, erection, addition to or structural alteration of any building or structure, on a single lot that is no greater than 7,500 square feet Wherever this Article contains provisions which may conflict with the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and any other relevant ordinances, this Article shall prevail and supersede the applicable provisions of that Code.

The City shall also adopt ordinances and regulations that encourage the ratification of Project Labor Agreements and Community Workforce Agreeements.

Section 2404 – Prevailing Wages
All workers employed on any Project in the City of Santa Monica, which includes commercial space, mixed-use, or more than ten (10) residential units on any single parcel, must be paid at least the applicable wage set forth in the tables below:

For Projects that include 10-50 residential units:

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 1280 Attachment: SM Charter amendment 7-22-22 (002) (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) For Projects that include 151-500 residential units:

A Project may not be split up into several sub-projects in order to reduce the minimum wages required as set forth above.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 1281 Attachment: SM Charter amendment 7-22-22 (002) (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jodie Escobedo <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - I support the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please support 16D to assure a living wage in Santa Monica. Real estate speculators take advantage of rising property values to build and add nothing for those most in need of housing.

They are going to build regardless. The profits are just too huge. Making sure those lowest on the rungs of pay receive a livable wage is just, equitable and good policy.

Please see through the against specious arguments this is somehow about raising rents. That is baloney. Whenever equitable wages are fought for those taking profits scream they will have to raise prices. The more money In consumers pockets in our local economy the more liveable and vital Santa Monica is. Please approve this important measure.

Jodie Escobedo
[email protected]
3114 Urban Ave
Santa Monica, California 90404
Item 16.D
07/26/22
1 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1282 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Juan Matute <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

The only practical effect of this ballot initiative would be at least $5,000,000 in city funds going to legal costs. This money should be used to restore city services that support working families, like CREST, rather than a political battle with the state.

Juan Matute
[email protected]
1435 26TH ST UNIT 10
Santa Monica, California 90404
Item 16.D
07/26/22
2 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1283 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Tracy Bromwich <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:58 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Tracy Bromwich
[email protected]
2424 7th Street
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
3 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1284 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: Sara Gersen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
I am appalled that the City would consider a measure that would make it impossible to develop new housing for the middle class. My father is a retired letter carrier and my mother is retired from a career in the school district where they raised me in Florida. I can afford a home in Santa Monica because I am a lawyer, but it's maddening that our housing policies exclude people like my parents from finding homes in Santa Monica today. Please take us forward in addressing the housing crisis productively rather than taking us backward.

Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica.

Sara Gersen
[email protected]
1537 16th St #102, Santa Monica CA 90404
, California
Item 16.D
07/26/22
4 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1285 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Abby Arnold <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1286 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 6 Vernice Hankins
From: Sean Youssefi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:34 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Sean Youssefi
[email protected]
1422 19TH Street Apt. B
Santa Monica, California 90404
Item 16.D
07/26/22
6 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1287 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 7 Vernice Hankins
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D: Please Oppose the Proposed Anti-housing Charter Amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment, Item 16D. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica.

Jacob Wasserman
[email protected]
1027 11th Street, Apartment C
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
7 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1288 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 8 Vernice Hankins
From: Gregory Wendt <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 11:33 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Gregory Wendt
[email protected]
2441 Beverly Ave
Santa Monica, California 90405-3743
Item 16.D
07/26/22
8 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1289 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Joseph Pagliaro <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 1:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Joseph Pagliaro
[email protected]
1007 Ocean Ave
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
9 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1290 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Ilya Haykinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:54 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Proposed changes

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear council members,
The currently proposed amendment is not congruent with our housing needs — I recommend that the city not adopt the proposal unless one of the following changes are added:
a) A sunset provision, if insufficient housing is built with this in place over the next two years b) Automatic bypass of zoning regulations, or some other significant reduction in regulatory cost or complexity, in exchange for the requirements placed on developers under this proposal.
c) Reduction in "prevailing wage" multipliers to be no more than 1.5x the prevailing wage. It is unreasonable to expect to pay electricians $150/hr or more.

In general, I feel that using punishing labor rates to force affordable unit construction is unreasonable. If the city needs to create that kind of housing stock, the city should find the money for it — through taxes, bonds, etc — rather than expect developers to pay for all of it.

Ilya Haykinson
[email protected]
2308 Hill St
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
10 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1291 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 3 Vernice Hankins
From: Matt Stauffer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:33 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Matt Stauffer
[email protected]
908 South Hobart Boulevard, 504
Los Angeles, California 90006
Item 16.D
07/26/22
11 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1292 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 4 Vernice Hankins
From: George Gleason <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Legislation should be written to solve problems. There isn't a problem with construction wages in Santa Monica. It's already extremely expensive to build in our city. This proposal creates a much larger problem that already exists.

Please, please, please oppose this amendment. It is ridiculous.

Thank You,
George Gleason
George Gleason
[email protected]
811 20th St
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
12 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1293 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 5 Vernice Hankins
From: Jason Avishay <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:21 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

The incremental costs that this measure would place on housing construction would make the development uneconomic, and therefore, make the housing crisis much worse.

If the City Council is interested in making housing more attainable in Santa Monica, the City should streamline the approvals and permitting process and reduce the fees excised on developers and their investors.

Sincerely a concerned Santa Monica resident,
Jason Avishay
Jason Avishay
[email protected]
856 Princeton St
Los Angeles, California 90025
Item 16.D
07/26/22
13 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1294 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 6 Vernice Hankins
From: Debbie Mulvaney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Debbie Mulvaney
[email protected]
2524 Washington Avenue
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
14 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1295 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 7 Vernice Hankins
From: Gil Leib <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Gil Leib
[email protected]
601 California Ave
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
15 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1296 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Kathy Seal <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 1:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Kathy Seal
[email protected]
2431 32nd St
Santa Monica, California 90405-2029
Item 16.D
07/26/22
16 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1297 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Amber Kain <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 1:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

We need MORE affordable housing in Santa Monica, not less. And many people who will live in these homes rely on public transit (like me) so affordable housing does not equal more traffic. Anyway, solving homelessness is far more important than reducing traffic. This is so important. Thank you.

Respectfully,
Amber Kain, Santa Monica Renter
Amber Kain
[email protected]
632 Ocean Park Blvd
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
17 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1298 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Sebastian Felbeck <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 2:09 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Sebastian Felbeck
[email protected]
1054 3rd ST
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
18 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1299 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Timothy Macker Jr. <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 3:12 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

There is a lack of housing in the City and this is another anti-growth initiative that will continue to limit the supply and drive up housing costs.

Please OPPOSE!
Timothy Macker Jr.
[email protected]
1515 S. Sepulveda Blvd.

Los Angeles, California 90025
Item 16.D
07/26/22
19 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1300 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Stephanie Speights <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 4:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Stephanie Speights
[email protected]
648 Ocean Park Blvd
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
20 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1301 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: ben Swett <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 2:41 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16D - Come on, guys ...

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Team:

The big problem in santa monica right now is not underpaid construction workers on big projects.

We are in a housing crisis - and we have to do our share. "Pull up the Drawbridge" might feel like what the most vocal residents tell Phil -- but it's not viable in even the medium term, nor does it recognize that we are part of a larger community - This plan makes new affordable housing too expensive to build.

Please be sensible.

And please support Sue's (bigger) transfer tax ... again, a higher transfer tax is not going to discourage anyone from buying a $10,000,000 home in santa monica.

Thank You,
Ben Swett - RESIDENT
614 San Vicente Blvd Apt G
ben Swett
[email protected]
614 san vicente
santa monica, California 90402
Item 16.D
07/26/22
21 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1302 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Daniel Hall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 10:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra
Subject: Yes on 8A, No on 11A, No on 11B, Yes on 11D, No on 16D

EXTERNAL
Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tem McCowan, and City Councilmembers, I urge you to consider the following for July 26th's Agenda Items:
8A ‐ Vote YES ‐ 10,000+ Santa Monica voters have said through the Citizens' Initiative that they want to tax extremely high‐value real estate in order to subsidize rent‐burdened, low‐income Santa Monicans to prevent homeless, ensure our community does not become economically gated, and to continue to guarantee high quality schools following Malibu unification. This measure is critical to establishing long term and substantial funding for deed restricted affordable housing and our school system.
11A ‐ Vote NO ‐ Removing the Personnel Board from the Charter will subject what ought to be non‐political work to the whims of a political Council. This was not the recommendation that the Personnel Board themselves brought forward, which sought only to allow greater participation from non‐resident community stakeholders on an oft understaffed commission. I do not think risking the politicization of the Personnel Board is wise and encourage you to vote against the staff recommendation as written.
11B ‐ Vote NO ‐ This measure is in direct competition with the Citizens' Initiative which 10,000+ Santa Monica residents have indicated their support for as indicated by the poison pill which would allow for this measure to win out with one more vote, even if both measures get majority support. As written, there are too many carve outs and, my main concern, too few rules about how the funds would be spent. We need a dedicated stream of funding for affordable housing construction; this measure simply adds to our General Fund, where the advisory measure could be entirely ignored by future Councils.
11D ‐ Vote YES ‐ While I am disappointed Council did not work with their sister body, the duly (and independently!) elected Rent Control Board and adopt their full requested Charter Amendment, the proposed measure will still help Santa Monica renters now and in the future. We are a city that is majority renter; we must support our renters in order to prevent our community from becoming economically gated. 16D ‐ Vote NO ‐ The measure proposed in 16D shows a basic lack of understanding of how the market economy works and masks anti‐housing policies in the language of social justice. As someone who volunteers and leads in diversity, equity, and inclusion‐oriented organizations, this is incredibly disappointing and disturbing. I am pro‐labor; I support collective bargaining and higher minimum wages for workers. This proposal, however, will block economic feasibility for any new development projects... benefitting the very landlord Councilmembers bringing this proposal forward. No projects equates to no construction jobs. Let's be realistic about what the market can bear.

Thank you for your consideration,
Dan
Daniel Hall
Santa Monica Mid‐City Resident
Item 16.D
07/26/22
22 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1303 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Pronouns: he/him
Item 16.D
07/26/22
23 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1304 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Catherine Gentile <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 4:58 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Catherine Gentile
[email protected]
1128 Ocean Park Blvd., #312
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
24 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1305 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Joanne Leslie <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 5:52 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica. I believe we can and should have more housing, especially more affordable housing in Santa Monica. In my Sunset Park neighborhood there could be many 4-plexes built on lots that currently have a single family home without changing the look or character of our neighborhood. The busier streets such as Pico and Ocean Park could certainly have larger apartment buildings. Flexible rents with lower rents for those who do not own a car would help increase use of public transportation and mitigate increases in traffic. It is pure selfishness to say that those of us fortunate enough to already live in Santa Monica should make it as difficult as possible for anyone else (except the very rich) to move here.

Thank you for your attention,
The Rev. Dr. Joanne Leslie
Joanne Leslie
[email protected]
1351 Grant St.

Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
25 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1306 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Daphne Dennis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 5:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Daphne Dennis
[email protected]
2240 6th St
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
26 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1307 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Hank Koning <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 1:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica.

I am a 40 yr resident of Santa Monica and believe more housing is urgently needed. A greater supply of housing will reduce the spiraling increases on market rate housing costs and provide much needed affordable housing. As a former Planning Commissioner, I was actively involved in the 2012 LUCE which provided protections in the residential neighborhoods and encouraged housing development on the commercial boulevards adjacent to transit. The intent was to create complete neighborhoods were folks don't need to drive a car for daily activities.

Yes, we can have more housing without a huge traffic increase.

If housing is not built in Santa Monica, where there are 3 times the number of jobs as residents, it will be built elsewhere and this will only worsen the morning and evening traffic situation. The environmental impact of that will be huge.

Thank you,
Hank Koning
Hank Koning
[email protected]
909 25th St
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
27 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1308 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Grace Phillips <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 12:38 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please stop NIMBY landlords Brock and de la Torre! Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please oppose Phil and Oscar and all the other self-dealing landlord NIMBYs by voting against the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica.

Grace Phillips
[email protected]
2442 33rd Street
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
28 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1309 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: John Given <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 8:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
The proposed ballot measure is a cynical and abysmally low brow moment. Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica.

John Given
[email protected]
2240 6th Street
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
29 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1310 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Ali Moghaddas <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 9:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please SUPPORT the proposed charter amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please SUPPORT the proposed charter amendment. Under the prior council’s leadership we have overbuilt and Santa Monica is losing its charm. Increasing wages for laborers not only supports workers’ rights, but also limits development in Santa Monica to a reasonable amount.

You can’t even drive through Lincoln and Broadway anymore with all the new units. Something needs to change as the way Himmelrich et al have been operating for the last several years hasn’t worked!!
Ali Moghaddas
[email protected]
858 21st St
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
30 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1311 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Tara Barauskas <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 8:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16D- council agenda for 7/26/22
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and members of the City Council,

Community Corp. is very concerned about Item 16D on the agenda for July 26th. Although affordable housing already pays prevailing wages (State or Federal) for all of its projects, there are a variety of provisions in the Charter amendment that could negatively impact affordable housing and our projects. We have several inclusionary projects connected to market rate projects; these projects would likely become infeasible with these new prevailing wage requirements.

Currently, due to lack of funding in the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, inclusionary projects are among the only new projects in our pipeline. In addition, moderate income projects would be overburdened with these requirements.

Moderate income projects are already extremely difficult to make pencil, which is why there are so few of those unit types. And finally, we have several mixed use projects with affordable small business space, including our 1819 Pico marketplace. If these requirements are imposed on the commercial spaces, we will not be able to make them affordable to local small businesses.

I strongly urge you to pull this item from the agenda and study the ramifications of these potential new requirements.

We are concerned that the provisions may be in conflict with Housing Element law as well, which could jeopardize the City’s ability to produce affordable housing.

Thank you,
Tara

Tara Barauskas, LEED AP
Executive Director
Community Corporation of Santa Monica
1423 2nd Street, Suite B
Santa Monica, CA 90401
(310) 394‐8487 ext. 133
[email protected]
www.communitycorp.org
I acknowledge with respect and gratitude the Tongva, Kizh, and Chumash Peoples on whose traditional territory I live and work.

Item 16.D
07/26/22
31 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1312 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 3 Item 16.D
07/26/22
32 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1313 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Dustin Herrmann <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 10:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Dustin Herrmann
[email protected]
2438 5th St
Santa Monica, California 90405-3702
Item 16.D
07/26/22
33 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1314 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Daniel Hall <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 10:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra
Subject: Yes on 8A, No on 11A, No on 11B, Yes on 11D, No on 16D

Thank you for your consideration,
Dan
Daniel Hall
Santa Monica Mid‐City Resident
Item 16.D
07/26/22
34 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1315 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Pronouns: he/him
Item 16.D
07/26/22
35 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1316 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Patricia Hoffman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 7:33 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: No on 11B and 16D, Yes on 8A and 11D

EXTERNAL
July 26
Mayor Himmelrich, Councilmembers:

I am updating my letter to you regarding the July 12 agenda to make it appropriate for the July 26 agenda. The issues remain the same but the item numbers have changed.

I again want to add my voice to the chorus of hundreds who have asked that you vote against putting Item 11B on the ballot. Please vote no on 11B. 11B is in direct competition with and could kill the people’s initiative in 8A. I also hope that you do not move forward with Item 16D.

It is too late to adequately study the consequences, both intended and unintended, of this item.

As a reminder, more than 10,000 Santa Monica voters have said that they want to tax extremely high-value real estate in order to subsidize rent burdened low-income Santa Monicans to keep them from becoming homeless, to build more affordable housing for our local work force, and to continue to guarantee high quality schools even if Malibu takes its money and runs. I strongly support Item 8A. I know you will be voting yes on it but I hope you will do so enthusiastically and that you will enthusiastically support the measure since you will be helping so many of your constituents by doing so.

Right now you will also have the opportunity to help many of the tenants of Santa Monica by voting yes on Item 11D. You can also place a 3% cap on general adjustments to the maximum allowable rents, in addition to the other components of Item 11D.

You have a rare opportunity to be heroes to thousands of struggling Santa Monicans in this very scary moment of uncertainty. Please vote no on Item 11B and 16D. Please vote yes on Item 8A and Item 11D.

Thank you,
Patricia Hoffman.

Item 16.D
07/26/22
36 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1317 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Jeremy Bamberger <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 6:44 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

Thank you.

Jeremy Bamberger
[email protected]
140 Julian Ave, 306
San Francisco, California 94103
Item 16.D
07/26/22
37 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1318 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Dwight Flowers <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 10:24 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica. The cost of construction has risen significantly due to both materials and wage rates. Item 16D would drastically reduce housing construction in general, and especially the low/moderate income sector. As an architect and urban planner I have observed the construction industry and want to hold down costs to produce more desperately needed housing, and encourage builders and developers to produce it. Sincerely, Dwight E Flowers AICP
Dwight Flowers
[email protected]
1400 California Ave.

Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
38 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1319 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment)

July 26, 2022
Santa Monica City Council
City Hall Council Chambers
1685 Main Street, Room 250
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Charter Amendment Item 16 D from July 26 Agenda – OPPOSE Dear Members of the Santa Monica City Council:

SCANPH is a nonprofit membership association representing affordable housing developers across the five counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. Our members develop permanent, high quality below market rate homes for low and extremely low income residents. They focus on individuals and families in most need of affordable housing – and our members are very active in Santa Monica.

SCANPH opposes Item 16 D, the proposed charter amendment on today’s Santa Monica City Council agenda. This amendment would dramatically increase project costs and make building affordable housing infeasible for many developments in Santa Monica.

SCANPH members strongly believe in paying their construction workers prevailing wages.

Their hard work and sweat makes building affordable housing here in Southern California possible, so they deserve a fair living wage. But the proposed charter amendment would require wages sometimes double and almost triple the standard prevailing wage. This substantial cost increase would balloon budgets and kill many affordable projects.

The proposed charter amendment has other problems as well. First, it proposes paying 0.8 and 0.9 times the prevailing wage in some instances. Paying less than prevailing wage is generally not even allowed, due to public funding obligations, project labor agreements, or other incentives that require prevailing wage. Second, many inclusionary projects – including some currently underway in Santa Monica – are budgeted with separate considerations for the affordable units than the market rate units. Mandating wages for the entire project would destabilize the entire project and jeopardize its completion.

We encourage the Santa Monica City Council to oppose this charter amendment. It would harm the production of affordable housing in Santa Monica, which is greatly needed.

Section 2401 of the proposed charter amendment cites this great need as described by the recent Regional Housing Needs Allocation – almost 9,000 affordable units. To begin to meet this need, Santa Monica needs to move forward, not backward.

Sincerely,
Francisco Martinez
Policy Director
Southern California Association of NonProfit Housing (SCANPH)

BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Nicole Norori
President
California Housing Partnership
Joss Tillard-Gates
Vice President
Enterprise Community Partners
Lesley Hampton
Secretary
National Community
Renaissance
Jesse Slansky
At-Large
West Hollywood Community
Housing
Ezra Bolds
Treasurer
Innovative Housing Opportunities
Tara Barauskas
Ex-Officio
Community Corporation of Santa
Monica
Manuel Bernal
Cesar Chavez Foundation
Kelsey Brewer
Jamboree Housing
Beulah Ku
Century Housing
Joan Ling
UCLA
Faizah Malik
Public Counsel
Monica Mejia
East LA Community Corporation
Lara Regus
Abode Communities
Mee Heh Risdon
A Community of Friends
Victoria Senna
Hollywood Community Housing
Karen Michail Shah
Fisher Broyles
Luz Soto
Cabrillo Economic Development
Corporation
Heather Vaikona
Lift to Rise
Mark Wilson
Coalition for Responsible
Community Development
Denice Wint
EAH Housing
Item 16.D
07/26/22
39 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1320 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) July 26, 2022
Santa Monica City Council
c/o City Clerk
1685 Main St., Room 250
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Agenda Item 16-D (Proposed Charter Amendment re Prevailing Wages) Dear Hon. Councilmembers,
While I support the goals of protecting neighborhoods from gentrification and displacement, as well as the important goal of ensuring that all workers are paid fair and livable wages, I feel compelled to call attention to the fact that the proposed charter amendments under consideration under Agenda Item 16-D likely conflict with certain state laws.

For one thing, if the Charter Amendments conflict any of the numerous statewide prevailing wage statutes,1then the amendments could threaten state funding for critical infrastructure improvements (many of which may be necessary to protect public health and safety). Per Labor Code section 1782(a): “A charter city shall not receive or use state funding or financial assistance for a construction project if the city has a charter provision or ordinance that authorizes a contractor to not comply with the provisions of this article on any public works contract.”
Furthermore, if the amendments make housing developments economically infeasible, then they may be an impermissible constraint on the production of housing. (See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 65583(c)(3).) And in any event, a developer subject to the proposed wages may be able to use a concession or waiver under California’s Density Bonus Law to sidestep the wage requirements. (Gov. Code, § 65915.)
I suggest re-examining the issue of prevailing wages at a future study session so that the City Attorney’s office and the Planning Department can have an opportunity to study all potential implications of potential legislative reforms.

Best,
Ellis Raskin

1 For a list of prevailing wage laws in effect on Feb. 1, 2020, see https://www.dir.ca.gov/publicworks/californiaprevailingwagelaws.pdf.

Item 16.D
07/26/22
40 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1321 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Cris Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 12:33 PM
To: Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White
Subject: 7/26/22 Agenda: Oppose 16D, proposed charter amendment ballot measure

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich and Santa Monica City Council Members:

I write to express strong disappointment about and opposition to putting on the ballot a city charter amendment that would increase labor costs for housing construction.

I was born in Santa Monica and have lived in our beach city for 45 years. As a resident and renter, as well as a youth, peace and climate advocate, I have been happy to see our city's openness to nourishing a multicultural, diverse, thriving community. As you seek now to identify wise ways to increase our housing stock for Santa Monica, we need you to continue welcoming diverse and thoughtful new residents to our city, meet our state responsibilities, and reject ideas that would undermine the city's goals to be socially and environmentally just, sustainable and inclusive.

The proposed city charter amendment's new formula for construction labor costs would be excessively out of line with both our prevailing (carefully crafted) living wage and reasonable market expectations. Amending our city charter to "encourage" an increase of labor costs for housing construction would strangle the city's aspirations and mark Santa Monica as encouraging exclusivity.

Additionally, the City could be subject to potential costly lawsuits given the questionable legality of such a move.

The charter amendment looks to stop building the housing, indeed the future, that we need. I urge you not to place on the ballot this charter amendment on labor costs presented before you tonight.

Sincerely,
Cris Gutierrez
Santa Monica resident
Item 16.D
07/26/22
41 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1322 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Frank Greenberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 1:54 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

This would further Santa Monica’s resident and business unfriendly policies.

While I am completely against this, it is also silly to be introducing another law which would not be enforced. Before you do anything, make our streets clean and safe.

Frank Greenberg
[email protected]
Ashland
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
42 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1323 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 1:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment

EXTERNAL
Councilmember City Council,
Dear Councilmembers,
Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica, and is a flagrant violation of state housing law. Our housing element is already out of compliance, and I doubt that HCD will give us an in-compliance determination with city council openly flouting state housing law like this.

Jason Mastbaum
[email protected]
4th St
SANTA MONICA, California 90403
Item 16.D
07/26/22
43 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1324 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Natalya Zernitskaya <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 2:06 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SM City Council Agenda 7/26/2022 Item 16D- Oppose

EXTERNAL
Good Afternoon Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tem McCowan, and City Councilmembers, I strongly urge you to vote NO on Item 16‐D on this evening's agenda, the item to put a proposed charter amendment on November's ballot regarding wages for the construction of affordable housing in Santa Monica.

First, I want to clarify that I am strongly supportive of living wages for all people and of affordable housing.

This proposal would not result in better wages for construction workers nor sufficient affordable housing. Additionally, there is a strong possibility that the proposal may actually be illegal under state law, although I would defer to the City Attorney or other appropriate legal resource to ascertain its legality.

The concerns that I have with the proposed charter amendment fall into two general categories: concerns with the process and concerns with the content. I have briefly summarized some of my concerns below:

Concerns with the Process:
 The City Charter is like the City's constitution and it can only be changed by a vote of the people, if something like this were to be added to the charter, any changes could only be done through the ballot box  Submitting a proposed charter amendment with less than 4 months until the election does not allow sufficient time for community members, City Staff, or community organizations to analyse the best ways to meet the stated objective(s) of providing sufficient affordable housing while also supporting sufficient wages for those who build the housing
 There may be other laws in Santa Monica's municipal code (or City Charter) in conflict with the proposed charter amendment and to the best of my knowledge, there has not been any analysis performed of how this amendment would interact with those laws
Concerns with the Content:
 The proposed charter amendment appears to have a completely different definition of affordable housing (a unit subject to a deed restriction requiring that the rent charged for the unit does not exceed 24% of AMI for LA County) as compared to standard categories used by California HCD, HUD, or even the City's own tables (which set forth different levels of affordability such that a specific unit would be affordable to households making certain percentages of the AMI, as adjusted for Santa Monica's cost of living)  The language excludes projects where the total square footage would not exceed 2,500 square feet and lot sizes of less than 7,500 square feet, which may have certain equity implications  Much of the City's affordable housing is built through inclusionary zoning and is subject to the requirements that the City sets. This proposed charter amendment would actually make it more expensive to build sufficient affordable housing that our community needs and that we are required to demonstrate can be built per RHNA  It would also impact non‐residential projects as it would require "at least 1.5 times the prevailing wage" for mixed use or commercial‐only projects which could negatively impact our local economy by harming opportunities for local businesses
Item 16.D
07/26/22
44 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1325 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 2  The true implications of the proposed amendment would have the opposite effects from what the language appears to support‐ it would not result in higher wages for construction workers if there are no construction projects for them to work on. Any multiplier of the prevailing wage times 0 would be 0.

As this item was only added to the Agenda on Friday afternoon, the potential issues with the charter amendment proposed in Item 16‐D are wider and further reaching than I was able to describe above and I once again urge the Council to please vote no on Item 16‐D.

Thank you very much for your consideration.

Best Regards,
Natalya
Natalya Zernitskaya (she/her)
[email protected]
Item 16.D
07/26/22
45 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1326 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Cynthia Rose <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2022 1:18 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica.

Cynthia Rose
[email protected]
1453 Stanford
Santa Monica , California 90404
Item 16.D
07/26/22
46 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1327 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Neal Payton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2022 8:33 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Item 16D - Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment Councilmember City Council,
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and members of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please oppose the proposed anti-housing charter amendment. It is nothing more than an absurd attempt to eliminate almost all new housing in Santa Monica.

Neal Payton
[email protected]
1211 GRANT St
Santa Monica, California 90405
Item 16.D
07/26/22
47 of 47 Item 16.D
07/26/22

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1328 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (5284 : de la Torre, Brock: Proposed Charter Amendment)

Santa Monica City CouncilJuly 26, 2022

Santa Monica City Council
July 26, 2022