Santa Monica City Council
November 15, 2022

City of Santa Monica
City Council Meeting
AGENDA

SUE HIMMELRICH
MAYOR

LANA NEGRETE CHRISTINE PARRA

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

GLEAM DAVIS PHIL BROCK

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

KRISTIN MCCOWAN OSCAR DE LA TORRE

MAYOR PRO TEM COUNCILMEMBER

DAVID WHITE

CITY MANAGER

DOUGLAS SLOAN

CITY ATTORNEY

DENISE ANDERSON-WARREN

CITY CLERK

STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR THAT PROMOTE CIVILITY AT ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS:
• Treat everyone courteously; • Give open-minded consideration to all viewpoints; • Listen to others respectfully • Focus on the issues and avoid personalizing debate; • Exercise self-control • Embrace respectful disagreement and dissent as democratic rights, inherent components of an inclusive public process, and tools for forging sound decisions
Meetings are broadcast live on CityTV cable channel 16 and on the internet at santamonica.gov. Cable television re-broadcasts air on Thursday and Saturday at 11:30 AM. The agenda will air on CityTV on Saturday and Sunday at 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM, and on Monday and Tuesday at 12:30 PM and 6:00 PM.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 2

RULES OF ORDER FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (Resolution No.11427(CCS))

WAYS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT
If you are interested in providing public comment at a City Council meeting, there are several ways to participate:
(1) Written public comment. In lieu of oral public comment, the public is strongly encouraged to submit written public comment on agenda items via email to [email protected]. Written public comment submitted before 12:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be available for online viewing. Please note the agenda item number in the subject line of your written comments. (2) Oral public comment. Persons wishing to address the City Council regarding items on the agenda must be present and submit their name and address (optional) to the City Clerk before the public comment section is opened for that item or before the public hearing is opened where one is required by law. Register to speak at the Speaker Kiosk prior to the meeting. Remarks from the public are limited to a total of 6 minutes per City Council meeting, with a maximum of 2 minutes and a minimum of one minute per item. Except for the author of the request, public comment on 12-items are limited to 1 minute. Except on Public Input, speakers appearing at the meeting in person, may donate 2 minutes to another person present in-person at the meeting, who may speak for a total of 4 minutes on that item.

Both the donor of time and the designated speaker must register at the Speaker Kiosk in person together.

Oral public comment from any one individual is limited to a total of 6 minutes per City Council meeting, with a maximum of 2 minutes per agenda item; under some circumstances, Council may change the maximum to 1 minute per agenda item.

ORDER OF BUSINESS (may not be changed except by majority vote of the City Council.)

1. General Public Input
(members of the public may address the City Council
only on items not on the agenda, but within the
subject matter jurisdiction of the City).

2. Public Comment for Closed Session, Special
Agenda, and Consent Calendar Items Only
(Commendations and Proclamations presented).

3. Closed Session.

4. Special Agenda Items (City Manager’s Report,
Presentations, etc.).

5. Consent Calendar (All items considered in one
motion unless removed by a City Councilmember for
discussion. Public comment shall be heard prior
to City Council discussion).

6. Public Comment on remaining Agenda Items

7. Study Session.

8. Continued Items.

9. Administrative Proceedings.

10. Ordinances:
• 1
st Reading
• 2
nd Reading

11. Staff Administrative Item.

12. Public Hearings.

13. Reports of Boards and Commissions.

14. Resolutions.

15. Written Communications (other than
Reports of Commission and Officers).

16. Councilmember Discussion Items.

Agendas and reports are accessible on the City's webpage at smgov.net/council/agendas. They are also available at the City Clerk's Office and in alternate formats upon request. For a free email subscription to the City Council Agendas, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or [email protected].

Si desea comunicarse con alguien en español, llame a nuestra oficina al (310) 458-8211 y pida hablar con Esterlina Lugo.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 3

AGENDAS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

SPECIAL MEETING

CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1685 MAIN STREET, ROOM 250,
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2022
MEETING BEGINS AT 5:30 PM
WAYS TO PROVIDE REMOTE PUBLIC COMMENT:

Written public comment can be submitted via email to [email protected].

Written comments received prior to 12:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be available online. Please note the agenda item number in the subject line of your written comments.

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL
(This is a special City Council meeting. Public comment is restricted to only items listed on the agenda.)

1. PUBLIC INPUT (NON-AGENDA ITEMS)
. Public input under this item will not be heard at this meeting. This is a special meeting and public input is limited to agenda items only.

2. PUBLIC INPUT (AGENDA ITEMS UNDER CLOSED SESSION, SPECIAL AGENDA

ITEMS, CONSENT CALENDAR ONLY)

3. CLOSED SESSIONS

3.A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): James Anthony Humphrey v. City of Santa Monica, et al., Case No. 21-cv-06812

3.B. Conference with Labor Negotiator: Government Code Section 54957.6 -- Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager David White, Chief People Officer Lori Gentles, and Human Resources Manager Robert Scalise; Bargaining Units: FEMA-Santa Monica Fire Executive Management Association.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 4

3.C. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Santa Monica v. The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, et al., LASC Case No. 21STCV36027

3.D. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): John VMA Doe, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al., Case No. 22STCV30598; John TAU Doe, et al. v. Santa Monica PAL, et al., Case No. 22STCV19401; John Doe 1-4 v. Does 1-50, Case No. 21STCV34537; John Doe 5 and John Doe 6 v. Does 1-50, Case No. 22STCV08765; John JH Doe v. Police Activities League, et al., Case No. 21STCV24491; John Doe (D.C.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al., Case No. 21STCV47551; John Doe (MU) v. Santa Monica PAL, et al., Case No. 22STCV17022; John Doe #1, John Doe #2 and John Doe #3 v. Santa Monica PAL, et al., Case No. 22STCV03113; John Doe 142 v. Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe 3, Case No. 22STCV01268; Jose Villaseñor v. City of Santa Monica, et al., Case No. 22STCV17835

3.E. Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) or (3) of subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9: (Police Officers Association v. City).
(Please note that Agenda Items may be reordered during the Council meeting at the discretion of the City Council.)

4. SPECIAL AGENDA ITEMS

4.A. Commendations: Supervisor Sheila Kuehl & Assemblymember Richard Bloom

THE FOLLOWING IS THE ORDER OF BUSINESS FOR ITEMS TO BE HEARD NO EARLIER THAN 7:00 P.M.

4.B. City Manager Report

4.C. Proclamation for United Against Hate Week - New Item Received 11/14/2022

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items will be considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.)

5.A. Authorization of Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to Agreement #10534 in the amount of $2,240,069 with UNISERVE Facilities Services Corp., for custodial services for various City locations. This would result in a 7-year amended agreement through April 30, 2024 City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 5 with a new total amount not to exceed $9,953,390 with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5.B. Adoption of Resolution Making AB 361 Findings Regarding Teleconference Meetings
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council adopt a resolution making the findings required by AB 361 to continue teleconference meetings of the City Council and City Boards, Commissions, and Task Force.

5.C. Award RFP #SP2666 to DRP Engineering, Inc. for the design of Water and Wastewater replacement project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award RFP #SP2666 to DRP Engineering, Inc., to provide engineering design services, develop construction documents, and provide engineering support during the construction of the water, wastewater and recycled water main projects for fiscal years 2022-23 through 2026-27 for the Public Works Department.

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with DRP Engineering, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,322,991 (including $120,271 contingency) for two years, with three additional one-year renewal options in the amount of $2,136,503 (including $194,227 Contingency) on the same terms and conditions for a total amount not to exceed $3,459,494 over a 5-year period with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

3. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15302 (Replacement/Reconstruction), of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The project consists of replacement or reconstruction of existing water and sewer main facilities where the new replacement will be in the same locations and will have substantially the same purpose as the structures replaced.

5.D. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the purchase of various replacement vehicles
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Tennant Company for the purchase of six scrubbers for the Public Works Department.

This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250(b) and is for a total amount not to exceed $936,260;

2. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with NixonEgli Equipment Co. for the purchase of one DZero Plus Electric Sidewalk Sweeper for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section

2.24.250(c) and is for a total amount not to exceed $385,032; City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 6

3. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with National Auto Fleet Group for the purchase of one bin truck for the Public Works Department and two sports utility vehicles (SUVs) for the Records and Election Services Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250(c) and is for a total amount not to exceed $188,557; and

4. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Los Angeles Truck Centers (DBA Velocity) for the purchase of two front loader trucks for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section

2.24.250(c) and is for a total amount not to exceed $991,110.

5.E. Award RFP for Landfill Trash Disposal Services to Arakelian Enterprises, Inc., dba Athens Services and Chiquita Canyon, LLC
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award RFP# 313 to Arakelian Enterprises, Inc. dba Athens Services for landfill trash disposal services for the Public Works Department;

2. Award RFP# 313 to Chiquita Canyon, Inc., dba: Chiquita Canyon, LLC for landfill trash disposal services for the Public Works Department;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Arakelian Enterprises, Inc., dba Athens Services, in an amount not to exceed $3,279,863 (including a 15% contingency) for two years, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Chiquita Canyon, Inc., dba: Chiquita Canyon, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $4,575,489 (including a 20% contingency) for two years, with three additional one-year renewal options in the amount of $7,320,783 on the same terms and conditions for a total amount not to exceed $11,896,272 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5. Staff recommends the Council adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section15301 and 15308 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

5.F. Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council review and accept the FY 2021-22 Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees per the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code 66000-66025) and the FY 2021-22 Child Care Linkage Fee Report per SMMC Chapter 9.65.

5.G. Approval of 1st Modification of Agreement #4957 with Flying Lion for Drone as a First Responder Program
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to agreement #4957 in the amount of $136,000 with City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 7 Flying Lion Incorporated (FLI) to provide air support services for the Police Department. This will result in a two-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $181,000, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5.H. Approval of First Modification to Alta Planning and Design Professional Services Agreement for Program Services for the Active Aging-Safe Routes for Seniors Project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Professional Services Agreement (PSA) #10949 (CCS) with Alta Planning and Design for the continuation of Program Services for the Active Aging-Safe Routes for Seniors Project for the Department of Transportation. This will result in a one-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $378,127, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

5.I. Authorization to accept Grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Selective Traffic Enforcement Program
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Authorize the City Manager to accept a grant awarded in the amount of $290,000 from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Selective Traffic Enforcement Program in the Police Department.

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grants and all grant renewals.

3. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.

5.J. Award RFP to provide professional services to assist Los Angeles Area Fire Chief’s Association Regional Training Group Fire Service Training Officer hosted by Santa Monica Fire
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award RFP #325 for professional services to Fire Resources LLC, to assist Los Angeles Area Fire Chief’s Association Regional Training Group hosted by Santa Monica Fire Department; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a professional service agreement with Fire Resources LLC, in an amount not to exceed $370,000 for a twenty-four month period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval and state homeland security grant funding.

5.K. City Council - Special Meeting - May 5, 2020 3:00 PM

5.L. City Council - Regular Meeting - May 12, 2020 5:30 PM

5.M. City Council - Regular Meeting - May 26, 2020 5:30 PM City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 8

5.N. City Council - Special Meeting - Nov 1, 2022 6:00 PM

5.O. City Council - Special Meeting - Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM - New Item Received 11/14/2022

6. PUBLIC INPUT ON REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS
. Public Input on the Continued Items listed on this agenda under 8-Item were heard at the 10/25/2022 meeting and is now closed. No additional public comment will be heard on these items.

7. STUDY SESSION
No items

8. CONTINUED ITEMS

8.A. Adoption of a Resolution Declaring Intention to Award a Franchise Agreement for RFP 300: Digital Wayfinding and Out-of-Home Advertising Kiosk Program and related categorical exemptions. (Continued from October 25, 2022) Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) and 15311 (Accessory Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines in accordance with the Environmental Review section of this report; and

2. Adopt the attached Resolution of Intent declaring the Council’s intent to hold a public hearing on December 13, 2022 to award a franchise to BIG Outdoor for the installation, operation, and maintenance of a digital wayfinding and out-ofhome advertising kiosk network for a 20-year term, per the terms and conditions stated in the resolution.

9. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
No items

10. ORDINANCES
(Public comment is permitted on ordinances for introduction and first reading. No public discussion is permitted on ordinances for second reading and adoption.)

10.A. Introduction and Adoption of an Emergency Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition Against Camping in Public Spaces, to Clarify: (1) the Applicability of the Section’s Prohibitions; and (2) the Definition of “Camp Facility”
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Exemption pursuant to 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 9

2. Introduce for adoption an Emergency Ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition against camping in public spaces (“Section 4.08.095”), to clarify: (1) the applicability of the section’s prohibitions in line with recent case law; and (2) the definition of “Camp Facility.”

10.B. Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Lessons Learned; Introduction of First Reading of an Ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 3.12.1055 to Authorize the Use of Remote-Controlled Robotic Personal Delivery Devices; Adoption of an Emergency Ordinance to Extend the Moratorium on the Operation of Autonomous Robotic Delivery Devices through January 30, 2023, and Authorize the City Manager to Negotiate and Execute a Contract Extension with Automotus to continue Curb Management Services
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Introduce for first reading an ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 3.12.1055 to authorize the operation of remote-controlled personal delivery devices (PDDs) and prohibit the operation of autonomous delivery devices; and

2. Adopt an emergency ordinance extending the moratorium prohibiting the operation of autonomous delivery devices through January 30, 2023;

3. Adopt a finding of Exemption pursuant to 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) and 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to execute a second modification to the agreement with Automotus to extend an existing license agreement and software as a service (SaaS) agreement through December 31, 2024, to allow for continued study of curb management via Automotus curbside cameras. There are no costs associated with this agreement.

11. STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
No items

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS
No items

13. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS

13.A. Request of the Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission to Receive and Review the Reports Provided by the Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission
Recommended Action
The Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission has prepared a series of reports and recommendations concerning public safety in Santa Monica, most recently focused on complaint investigations and the status of the Santa Monica City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 10 Police Department’s implementations of the reforms recommended by the OIR Group following their in-depth after action report concerning the events of May 31, 2020. Staff recommends that the City Council receive and review the reports provided by the Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission.

14. RESOLUTIONS
No items

15. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
No items

16. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS

16.A. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Airport Commission for a term ending on 6/30/2024.

16.B. Request of Councilmembers Negrete, Parra, and Brock that the City Manager develop and return to City Council with recommendations for a Poet Laureate program for the City of Santa Monica. The program and recommendations shall be developed in collaboration with the Library Board and Arts Commission.

16.C. Designation of a voting delegate for the National League of Cities Annual Business Meeting being held on Saturday, November 19 in Kansas City, MO

16.D. Request of Councilmember Davis that the City Council direct the City Manager to contact the head of each Neighborhood Organization and Business Improvement District listed on the City's website and ask if the organization or its Board of Directors (acting as a Board) will refrain from endorsing or opposing candidates or measures in any future election. If the Neighborhood Organization or Business Improvement District will not make that commitment, then the City Manager is authorized and directed to remove that Neighborhood Organization or Business Improvement District from any listing of such organizations on the City's website and to remove any hyperlinks to the organization’s website. In addition, the City Attorney and City Manager are directed to draft a policy that states as a condition of receiving City funding any Neighborhood Organization or Business Improvement District that makes campaign endorsements must provide a disclaimer on any written campaign endorsement materials stating no public funds are used for campaign purposes and views of the organization do not necessarily reflect the views of the City of Santa Monica or any of its officials.

16.E. Request of Councilmembers Parra, Brock and de la Torre to direct the City Manager to evaluate the impacts and feasibility of changing the Santa Monica Housing Authority Payment Standard basis to Small Area Fair Market Rate and increasing select zip code/unit size categories to 120% SAFMR to mitigate negative impacts as recommended by the Housing Commission by midDecember.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 11/17/2022 11:28 AM Page 11

16.F. Request of Mayor Himmelrich for the Council to adopt the attached Statement of Apology to African American Residents and their Descendants and direct the City Manager to commit to programs, policies, and investments that can educate the public about this history of discrimination and its ongoing consequences, and to ferreting out and overturning systemically racist policies to ensure that the pain caused by several decades of racial injustice and discrimination against blacks and other people of color is mitigated to the extent possible. Mayor Himmelrich further requests Council to direct the City Manager to post this apology on the City’s website and in a public location within the City.

16.G. Request of Councilmembers Brock and Parra that the City Council allocate $5,000 of their Discretionary Funds to the Samohi Wrestling Program, a 501 (c) (3). The funding will be used to offset costs related to transportation, tournament fees, lodging for out of town tournaments and equipment, thereby allowing all students on the team to participate in all activities for the season.

16.H. Recommendation to accept Jeff Swimmer's resignation from the Arts Commission and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy. - New Item Received 11/14/2022

ADJOURNMENT
Agendas and reports are accessible on the City's webpage at www.smgov.net/council/agendas. They are also available at the City Clerk's Office and in alternate formats upon request. For a free email subscription to the City Council Agendas, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or [email protected].

Members of the public unable to attend a meeting but wishing to comment on an item(s) listed on the agenda may submit written comments prior to the meeting by meeting by mailing them to: City Clerk, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 or to [email protected]. Written comments received from the public by 2 PM on the day of the City Council meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to the meeting and posted online.

City Hall and the Council Chamber are wheelchair accessible. If you require any special disability related accommodations (i.e. sign language interpreting, access to an amplified sound system, etc.), please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or TDD: (310) 917-6626 at least 3 days prior to the scheduled meeting.

Si desea comunicarse con alguien en español, llame a nuestra oficina al (310) 458-8211 y pida hablar con Esterlina Lugo.

Santa Monica Blue Bus Lines #2, #3, #5, #9 and the EXPO Line serve City Hall. Parking is available on Main Street, on Olympic Drive, and in the Civic Center Parking Structure (validation free).
16130 Ventura Boulevard │ Suite 600 │Encino, CA 91436│ T 747.221.7100 │ F 747.221.7101 ENCINO | FRESNO | LOS ANGELES | ONTARIO | PLEASANT HILL | SACRAMENTO SAN FRANCISCO | SANTA MONICA | SANTA ROSA | TRUCKEE
www.RLSlawyers.com
Elizabeth Silver Tourgeman
Attorney at Law
[email protected]
September 20, 2022
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL [[email protected]] & FIRST CLASS MAIL Douglas T. Sloan, City Attorney
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Public Safety and Reform Oversight Commission - Final Notice to Remove Commissioners Who Fail to Meet Minimum Qualifications
Dear Mr. Sloan:

I am writing on behalf of the Police Officer’ Association (“POA”) to follow up on a letter dated July 20, 2022 to Lisa Parsons requesting a detailed accounting of each Commissioner’s training and the dates on which it was attended to ensure proper compliance with the Municipal Code and the Settlement Agreement between the POA and the City of Santa Monica related thereto. Specifically, as you are aware, each Commissioner must have attended the training set forth in Municipal Code Section 2.50.020(f) by May 31, 2022 or they shall be removed from the Commission.

Section 2.50.020(f) provides:

Within six months of appointment, each commissioner shall participate in training relevant to providing oversight of law enforcement and to the understanding of racial justice. Such training shall include participation in the SMPD Community Academy; a training session of two hours or less presented by the SMPOA that will address topics including the rights of police officers under the Police Officers Bill of Rights; and reasonable additional required training as identified by the Commission, which may include programs offered by the National Association of Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement, the Association of Local Government Auditors, entities with experience providing racial justice training, or other similar bodies.

The Commissioners initially appointed to the Commission shall have until May 31, 2022 to complete the required training. Failure to complete required training will result in removal from the Commission. (Added by Ord. 2662CCS, adopted 1/26/21; amended by Ord. 2686CSS § 2, adopted 1/11/22)

3.E.a
Packet Pg. 12
Attachment: 2022.09.20 Letter to City Attorney (5484 : POA closed session) Douglas T. Sloan
Re: Public Safety and Reform Oversight Commission
September 20, 2022

In response to the aforementioned July 20th request, we received an accounting of the approved training by the Commission that must be completed by each Commissioner in order to ensure compliance with the Settlement Agreement between the City of Santa Monica and the Police Officers’ Association and the above quoted Municipal Code. Pursuant to the City’s records, three Commissioners did not meet the training requirements and must be removed immediately from the Commission in order to avoid a direct violation of the City’s own laws.

1. Jaime Cruz: Pico Neighborhood Partnership; youth advocate: According to the City’s records of the Final Commission Academy Attendance, Commissioner Jamie Cruz was absent from the May 19th Internal Affairs/POBR Training and the May 25th Traffic Stops Practical Training.

2. Miranda McLaughlin-Basseri (young adult): Santa Monica College student; External Vice President, SMC honor society: Commissioner McLaughlin-Basseri did not attend any of the May 19th training sessions (Investigations, Misdemeanor Filing, or Internal Affairs/POBR).

3. Angela Scott: Former Arts Commissioner; Public Safety Reform Advisory Committee; Santa Monica Black Agenda; Committee for Racial Justice:

Commissioner Scott did not attend the May 25th training (Use of Force, CNT/Mobile Field Force, Traffic Stops Classroom, or Traffic Stops Practical). Interestingly, Commissioner Scott requested accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act seeking virtual training. Despite the fact that she does not qualify under the law for ADA accommodations as a part-time Commissioner, the Department nevertheless worked directly with City employees assigned to Risk Management to notify her in advance that it would be able to accommodate her with outdoor training sessions, masks and social distancing. She refused to attend yet has been known to voluntarily attend other outdoor events of her choosing during that same time frame with and without a mask.

Based on the above, the City is being formally notified that it has two weeks from the date of this letter to provide additional supporting documentation to ensure the aforementioned three Commissioners are entitled to remain on the PSROC and that they met the minimum qualifications within the parameters mandated by the Code. If the City is unable to produce such evidence, it must immediately disqualify Commissioners Cruz, McLaughlin-Basseri and Scott.

Alternatively, we will seek action in an alternative legal forum.

3.E.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: 2022.09.20 Letter to City Attorney (5484 : POA closed session) Douglas T. Sloan
Re: Public Safety and Reform Oversight Commission
September 20, 2022

The impetus for the training requirement was to ensure that the actions and authority of the Commission as agreed to by the POA is allowed only with the training necessary to ensure such actions are done with the knowledge base of critical information. It is extremely disappointing that the City is willing to let the training requirement remain unfulfilled without any corresponding limitation on the Commission’s power. It should be clear that any actions taken by the Commission in violation of the training requirement shall be deemed null and void.

Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this serious matter.

Very truly yours,

RAINS LUCIA STERN
ST. PHALLE & SILVER, PC
/s/ Elizabeth Silver Tourgeman
Elizabeth Silver Tourgeman
EST:cg
cc: Gerardo Leyva

3.E.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: 2022.09.20 Letter to City Attorney (5484 : POA closed session) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Joanne Berlin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 8:56 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Input for item 3E on the 11/15/22 City Council Agenda

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members ,
Once again the SMPOA is attempting to undercut the effectiveness of the SMPSROC by their current threat of a lawsuit which would demand the removal of 3 reform oriented commissioners from the Santa Monica Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission, ostensibly over absences from required training to be a commissioner (the result of a settlement reached with the Santa Monica Police Officers Association in reaction to their initial lawsuit threat during the formation of the PSROC). It is disturbing to see this organization, which serves as a union for police officers, using this threat of a lawsuit to sway the votes of the Council on a matter of membership.

To my knowledge, the police department has not made good faith attempts to accommodate the issues that prevented these commissioners from attending all of the mandated meetings. All 3 did attend the POA presented one in person at VAP, which was actually after the May 31st deadline. All 3 are willing to make up those sessions, but have not been offered any times to do so.

I urge you to not allow them to extend their political power in our city by further expanding their influence over this commission which was conceived as civilian oversight for police. It is unseemly for them to demand the removal of concerned citizens who are doing their best to help Santa Monica reimagine and have some oversight of our police department. I’m asking you to not be intimidated by their threatened lawsuit. Exercise your own power to help broker a better way forward.

Thank you for considering community input,
Joanne Berlin
Coordinator for the Committee For Racial Justice
Concerned member of the Santa Monica community since 1996 Item 3.E
11/15/22
1 of 2 Item 3.E
11/15/22

3.E.b
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Written Comment (5484 : POA closed session) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Peter DiChellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 1:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra
Cc: POA; Community Affairs; Ramon Batista
Subject: Agenda Item 3E PSROC & Litigation

EXTERNAL
The three PSROC members who skirted their legally required training obligations must be removed.

Suggest replacing them with experienced individuals who have professional law enforcement credentials and a willingness to fully study the issues, rather than appointing yet more learning-resistant amateurs.

Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis - Unaffiliated moderate
Santa Monica 90403
Item 3.E
11/15/22
2 of 2 Item 3.E
11/15/22

3.E.b
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Written Comment (5484 : POA closed session)

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: January 13, 2015_Staff Report (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: January 13, 2015_Staff Report (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: January 13, 2015_Staff Report (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: January 13, 2015_Staff Report (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: January 13, 2015_Staff Report (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: January 13, 2015_Staff Report (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 12, 2017
Agenda Item: 3.C
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director, Public Works, Facilities Maintenance Subject: Contract Award for Citywide Custodial Services Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award Bid #4272 to UNISERVE Facilities Services Corp., a California-based company, for custodial services for various City locations, as required by the Custodial Services Section; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with UNISERVE Facilities Services Corp. in an amount not to exceed $1,488,016 (including a 20% contingency) for one year, with four additional one-year renewal options for a total amount not to exceed $7,713,321 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

Executive Summary
Staff recommends an agreement with UNISERVE Facilities Services Corp. to provide custodial services for various locations in the City in an amount not to exceed $1,488,016 for one year with four additional one-year options for a total amount not to exceed $7,713,321. The contract award would ensure continuity of custodial services, Living Wage and health insurance for all eligible contract employees, and no displacement of any permanent City custodians.

Background
Historically, the City has adopted a hybrid service model of utilizing in-house and contract custodial services to clean various City-owned and City-leased locations in order to minimize service interruptions at busy locations and maximize workforce flexibility at sites with dynamic, seasonal demands. In addition to regular cleaning services such as vacuuming and emptying trash, the City also contracts out specialty cleaning services, including window cleaning, carpet cleaning, floor cleaning, and upholstery cleaning.

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: UNISERVE_Staff Report_9-12-17 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) 2 of 6
On November 25, 2014 (Attachment A), Council awarded a contract to Lee’s Maintenance Services to provide custodial services at various City facilities for an initial six-month period, pending the outcome of a citywide contract study, with five one-year renewal options for a total amount not to exceed $7,570,582 over a five-and-a-half-year period. The current contract, with all options to extend, runs through June 30, 2020.

On January 13, 2015 (Attachment B), staff presented to Council a Contract and AsNeeded Staffing Review: Policy, Practice, & Recommendations report. Council approved contracted staff for custodial services as part of the comprehensive report; custodial services have not changed substantially since that analysis.

Discussion
Currently, the City employs 55 permanent in-house custodians to provide cleaning services for City facilities that have stable demand of long stretches of hours, such as the Annenberg Beach House, City Hall, public libraries, public parks, the Santa Monica Pier, and the Santa Monica Swim Center.

The City also augments service by utilizing contract custodial staff at the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant, City TV, City Yards, Civic Auditorium administrative offices, Public Safety Facility, Santa Monica Airport, Santa Monica Animal Shelter, Santa Monica Pier and Police Substations on the Pier, as well as leased offices located at 1437 4th Street, 1717 4th Street, 1730 4th Street, 1660 7th Street, and 1901 Main Street. Some of the contract locations require consistent but limited number of service hours, where other sites, such as the Pier, require year-round in-house and contract staffing as well as additional contract staffing during peak seasons. Lee’s Maintenance Services (Lee’s) has been providing custodial services at the above contract sites since 2014.

Affordable Care Act
Signed into law in March 2010, the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, is a federal mandate that requires employers with at least 50 full-time equivalent employees to offer “affordable, minimum value health coverage” to their full-time employees. When Lee’s

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: UNISERVE_Staff Report_9-12-17 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) 3 of 6
first started providing custodial services to the City, no federal guidelines existed for small businesses to comply with the ACA.

Subsequently, the federal government released further ACA compliance instructions, and Lee’s began providing health insurance to its qualified custodians in March 2016.

The City agreed to reimburse Lee’s for the health insurance costs of its eligible custodians assigned full-time to City job sites using the contract’s contingency fund to cover the additional expenses. At the time of this report, $81,833 has been expended on ACA payments.

While Lee’s has been providing satisfactory services to the City and the current contract provides renewal options through June 2020, staff decided it would be prudent to evaluate custodial services options available in the current marketplace by going out to bid. The new formal bid requires that ACA and other mandated costs, including the City’s Living Wage, be included in an all-inclusive hourly rate cost proposal in order to simplify the administrative aspects of managing the contract.

Vendor Selection
In March 2017, the City published Notices Inviting Bids to provide custodial services for various City locations, as required by the Custodial Services Section, in accordance with City specifications. The bid was posted on the City’s online bidding site, Planet Bids, and notices were advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with City Charter and Municipal Code provisions. A total of 52 vendors downloaded the bids.

Seven bids were received and publicly opened on April 17, 2017, per Attachment C:

Company First Year Regular Service
Coastal Building Services $1,146,914
Executive Suite Services, Inc. $1,398,875
Huffman & Downs Maintenance $1,165,145
Lee’s Maintenance Services, Inc. $1,254,927
Professional Building Maintenance $1,289,911

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: UNISERVE_Staff Report_9-12-17 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) 4 of 6
Servicon System, Inc. $1,145,569
UNISERVE Facilities Services Corporation $1,131,464
Bids were evaluated based on the criteria in SMMC 2.24.072, including price, quality of service, experience, capacity, and reputation & judgment. Based on these criteria, UNISERVE Facilities Services Corp., the lowest bidder, is recommended as the best bidder. In addition to being the lowest bidder, UNISERVE has demonstrated superb industry experience and capacity as well as a strong commitment to employee training, service quality assurance, and established professional practices.

Founded in 1966, UNISERVE has been delivering custodial services to Fortune 1000 companies, airports, museums, and government entities for over five decades. The company has large, long-term custodial accounts, which includes FedEx, the Getty Center, the Getty Villa, and the City of Los Angeles. Specifically, the City of Los Angeles provided an excellent reference and attested to the company’s capability to handle a wide variety of job sites that are similar to those in the City of Santa Monica.

Additionally, the company provides ACA health insurance and the City’s current Living Wage of $15.87 per hour (adjusted annually per the Consumer Price Index) to all of its employees assigned to City sites. Finally, although not a bid requirement, UNISERVE’s proposal to provide a 100% dedicated account manager for the City illustrates the company’s commitment to customer care and quality assurance.

Based on these criteria, staff recommends that Council award bid #4272 to UNISERVE Facilities Services Corp. for custodial services at various City locations for a five-year amount not to exceed $7,713,321. The first contract year and first renewal option have a not-to-exceed amount of $1,488,016 per year. The subsequent three renewal options are subject to an increase based on the City’s Living Wage Ordinance.

Service Continuity and Sustainability
There will be no interruption of service during the transition period. Lee’s will continue to provide custodial services at all contract locations on a month-to-month basis with a 30-

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: UNISERVE_Staff Report_9-12-17 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) 5 of 6
day termination notice until the new contract with UNISERVE is in place. UNISERVE will comply with the California Displaced Janitor Opportunity Act and the City’s requirement to retain existing custodians employed by the previous contractor to ensure continuity in employment and service level. UNISERVE will continue to use environmentally sensitive, low toxicity cleaning products that are supplied by the City and pre-approved by Risk Management and the Office of Sustainability and Environment to ensure the health of staff, the public, and the environment.

Alternative
If the City were to provide the same level of custodial services using in-house personnel, staff estimates a cost difference of $3.65 million, or 56% more, in staffing costs alone over the course of five years compared with utilizing services from UNISERVE (Attachment D). Bringing custodial services in-house for the contract locations would incur additional salaries and benefits of $1.96 million in the first year (plus potential cost of living and benefit premium increases for subsequent years) and the hiring of an additional 22.4 FTE Custodians and 2 FTE Custodial Supervisors. This does not include significant initial investment for vehicles, tenant improvement for additional office spaces, office equipment, cleaning equipment, and uniform purchases, as well as ongoing expenses in City overhead, training, overtime incurred by backfilling vacation and sick leaves, and maintenance/replacement of vehicles, equipment, and supplies.

In addition to the fiscal impact, changing the current service model and creating additional permanent positions at this time would have a negative operational impact by:

A) reducing workforce flexibility at locations where service demand is seasonal, such as the Santa Monica Pier and the additional service level required during the popular Twilight Concert Series every summer; B) limiting the City’s options to redefine or adjust service levels when City staff currently working in leased office spaces move into the new City Services Building in the foreseeable future; and C) increasing administrative complications and the span of supervision for the Custodial Services Section, including recruitment, staff training, performance evaluations, disciplinary actions, and workers’ compensation risk.

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: UNISERVE_Staff Report_9-12-17 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) 6 of 6
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
The contract to be awarded to UNISERVE Facilities Services Corp. is for an amount not to exceed $7,713,321. Funds of $1,488,016 are available in the FY 2017-18 budget in various departments. The contract will be charged to various accounts as needed (Attachment E). Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Prepared By: Yvonne Yeung, Senior Administrative Analyst Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. November 25, 2014 Staff Report
B. January 13, 2015 Staff Report
C. Bid #4272 Summary
D. In-House vs. Contract Cost Analysis
E. Contract Budget
F. Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form - UNISERVE

5.A.b
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: UNISERVE_Staff Report_9-12-17 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 31
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.c
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: UNISERVE_Contract_10534 (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services)

5.A.d
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: UNISERVE_Oaks (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 11:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda Item 5.A
From: Carlos Rubio <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 11:27 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Cc: David White <[email protected]>; Rick Valte <[email protected]> Subject: Agenda Item 5.A

EXTERNAL
Honorable City Council:

The purpose of this email is to inform you that we have recently found out that there is an item in today’s agenda that is looking to authorize a contract for modification for city wide custodial services.

In accordance to the Memorandum of Understanding between California Teamsters Public, Professional & Medical Employees Union, Local 911 and the City of Santa Monica, Article 5.12, the City of Santa Monica is to provide notice of any proposal to subcontract work ordinarily performed by employees represented by Teamsters. The City of Santa Monica is to meet and confer with Teamsters under this contract provision and applicable law.

It is inappropriate for the City of Santa Monica to move forward with this until the obligations have been met. Our custodial division has been essential to the safety and maintenance of quality of life of the City of Santa Monica community. Contracting out their work is not only wrong but not in line with the labor management partnership we have.

Please confirm with me that this approval will be continued and stayed until we meet and confer.

In Unity,
Carlos I. Rubio
President
California Teamsters Local 911
Public, Professional & Medical
Employees Union
9900 Flower Street
Bellflower, CA 90706
T: (562) 595-4518 Ext: 111
F: (562) 427-7298
E: [email protected]
Item 5.A
11/15/22
1 of 1 Item 5.A
11/15/22

5.A.e
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Written Comment (5058 : Authorize Contract Modification for Citywide Custodial Services) 1 City Council Meeting: November 15, 2022 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA MAKING FINDINGS AS REQUIRED BY AB 361

TO PERMIT COUNCIL AND CITY BOARD, COMMISSION, AND TASK FORCE

MEETINGS TO CONTINUE TO BE CONDUCTED BY TELECONFERENCE WHILE THE COVID-19 EMERGENCY REMAINS IN PLACE
WHEREAS international, national, state, and local health and governmental authorities are responding to an outbreak of respiratory disease caused by a novel coronavirus named “SARS-CoV-2,” and the disease it causes has been named “coronavirus disease 2019,” abbreviated COVID-19, (“COVID-19”); and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California declared a state of emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for broader spread of COVID-19; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and Department of Public Health declared a local emergency and local public health emergency to aid the regional healthcare and governmental community in responding to COVID-19; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the President of the United States of America declared a national emergency and announced that the federal government would make emergency funding available to assist state and local governments in preventing the spread of and addressing the effects of COVID-19; and

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: CM-Reso-AB 361 (5232 : AB361 Findings for Teleconference) 2 WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the City Manager, in his role as the Director of Emergency Services, (“Director of Emergency Services”) issued an Executive Order of the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Santa Monica Declaring the Existence of a Local Emergency (“Executive Order”) declaring a local emergency pursuant to Chapter 2.16 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to ensure the availability of mutual aid and an effective response to COVID-19 and this local emergency was restated on March 14, 2020, through a revised declaration of local emergency to ensure compliance with all digital signature requirements (“Revised Executive Order”); and WHEREAS, the Governor’s March 4, 2020 declaration of a state of emergency based on the COVID-19 pandemic remains in place; and
WHEREAS, the Proclamation of Existence of a Local Emergency issued by the Director of Emergency Services on March 13, 2020, has been ratified by the City Council on March 19, 2020, April 6, 2020, April 14, 2020, May 12, 2020, May 26, 2020, June 9, 2020, June 23, 2020, July 14, 2020, July 28, 2020, September 8, 2020, October 27, 2020, December 15, 2020, January 26, 2021, March 23, 2021 effective May 22, 2021, July 13, 2021, August 24, 2021, October 26, 2021, December 7, 2021, March 8, 2022 effective May 7, 2022, May 24, 2022, July 12, 2022, July 26, 2022, August 23, 2022, September 13, 2022, October 11, 2022, and October 25, 2022 with the result that the proclamation of a local emergency based on the COVID-19 pandemic remains in place; and WHEREAS, throughout the emergency resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (“LACDPH”) has issued a series of Health Officer Orders containing mandates and recommendations for keeping safe and preventing the spread of COVID-19; and

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: CM-Reso-AB 361 (5232 : AB361 Findings for Teleconference) 3 WHEREAS, the Ralph M. Brown Act, Government Code Sections 54950-54963, allows for meetings of legislative bodies of a local agency, as those terms are defined in the Brown Act, to occur via teleconferencing subject to certain requirements, particularly that the legislative body notice each teleconference location of each member that will be participating in the public meeting, that each teleconference location be accessible to the public, and that members of the public be allowed to address the legislative body at each teleconference location, see Government Code Section 54953(b)(3); and WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill No. 361 (“AB 361”), which, until January 1, 2024, authorizes a local agency to use teleconferencing without complying with the teleconferencing requirements imposed by the Brown Act when a legislative body of a local agency holds a meeting during a declared state of emergency, as that term is defined, when state or local health officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing or when the legislative body has determined that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; and
WHEREAS, AB 361 requires legislative bodies that hold teleconferenced meetings under its abbreviated teleconferencing procedures to give notice of the meeting and post agendas, as described, to allow members of the public to access the meeting and address the legislative body, to give notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting and offer public comment, including an opportunity for all persons to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, and to conduct the meeting in a manner that protects the statutory and constitutional rights of the parties and the public appearing before the legislative body; and

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: CM-Reso-AB 361 (5232 : AB361 Findings for Teleconference) 4 WHEREAS, AB 361 requires the legislative body to take no further action on agenda items when there is a disruption which prevents the public agency from broadcasting the meeting, or in the event of a disruption within the local agency’s control which prevents members of the public from offering public comments, until public access is restored; and
WHEREAS, AB 361 prohibits the legislative body from requiring public comments to be submitted in advance of the meeting and specifies that the legislative body must provide an opportunity for the public to address the legislative body and offer comment in real time; and
WHEREAS, AB 361 prohibits the legislative body from closing the public comment period and the opportunity to register to provide public comment, until the public comment period has elapsed or until a reasonable amount of time has elapsed, as specified; and WHEREAS, when there is a continuing state of emergency, or when state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, AB 361 requires a legislative body to make specified findings not later than 30 days after the first teleconferenced meeting pursuant to these provisions, and to make those findings every 30 days thereafter, in order to continue to meet under AB 361’s abbreviated teleconferencing procedures; and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2021, October 26, 2021, November 23, 2021, December 14, 2021, January 11, 2022, February 8, 2022, March 8, 2022, March 22, 2022, April 8, 2022, May 10, 2022, May 24, 2022, June 14, 2022, July 12, 2022, July 26, 2022, August 23, 2022, September 13, 2022, October 11, 2022, and October 25, 2022 the City Council adopted Resolutions, which made the findings required by AB 361 to allow the

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: CM-Reso-AB 361 (5232 : AB361 Findings for Teleconference) 5 City Council and all City Boards, Commissions, and Task Forces to continue to meet under AB 361’s abbreviated teleconferencing procedures, and authorized the City Council and all City Boards, Commissions, and Task Forces to conduct meetings under AB 361’s abbreviated teleconferencing procedures, without complying with the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 54953(b)(3), subject to compliance with the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 54953(e)(2); and WHEREAS, in light of the continuing State and local declarations of emergency resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, the City Council desires to again make the findings required by AB 361 to allow the City Council and all City Boards, Commissions, and Task Forces to continue to meet under AB 361’s abbreviated teleconferencing procedures.

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

SECTION 1. The City Council finds that the State and local declarations of emergency resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic remain in place, and that the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability to meet safely in person.

SECTION 2. The City Council finds that local officials have continued to recommend measures to promote social distancing.

SECTION 3. As a result of the findings in Sections 1 through 2 above, the City Council and all City Boards, Commissions, and Task Forces are authorized to conduct meetings under AB 361’s abbreviated teleconferencing procedures, without complying with the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 54953(b)(3), subject to compliance with the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 54953(e)(2).

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: CM-Reso-AB 361 (5232 : AB361 Findings for Teleconference) 6 SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Resolution 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 Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Resolution and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this Resolution would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 5. 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:
____________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: CM-Reso-AB 361 (5232 : AB361 Findings for Teleconference) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: November 27, 2018
Agenda Item: 8.C
1 of 40
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director, Public Works, Water Resources Subject: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water SelfSufficiency Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Provide staff with direction to proceed with water self-sufficiency components.

2. Provide staff with direction regarding funding recommendations to achieve water self-sufficiency.

3. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget Actions section of this report.

4. Direct staff to return for a public hearing on January 8, 2019, to consider implementation of 9% water rate increase previously approved by Council on February 24, 2015 to go into effect on March 1, 2019.

Executive Summary
The City of Santa Monica (City) has historically provided water service to residential and business customers allowing for bold efforts in securing resiliency and self-sufficiency for the community. Given the statewide challenges surrounding a safe and reliable water supply in recent years, Council directed staff to develop a water self-sufficiency plan with the goal of meeting 100% of Santa Monica’s water demand using local water sources by 2020. On October 28, 2014, Council adopted the Sustainable Water Master Plan (SWMP), which outlines a strategy to achieve the City’s water self-sufficiency goal (Attachment A). Staff initiated a comprehensive update of the SWMP in 2017 to incorporate new information regarding local groundwater resources and to integrate new water conservation programs and alternative water supply opportunities. On January 9, 2018, staff reported to Council that further analysis was needed to assess whether the City could meet its water self-sufficiency goal by 2020 (Attachment B). The further analyses have been completed and confirm that achieving water self-sufficiency that can be maintained into the future is practical and cost effective, but the projected

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 2 of 40
date of reaching that goal would be 2023. The delay from the original date is due to new state drinking water requirements implemented in 2018, permitting requirements for alternative water supply projects, and results of recently completed feasibility studies which resulted in longer timelines for project completion relative to previous estimates.

The benefits of becoming water self-sufficient when compared to the alternative of continuing to meet a portion of local water demand using imported water include: longterm cost benefits for water ratepayers, establishment of a diverse, sustainable and drought resilient local water supply, and reduction of the City’s water supply energy footprint. It should be noted that in the updated plan proposed by staff, water selfsufficiency equates to approximately 99% locally sourced water, with 1% of the City’s water supply still being purchased from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD) to maintain the imported water connection for emergency purposes.

The updated proposal to meet water self-sufficiency presented in this staff report includes an optimized water conservation program together with local water supply projects, an updated implementation timeline, and recommended funding toward achieving water self-sufficiency for the City. Following Council direction and approval, the final components will be included in an updated SWMP that will guide City efforts toward achieving the goal through 2023. To achieve self-sufficiency by 2023, staff is proposing to replace imported water purchases with a comprehensive plan consisting of:
 Component 1 - continuing and increasing water conservation efforts to permanently reduce water demand,
 Component 2 - developing sustainable and drought resilient alternative water supplies, and
 Component 3 - expanding local groundwater production within sustainable yield limits.

The anticipated cost to implement the components required to meet the self-sufficiency goal is approximately $38 million to increase local water supplies, which includes capacity expansion of the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant (WTP), implementation of

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 3 of 40
production efficiency enhancements, as well as acquiring an additional groundwater well to enhance resiliency. The $38 million would be funded primarily through the issuance of a water revenue bond and a contribution from the Wastewater Fund ($3.25 million) to the Water Fund to fund the various projects outlined in this staff report, with the debt service on the bonds incorporated into water rates in an upcoming rate study.

An additional $64 million from existing water-contamination settlement funds would be used for restoring the Olympic Sub-basin, which would allow additional water production from that sub-basin to support achievement of water self-sufficiency. The proposed water self-sufficiency plan and staff recommendations are based on recently completed studies (e.g., confirmation of sustainable yield analysis, evaluation of new drinking water regulations on the Olympic Sub-basin restoration, and feasibility studies to assess new technologies that increase production efficiency at the Arcadia WTP) in which multiple scenarios were evaluated for cost, benefits and effectiveness.

Lastly, staff will return to Council on January 8, 2019, for a public hearing and to recommend a full implementation of the 9% water rate adjustment (within the previously adopted Council authorization) for calendar year 2019 and effective on water bills issued on or about March 1, 2019. The recommended water rate adjustment would ensure a fiscally sustainable comprehensive program for safe, clean, reliable water supply to our community. It would also help offset increased construction costs to keep up with the City’s 100-year water main replacement program and fund preliminary design efforts on the various components required to achieve water self-sufficiency as contemplated in the 2014 rate study.

Background
On January 25, 2011, City Council directed staff to develop a water self-sufficiency plan with the goal of meeting 100% of Santa Monica’s water demand using local water sources by 2020. On October 28, 2014, Council adopted the SWMP which outlines a comprehensive plan to achieve water self-sufficiency. The SWMP involves a combination of water demand reduction strategies through various water conservation and efficiency programs designed to permanently reduce residential and commercial

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 4 of 40
water use, along with increased water supply from 1) alternative water sources such as captured rainwater and treated wastewater; 2) increased efficiency of the City’s water treatment systems; and 3) additional pumping from existing groundwater wells and new wells in the local groundwater basin. Implementation of the SWMP has been proceeding since 2014, with updates provided during Council’s annual consideration of water rate adjustments. The most recent update was provided on January 9, 2018.

Between 2014 and 2018, other elements of the SWMP progressed, including completion of a preliminary Sustainable Yield Analysis (SYA) of the Santa Monica groundwater basin and finalizing plans for the Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP) to support further analysis and refinement of alternatives to reduce reliance on imported water supply and meet the City’s self-sufficiency goal. Staff initiated a comprehensive update of the SWMP in 2017 to incorporate new information regarding local groundwater resources, regulatory updates, and to integrate new water conservation programs and alternate water supply opportunities.

On January 9, 2018, staff reported to Council that further analysis was needed to assess whether the City could meet its water self-sufficiency goal by 2020. Additional work completed since January 2018 included analysis to validate preliminary SYA estimates of the local groundwater basin, drilling of exploratory water wells in the Coastal sub-basin to evaluate potential new local water production, technical studies to evaluate the cost and viability of increasing the production efficiency of the City’s Arcadia WTP, evaluating the impact of new drinking water regulations (e.g., maximum contaminant level [MCL] for 1,2,3 TCP) on groundwater extraction from the Olympic Sub-basin, and evaluating the cost and viability of additional water conservation programs as requested by the Task Force on the Environment. A timeline summarizing key events related to the development of the SWMP from 2011 is provided in Figure 1.

Staff currently anticipates that the City would achieve water self-sufficiency in 2023 based on the plan outlined in this report. In addition to the proposed plan to achieve water self-sufficiency, a Five-Year Rate Study (2020-2024) is also currently underway and will consider potential rate impacts of water self-sufficiency projects. Results of the Five Year Rate Study will be presented to Council in the first half of 2019.

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 5 of 40
January 25, 2011
City Council directed
staff to develop water
self-sufficiency plan
(100% on local water
supplies)
Council adopts Sustainable
Water Master Plan (Oct ’14)
Plan outlines the City’s strategy to
achieve water self-sufficiency
Olympic Treatment Pilot Project
Initiated (Sept ’14)
Evaluate treatment technologies to
restore pumping capacity at Olympic
Sub Basin
SWMP Update
(Nov ‘18)
Staff to present
strategy to meet
City’s water selfsufficiency goal
Conservation Plan
Implemented (2015)
Increased conservation
efforts saw a ~20% reduction
in gallon per capita per day
(gpcd) water consumption
SWMP Update
(Jan ‘18)
Staff reported to City
Council that additional
analysis was needed to
determine if selfsufficiency goal could
be met by 2020
New Contaminant at
Olympic Sub Basin
(May ‘18)
New drinking water
regulations required
additional analysis of
Olympic Sub Basin
treatment strategy
Water SelfSufficiency
Achieved (2023)
Figure 1: Self-Sufficiency Timeline
Discussion
Goals and Benefits of Water Self-Sufficiency
The proposed plan to meet the City’s self-sufficiency goal involves a combination of demand reduction through various water conservation and efficiency programs and the addition of local water supplies which will also provide the following benefits:
 Long-term cost benefits to ratepayers by maximizing local water resources  Provide a more sustainable and drought-resilient water supply through a diversified water supply portfolio
 Reduce the City’s water supply energy footprint through conservation and locally sourced water supplies
With imported water purchase costs from MWD expected to increase annually from 3 to 7 percent over the next 10 years, the primary focus of the updated SWMP was to develop water self-sufficiency scenarios that are both sustainable and economical compared to the continued purchase of imported water from MWD. Development of

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 6 of 40
cost-effective local, sustainable, and drought resilient water supplies will provide Santa Monica water ratepayers with cost benefits over the long-term and provide the City with greater cost certainty on water rates compared to the continued purchase of imported water from MWD.

Providing a sustainable and drought-resilient water supply through a diversified water supply portfolio eliminates the City’s reliance on the purchase of imported water from MWD and maintains reliable production during routine maintenance and unforeseen downtimes of treatment equipment.

Lastly, maximizing local water resources instead of purchasing imported water from MWD also has long-term environmental benefits for the community in terms of reduced energy use and the associated reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, which support Council’s goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 or sooner. The addition of alternative water supplies, expansion of local groundwater supplies, and increased conservation will result in a 25-30% reduction of total energy footprint from the City’s water supply compared to continued purchase of imported water from MWD.

Marching Toward Water Self-Sufficiency
The City’s water supply portfolio has progressively transformed since 2011, with the community making significant strides toward water self-sufficiency and reduced reliance on the purchase of imported water to supplement local water resources as indicated in Figure 2. In 2011, after completion of the Charnock Wellfield Restoration Project, the City was able to meet approximately 51 percent (~6,700 acre-feet per year [AFY]) of its water supply demand through local groundwater resources and reduce the purchase of water from MWD, which is imported from Northern California and the Colorado River, to approximately 48% (~6,400 AFY).

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 7 of 40
Figure 2: Overview of City’s Water Supply Portfolio from 2011 through 2017 In 2015, the City and its residents responded to severe drought conditions throughout California with conservation efforts that resulted in a decrease in the City’s total water demand of 14,300 AFY in 2014 by about 17% (-2,500 AFY) to approximately 11,800 AFY by 2017. Santa Monica’s population grew by about 1.6% from 92,321 to 93,834 over the same period. Conservation efforts resulted in a decrease in average annual water consumption, measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD), from 140 GPCD to approximately 110 GPCD as indicated in Figure 3 and continues today even after the governor declared an end to the drought.

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 8 of 40
Figure 3: Historical Population Growth versus Per Capita Water Consumption From 2015 through 2017, the City was meeting approximately 50-56% of its water supply demand through local water sources (7,400-8,200 AFY) and 26-29% through water conservation (approximately 2,500 AFY), with the amount of imported water purchased from MWD dropping to approximately 26-29% (3,700-4,100 AFY). In 2017, local groundwater supply temporarily decreased due to an extended shutdown (approximately six months) of one well in the Charnock sub-basin for maintenance and repair. The loss of a single well from the Charnock Sub-basin over the six-month period and loss of approximately 800 AFY of groundwater production highlighted the need to increase resiliency of the local water supply to maintain reliable production as the City continues its march toward water self-sufficiency.

Refined SWMP Pathway to Achieve Water Self-Sufficiency
Additional analyses of various elements of the SWMP, as outlined at the January 9, 2018 City Council meeting, have been completed, and based on those analyses staff now estimates that water self-sufficiency can be achieved by 2023. To achieve selfsufficiency by 2023, staff is proposing to replace the purchase of imported water from MWD (approximately 50% of the total water supply demand when self-sufficiency efforts were initiated in 2011) with a comprehensive plan consisting of: 1) Component 1 - continuing and increasing water conservation efforts to permanently reduce water demand, 2) Component 2 - developing sustainable and drought resilient alternative

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 9 of 40
water supplies, and 3) Component 3 - expanding local groundwater production within sustainable yield limits.

The delay in achieving the City’s self-sufficiency goal from 2020 to 2023 is due to several factors, including new regulations established by the State Water Resources Control Board’s Division of Drinking Water (DDW) that required further analysis to determine the level of treatment required for the Olympic Sub-basin, the project timeline and permitting schedule for the SWIP project to recharge local groundwater aquifers with purified water, and the need to confirm and refine preliminary SYA estimates with additional data to establish an accurate estimate of the sustainable yield for the Santa Monica Groundwater Basin.

The remainder of this staff report is organized as follows to provide detailed descriptions of each component of the updated SWMP and its contribution/benefits toward the City’s self-sufficiency goal:
 Proposed Plan to Achieve Water Self-Sufficiency
 SWMP Project Cost and Implementation Schedule
 Funding Recommendations
Proposed Plan to Achieve Water Self-Sufficiency
A comprehensive plan was developed through the SWMP and comprises three components that provide a path for the City to achieve water self-sufficiency by 2023.

The contribution of each proposed component to eliminate reliance on imported water supply by 2023 is summarized in Figure 4 along with the percent contribution toward replacing imported water purchases. In total, the three components: 1) conservation, 2) alternative water supplies - production efficiency, recycled water, and purified water for recharge, and 3) new local groundwater will contribute approximately 8,057 AFY toward the City’s total water supply and reduce imported water purchase to only 170 AFY. A brief description of each of the recommended components is provided below.

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 10 of 40
New Local Groundwater,
2,100 AFY, 25%
Imported
Water (MWD),
170 AFY, 2%
Alternative Water Supply -
Purified Water (Recharge),
1,100 AFY
Alternative Water Supply -
Alternative Water Supply Recycled Water , 560 AFY
- Production Efficiency,
1,200 AFY
Conservation, 3,097 AFY, 38%
PROPOSED STRATEGIES TO REPLACE IMPORTED WATER SUPPLY (2023) New Local Groundwater Imported Water (MWD)
Alternative Water Supply - Purified Water (Recharge) Alternative Water Supply - Recycled Water Alternative Water Supply - Production Efficiency Conservation Alternative Water Supply,
2,860 AFY, 35%
Figure 4: Summary of Proposed Components to Replace Imported Water Supply by 2023 Component 1 - Conservation (38% Reduction in Imported Water Purchases) In 2014, Council authorized the significant expansion of staffing and funding to augment the City’s water conservation efforts to address the state-wide drought and help the City meet its self-sufficiency goal. This contributed to a water demand reduction of approximately 20% over the past three years (2015-2017), which equates to saving approximately 2,500 AFY. Continued implementation of the existing conservation programs with the addition of supplemental conservation efforts is expected to continue this trend of water demand reduction through 2040, with the staff recommended Optimal conservation plan which is described below. Continuation of existing, and implementation of proposed, conservation programs are essential for the City to eliminate reliance on imported water from MWD. The recommended Optimal conservation plan will contribute approximately 3,100 AFY to the City’s water supply portfolio in 2023 and reduce imported water purchases by roughly 38%.

Staff modeled three conservation plans (Optimal, Enhanced, and 90 GPCD), which are presented in gallons per capita per day by 2025 and abbreviated as GPCD. The Optimal Conservation Plan can be completed using existing budgeted resources and would reduce the City’s total water demand by approximately 20%, even after factoring in demand increases associated with expected population growth through 2025.

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 11 of 40
Increasing conservation efforts from the Optimal to the Enhanced Plan would cost an additional $7.2 million in total program cost, on top of the budget already allocated for the Optimal Conservation Plan, but with a marginal increase in water conserved (approximately 2% additional reduction in GPCD with the Enhanced Plan). The enhanced conservation plan would still require approximately 3,500 to 3,700 AFY of water that would need to be met through the purchase of imported water or from the development of additional local water resources. With marginal gains from increased conservation efforts compared to the additional implementation cost required, staff is recommending continuing with the optimal conservation plan, which costs approximately $708/AF of water saved.

A third, aggressive conservation plan was also studied following a request by the Task Force on the Environment to evaluate the cost and feasibility of reducing city-wide water demand to 90 GPCD by 2025. The assessment of the 90 GPCD Plan conducted by staff concluded that reducing overall water demand to 90 GPCD would be extremely costly and may not be feasible for implementation. The overall cost to implement this plan would exceed $56.6 million, with $40 million of the cost incurred over the first five years. In addition to the significant cost premium, this scenario would likely require additional staffing and would be very challenging to achieve by 2025.

Staff met with industry experts to review and receive input on the City staff modeling of proposed conservation programs. A panel of outside experts supported both the optimal and enhanced conservation plans and the proposed programs that comprise them. A summary of the conservation scenarios evaluated is provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Summary of Conservation Scenarios Considered
Description1 Conclusion Cost
Optimal,
108 GPCD
 Best Conservation option
 Does not achieve self-sufficiency
goal by itself but supports demand
reduction.

Within current operating budget
$708/AF (over 30 years) 2
Enhanced,
106 GPCD
 Feasible but expensive compared to
Optimal Plan. Requires 1.5 new
staff for 10 years
$7.2 million increase in program
costs compared to Optimal
(2018-2023)

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 12 of 40
 Does not achieve self-sufficiency
goal
 Not worth the incremental cost for a
2GPCD reduction.
137% increase in budgeted costs
(2018-2013)
$1,078/AF (over 30 years) 2
Aggressive,
90 GPCD
 Potentially feasible but very
expensive, requires 2.5+ new staff
for 10 years
 Does not achieve self-sufficiency
goal
$40.8M over the first five years;
$58.6 M 2019-2040,
800% increase in costs (2018-
2023) compared to Optimal
Scenario
~$1,280/AF (over 30 years)2
1GPCD based on water conservation efforts achieved as of 2025 2Excluding ongoing conservation staffing cost.

Due to conservation efforts since 2015, the City’s current water demand measured in gallons per capita per day (GPCD) is approximately 110 GPCD. Staff also conducted a theoretical exercise to determine what would be required for the City to become water self-sufficient solely through conservation efforts (assuming no imported water and no additional local water production). Results of that exercise indicated that the total per capita water demand would need to be reduced to 64 GPCD. Staff consulted water conservation experts, analyzed conservation efforts in other cities and evaluated various local conservation scenarios and determined that attempting to achieve the selfsufficiency goal through conservation alone (i.e. achieving 64 GPCD in Santa Monica) is neither financially feasible nor realistic within the time horizon.

However, the community should be commended on the conservation efforts already taken to reduce water demand and decrease imported water purchased from MWD.

Santa Monica is - and can be - a model for a new ethic of resource self-sufficiency and environmental sustainability. The Council’s recent adoption of the 100% renewable default rate for community electric supply represents this ethos of “living within our means.” Conservation will continue to play a critical role in the City’s march toward water self-sufficiency by continuing to reduce overall water demand in the face of continued population growth from new housing and demand from the commercial and institutional sectors of our local economy.

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 13 of 40
Based on the modeling described above, staff recommends pursuing the Optimal conservation plan, which continues the successful conservation programs initiated over the past three years and increases water conservation in untapped areas such as:
 Funding of retrofits in Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District facilities and landscapes
 Commercial sector fixture retrofits and enhanced rebates  Coin-operated laundry machine retrofits
 Increase in Water Neutrality offsets and direct installs  Rebates for new technologies including gray and black water systems  Enhanced water conservation education and enforcement  Additional sustainable landscape conversions
 Outreach to assist customers on how to properly adjust their irrigation timers  New marketing and outreach campaign focusing on instilling permanent conservation behaviors consistent with the state’s forthcoming framework for “Making Water Conservation a California Way of Life”
 Incorporating limited-term employees as part of the permanent water conservation team to ensure new state requirements and regulations are met, as well as maintaining programs at an effective level
In developing the water conservation plan to reach and maintain self-sufficiency, the City evaluated the potential for further water efficiency and conservation in all customer sectors. This included an assessment of the current level of water fixtures in the city, as well as identifying where the greatest opportunity for reducing water consumption existed. Based on this analysis, a program plan was developed to reach the City’s longterm objectives via existing and new conservation programs.

Table 2 shows the projects planned over the next five years including the number of activities for each program such as number of rebates, consultations and direct installation of water efficient fixtures to replace inefficient fixtures in existing buildings

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 14 of 40
throughout the city. The projected number of activities is based on historical participation, available market of opportunity, and strategic community engagement campaigns to increase programs over multi-year periods. The table also includes the estimated water savings and total costs from 2018 through 2023 when water selfsufficiency is expected to be reached.

Table 2: Summary of Optimal Water Conservation Programs and Results Measure Customer Class Total Activities
2018-2023
Total Water Savings (AF)
2018-2023
Rebates, Single Family
(i.e. clothes washers, landscape, soil sensors, toilets, irrigation) Single Family 4,660 286 Water Use Consultations, Single Family Single Family 720 58 Graywater System Incentive Single Family 60 1
Direct Installs, Single Family
(i.e. 0.80 gpf toilets, water neutrality) Single Family 0 0 Direct Installs, Multi-Family
(0.80 gpf and 1.06 or less gpf toilets) Multi-Family 3,750 124 Rebates, Multi-Family
(i.e. high-efficiency clothes washers, landscape, toilets) Multi-Family 1,475 94 Water Use Consultations, Multi-Family Multi-Family 750 90 School Education Program Institutional 2,090 14
Direct Installs, Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District (i.e. 0.80 gpf and 0.125 gpf toilets and urinals, water neutrality) Institutional 537 9 Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District Weather Based Irrigation Controller Incentive Institutional 22 21
Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District Landscape
Incentive Institutional 9 8
Rebates, Commercial & Institutional
(i.e. ice machines, toilets, urinals, toilets, irrigation) Commercial & Institutional 1,792 260 Direct Installs, Commercial & Institutional
(i.e. toilets and urinals) Commercial & Institutional 3,280 517 Water Use Consultations, Commercial & Institutional Commercial & Institutional 300 45 Performance Pays Commercial & Institutional 4 9
Soil Moisture Sensor Rebates Multi-Family, Commercial & Institutional 75 7
Water Saving Devices - Faucet Aerators All 9,240 328
Water Saving Devices - Showerheads All 4,200 160
Community Outreach & Education All 16 1
Pilot Projects All 2 2
Total 32,982 2,034
The financial summary of the Optimal Conservation Plan is provided in Table 3.

Table 3: Financial Summary of Optimal Water Conservation Plan Average Water Savings (AFY)
610
Cost of Savings per Unit Volume ($/AF)

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 15 of 40
$708
Modeling of the water conservation plan was purposefully conservative and only includes expected water demand reductions directly related to City efforts. Therefore, the projected demand reductions do not include the potential savings from efficiency improvements in California State Plumbing Codes known as “passive conservation.” Passive water conservation is achievable through non-City sponsored programs, such as maximizing current plumbing code enforcement, landscape ordinances, natural fixture replacement rates, as well as future local and state regulations and codes. This includes the impact and enforcement of the legislation, California SB 407, requiring noncompliant plumbing fixtures in any single-family residential and multi-family residential, and commercial properties to be replaced by the property owner with waterconserving plumbing fixtures.

Through the currently established programs, proposed new programs, and passive conservation, it is estimated that the City can reach 99 GPCD by 2025 and 96 GPCD by 2030. These efforts would result in an estimated additional annual savings between 680 acre-feet (AF) per year by 2025 and as much as 1,000 AF per year in 2030. The City allocates funding for conservation within the water fund annual operating budget; no additional funding would be required to implement the Optimal Conservation Plan. Staff will return during the Five-Year Rate Study to present long-term staffing options for the recommended Optimal Conservation Program.

Component 2 - Alternative Water Supplies (35% Reduction in Imported Water Purchases)
To further diversify the City’s water supply portfolio and increase overall resilience, three alternative water supply projects are proposed and collectively offset imported water purchases from MWD by 35 percent (see Figure 4). These projects include:
 Increase recycled water production through the Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP), upgrading the existing Santa Monica Urban Runoff Recycling

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 16 of 40
Facility (SMURRF) and constructing a new Advanced Water Purification Facility (AWPF) that provides a drought resilient, local water supply. The increase in recycled water production from SMURRF would offset imported water purchases from MWD by approximately 4% (approximately 560 AFY).
 Recharge local groundwater aquifers in the Olympic Sub-basin to maintain sustainable yield pumping levels with purified water from the SWIP’s AWPF. The purified water from the AWPF would offset imported water purchases from MWD by approximately 7% (approximately 1,100 AFY).
 Upgrade the City’s Arcadia Water Treatment Plant (WTP) with new technology to increase overall production. Closed Circuit Reverse Osmosis (CCRO) would be added to the Arcadia WTP to treat the Reverse Osmosis concentrate waste stream, which is currently discharged to the sewer system, and increase the overall treatment efficiency at the Arcadia WTP to approximately 90 percent, or greater. The addition of CCRO at the Arcadia WTP would offset imported water purchases from MWD by approximately 8% (approximately 1,200 AFY).

The SWIP project is a major component of the alternative water supply for the City as it will provide a sustainable and drought resilient water supply by providing purified water to recharge local groundwater aquifers. In return, the aquifer recharge that will be provided by the SWIP will allow the City to maximize groundwater pumping, within sustainable yield limits, from the Olympic Sub-basin.

Component 3 - New Local Groundwater Production (25% Reduction in Imported Water Purchases)
To offset the remaining imported water purchased from MWD, local groundwater production would need to be increased to reduce imported water purchases from MWD by 25% and resiliency measures implemented to maintain reliable production.

Staff developed and analyzed seven scenarios to expand the City’s groundwater production and carefully vetted each scenario internally and with outside industry experts. The seven scenarios were compared based on project feasibility, capital, and operation cost, and are summarized in Attachment C. All scenarios evaluated assume

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 17 of 40
that the Optimal Conservation Plan is implemented. Of the seven scenarios evaluated, Scenario 1 - Expansion of Arcadia WTP with Closed Circuit Reverse Osmosis (CCRO) combined with a Separate Olympic Sub-basin Pipeline and Treatment at the Arcadia WTP site is recommended. Scenario 1 combined with the Optimal Conservation Plan is the most cost-effective solution to achieve self-sufficiency and maximize local water resources. Scenario 1 includes the following elements:
 Expansion of the Arcadia WTP, including CCRO technology (as discussed under component 2 - alternative water supplies), to increase treatment capacity and accommodate future 2040 water demands.
 Acquisition of a new groundwater well to enhance resiliency.  Olympic Sub-basin Restoration:
o A new pipeline separating Olympic Sub-basin water, conveying it independently to the Arcadia WTP, thus requiring a smaller treatment facility at the Arcadia WTP to remove contaminants in the Olympic Sub-basin.
o Separate contamination treatment facility at the Arcadia WTP for the Olympic basin.

Expansion at Arcadia WTP
To support development of alternative water supplies and restoration of the Olympic Sub-basin, treatment capacity expansion and plant upgrades are required at the Arcadia WTP to support an overall increase in water production and enhance resiliency to achieve water self-sufficiency. The Arcadia WTP is currently capable of treating up to approximately 11,300 AFY (10 million gallons per day [mgd]) and produce 9,900 AFY (8.9 mgd) of treated water (approximately 82% recovery or efficiency). The proposed expansion and addition of new technologies to increase production efficiency at the Arcadia WTP will increase its treatment capacity to approximately 14,700 AFY (13 mgd) and produce 13,400 AFY (12 mgd) of treated water (approximately 92% recovery or efficiency). The proposed improvements for expanding production capacity at the Arcadia WTP and enhancing water supply resiliency include:

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 18 of 40
 Acquire an additional groundwater well to enhance resiliency and maintain production during routine maintenance or unforeseen downtimes of groundwater wells, while aggressively pumping within the sustainable yield.  Install new CCRO to increase overall plant efficiency to 90 percent or greater (as discussed previously under component 2 - alternative water supplies).  Expand capacity (e.g., pumps, blowers, cartridge filters, etc.) of the Arcadia WTP to accommodate increased groundwater production and new technologies (e.g., CCRO described in Component 2).

Olympic Sub-basin Restoration
The Olympic Sub-basin plays a key role in achieving the City’s water self-sufficiency goal as it could provide up to 3,200 AFY of groundwater and is also the location where purified water from the SWIP will be recharged to sustain this pumping rate. However, the Olympic Sub-basin contains several contaminants that would require additional treatment to meet drinking water standards. The key contaminants in the Olympic Subbasin include: 1,2,3-Trichloropropane (1,2,3-TCP), 1,4-Dioxane, trichloroethylene (TCE), and tetrachloroethylene (PCE). Drinking water regulations, or maximum contaminant levels (MCL), have been in place for TCE and PCE prior to January 2018, and regulations for 1,2,3- TCP were established after January 2018 which required further treatment analysis. 1,4-Dioxane is currently on the State of California’s drinking water Notification Level (NL) list, which is a health-based advisory level and not an MCL. It is anticipated that the NL of 1 microgram per liter (g/L) or part per billion (ppb) for 1,4-Dioxane will likely become an MCL in the near future (within next 5 years).

Further analysis of treatment options for the Olympic Sub-basin was required due to a recently established drinking water regulation that established a MCL for 1,2,3 TCP at 5 parts per trillion (ppt), and additional data on 1,4 Dioxane was available to refine the treatment analysis to determine if the current 1 ppb NL (anticipated future MCL) could be met once full production of the Olympic Sub-basin is restored. The Olympic Subbasin treatment analysis was performed by an outside consultant, Black & Veatch. Key findings of the treatment analysis are listed below:

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 19 of 40
 1,2,3-TCP was only detected at one well, SM-4, and the MCL of 5 ppt could be met through blending with other wells at full production capacity.  1,4-Dioxane is present in all three wells (two existing and one future) and could limit groundwater production from the Olympic Sub-basin to 845 AFY or approximately 25% of the basin’s total sustainable yield.
 Other contaminants, TCE and PCE, do not impact groundwater production from the Olympic Sub-basin as they would be removed through existing treatment processes at the Arcadia WTP.

To maximize groundwater production from the Olympic Sub-basin and comply with regulation on the key contaminants of concern, the following improvements are recommended:
 Increase groundwater pumping from existing wells (SM-3 and SM-4), complete equipping and permitting of one recently installed new well (SM-8) and install a replacement well (SM-9) to increase local production from this sub-basin to ~3,200 AFY within sustainable yield levels. Please note that purified water from the SWIP will be used to recharge the Olympic Sub-basin that helps maintain the sustainable yield levels by supplementing naturally available groundwater within the sub-basin.

Design and procurement efforts are currently underway, and the well projects were previously approved by Council in the FY 19-20 Capital Improvement Budget.  Construct a new pipeline to separate Olympic Sub-basin groundwater from Charnock wellfield groundwater for separate treatment at the Arcadia WTP, primarily to target removal of 1,4 Dioxane. This reduces the amount of water needing treatment since only the Olympic Sub-basin flows (3,200 AFY) contain 1,4 Dioxane.

If the flows are not separated, 14,700 AFY (Olympic + Charnock) would need to be treated.
 Construct a new contamination treatment facility for only the Olympic Sub-basin flows to remove 1,4 Dioxane, 1,2,3-TCP, TCE, and PCE at the Arcadia WTP site.

The proposed treatment train consists of the ultraviolet light advanced oxidation

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 20 of 40
process and granular activated carbon. With the new contamination treatment facility and increased production efficiency (90-92% recovery) at the Arcadia WTP, approximately 2,900 AFY of treated water will be produced from the 3,200 AFY extracted from the Olympic Sub-basin. The new contamination treatment facility will provide high-quality drinking water that meets current and future regulatory standards.

Sustainable Yield Update
The sustainable yield from the Santa Monica Groundwater Basin is a critical component to ensure overall groundwater production is within sustainable limits of the basin and could support the proposed projects described above on an ongoing basis. A preliminary Sustainable Yield Analysis, (SYA), prepared by Richard C. Slade & Associates (Slade) in 2017, was presented to Council in January 2018. Since then, additional work was performed to refine and update the SYA. Additional work included the Coastal Sub-basin Exploratory Boring Program and a digital elevation mapping study that analyzed the potential recharge from the nearby mountain front. The updated report contains findings from this recently completed work as well as 2017 data regarding rainfall, geology, static water levels in key wells, and groundwater withdrawals from active City wells and other known private well owners (Attachment D). The updated SYA estimate from Slade’s analysis for the Santa Monica Basin is between 11,800 and 14,725 AFY.

To substantiate the assessment conducted by Slade, City staff contracted with consultants from ICF to perform a separate estimate of the sustainable yield using a water-balance approach. This method compares the amount of water that recharges into a basin (inflow) from a wide range of sources (natural and anthropogenic), with the amount of water leaving the basin (outflow) from losses caused by pumping, evapotranspiration, basin outflow, etc. ICF’s assessment also considered findings from both the digital elevation mapping and Differential Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar Study (DInSAR) studies, presented to Council in January 2018. Based on ICF’s water-balance approach, average sustainable yield was estimated to be between

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 21 of 40
11,416 AFY to 13,722 AFY. The similarity of the sustainable yield estimates developed by Slade and ICF using different modeling methods provide a strong level of confidence that the City can use local groundwater resources in an ongoing manner into the future without negatively impacting the basin or creating overdraft conditions.

It should be noted that the estimates developed by Slade and ICF are conservative and do not include a sustainable yield estimate for the Crestal Sub-basin. In addition, all estimates of sustainable yield are transitory due to myriad associated climatic and hydrogeologic factors that are constantly in flux. The State legislature enacted the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (Water Code sections 10720 et seq.)("SGMA"), which became effective on January 1, 2015. A portion of the 50-square mile Santa Monica Basin that underlies Santa Monica has been designated by the Department of Water Resources as a "medium-priority" groundwater basin. Any groundwater basin designated as medium-priority must be managed under a groundwater sustainability plan (“GSP”) adopted by a local groundwater sustainability agency and approved by the Department, by January 31, 2022. In light of SGMA, further analysis will be required to determine if future demand will exceed what could be sustainably pumped from the basin. If it is determined that the City’s plans to extract more groundwater is not supported in the approved draft of the GSP, then the City may be precluded from withdrawing groundwater in excess of the then-projected sustainable yield and the City would need to continue purchasing imported water from MWD to meet its potable water demand. The potential limitations on future groundwater withdrawals from the City’s active sub-basins indicate that the City’s approach of pursuing nonconventional resources, indirect potable reuse via aquifer recharge, additional water supply wells in the Coastal sub-basin, replacement of underperforming wells, increasing treatment efficiency at the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant, and continuing conservation efforts are necessary for the City to achieve and sustain its long-term objective of independence from imported water. Future updates of the SYA and numerical models will further refine the sustainable yield for the basin. Going forward, the City is planning to update the SYA approximately every two to three years. Future updates will include additional findings from work being conducted jointly with the US Geological Survey (USGS) and an ongoing climate stress test evaluation by the Rand Corporation. The

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 22 of 40
City plans to produce groundwater within the upper limit of the estimated sustainable yield, while taking into consideration two irrigation pumpers in the Arcadia Sub-basin and one in the Crestal in addition to one diminutive residential irrigation well.

Summary of Proposed Plan to Achieve Water Self-Sufficiency The three components proposed in the SWMP will help the City achieve water selfsufficiency by 2023 and eliminate the City’s reliance on imported water purchases from the MWD. The projected makeup of the City’s water supply portfolio is summarized in Figure 5, and contribution from each component to the City’s total water supply is provided in Table 4. The location for each of the three components is provided in Figure 6, and the synergy and inter-relationship between each component is illustrated in Figure 7. Achieving water self-sufficiency through a diversified water supply portfolio also provides the City with greater cost control over water rates as compared to the continued purchase of imported water from the MWD. As noted previously, approximately 1 percent of the water supply would continue to be made up of imported water purchased from the MWD as periodic circulation is required to maintain the supply line as an emergency backup for the City.

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 23 of 40
New Local
Groundwater
13%
Imported Water
(MWD)
1% Alternative Water
Supply - Purified
Water (Recharge)
Alternative
Water Supply -
Recycled Water
Alternative Water Supply -
Production Efficiency
Conservation
20%
Local Groundwater
47%
WATER SELF-SUFFICIENCY BY 2023
New Local Groundwater Imported Water (MWD)
Alternative Water Supply - Purified Water (Recharge) Alternative Water Supply - Recycled Water Alternative Water Supply - Production Efficiency Conservation Local Groundwater
Alternative
Water Supply
19%
Figure 5: A Sustainable and Drought Resilient Water Supply Portfolio Achieved through Self Sufficiency

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 24 of 40
Table 4: Summary of Water Supply Contribution from Each Self-Sufficiency Component Water Self Sufficiency Component Estimated
Water Supply
Contribution
by 2023 (AFY)
%
Reduction
in Imported
Water
Estimated
$/AFY
Component 1 - Conservation
Optimal Conservation Plan 3,100 38% $708
Component 2 – Alternative Water Supplies
Recycled Water from SMURRF 560 7% $4201
Purified Water from SWIP to
Recharge Olympic Sub-basin
1,100 13% $1,0171
Increase Production Efficiency at
Arcadia WTP
1,200 15% $1,0711
Component 3 – New Local Groundwater Production
Arcadia WTP Expansion and
Resiliency Enhancement2
N/A N/A $7051
Olympic Sub-basin Restoration 2,100 26% N/A3
Subtotal 8,060 99%
Existing Water Resources
Existing Local Groundwater
(2023 projected costs)
7,330 $1,100
Imported Water from MWD
(to maintain for emergency use, 2023
projected costs)
170 $1,248
Subtotal 7,500

TOTAL WATER
RESOURCES (2023)
15,560
1Estimated year 1 cost when project is complete and includes savings from avoided imported water purchase cost
2Aracadia WTP upgrades to accommodate increase in production efficiency and Olympic Sub-basin Restoration
3Olympic Sub-basin Restoration will be paid for through settlement funds

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 25 of 40 • Olympic Sub-Basin Restoration
• Recharge with SWIP
• Production Efficiency and Capacity
Expansion at Arcadia WTP
• Separate Olympic Pipeline +
New Treatment
• CBI Tank
• SWIP
Well Acquisition to
Enhance Resiliency
Figure 6: Project Locations of Proposed SWMP Component Toward Self-Sufficiency

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 26 of 40
Figure 7: Synergy between Proposed Water Supply Components to Achieve Self-Sufficiency SWMP Cost Summary and Implementation Schedule
A cost summary for the proposed SWMP components to achieve self-sufficiency by 2023 is provided in Table 5. The funding required to complete the capital projects increasing local water supplies and enhance water supply resiliency is $38 million. A Five-Year Rate Study (2020-2024) is currently underway and will present funding solutions to cover these costs. It is projected that the components of the proposed SWMP may be funded primarily through the issuance of water revenue bonds (approximately $34.75 million), with the debt service on the bonds incorporated into water rates, and from a contribution from the Wastewater Fund (approximately $3.25 million). Staff will return to Council in spring 2019 for a rate study session. An additional $64 million from existing water-contamination settlement funds would be used for restoring the Olympic Sub-basin, which would allow additional water production from

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 27 of 40
that sub-basin to support water self-sufficiency. The Olympic Sub-basin restoration cost includes an approximate, one-time $20 million capital expenditure for treatment systems and 30 years of ongoing operation and maintenance for an additional $20 million. Based on current modeling projections by ICF, over 80% of the Olympic Sub-basin will be remediated within the first 30 years; however, the Sub-basin may not be completely restored. Thus, the remaining balance in the settlement fund ($24 million) should be reserved to address any contamination that may still be present after 30 years or any new regulations that may impact use of the Olympic Sub-basin. A more detailed discussion on recommended budget appropriations is provided below.

Table 5: SWMP Cost Summary for Proposed Components to Achieve Self-Sufficiency Unfunded Projects Additional Cost
Arcadia WTP: Expand Capacity and Production Efficiency
Enhancement
$30M
Additional Well and Improvements: Increase Resiliency and Ground Water Production
$8M
Olympic Sub-basin Restoration, Capital Improvements and 30 years of Operations and Maintenance
$40M
Olympic Sub-basin Restoration Reliability Reserve $24M
Total: $102M
Implementing the SWMP and reaching water self-sufficiency by 2023 entails numerous capital projects that are interrelated. An overview of the proposed implementation schedule is provided in Figure 8. Several well projects (SM-8, SM-9 and injection well) were approved by Council on July 11, 2017 and on June 12, 2018 and are on track to be completed by 2021 (Attachments E and F, respectively). A portion of the projects are in the City of Los Angeles and require installation of pipelines. Construction and permitting of pipelines in the City of Los Angeles will take time and was considered in the schedule. The design, construction, and permitting of improvements at the Arcadia WTP, including efficiency upgrades, are expected to be completed in 2023 if procurement starts in December 2018. A schedule contingency of approximately six months has been included to account for unforeseen conditions or new regulations that could impact the plan implementation.

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 28 of 40
Figure 8: Proposed Implementation Schedule to Achieve Self-Sufficiency by 2023 Alternatives to Water Self-Sufficiency
The proposed SWMP components summarized above are a considerable investment towards the City’s future resiliency and achieving water self-sufficiency by 2023. In consideration of the capital investment and impacts to water rates, staff has also evaluated potential alternatives to reduce capital expenditures to potentially provide relief to potential water rate increases (to be confirmed in the Five-Year Rate Study for 2020-2024). A summary of potential alternatives that may reduce upfront capital investment compared to the proposed water self-sufficiency plan is provided in Table 6.

The capital cost summarized in Table 6 for each alternative is the capital cost that needs to be funded and does not include the $64 million in settlement funds that will be used for the Olympic Sub-basin restoration. For all alternatives, it is assumed that the Olympic Sub-basin restoration will be implemented. A brief description on which component is implemented and its associated capital cost to be funded is provided.

Staff also considered delaying self-sufficiency goal to beyond 2023 and delaying capital expenditures to ease rate increase over the next five years. However, delaying implementation may result in increasing overall project cost due to inflation and negate

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 29 of 40
any potential up front capital savings. The alternatives summarized in Table 6 only consider reduction in upfront capital cost and do not include projected increase of imported water purchase from MWD (estimated to be at 5% annual increase), which will ultimately be more expensive than locally produced water.

Table 6: Summary of Alternatives Considered for Self-Sufficiency Alt. No. Alternatives
Description
Capital
Cost3
Locally Sourced
Water +
Conservation
Imported
Water
Purchase
from MWD
Staff
Recommended
Plan
99% water selfsufficiency1 Component
1 - Conservation
Component 2 -
Alternative Water
Supplies Component 3 -
New Local Groundwater
$38M 11,730 AFY
(Existing Arcadia
WTP + Olympic)
3,100 AFY
(Conservation)
560 AFY
(Recycled
Water)2
170 AFY
1 87% water selfsufficiency1 Implement
only SWIP and Olympic
Sub-Basin Restoration.

Acquire new well to
enhance resiliency at
Arcadia WTP. No
expansion and
production efficiency
enhancements at Arcadia
WTP
$8M 9,900 AFY
(Existing Arcadia
WTP + Olympic)
3,100 AFY
(Conservation)
560 AFY
(Recycled
Water)2
2,000 AFY
2 90% water selfsufficiency1 Implement
SWIP, Olympic
restoration, and
expansion at Arcadia
WTP. No production
efficiency enhancements
at Arcadia WTP. Results
in loss and negative
impact to treatment
resiliency.
$21M 10,500 AFY
(Existing Arcadia
WTP + Olympic)
3,100 AFY
(Conservation)
560 AFY
(Recycled
Water)2
1,400 AFY
3 94% water selfsufficiency1 Implement
SWIP, Olympic
Restoration, expansion
$30M 10,900 AFY
(Arcadia WTP +
Olympic) 3,100
AFY
1,000 AFY

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 30 of 40
and production efficiency
upgrades at Arcadia
WTP. Do not acquire a
new well to enhance
resiliency.
(Conservation)
560 AFY
(Recycled
Water)2
1Percentages are based on year 2023 projected demand. 2560AFY of recycled water to be available in 2023, but actual usage of full capacity may not be until 2040. 3Excluding Olympic Sub-Basin restoration cost, which is funded through settlement funds and SWIP capital costs as it is already funded through a low interest loan from the State of California.

The alternatives evaluated by staff are simply presented as scenarios to reduce capital expenditures over the next five years but does not provide a complete solution to achieve the City’s water self-sufficiency goal.

Funding Recommendations to Achieve Water Self-Sufficiency A financial analysis for the plan outlined in this report to achieve water self-sufficiency was conducted by staff. The financial analysis includes comparing the future cost of imported water to the projected cost of locally produced water over a 30-year period.

This analysis excluded the Olympic Sub-basin restoration costs, as the recommended funding source would be from groundwater settlement funds received by the City from outside sources to cover the costs for remediating the contaminants in that sub-basin. In summary, locally produced water from the recommended SWMP components outlined in this report is projected to cost between $400/AFY to $1,100/AFY, which is less than the expected cost to purchase imported water from the MWD at $1248/AFY in 2023.

Please refer to Table 5, presented previously, for a detailed breakdown on the cost per acre-foot for each local water supply component. A comparison of the projected cost differential between the purchase of imported water from the MWD and production of locally produced water is provided in Table 7. With locally produced water cheaper than imported water costs, the components outlined in the SWMP to achieve water selfsufficiency by 2023 are a positive investment toward the future of the City. Ratepayers will benefit from the implementation of these projects, thus keeping local water costs low compared to the ongoing cost increases for imported water. Not only does the proposed SWMP provide a sustainable and drought resilient water supply for the City, it would also benefit the ratepayers with greater control over future water rates compared with

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 31 of 40
imported water rates that are projected to increase at a higher rate and are outside the City’s control.

Table 7: Future Estimated Imported Water Cost (increased at 5%) Compared to Projected Locally Produced Water Cost. Assuming Efficiency (CCRO) technology is installed and 2,800AFY is produced.

As noted previously, staff recommends a combination of bonding and use of settlement funds to fund the capital projects supporting water self-sufficiency and the Olympic Subbasin restoration.

Water Revenue Bond: A rate study is currently being conducted through October 2019 to set water and wastewater rates for calendar years 2020 to 2024. The rate study will address options to support the costs of this plan. A possible funding solution, to be confirmed in the rate study, is the issuing of a 30-year water revenue bond totaling approximately $34.75 million to increase local water supplies and enhance resiliency as outlined in the SWMP. The remaining $3.25 million would be contributed from the Wastewater Fund due to joint property use. The $34.75 million in bonds would cover new well acquisition, treatment capacity expansion and implementation of new

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 32 of 40
technologies to enhance production efficiency at the Arcadia WTP, and other supporting infrastructure upgrades. The Water Fund would need to cover an annual payment of approximately $2.2 million over the next 30 years to fund the projects outlined in the SWMP. Assuming a bond is issued, Figure 9 illustrates projected annual savings from avoiding imported water purchases and estimated annual bond repayments. In year 2036, where the two lines cross, the City will start saving money for rate payers on an annual basis. This analysis assumes imported water cost from MWD will increase at an annual rate of 5%. The total money borrowed is estimated to be offset by cumulative savings in the year 2048.

Figure 9: City’s Projected Annual Savings due to Local Water Production in lieu of Import Water Purchases, compared to the Payments (debt service) for a 30 Year Bond.

Settlement Funds Usage - The current balance of Gillette/Boeing funds available to program is $64.1 million. This balance includes $11.1 million transferred and currently

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 33 of 40
available in the Water Fund as authorized by Council on January 9, 2018 and $53.0 million in the General Fund. Staff recommends transferring $53.0 million from the General Fund to the Water Fund to be used to restore the Olympic Sub-basin.

Additionally, to satisfy the settlement agreement, Boeing still owes the City three payments totaling $11.0 million. Staff recommends depositing these funds directly into the Water Fund.

Approximately $20 million would be used to construct a new treatment facility to remove the contaminants currently present in the sub-basin and $20 million would be reserved for operation and maintenance costs of the treatment facility related to restoration of the Olympic Sub-basin over a 30-year period. Due to uncertainty with the Olympic Subbasin restoration after 30 years, staff recommends setting aside the remaining $24 million of Gillette/Boeing funds as a reliability reserve. The remaining $11.0 million that has been previously transferred to the Water Fund, is currently being used for groundwater modeling, monitoring, and reporting in support of Olympic Sub-basin remediation.

With the proposed injection of advanced purified water from the SWIP into the Olympic Sub-basin, staff will revisit this timeframe and report back to Council in the future once recharge operation begins.

Grants - Staff will identify and apply for state and/or federal grants to help offset the $38 million capital investment and return to Council in early 2019 with resolutions required for grant applications if available for the proposed projects. Staff has engaged a grant consultant to assist in the process. Grants being considered are:
 MWD, Local Resources Program
 California Department of Water Resources, Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 (Proposition 1).

Previously Authorized Water Rate Increase

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 34 of 40
On February 24, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution Number 10867 (CCS) to authorize water rate increases over a five-year period, beginning March 1, 2015.

The five-year water increase schedule was adopted after Council’s consideration of a rate study conducted by Kennedy Jenks Consultants. Resolution Number 10867 (CCS) also contained a provision, giving Council flexibility to approve a suspension of each annual increase, in whole or part, beginning with the 9% scheduled increase for January 1, 2016. This resolution was adopted without a majority protest, following a noticed public hearing in accordance with Proposition 218. Since adoption of this resolution, Council has partially suspended the full increases authorized for 2016-2018, and instead approved 5% increases for each of those years due to:
 Actual water sales revenues exceeded expectations during 2015 to 2017.  Actual operating and capital expenditures lower than expected. Resulting savings were applied to conservation programs, water main replacements and partially suspending planned 9% annual rate increases to more modest 5% increases.

State of the Water Fund and Forthcoming 2019 Rate Adjustment Justification Staff will return to Council on January 8, 2019 for a public hearing and to obtain authorization for the full 9% water rate increase previously approved by Council on February 24, 2015 for calendar year 2019. If approved this would result in a monthly increase of $4.33 to average single-family customer. This is the final year of a five-year rate adjustment cycle approved via resolution as mentioned above.

A summary of rate increases from 2015 is provided in Table 8.

Table 8: Rate Increase History
Calendar
Year
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Effective Date March 1,
2015
January
1, 2016
January 1,
2017
January 1,
2018
January 1,
2019
Maximum
Authorized
Increase
9% 9% 9% 9% 9%

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 35 of 40
Actual
Increase*
9% 5% 5% 5% 9%**
Date Actual
Increase
Authorized
February
24, 2015
February
23, 2016
November 22,
2016
January 9,
2018
**public
hearing on
January 8,
2019
The full implementation of the 9% previously authorized adjustment would be sufficient to allow the City to:

A) Deliver potable water to Santa Monica customers reliably, safely and sustainably in compliance with federal and state regulations.

B) Fund operating and capital budgets that are necessary to implement the City's self-sufficiency goals to encourage water conservation and sustainability, as contemplated in the City's 2014 water rate analysis.

C) Continue to implement infrastructure improvements associated with replacing aging existing infrastructure facilities comprised of water mainlines that are approaching the end of their useful lives.

The 9% rate increase would provide sufficient funding to complete the following capital projects as contemplated in the City's 2014 water rate analysis and to continue progress toward the City’s water self-sufficiency goal:

1. Additional capacity improvements, which include Preliminary Design for the Arcadia Treatment Capacity Expansion and Enhancement Project - $3.18 million in FY 2018-19. As noted in the prior section, the design would upgrade pumps, blowers, cartridge filters, and other equipment at the treatment plant to accommodate increased groundwater production and new technologies. The design would also incorporate a new process (CCRO) to increase overall plant efficiency to 90% or greater (as discussed previously under component 2 - alternative water supplies.

2. New Groundwater Resiliency Well - $6,825,000 in FY 2018-19 for acquisition of a new groundwater well to enhance resiliency. Also limit future exposure to imported water.

3. Water Main Replacement Cost Escalation - an increase of $2,000,000 starting in FY 19-20. The rate increase is necessary to fund the sharp increase observed in

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 36 of 40
water main replacement construction costs. Water main contract awards in 2017 and 2018 have returned bids of $600 to $700 per linear foot in the current highcost construction environment. These costs have increased from a prior $400 per linear foot estimate. The budget was established at $4 million per year. However, staff is now estimating a need of $6 million per year to implement the recommended 100-year water main replacement cycle (2 miles replaced per year for the City’s 205-mile water main system. Maintaining a $4 million per year budget would only yield replacement of 1.1 to 1.25 miles of pipeline per year, thus increasing the replacement cycle from 100 years to approximately 160 to 190 years. Staff recommends staying on a 100-year replacement cycle to maintain operational reliably.
 Council approval of the full 9% rate increase would also help fund the following ongoing operational expenditures:
1) Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California - $5 million per year from FY 2020-21 to FY 2022-23 (additional $8.7 million) to ensure sufficient funding for imported water deliveries prior to achieving water self-sufficiency. 2) City Yards Master Plan - Required contribution from the Water Fund for upgrades to City Yards - $4 million modeled, actual costs to be determined.

As noted above, staff will return to Council on January 8, 2019 with a recommendation that Council adopt the full 9% rate increase for calendar year 2019 as previously authorized in 2015. The staff report will include a detailed justification for the 9% rate increase as well as a 10-year fund forecast, cost comparison with other water agencies and an analysis of impacts to ratepayers.

Funding Summary
Table 9 provides a summary of funding recommendations to implement the SWMP. As noted above, staff also recommends that Council approve funding for three Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects, which would commence in FY 2018-19:

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 37 of 40
 Arcadia Capacity Expansion and Enhancement Project, Preliminary Design ($3,180,000)
 New Groundwater Resiliency Well ($6,825,000)
 Olympic Wellfield Restoration Design ($1,800,000).

Table 9: Funding Summary
Settlement
Funds
Available for
current
remediation
and O&M for
next 30 years
Settlement
Funds
Available for
Future Reserve
(Olympic subbasin
Restoration)
Water
Bond
Amount
(pending
ongoing rate
study)
Est. Annual
Bond Payment
(30 yrs):
$40 million $24 million $34.75 million $2.2 million
Task Force on the Environment and Water Advisory Committee Actions Findings of the Sustainable Yield Analysis, Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and proposed projects, cost and schedules were presented to the Task Force on the Environment on March 19, June 18, and October 15 and to the Task Force on the Environment Water Subcommittee on November 19, 2018. Similar updates were presented to the Water Advisory Committee on March 5, May 7, June 4, September 5 and November 5, 2018.

Rate Adjustment recommendations were presented to the Water Advisory Committee on November 5, 2018 and at a Task Force on the Environment Water Subcommittee on November 19, 2018. The Water Subcommittee strongly supports the Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and staff’s recommendations.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Approval of the recommended action requires the following:

1. Appropriations to the FY 2018-19 Capital Improvement Program in the Water Fund:

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 38 of 40
Account Number Amount
C5007740.689000 - Arcadia Capacity Expansion and
Enhancement Project, Preliminary Design
$3,180,000
C5007750.689000 - Olympic Wellfield Restoration Design $1,800,000 C5007760.689000 - New Groundwater Resiliency Well $3,575,000 Total $8,555,000

2. An appropriation to the FY 2018-19 Capital Improvement Program in the Wastewater Fund
C5107760.689000 - New Groundwater Resiliency Well, Property Joint Use.
$3,250,000
Total $3,250,000

3. $53 million cash transfer of Gillette/Boeing settlement funds from the General Fund to the Water Fund and the corresponding release of the remaining fund balance in General Fund account 1.380237. The cash will be recorded in an interest earning restricted cash account in the Water Fund, Olympic Wellfield Remediation account 50.102442.

4. Transfer of two remediation capital projects, appropriated in previous fiscal years and funded with Gillette/Boeing funds, from the General Fund to the Water Fund to consolidate all budgeted Olympic restoration projects in the Water Fund.

General Fund Account Number Proposed Water Fund
Account
Amount
C019045.589000 Olympic Sub-basin
Remediation
C5005880.689000 $1,909,732
C019067.589000 Olympic Sub-basin Well
Hydrology
C5006050.689000 $1,946,407

5. The following budget items related to Gillette/Boeing water mediation settlement funds were previously taken by Council:

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 39 of 40
 On January 9, 2018, Council authorized staff to make an $11,100,000 transfer of Gillette/Boeing settlement funds from the General Fund to the Water Fund for ongoing and future remediation costs associated with polluted groundwater in the Olympic Wellfield (Attachment B). Staff transferred these funds to account 25695.570080 in FY 2017-18.
 On June 12, 2018, Council approved a FY 2018-19 transfer of $2,300,000 of Gillette/Boeing water mediation settlement funds from the General Fund to the Water Fund (Attachment F). This transfer was to fund the projects for the Olympic Wellfield remediation appropriated in the FY 2018-19 Capital Improvement Program.

Account Number Amount
C5007460.689410 City / USGS Monitoring Well & Numerical Flow Model
$1,800,000
C5007260.689410 Redrill Santa Monica Well #3 $500,000
Total $2,300,000

6. Future Gillette/Boeing settlement funds are to be deposited in the Water Fund, and a corresponding receivable shall be established. The liability associated with current and future pollution remediation utilizing Gillette/Boeing funds will be recorded in the Water Fund.

Prepared By: Alex Nazarchuk, Interim Water Resources Manager Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. October 28, 2014 Staff Report (Web Link)
B. January 9, 2018 Staff Report
C. Summary of Water Self-Sufficiency Scenarios to Expand Groundwater Production

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water 40 of 40
D. Updated Preliminary Sustainable Yield Analysis
E. July 11, 2017 Staff Report (Web Link)
F. June 12, 2018 Staff Report (Web Link)

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Sustainable Water Master Plan Update and Pathway to Water Self-Sufficiency (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: September 26, 2017
Agenda Item: 8.A
1 of 9
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director, Public Works, Water Resources Subject: Approval of Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the 2017 Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan.

Executive Summary
The 2017 Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (SSSMP) (Attachment A) provides the City with a tool for planning sanitary sewer collection system infrastructure improvements. The primary purpose of this Master Plan is to evaluate the capacity of the City’s existing sanitary sewer system under current conditions and plan for the capacity required by future conditions associated with anticipated development projects, including the Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) and the Downtown Community Plan (DCP). In order to analyze the impacts of existing and future sewer flows, a numerical hydraulic model was developed. The analysis found that the City’s sewer system performs well under both existing and future conditions. Existing conditions show a 1% shortfall in sewer flow capacity citywide, and under future build out conditions, only 3% of the modeled pipelines exhibited a capacity deficiency.

The ability of the sewer collection system to meet future conditions with only modest investments in sewer upgrades paid for by development fees means these improvements can be incorporated into the City’s existing $3 million per year sewer main replacement Capital Improvement Program forecast, as presented below.

Description FY
2018/19
FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 FY
2021/22
FY2022/23
Capacity Improvements $2,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,600,000 $2,000,000 Field Review Services $100,000 $80,000
Pipeline Replacements $900,000 $1,800,000 $1,400,000 $2,920,000 $1,000,000

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 2 of 9
TOTAL ANNUAL CIP $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Background
Santa Monica’s wastewater system includes a collection system including gravity sewers, force mains, monitoring stations and a lift station to help convey sewage to the City of Los Angeles’ Hyperion Water Reclamation Plant in El Segundo for treatment and disposal. The City’s sanitary sewer facilities include approximately 152 miles of pipelines, 2,800 maintenance holes, two permanent flow monitoring and sampling stations, and one 26-million-gallons-per-day (MGD) pumping station, referred to as the Moss Avenue Pump Station (MAPS), located at 1623 Appian Way. The City’s sanitary sewer system is shown in Figure 1.

Prior studies included the development of a limited model assessing the capacity of the trunk sewer used to discharge brine (the wastewater produced as a by-product of potable water treatment process) from the City’s water treatment plant into the sewer system at 19th and Broadway (2011), and a Sewer System Management Plan (2012) which addressed sewer system organization and management, operations and maintenance, overflow response plans, and water quality monitoring programs. The last comprehensive Sewer Master Plan for the system was conducted in 1992. The findings and recommendations of the 1992 Master Plan were mostly not implemented, however, as the 1994 Northridge Earthquake caused considerable damage to the sewer system, after which approximately 80% of the system was rebuilt and rehabilitated.

Discussion
This 2017 Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (SSSMP) was prepared to reflect current conditions in the City and anticipated future developments coincident with the LUCE and DCP planning horizons of year 2030, and to provide the City with a tool for planning improvements needed for sanitary sewer collection system infrastructure. The Downtown Community Plan EIR includes mitigation measure MM U-4 which states: “In addition to the improvements to the water delivery system described in the MM U-1, the City shall ensure adequate financing for funding of infrastructure improvements to the wastewater system. The DPIFP described in MM U-1 shall determine the costs of and establish a funding program for the following capital improvements to wastewater

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 3 of 9
conveyance as needed to serve the demands of new projects occurring under the Downtown Community Plan.”
The primary purpose of this planning document is to evaluate the capacity of the City’s sanitary sewer system under current conditions and plan for any necessary improvements in capacity to accommodate anticipated new development in the City.

These improvements would be implemented within the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP).

To fully assess existing conditions in the sewer collection system and plan for the future capacity needs of the sanitary sewer system, future flow estimates incorporate the changes in sanitary flows that would be generated by anticipated development and the additional water that enters the sewer system from storm-related events. The additional sanitary sewer flows associated with these development projects are derived by applying the applicable sewer discharge factors for the land use types and densities of each planned development project. Future development projects and their status in the development process are depicted graphically on Figure 2. Based on these factors, future average dry weather flows are projected to increase from 14.4 million to 16.5 million gallons per day (MGD), an increase of approximately 14 percent. About half of this increase is projected to occur in the downtown area.

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 4 of
9 Figure 1
Figure 2

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 5 of 9
Recent and near-term actions planned by the City continue to support the City’s

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 6 of 9
sustainability goals and minimize the projected increase of sewage generation related to new development in the City. Foremost among these programs is the recently adopted Water Neutrality Ordinance and the programmatic efforts of the Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP). Each of these programs will help in reducing the projected overall increase in sewer flows and are summarized below.

Water Neutrality
In May 2017, the Santa Monica City Council adopted a Water Neutrality Ordinance to require that new development offset water use on site or off site, or alternately, pay the City an in-lieu fee to fund retrofitting of plumbing fixtures offsite. The ordinance would prohibit a new development from exceeding the water use of the existing development on that property. If that requirement could not be met onsite, the excess water demand would have to be offset by reducing the water demand (through fixture replacement) at other sites within the City. Given this water neutrality requirement, much if not all of the projected overall increase in future sewage flow should be offset through this growthfunded plumbing fixture retrofit program.

It should be noted that while this water neutrality program may offset an increase in overall sewage flows, Water Neutrality may still allow for an increase in flows at any specific site. With this program provision, some of the large future developments could still have a substantial point load increase in sewage discharges. To plan for this potential increase associated with these developments and to assure adequate capacity in the sanitary sewer system collection system network, the impact of site specific increases has been incorporated in the hydraulic model. Proceeding in this manner, the assessment included some anticipated impact from new development to reduce the risk of sanitary sewer overflows.

SWIP – Water Reclamation Facility (WRF)
The City of Santa Monica Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP) will provide for the treatment and reuse of brackish/saline impaired groundwater, recycled municipal wastewater and stormwater runoff. In addition, the SWIP will help improve the water quality in the Santa Monica Bay by reducing urban runoff into the Bay.

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 7 of 9
The Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) component of the SWIP will have the greatest benefit to the City’s sanitary sewer system. The WRF will remove 1 MGD of sewage from the sewer collection system in the area. This will provide additional pipeline capacity and reduce the cost of wastewater treatment and disposal currently charged by the City of Los Angeles.

Assessment Modeling
To support the evaluation of the City’s sanitary sewer system for both existing and future conditions, a hydraulic model was developed. The hydraulic model development activities included a comprehensive review of system data including Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping, Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA), NorthStar billing system statistics, sewer flow analysis and allocation, elevation extraction for the model facilities based on survey data, diurnal (daytime/nighttime) pattern assignments, analysis of dry and wet weather peaking factors and model calibration based on flow monitoring data.

The calibrated sanitary sewer system hydraulic model was used to perform a comprehensive capacity analysis of the sewer system under current and future conditions. These modeling simulations determined the adequacy of the system capacity under dry weather and wet weather conditions, and subsequently identified parts of the systems where improvements will be required for anticipated development.

Findings
The analysis found that the City’s sanitary sewer system performs exceedingly well, and there are very limited areas where the hydraulic capacity of the existing sewer system may fall short of the applicable evaluation criteria. These evaluation criteria comprise two factors used in sewer flow analysis in pipelines:
 depth of flow equal to or less than half of the pipe diameter; and  average flow velocity equal to or greater than 2 feet per second.

For maintenance hole performance, surcharge relates to the depth of wastewater in the

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 8 of 9
maintenance hole relative to the street elevation in the event of a sewage backup.

Under existing conditions, approximately 1% of the system may experience a capacity shortfall. In utilizing the model to simulate future conditions, the City’s sewer system continues to perform well. In fact, under future conditions, only 3% of the modeled pipelines exceeded the evaluation depth of flow criteria (depth of flow greater than half of the pipe diameter). Although 1% existing and 3% future capacity shortfall results represent a favorable outcome of this analysis, any Sanitary Sewer Overflow which occurs can become an environmental hazard to the coastal environment. By addressing problem areas proactively, spills may be prevented and hazards avoided.

The condition of the existing system and its ability to address future conditions with relatively modest investment lead to a proposed 5-year Capital Improvement Program.

The annual expenditures in the proposed CIP coincide with historical $3 million per year sewer main replacement budgets. In addressing needed improvements in the immediate five-year planning horizon, capacity to serve future conditions will be in place in advance of the build-out of the DCP/LUCE. The proposed five-year CIP schedule is provided below.

Description FY
2018/19
FY 2019/20 FY 2020/21 FY
2021/22
FY2022/23
Capacity Improvements $2,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,600,000 $2,000,000 Field Review Services $100,000 $80,000
Pipeline Replacements $900,000 $1,800,000 $1,400,000 $2,920,000 $1,000,000 TOTAL ANNUAL CIP $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 Capacity improvements are those projects identified in the SSSMP, which were found through the hydraulic modeling to be in need of replacement due to insufficient capacity to meet existing and/or future conditions.

Field review services include projects or activities that are needed to further refine the sewer system hydraulic model from additional field investigations, in the form of facility information validation or flow verification, to confirm pipeline and maintenance hole data and obtain new information on actual sewer flow conditions in various areas of the City.

The results of this effort may enable the City to reduce the identified capacity-related

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project) 9 of 9
improvements provided herein.

Pipeline replacements include those pipelines identified through ongoing maintenance activities (e.g., sewer jetting and video inspections) for the annual sewer main replacement program.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Projects identified in the plan will be incorporated into future Capital Improvement Program budgets.

Prepared By: Gil Borboa, Water Resources Manager
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan - Draft - August 2017 B. Powerpoint Presentation

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE

NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS

AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS,

OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Santa Monica’s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative’s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative’s text from the City Clerk.

This information is required by City Charter Article XXII—Taxpayer Protection. It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after the official votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a “public benefit” to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of Santa Monica.

All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees. Examples of a “public benefit” include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12-month period.

In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a “public benefit” covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months.

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: OaksInitiative-wEx _DRP (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or

7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________ _
Saik-Choon Poh President ________________
10/25/2022
[email protected] 213.407.4467
DRP Engineering, Inc.

Saik-Choon Poh, Curtis Roth
Saik-Choon Poh, Curtis Roth

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: OaksInitiative-wEx _DRP (5243 : Award RFP SP#2666 for the Design of Water and Wastewater Replacement Project)

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 182
Attachment: Nixon-Egli Oaks Form 2023 (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the purchase of replacement

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 183
Attachment: Nixon-Egli Oaks Form 2023 (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the purchase of replacement

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE

NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS

AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS,

OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Santa Monica’s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative’s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative’s text from the City Clerk.

This information is required by City Charter Article XXII—Taxpayer Protection. It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after the official votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a “public benefit” to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of Santa Monica.

All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees. Examples of a “public benefit” include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12-month period.

In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a “public benefit” covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months.

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: TennantCo. Oaks (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the purchase of replacement v)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or

7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: TennantCo. Oaks (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the purchase of replacement v) Tennant Sales and Service Company
Name Title Role First Elected Expires On Term
David W. Huml Director Director 03/01/2021 12/31/2999 PerpetualDiane A. Zanish Assistant Secretary Officer 12/31/2999 PerpetualKevin M. O'Riordan Assistant Secretary Officer 04/26/2022 12/31/2999 PerpetualKristen M. Zehr Assistant Secretary Officer 12/31/2999 PerpetualKristin Anne Stokes Director Director 12/31/2999 PerpetualKristin Anne Stokes Secretary Officer 12/31/2999 PerpetualRichard H. Zay Chief Executive Officer Officer 12/31/2999 PerpetualRichard H. Zay President Officer 12/31/2999 PerpetualThomas Allan Stueve Director Director 12/31/2999 PerpetualThomas Allan Stueve Treasurer Officer 12/31/2999 PerpetualThomas Allan Stueve Vice President Officer 12/31/2999 Perpetual 07/27/2022

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 186
Attachment: TennantCo. Oaks (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the purchase of replacement v)

5.D.c
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: National Auto Fleet Group - Oaks Initiative (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the

5.D.c
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: National Auto Fleet Group - Oaks Initiative (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase orders for the

CITY OF SANTA MONICA OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of$25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more inany 12-month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an establishedland use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or

7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Los Angeles Truck Centers, LLC
Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Bradley C Fauvre – President
James A Barker - President
Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenueinterest:

Bradley C Fauvre – 50%
James A Barker – 50%
Prepared by: Louie Garcia Title: Regional Parts and Service Manager Signature: Louie Garcia Date: 8/15/2022
Email: [email protected] Phone: 949-655-2373
FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # Permit #

5.D.d
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Los Angeles Truck Centers - Oaks Initiative_print [Revision 1] (5296 : Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue purchase

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or

7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ___________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________

5.E.c
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Athens Services Oaks Initiative Form (5305 : Award RFP for Landfill Trash Disposal Services)

5.E.d
Packet Pg. 191
Attachment: Chiquita Canyon, LLC Oaks Initiative Form (5305 : Award RFP for Landfill Trash Disposal Services)

5.E.d
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: Chiquita Canyon, LLC Oaks Initiative Form (5305 : Award RFP for Landfill Trash Disposal Services)

5.E.d
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Chiquita Canyon, LLC Oaks Initiative Form (5305 : Award RFP for Landfill Trash Disposal Services)

5.E.d
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Chiquita Canyon, LLC Oaks Initiative Form (5305 : Award RFP for Landfill Trash Disposal Services)

5.E.d
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Chiquita Canyon, LLC Oaks Initiative Form (5305 : Award RFP for Landfill Trash Disposal Services) (A) A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund. (B) The amount of the fee.

Project Fee
Residential $165.79 per unit
Hotel $3.95 per square foot
Retail $5.62 per square foot
Office $7.87 per square foot
(C) The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund and (D) The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned.

FISCAL YEAR

BEGINNING FUND

BALANCE FEES COLLECTED INTEREST EARNED EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE FY 2021-22 $ 92,255 676,866 523 - $ 769,644
No interfund transfers or loans were made during the fiscal year from this fund.

No refunds were made during the fiscal year.

No expenditures were incurred during this reporting period.

F) An approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete.

City of Santa Monica
Development Impact Fees Report Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022
Child Care Linkage Fee
For the purpose of compliance with Government Code subsection 66006(b)(1), the following information regarding AB 1600 fees is presented:
(G) A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan.
(H) The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocation pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001.

For each separate account or fund established pursuant to subdivision (a), the local agency shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:

Child Care Linkage Fee - The purpose of the Child Care Linkage Fee (CCLF) imposed and collected on development of commercial projects adding floor area of at least 7,500 square feet or multi-family residential projects development within the City since fiscal year 2011-2012 is to fund property acquisition, development, and construction of child care facilities in order to create new child care spaces. (E) Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees. Note: The percentage will be reported upon completion of the project/s.

There are no projects underway that utilize these funds. The City is in the process of identifying eligible projects.

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) (A) A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund. (B) The amount of the fee.

Project Fee
Single Family,
Area 1 $9,427.39 per unit
Single Family,
Area 2 $9,675.48 per unit
Multi-Family, Area
1 $3,225.16 per unit
Multi-Family, Area
2 $4,093.47 per unit
Multi-Family, Area
3 $3,225.64 per unit
Retail, Area 1 $26.05 per square foot
Retail, Area 2 $37.33 per square foot
Office, Area 1 $12.03 per square foot
Office, Area 2 $13.40 per square foot
Medical Office,
Area 1 $34.86 per square foot
Medical Office,
Area 2 $36.96 per square foot
Hospital, Area 1 N/A
Hospital, Area 2 $18.24 per square foot
Lodging, Area 1 $4.46 per square foot
Lodging, Area 2 $4.46 per square foot
Industrial, Area 1 $1.48 per square foot
Industrial, Area 2 $1.62 per square foot
Auto Sales and
Display Areas,
Area 1 $1.48 per square foot
Auto Sales and
Display Areas,
Area 2 $1.62 per square foot
City of Santa Monica
Development Impact Fees Report Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022
Transportation Impact Fee
For the purpose of compliance with Government Code subsection 66006(b)(1), the following information regarding AB 1600 fees is presented:

For each separate account or fund established pursuant to subdivision (a), the local agency shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:

Residential (dwelling unit)
Non-Residential (sq. ft.)
Transportation Impact Fee - The City Council adopted an ordinance on February 26, 2013 that established a Transportation Impact Fee for new development and intensified land uses that will fund transportation network improvements such as new sidewalks, crosswalks, traffic signal upgrades, bus stops, transportation demand management, and bicycle facilities that are necessitated by the new trips associated with the land use change. The fees are based on a nexus study and calculated using residential units or commercial square footage. The fee is charged prior to issuance of building permits, unless state law requires the City to accept later fee payment. The Transportation Impact Fee reflects the costs associated with transportation network improvements and the amount of new auto trips that can be attributed to land use changes.

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) (C) The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund and (D) The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned.

FISCAL YEAR

BEGINNING FUND

BALANCE FEES COLLECTED INTEREST EARNED EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE FY 2021-22 $ 10,608,232 1,712,857 27,045 929,368 $ 11,418,766 Began Winter 2021 and is ongoing
Ongoing
Ocean/California Intersection Modification
4th Street Enhancements - Expo Linkages,
Phase 2
Michigan Avenue Greenway 20th Street
Bike Connection
Ongoing
Downtown Wayfinding Complete
Construction began in Spring 2022 and is
ongoing
17th Street/SMC/Expo Bike Path
Connection
Project Name
(E) Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees. Note: The percentage will be reported upon completion of the project/s.

F) An approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete.

In FY 2021-22, Transportation Impact Fees were expended as follows:
> $717,366 on Vision Zero and Mobility Project Delivery, including tools to analyze crash reports to determine safety countermeasures, project design, right of way, required studies, prevailing wage monitoring, utility coordination, and construction documents to implement Vision Zero improvements associated with the following projects:
- 17th Street/SMC/Expo Bike Path Connection: $36,593
- 4th Street Enhancements - Expo Linkages, Phase 2: $241 - Downtown Wayfinding: $230
- Michigan Avenue Greenway 20th Street Bike Connection: $39,473 - Ocean/California Intersection Modification: $153,660
- Olympic Boulevard & 26th Street – First/Last Mile Improvements: $393 - Pico Boulevard & Santa Monica College Pedestrian Safety Improvements: $4,507 - Multimodal Signal Detection: $447,297
- Stewart & Pennsylvania Safety Enhancement Project: $22,018 - Project Management Support: $12,954
> $212,002 on the Pedestrian Improvements at Four Schools Project Project Progress
Ongoing
Ongoing
Completed Spring 2022
Olympic Boulevard & 26th Street –
First/Last Mile Improvements
Project Management Support
Multimodal Signal Detection
Currently in right-of-way acquisition
Construction completed Fall 2021
Stewart & Pennsylvania Safety
Enhancement Project
In FY 2022-23, approximately $4.1 million of TIF funds will be programmed to implement various roadway safety measures in conjunction with the Annual Repaving project, including Phase 1 implementation of the Wilshire Boulevard Safety Study recommendations, enhancements to the Broadway protected bikeway, and upgrades to Priority Vision Zero intersections. In FY 2023-24, approximately $3.2 million will be programmed to planning and/or construction of various protected bikeways including extending the Broadway protected bikeway, Stewart Street, and the priority projects identified in the Bike Action Plan Amendment. Finally, funds are reserved annually for the salary of the construction manager position responsible for overseeing these projects.

Pedestrian Improvements at Four Schools
Pico Boulevard & Santa Monica College
Pedestrian Safety Improvements
Construction contract executed Fall 2021;
project completion anticipated Fall 2022

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) No refunds were made during the fiscal year.

No interfund transfers were made during the fiscal year. (H) The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocation pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001. (G) A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan.

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) (A) A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund. (B) The amount of the fee.

Project Fee
Single Family
Residential $9,092.38
Multi-Family
Residential -
Studio/1 Bedroom
$4,927.22 per unit
Multi-Family
Residential - 2+
Bedrooms
$7,936.19 per unit
Retail $1.78 per square foot
Office $2.75per square foot
Medical Office $1.51 per square foot
Lodging $3.71 per square foot
Industrial $1.55 per square foot
(C) The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund and (D) The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned.

FISCAL YEAR

BEGINNING FUND

BALANCE FEES COLLECTED INTEREST EARNED EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE FY 2021-22 $ 3,018,857 1,952,613 10,497 944,782 $ 4,037,185 In FY 2021-22, Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fees were expended on the following public improvements:
> $782,625 was spent on playground safety upgrades at Marine Park - This project is ongoing > $39,899 was spent on the Marine Park basketball court - This project is ongoing > $14,920 was spent to resurface two Reed Park tennis courts - This project was completed using 100% improvement funds > $14,579 was spent to purchase picnic tables at Beach Park #1 - This project was completed using 100% improvement funds > $92,759 on repurposing the petanque courts in Palisades Park - This project is ongoing For each separate account or fund established pursuant to subdivision (a), the local agency shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:

City of Santa Monica
Development Impact Fees Report Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022
Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee
For the purpose of compliance with Government Code subsection 66006(b)(1), the following information regarding AB 1600 fees is presented:

Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee - The purpose of the fee is to provide a direct funding source from new residential and commercial development to be used solely for the acquisition and development of open space, parkland, and recreation facilities to meet demand generated by occupants and users of the new development. (E) Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees. Note: The percentage will be reported upon completion of the project/s.

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) In the City’s FY 2022-24 CIP Biennial Budget, Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fees have been allocated for use on two projects:
> $191,600 allocated for the Beach Park #1 Playground Equipment Replacement project, expected to begin construction in Summer 2023 with completion expected in Fall 2023
> $486,300 allocated for the Douglas Park Playground Reconstruction project, expected to begin construction in Spring 2024 with expected completion in Summer 2024
During the Mid-Year FY 2021-22 Budget process, $150,000 of Parks & Rec Development Fees were allocated to the Park Condition Assessment project, expected to start in the Winter 2022 with completion expected Summer 2023.

N/A
(F) An approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete.
(G) A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan.
(H) The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocation pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001.

N/A

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) (A) A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund. (B) The amount of the fee.

Project Fee
Retail $11.61 per square foot
Office $13.34 per square foot
Hotel/Lodging $3.65 per square foot
Hospital $7.32 per square foot
Industrial $8.97 per square foot
Creative Office $11.42 per square foot
Medical Office $8.21 per square foot
Institutional $12.18 per square foot
(C) The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund and (D) The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned.

FISCAL YEAR

BEGINNING FUND

BALANCE FEES COLLECTED INTEREST EARNED EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE FY 2021-22 $ 538,826 742,931 2,719 - $ 1,284,476
Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fee - A fee paid to the City by an applicant for approval of certain development projects to contribute to the creation of affordable housing production or preservation to offset additional need for affordable housing generated by new commercial development.

For each separate account or fund established pursuant to subdivision (a), the local agency shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:
(E) Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees. Note: The percentage will be reported upon completion of the project/s.

No expenditures were incurred during this reporting period.

F) An approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete.

City of Santa Monica
Development Impact Fees Report Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022
Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fee
For the purpose of compliance with Government Code subsection 66006(b)(1), the following information regarding AB 1600 fees is presented:
(H) The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocation pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001.

There are no projects underway that utilize these funds. The City is in the process of identifying eligible projects.

No interfund transfers or loans were made during the fiscal year from this fund.

No refunds were made during the fiscal year.
(G) A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan.

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) (A) A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund. (B) The amount of the fee.

Project Fee
Single-Family $990.00
Studio/Single
Apartment: $315.00
1 Bedroom
Apartment: $375.00
2 Bedroom
Apartment: $570.00
3 Bedroom
Apartment: $750.00
Duplex (2
Apartments): $900.00
Non-Residential:

To be determined by
the Civil Engineering
Plan Checker
(C) The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund and (D) The amount of the fees collected and the interest earned.

FISCAL YEAR

BEGINNING FUND

BALANCE FEES COLLECTED INTEREST EARNED EXPENDITURES ENDING FUND BALANCE FY 2021-22 $ 414,219 0 0 93,325 $ 320,894
The Water Demand Mitigation Fee - A one-time fee the City charges new development to mitigate the total daily water consumption rate projected for the development. The total daily water demand for the project is calculated using standard water demand factors which have been developed by City staff. The water demand mitigation fee is set at $3.00 for each gallon of daily water demand which must be mitigated. Effective, July 1, 2017, the Water Demand Mitigation Fee was replaced with the Water Neutrality Fee. The City will continue to collect Water Demand Mitigation revenues for permit applications submitted prior to July 1, 2017 with the following exception: Any new development applications for a building permit filed on or before November 27, 2018, that only results in a change of use of less than 6,000 square feet and/or an addition of less than 1,500 square feet, will be required to pay the water demand mitigation fee in effect as of November 27, 2018.

This fee is required when:
• Single-Family Residence -- for construction of a new residence or whenever adding 50% or greater to the square footage. • Multi-Family -- for construction of a new building or whenever new units are added. • Non-Residential -- for construction of a new building or whenever there is a change of use, changing or adding plumbing fixtures, or adding restaurant seats or square footage.

Multi-Family (condominium fees same as
apartments):
(E) Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the total percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees. Note: The percentage will be reported upon completion of the project/s.

In FY 2021-22, $54,175 of Water Demand Mitigation Fees were expended on the Recycled Water Main Expansion Project and $39,150 were expended on the SWIP Injection Well.

For each separate account or fund established pursuant to subdivision (a), the local agency shall, within 180 days after the last day of each fiscal year, make available to the public the following information for the fiscal year:

City of Santa Monica
Development Impact Fees Report Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2022
Water Demand Mitigation Fee
For the purpose of compliance with Government Code subsection 66006(b)(1), the following information regarding AB 1600 fees is presented:

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) No interfund transfers or loans were made during the fiscal year from this fund.

No refunds were made during the fiscal year.

As part of the FY2020-21 Exception Based Capital Improvement Program Budget Process, the following funding was appropriated with Water Demand Mitigation Fees:
> $39,150 was appropriated to the Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP) Injection Well (SM-10i) - construction began October 2021, expected completion by end of 2022
> $1,127,540 was appropriated to the Recycled Water Main Expansion Project - construction began December 2020 (G) A description of each interfund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including the public improvement on which the transferred or loaned fees will be expended, and, in the case of an interfund loan, the date on which the loan will be repaid and the rate of interest that the account or fund will receive on the loan. (H) The amount of refunds made pursuant to subdivision (e) of Section 66001 and any allocation pursuant to subdivision (f) of Section 66001.

F) An approximate date by which the construction of the public improvement will commence if the local agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on an incomplete public improvement, as identified in paragraph (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 66001, and the public improvement remains incomplete.

5.F.i
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: AB1600 FY21-22 REPORT rev2 (5321 : Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees) 1 UAS AIR SUPPORT SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement for project services (this “Agreement”) is made between the City of Santa Monica (“City”) and Flying Lion, Inc., a California Corporation (“Contractor” or “Consultant”).

The parties hereby agree as follows:

A. Description of Project or Scope of Services. The project description or scope of services to be provided by Contractor, and any corresponding responsibilities of City or services required to be provided by City are set forth in Exhibit “A”.

B. Term and Time of Completion. Contractor shall commence and complete the project or services described in Exhibit “A” in accordance with the term set forth in Exhibit “B”.

C. Compensation. City agrees to compensate Contractor for the work Contractor performs and provides to City in accordance with Exhibit “C”.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

1. Independent Contractor. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor is not a regular or temporary employee, officer, agent, joint venturer, or partner of the City, but rather an independent contractor. This Agreement shall not be construed as a contract of employment.

Contractor shall have no rights to any benefit which accrue to City employees unless otherwise expressly provided in this agreement. Due to the independent contractor relationship created by this Agreement, the City shall not withhold state or federal income taxes, the reporting of which shall be the Contractor’s sole responsibility.

2. Brokers. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor has not hired, retained or agreed to pay any entity or person any fees or commission, percentage, gift, or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from award or making of this agreement.

3. City Property. All plans, drawings, reports, calculations, data, specifications, videos, graphics, or other materials prepared for or obtained pursuant to this Agreement shall upon request be delivered to the City within a reasonable time, and the rights thereto shall be deemed assigned to the City. If Applicable, Contractor shall prepare check prints upon request. Said plans, drawings, reports calculations, data, specifications, videos, graphics or other materials shall be specific for the project herein and shall not be used by the City for any projects without Contractor’s consent. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Contractor shall not be obligated to assign any proprietary software or data developed by or at the director of Contractor for Contractor’s own use; provided, however, that Contractor shall, pursuant to Paragraph 14 below, indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any discovery or Public Records Act request seeking the disclosure of any such proprietary software or data.

4. Inspection. If the services set forth in Exhibit “A” shall be performed on City or other public property, the City shall have the right to inspect such work without notice. If such services shall not be performed on City or other public property, the City shall have the right to inspect such work upon reasonable notice. Inspections by the City shall not relieve or minimize the responsibility of the Contractor to conduct any inspections Contractor has agreed to perform pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

Contractor shall be solely liable for said inspections performed by Contractor. Contractor shall certify in writing to the City as to the completeness and accuracy of each inspection required to be conducted by Contractor hereunder.

5. Services. The project or services set forth in Exhibit “A” shall be performed to the full satisfaction and approval of the City. In the event that the project or services set forth in Exhibit “A” are itemized by price in Exhibit “C”, the City in its sole discretion, may upon notice to Contractor, delete certain items DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 2 or services set forth in Exhibit “A”, in which case there shall be a corresponding reduction in the amount of compensation paid to Contractor. City shall furnish Contractor, to the extent available, with any City standards, details, specifications and regulations applicable to the Project and necessary for the performance of Contractor’s services hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any and all additional data necessary for design shall be the responsibility of Contractor.

6. Records. Contractor, including any of its subcontractors, shall maintain full and complete documents and records, including accounting records, employee time sheets, work papers, and correspondence pertaining to the project or services set forth in Exhibit “A”. Contractor, including any of its subcontractors, shall make such documents and records available for City review or audit upon request and reasonable notice, and shall keep such documents and records, for at least four (4) years after Contractors completion of performance of this Agreement. Copies and all pertinent reposts and correspondence shall be furnished to the City for its files.

7. Changes and Extra Work. All changes and/or extra work under this Agreement shall be provided for by a subsequent written amendment executed by City and Contractor.

8. Additional Assistance. If this Agreement requires Contractor prepare plans and specifications, Contractor shall provide assistance as necessary to resolve any questions regarding such plans and specifications that may arise during the period of advertising for bids, and Contractor shall issue any necessary addenda to the plans and specifications as requested. In the event Contractor is of the opinion that City’s request for addenda and assistance is outside of the scope of normal services, the parties shall proceed in accordance with the changes and extra work provisions of this Agreement.

9. Professional Ability. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor is skilled and able to competently provide the services hereunder, and possesses all professional licenses, certifications, and approvals necessary to engage in its occupation. City has relied upon the professional ability and training of Contractor as a material inducement to enter into this Agreement.

Contractor shall perform in accordance with generally accepted professional practices and standards of Contractor’s profession.

10. Business License. Contractor shall obtain a City of Santa Monica Business License before performing any services required under this Agreement. The failure to so obtain such license shall be a material breach of this Agreement and grounds for immediate termination by City; provided, however that City may waive the business license requirement in writing under unusual circumstances without necessitating any modification of this Agreement to reflect such waiver.

11. Termination Without Default. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the City and Contractor may, separately and in their sole and absolute discretion and without cause, terminate this Agreement at any time prior to completion by Contractor of the project or services hereunder, upon providing a 30-day written notice to the other party. In the event of any such termination, Contractor shall be compensated for: (1) all authorized work satisfactorily performed prior to the effective date of termination; and (2) necessary materials or services of others ordered by Contractor for this Agreement prior to Contractor’s receipt of notice of termination, irrespective of whether such material or services of other have actually been delivered, and further provided that Contractor is not able to cancel such orders. Compensation for Contractor in such event shall be determined by the City in accordance with the percentage of the project or services completed by Contractor; and all of Contractor’s finished or unfinished work product through the time of the City’s last payment shall be transferred and assigned to the City. In conjunction with any termination of this Agreement, the City may, at its own expense, make copies or extract information from any notes, sketches, computation, drawings, and specification or other data, whether complete or not.

12. Termination in the Event of Default. Should Contractor fail to perform any of its obligations hereunder, within the time and in the manner provided or otherwise violate any of the terms of this Agreement, the City may immediately terminate this Agreement by giving written notice of such termination, stating the reasons for such termination. Contractor shall be compensated as provided immediately above, DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 3 provided, however, there shall be deducted from such amount the amount of damages, if any, sustained by the City by virtue of Contractor’s breach of this Agreement.

13. Conflict of Interest. Contractor acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor shall avoid all conflicts of interest (as defined under any federal, state or local statute, rule or regulation, or at common law) with respect to this Agreement. Contractor further acknowledges, represents and warrants that Contractor has no business relationship or arrangement of any kind with any City official or employee with respect to this Agreement. Contractor acknowledges that in the event that Contractor shall be found by any judicial or administrative body to have any conflict of interest (as defined above) with respect to this Agreement, all consideration received under this Agreement shall be forfeited and returned to City forthwith. This provision shall survive the termination of this Agreement for one (1) year.

14. Indemnity. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Contractor hereby agrees, at its sole cost and expense, to defend protect, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees, volunteers, attorneys, and agents (collectively “Indemnitees”) from and against and all claims, including, without limitation, claims from bodily injury, death or damage to property, demands, charges, obligation, damages, caused of action, suits, losses, stop payment notices, judgments, fines, liens, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses of every kind and nature whatsoever, in any manner arising out of, incident to, related to, in connection with or arising from any act, failure to act, error or omission of Contractor’s performance or work hereunder (including any of its officers agents, employees, Subcontractors) or its failure to comply with any of its obligations contained in the Agreement, or its failure to comply with any current or prospective law, except for such loss or damage which was caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Contractor’s obligation to indemnify shall be up to insurance limit, if any, received by Contractor or Indemnitees. This indemnification obligation shall survive this Agreement and shall not be limited by any term of any insurance policy required under this Agreement.
a. Nonwaiver of Rights. Indemnitees do not and shall not waive any rights that they may possess against Contractor because the acceptance by City, or the deposit with City, of any insurance policy or certificate required pursuant to this Agreement.
b. Waiver of Right Subrogation. Contractor, on behalf of itself and all parties claiming under or through it, hereby waives all rights of subrogation and contribution against Indemnitees.

15. Insurance. Contractor shall comply with the requirements set forth in Exhibit “D”. Insurance requirements that are waived by the City’s Risk Manager do not require amendments or revisions to this agreement.

16. Non-Liability of Officials and Employees of the City. No official or employee of the City shall be personally liable for any default or liability under this Agreement.

17. Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all federal, state and local laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations, and the orders and decrees of any courts or administrative bodies or tribunals, with respect to this Agreement, including without limitation all environmental laws, employment laws, and non-discrimination laws.

18. Limitations upon Subcontracting and Assignment. Contractor acknowledges that the service which Contractor shall provide under this Agreement are unique, personal services which, except as otherwise provided herein, Contractor shall not assign or sublet to any other party without the prior written approval of City, which approval may be withheld in the City’s sole and absolute discretion. In the event that the City, in writing, approves any assignment or subletting of this Agreement or the retention of subcontractors by Contractor, Contractor shall provide the City upon request copies of each and every subcontractor prior to the execution thereof by Contractor and subcontractor. Any attempt by Contractor to assign any or all of its rights under this Agreement without first obtaining the City’s prior written consent shall constitute a material default under this Agreement.

DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 4 The sale, assignment, transfer of other disposition, on a cumulative basis, of twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the ownership interest in Contractor or twenty-five percent (25%) or more the voting control of Contractor (whether Contractor is a corporation, limited liability company, partnership, joint venture or otherwise) shall constitute an assignment for purposes of this Agreement. Further, the involvement of Contractor or its assets in any transaction or series of transactions (by way of merger, sale, acquisition, financing, transfer, leveraged buyout or otherwise), whether or not a formal assignment or hypothecation of this Agreement or Contractor’s assets occurs, which reduces Contractor’s assets or net worth by twenty-five percent (25%) or more shall also constitute an assignment for purposes of this Agreement.

19. Subcontractors. Contractor shall provide properly skilled professional and technical personnel to perform any approved subcontracting duties. Contractor shall not engage the services of any person or persons now employed by the City without the prior written approval of City, which approval may be withheld in the City’s sole and absolute discretion.

20. Integration. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning the subject matter hereof and supersedes any previous oral or written agreement; provided, however, that correspondences or documents exchanged between Contractor and City may be used to assist in the interpretation of the exhibits to this Agreement.

21. Amendment. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a subsequent written amendment executed by both parties.

22. Conflicting Provisions. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those in any exhibit or attachment hereto, this Agreement proper shall prevail. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of any two or more exhibits or attachments hereto, those prepared by the City shall prevail over those prepared by the Contractor.

23. Non-Exclusivity. Notwithstanding any provision herein to the contrary, the services provided by Contractor hereunder shall be non-exclusive, and City reserves the right to employ other contractors in connection with the project.

24. Exhibits. All exhibits hereto are made a part hereof and incorporated herein by reference; provided, however, that any language in Exhibit “A” which does not pertain to the project description, proposal, or scope of services (as applicable) to be provided by Contractor, or any corresponding responsibilities of City, shall be deemed extraneous to, and not part of, this Agreement.

25. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of this Agreement.

26. Confidentiality. To the extent permissible under law, Contractor shall keep confidential its obligations hereunder and the information acquired during the performance of the project or services hereunder.

27. Third Parties. Nothing herein shall be interpreted as creating any rights or benefits in any third parties.

For purposes hereof, transferees or assignees as permitted under this Agreement shall not be considered “third parties”.

28. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of law. Venue for any litigation or other action arising hereunder shall reside exclusively in the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, Southwest Judicial District.

29. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event either party to this Agreement brings any action to enforce or interpret this Agreement, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to reasonable attorney’s fees (including expert witness fees) and costs. This provision shall survive the termination of this agreement.

DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 5 30. Claims. Any claim by Contractor against City hereunder shall be subject to Government Code §§ 800 et seq. The claims presentation provision of said Act are hereby modified such that the presentation of all claims hereunder to the City shall be waived if not made within six (6) months after the accrual of the cause of action.

31. Interpretation. Contractor acknowledges that it has had ample opportunity seek legal advice with respect to the negotiation of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be interpreted as if drafted by both parties.

32. Warranty. In the event that any product shall be provided to the City as part of this Agreement, Contractor warrants as follows: Contractor possesses good title to the product and the right to transfer the product to the City; the product shall be delivered to the City free from any security interest or other lien; the product meets all specifications contained herein; the product shall be free from material defects in materials and workmanship under normal use for a period of one (1) from the date of delivery; and the product shall be fit for its intended purpose(s). Notwithstanding the foregoing, consumable and maintenance items (such as light and batteries) shall be warranted for a period of thirty (30) days from date of delivery. All repairs during the warranty period shall be promptly performed by Contractor, at Contractor’s expense, including shipping. Contractor shall not be liable under this warranty for an amount greater than the amount set forth in Exhibit “C” hereto.

33. Severance. Any provision of this Agreement that is found invalid or unenforceable shall be deemed severed and all remaining provisions of this Agreement shall remain enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law.

34. Authority. City warrants and represents that the Chief of Police or his designee of the City of Santa Monica Police Department is duly authorized to enter into and execute this Agreement on behalf of the City. The party signing on behalf of Contractor warrants and represents that he or she is duly authorized to enter into and executed this Agreement on behalf of Contractor, and shall be personally liable to City if he or she is not duly authorized to enter into and execute this Agreement on behalf of Contractor.

35. Waiver. The waiver by the City of any breach of any term or provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of any subsequent breach.

36. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts with the same effect as if both parties hereto had executed the same document. Any signature to this Agreement transmitted electronically through DocuSign or PDF shall be deemed an original signature and be binding upon the parties hereto (it being agreed that such electronic signature shall have the same force and effect as an original signature).

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto enter into this Agreement.

ATTEST:
______________________________

DENISE ANDERSON-WARREN
City ClerkDENISE ANDERSON-WARREN
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________________

DOUG SLOAN
City Attorney

CITY OF SANTA MONICA,
a municipal corporation
By: ______________________________

DAVID WHITE
City Manager
FLYING LION, INC.

By: _______________________________

BARRY BRENNAN
President
DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 6 EXHIBIT A

PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND/OR SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. DEFINITION
City Location: Santa Monica, California.

Description of Service: Provide Remote Pilots in Command (RPIC) to support SMPD’s small Unmanned Arial Support (sUAS) program.

Initial Scheduled Operations: 4 days a week, 10 hours per day.

B. CONTRACTOR’S DUTIES
Contractor shall perform the following duties.

Implement and administer the UAS program that utilizes UAVs to provide Air Support Services to enhance the department’s mission of protecting lives and property.

FLI working in conjunction with the SMPD will staff the DFR Program. With FLI staff initially supporting & training SMPD:

Launch Site(s) – Police Department (or other suitable location) and will staff a rooftop Remote Pilot in Command (RPIC)
Future Phases Supported:

As SMPD expands the DFR Program, FLI is able and prepared to staff additional hours, days and locations.

I. Increased working days and hours operation at primary launch site (11-24 hours per day)
II. Expansion to additional sites for up to 24 hours per day operations Provide testing and recommendations for equipment, software and procedures to support the world class SMPD sUAS program,
Provide the City with Monthly Air Support activity reports.

C. CITY’S DUTIES

1. City will provide all equipment including UAVs, sensors, controllers, accessories (batteries, memory cards), computer equipment, roof shelters, networking equipment, and any other hardware/software necessary to perform the job. After initial trial period, City will be responsible for Motorola Cape, Air data and any other vendor supported services.

2. City will provide a safe and secure work environment for Contractor and Contractor’s staff.

DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 7 3. City will provide aviation liability and UAS hull insurance coverage for all UAS being flown.

4. City’s hull insurance coverage and/or self insurance will repair any damage to City provided equipment (independent of fault.)
DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 8 EXHIBIT B

SCHEDULE FOR PROJECT
TERM. Once executed this Agreement shall be understood by the parties to have an effective date of January 8, 2022 and shall continue until December 30, 2022, unless otherwise terminated as herein provided.

DFR Training and Launch - Full Staffing and Training
Program Details
The Flying Lion Trial Program includes:
 Motorola Solution’s Aerial Suite Software for 6 week Trial Program  Rooftop based FAA Part 107 Remote pilot and Visual Observer (for nighttime operations)  Flying Lion staff to accompany Air Support Officers during full shifts  Motorola Aerial Suite’s Setup of Geofences and Obstacles  Motorola Aerial Suite Training for Sworn SMPD Air Support Officers (ASO Overall Guidance to Ensure DFR Program Statistics are Captured Accurately and Consistently The Department would be responsible for:
 Sworn personnel to serve as Air Support Officers (ASOs)  Drones with 30x zoom camera and/or infrared sensor
 Helping to identify and secure the rooftop location
 A hard wired data line (minimum speeds 40 up and 40 down) to the rooftop location DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 9 EXHIBIT C

COMPENSATION

DFR SMPD UAS PROGRAM
Scope:

DFR Trial Period: November 26, 2021 to January 7, 2022.

DFR Program Period Dates: January 8, 2022 to December 30, 2022 10 Hour Days + 1 hour O/T to cover setup and breakdown
10:00h to 20:00h (7 hours daytime / 3 hours nighttime) with Actual hours - 09:30h to 20:30h *Assumes we don't have any weather delays and SMPD will supply VO during nighttime operations Description of Service: Flying Lion, Inc. to provide Remote Pilots in Command (RPIC) to support SMPD’s small Unmanned Arial Support (sUAS) program.

Initial Scheduled Operations: 4 days a week, 10 hours per day.

Pricing Beyond DFR Trial Period (or additional scope)
Contractor shall be compensated as provided below.

RPIC Hourly Rate
i. RPIC Daylight Hours ................................................................................... $42.50 per hour ii. RPIC Daytime Overtime Hours (for hours over 10 hours Per Day) ............ $63.75 per hour iii. RPIC Nighttime Hours ................................................................................. $51.00 per hour iv. RPIC Nighttime Overtime Hours (for hours over 10 hours Per Day) .......... $76.50 per hour v. VO Hours..................................................................................................... $32.50 per hour vi. Non-flight Rate (mechanical/adverse weather/TFR)................................... $32.50 per hour (Minimum of 5 hours for any scheduled flight day)
During non-flight time, RPIC can perform:
 Aircraft inspections & prep for repair
 Logging/updating administrative records
 Testing and updating systems
 Updating operating procedures/checklists
…. and other tasks as requested
vii.Holiday Pay - Hours Billed at 1.5x for all rates. Holiday list will align with City of Santa Monica’s holiday schedule.

Training
Daily Rate (up to 10 students) ...............................................................................$1,200/day i. Part 107 Exam (3 days)
ii. Flight Training (2 days)
iii. Motorola Aerial (1 day)
Equipment Leasing ..................................................................................................................Varies Equipment Maintenance...........................................................................................................Varies DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 10 Consulting/Training (non-flying) Rate............................................................................$250.00/hour  Development of Department Documents (SOP, Emergency Procedures, etc.)  FAA Consulting (Airspace Authorizations)
 Aircraft Testing and Assessment
FAA Consulting Services
Beyond Visual Line of Site (BVLOS) COA...........................................................................$7,000 Tactical Beyond Visual Line of Site (TBVLOS) COA ..........................................................$2,000 Two Drones to One Operator (2:1) ......................................................................................$3,000 Any additional services provided by Flying Lion, Inc. ...................................... Current Rates Apply COMPENSATION PAID TO CONTRACTOR. The total amount of compensation paid to Contractor under this Agreement for any and all products and services performed by Contractor and provided to City shall at no time exceed $45,000, unless the Agreement is amended in writing by the parties to provide otherwise.

METHOD OF PAYMENT. Contractor shall provide an invoice every 15 days, to City for approval and payment. Invoices must be itemized, adequately detailed, based on accurate records, and in a form reasonably satisfactory to City. Contractor may be required to provide back-up documentation upon request.

SCHEDULE OF PAYMENT. City agrees to pay Contactor any undisputed amounts in correctly submitted invoices within thirty days (30) days of City’s receipt of the invoice; provided, however, that services are completed to the City’s full satisfaction.

NOTICE. Written notices to City and Contractor shall be given by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid and addressed to or personally served on the following parties:

Contractor: Flying Lion, Inc.
2110 Artesia Blvd. Suite #234
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
City: Santa Monica Police Department
333 Olympic Dr,
Santa Monica, CA 90401
All notices, including notices of address changes, provided under this Agreement are deemed received on the third day after mailing if sent by registered or certified mail. Changes in the respective address set forth above may be made from time to time by any party upon written notice to the other party.

DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 11 EXHIBIT D
Agreement Insurance Requirements – Drone Contractors
Owner/Operator shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the ownership, maintenance, or use of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.

Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

1. Aviation Liability Insurance-on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, and $2,000,000 in the aggregate. This coverage may also be provided by endorsement to a Commercial General Liability policy. In that event then:

2. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

3. Automobile Liability: Insurance Services Office Form CA 00 01 covering Code 1 (any auto), or if Owner/Operator has no owned autos, Code 8 (hired) and Code 9 (non-owned), with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

4. Workers’ Compensation: Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits and Employers’ Liability Insurance with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

If the Owner/Operator maintains broader coverage or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City of Santa Monica requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage or higher limits maintained by the Owner/Operator. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City of Santa Monica.

Other Insurance Provisions

1. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
a. Additional Insured Status: The City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL and Aircraft Liability policies with respect to liability arising out of the use, occupancy, operations or maintenance of the leased premises, including work or operations performed by or on behalf of Owner/Operator. CGL coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Owner/Operator’s insurance (at DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 12 least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 10 11 85, or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38 and CG 20 37). b. Primary Coverage: For any claims related to this Agreement, the Owner/Operator’s insurance shall be primary coverage as least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the Owner/Operator’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
c. Notice of Cancellation: Each insurance policy required herein shall state that coverage shall not be cancelled except after notice has been given to the City of Santa Monica. d. Waiver of Subrogation: Owner/Operator hereby grants to the City of Santa Monica a waiver of any right of subrogation which any insurer of said Owner/Operator may acquire against the City of Santa Monica by virtue of payment of any loss. Owner/Operator agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City of Santa Monica has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City of Santa Monica for all work performed by the Owner/Operator, its employees, agents and subcontractors.
e. Loss Payee: The property insurance shall name the City of Santa Monica as Loss Payee as its interests appear.

Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Santa Monica. The City of Santa Monica may require the Owner/Operator to purchase coverage with a lower retention or provide satisfactory proof of ability to pay losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses within the retention. The policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the selfinsured retention may be satisfied by either the name insured or the City of Santa Monica.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in California with a current A.M.

Best rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Santa Monica.

Verification of Coverage
Owner/Operator shall furnish the City of Santa Monica with original certificates and amendatory endorsements (or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage provided by this clause). All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Santa Monica before the lease commences. However, failure to obtain required documents prior to the lease beginning shall not DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program) 13 waive the Owner/Operator’s obligation to provide them. The City of Santa Monica reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including the endorsements required herein, at any time.

Special Risks or Circumstances
Entity reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

Failure to Maintain Insurance Coverage
If Owner/Operator, for any reason, fails to maintain insurance coverage which is required pursuant to this Agreement, the same shall be deemed a material breach of contract. The City of Santa Monica, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement and obtain damages from the Owner/Operator resulting from said breach.

Subcontractors
Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein. All exceptions must be approved in writing by the Risk Manager.

Footnotes
# 1: Workers’ Compensation insurance coverage is not required if the Contractor does not have employees. The Contractor must, however, execute the City’s Workers’ Compensation Coverage Exemption Declaration Form.

DocuSign Envelope ID: B441ABFF-1208-4FDB-B4D2-A84FF124B909

5.G.a
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Flying Lion CT#4957 (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or

7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: __ ______ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________ Flying Lion, Inc.

Barry Brennan
Steven Katz
Barry Brennan
Steven Katz
Steven Katz VP
____
10/5/2022 ____
[email protected] 310-702-8147

5.G.b
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Flying Lion - Oaks Initiative Form (5379 : 1st Mod - DFR Program)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE

NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS

AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS,

OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Santa Monica s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative s text from the City Clerk.

This information is required by City Charter Article XXII Taxpayer Protection. It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after the official votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a public benefit to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of Santa Monica.

All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees. Examples of a public benefit include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12-month period.

In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a public benefit. If the public benefit is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a public benefit covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months.

5.H.b
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: OAKS INITIATIVE FORM (1) - signed (5384 : Active Aging Pilot Professional Services Agreement Extension)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a public benefit. If the public benefit is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12-month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax abatement, exception, or benefit of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or

7. Payment of cash or speci of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

Prepared by: ____________________________Title: __________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Date: ________________ Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ____________________ FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # ____________________________ Permit # ___________________________ Natalie Lozano Vice President as duly authorized
[email protected] (503) 230-9862
Aug 30, 2022
Alta Planning + Design, Inc.

Michael Renshaw, Michael Converse, Brett Hondorp, Natalie Lozano, Katherine Mangle, Joseph Gilpin, Michael Rose, Matthew Hayes, Deven Young, Emily Duchon, Steven Frieson, Jessica Roberts The Trilon Group

5.H.b
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: OAKS INITIATIVE FORM (1) - signed (5384 : Active Aging Pilot Professional Services Agreement Extension)

5.H.b
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: OAKS INITIATIVE FORM (1) - signed (5384 : Active Aging Pilot Professional Services Agreement Extension)

TAKE THE FRIENDLY ROAD
is an invitation to take practical steps to care
for the safety of everyone, especially when
we’re out on the road. Together as a city, we
all have a role to play in helping reach zero
road-related fatalities and severe injuries.

BE A FRIENDLY ROAD ADVOCATE
In the coming months, we want to involve you in bringing the Friendly Road to your family, community, and neighborhood. Please join us by signing up at santamonica.gov/friendlyroad. You’ll receive occasional campaign updates and invitations to take action, along with the City of Santa Monica’s bi-weekly newsletter.

Together, let’s create a safe and friendly Santa Monica for everyone.

HERE ARE THREE WAYS WE ARE WORKING TOGETHER:

INFRASTRUCTURE
We are constantly evaluating the best ways to
improve our roads so that all road users feel safe and
confident. The impact on people’s lives from these
projects is significant; for example, severe injury
collisions have fallen by 71% on Ocean Park Boulevard
since bike lanes and left turn pockets were installed
between Lincoln and Cloverfield boulevards.

Infrastructure projects are for you! Community
input is essential to understanding how people use
our streets and where improvements can be made.

To share ideas or issues in your neighborhood
through our map-based survey — or to find out
what projects are happening across the city — go to
santamonica.gov/friendlyroad.

Recently, the City began work to install 19
miles of green bike lanes, upgraded 20 traffic
signals to detect bikes and implemented 50
Leading Pedestrian Intervals, which give
pedestrians a head start and have
been shown to reduce collisions
by up to 60%. Major project are
also coming to 17th Street
and Michigan Avenue that
will improve traffic flow and
safety for everyone.

ENFORCEMENT
The Santa Monica Police Department plays a critical
role in putting a stop to behaviors like speeding,
distracted driving, and not yielding to others.

SMPD also takes on the responsibility of helping
the community be safe in practical ways, including
through the support of crossing guards and regular
enforcement operations like DUI checkpoints. Next
time you see an officer, thank him or her for helping
us all take the friendly road!

EDUCATION
No matter what age you are or how you get
around Santa Monica, we all need to know how
to move about safely. Through our Safe Routes
to School program, we are teaching students how
to walk and bike safely. Through community events
and outreach, there are opportunities to understand
new projects and laws that are designed to keep
us all safe.

If you have an event coming up, we’d love to be there!
Friendly Road team members are available to come
raise awareness and pass out swag. Send us an
email at [email protected] to get in touch
with our team.
friendly
road

5.I.a
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: SaMo_VisionZero_OnePager_Final (5402 : Office of Traffic Safety Grant)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE

NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS

AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS,

OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Santa Monica’s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative’s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative’s text from the City Clerk.

This information is required by City Charter Article XXII—Taxpayer Protection. It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after the official votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a “public benefit” to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of Santa Monica.

All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees.

Examples of a “public benefit” include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12-month period.

In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a “public benefit” covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months.

5.J.a
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Fire Resources Oaks exp 9.27.23 (5424 : Award RFP Training Professional Services on behalf LAAFCA) FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # Permit #

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includesthe name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has(e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.

Public benefits include:

1. Personalservices contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a12- month period;

3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of$25,000 over a 12- month period;

4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more in any 12- month period;

5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;

6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any12- month period; or

7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any12- month period.

Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:

Fire Resources LLC
Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:

Sean A. Escontrias
Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

Sean A. Escontrias OR Fire Resources LLC
Prepared by: Sean A. Escontrias Title: President
Signature: Date:

Email: [email protected] Phone:
9-27-2022
(310) 500-5530

5.J.a
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Fire Resources Oaks exp 9.27.23 (5424 : Award RFP Training Professional Services on behalf LAAFCA) 1 May 5, 2020
(NOT APPROVED)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 5, 2020
A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor McKeown at 3:00 p.m., on Tuesday, May 5, 2020, via teleconference pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 at https://primetime.bluejeans.com/a2m/live-event/xzurkqeh.

Roll Call: Present: Mayor Kevin McKeown
Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Sue Himmelrich
Councilmember Ana M. Jara
Councilmember Greg Morena
Councilmember Ted Winterer
Also Present: Interim City Manager Lane Dilg
Interim City Attorney George Cardona
City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren
CONVENE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 3:00 p.m., with all members present.

STAFF

ADMINISTRATIVE
ITEMS:

CITY RESTRUCTURING

8.A. Santa Monica: A Plan for Our Future - City Restructuring and Associated Modifications to the Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget Resulting from Economic Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic, was presented.

Recommended Actions
1) Staff recommends that Council authorize the following budget actions:
(a) Authorize staff to drawdown and use the entire $9.7 million Economic Uncertainty Reserve to mitigate short-term losses in FY 2019-2020;
(b) Authorize staff to release $9.2 million from assigned reserves in the General Fund and use those funds to mitigate short-term losses in FY 2019-20;
(c) Authorize staff to lower the General Fund Contingency Reserve formula from 15% to 12.5% in FY 2020-2021;
(d) Authorize staff to establish a $20 million Shutdown Reserve for FY 2020- 2021;
(e) Authorize staff to return $24 million of the Boeing/Gillette settlement funds from the Water Fund to the General Fund in FY 2019-2020;

5.K
Packet Pg. 225 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 5, 2020 3:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 May 5, 2020
(f) Authorize staff to have the General Fund retain one quarter of the FY 2020-2021 Measure GSH transaction and use tax revenue; (g) Authorize staff to: (i) suspend the currently scheduled FY 2020- 2021 $7.3 million pension fund paydown payment, (ii) shift from a 13-year to 15-year schedule for the pension fund paydown, and (iii) suspend the FY 2020- 2021 and FY 2021-2022 pension fund paydown payments under the new 15-year paydown schedule; (h) Authorize staff to establish a $1 million Economic Recovery Fund in FY 2020-2021; and,
(i) Appropriate FY 2019-20 CIP expenditure adjustments to alternative resources as set forth in Attachment A.
2) Staff also recommends that Council authorize the following personnel actions:
a) Authorize the abolition of the positions identified by Department and classification in Attachment A, with the exception of positions whose duties relate directly and substantially to the Santa Monica Pier; authorize staff to issue layoff notices to employees occupying those positions as necessary to accomplish the restructuring plan in Attachment A and in accordance with applicable provisions of the City’s Charter and Municipal Code; and authorize staff to enter into negotiations with the labor groups representing the laid off employees over the impacts of the layoffs; and
b) Authorize the abolition of the positions identified by Department and classification in Attachment A whose duties relate directly and substantially to the Santa Monica Pier; authorize staff to issue layoff notices to employees occupying those positions as necessary to accomplish the restructuring plan in Attachment A and in accordance with applicable provisions of the City’s Charter and Municipal Code; and authorize staff to enter into negotiations with the labor groups representing the laid off employees over the impacts of the layoffs.
3) Staff also recommends that Council provide staff with direction regarding principles and priorities for allocating $2 million in ongoing funds beginning in FY 2020-21, and other remaining available funds, if any, for restoring programs should the City’s circumstances postCOVID-19 permit such restoration.

Dr. Ben Drati spoke on behalf of the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District.

Members of the public David Fairbank, Mr. Cowar, Jennifer Cowan, Benjamin Steers, Stacy Weakenpaine, Therese Kelly, Chris Pico, Lauralee Ashe, Michael Tarbet, Michael Goldstrum, Noah Sodi, Jason Ritterben, Cris Gutierrez, Jon Kean, Wesley Swung, Joanne Berlin, Jenny Amaya, Sharon Kingsley, Zina Josephs, Allison Hovel, Rachel Weinstein, Tricia Crane, Lorraine Fuentes, Sonya Sultan, Puja Thomas-Patel, Marcy Kaplan,

5.K
Packet Pg. 226 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 5, 2020 3:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 May 5, 2020
Connor Everetts, Matt Stauffer, Gail Gutierrez, Carlos Rubio, Calisse Lindsey, Hillsbran Mercedes, Patti Braun, Michael Hanush, Cynthia Rhodes, Jayro Queme, Dr. Ashley Silvera, Jennifer Wolf, Michael Soloff, Noah Garrison, Rene Buchannan, Denise McGranahan, Ellis Raskin, Angel Towler, Noel Lewis, Tara Barauskas, Sheri Batalla, Phil Brock, Nico Bardicki, Carl Hansen, Carol Lemlein, Jason Kligier, Barbi Applequist, Ann Dudek, Angela Scott, Shawn Landres, Janet Gollery McKeithen, Nina Fresco, Tina Grossman, Denny Zane, Ericka Lesley, Shari Davis, Jennifer Kennedy, Marianne LaGuardia, Suzy Borlido, Joe Schmidt and Benjamin Kay spoke on the recommended action.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: there are questions and concerns from the school district as to whether or not the cuts being proposed for field access is a breach of contract with the school district; isn’t this a first step, and are there other opportunities to make budget decisions; how will the voluntary separation program adjust the layoffs being proposed; if someone in the city is laid off, they have a year to be reinstated in their job, could the Council choose to extend the reinstatement period by an additional year; how would the city be able to request volunteers to cover staffing for school district field access instead of providing Community and Cultural Services (CCS) staff; how do we balance the cost against the fees that we charge for services; how many members are in the Preserving Our Diversity (POD) program; are we actually going to eliminate 300 positions, even with the number of employees who took advantage of the voluntary separation plan; the people who are laid off, are they able to get unemployment; what is the total number of layoff notices that will be issued, or is there a range; in so much as Council accepts cuts in classifications, can unions negotiate those classifications; how are the negotiations with labor negotiators going to be conveyed to council, in open or closed session; with those who will ultimately be laid off, will they receive services from the city to help them transition to other employment; can you explain why other options have not been considered prior to proposing layoffs, and, why were negotiations with labor groups not included before now; what role will the bargaining unions have to be involved in the final layoff plans; how is the Fire Chief going to deal with the bargaining union in order to bring about the suggested staffing changes; is there any way to save a specific position without going into the $2 million dedicated to restoration; are there any specific programs that the city would want to have restored using the $2 million; does it take more of Finance staff team if the Council decided to go to a quarterly budget process; if we’re going to promote cleanliness, is that possible with the reduction of painters; can the revisioning project be completed with the impact of COVID-19 and a reduction in staff; for Fire, is 35 staff members the minimum daily number of Firefighters needed; does Fire currently have staffing that is being proposed as part of their budget cut; will Council have options when this plan comes back after

5.K
Packet Pg. 227 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 5, 2020 3:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 May 5, 2020
Councilmember Morena
excused at 8:17 p.m.

Councilmember Morena
returned at 8:19 p.m.
labor negotiations; was the process to remove certain programs first and then eliminate positions associated to those programs; is there capacity to make deeper cuts in the Office of Communications; what is the cost for the Print Shop; is there any Emergency Operation Center (EOC) work that is being done that certain staff cost could be recovered from the federal government; and do cross-trained individuals who have disaster services training get any special status, or do we get a stronger claim from the federal government for those workers.

Councilmember Morena recused himself from this vote in order to avoid any perceived conflict of interest because his family owns a restaurant on the Pier.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to authorize the abolition of the positions identified by Department and classification in Attachment A whose duties relate directly and substantially to the Santa Monica Pier; authorize staff to issue layoff notices to employees occupying those positions as necessary to accomplish the restructuring plan in Attachment A and in accordance with applicable provisions of the City’s Charter and Municipal Code; and authorize staff to enter into negotiations with the labor groups representing the laid off employees over the impacts of the layoffs.

The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Morena
Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Himmelrich, to approve and authorize all items 1(a) through 1(i) of the recommended action. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to:
whether or not to consider Architectural Review Board (ARB) design review options; concerns about asking for decisions about proposed staffing cuts without having analysis to show who these cuts impact; and, explanations for eliminating some positions, but creating others instead.

Motion by Councilmember Morena, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day,

5.K
Packet Pg. 228 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 5, 2020 3:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 May 5, 2020
to authorize the abolition of the positions identified by Department and classification in Attachment A, with the exception of positions whose duties relate directly and substantially to the Santa Monica Pier; authorize staff to issue layoff notices to employees occupying those positions as necessary to accomplish the restructuring plan in Attachment A and in accordance with applicable provisions of the City’s Charter and Municipal Code; and authorize staff to enter into negotiations with the labor groups representing the laid off employees over the impacts of the layoffs.

The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: Councilmember Jara
ABSENT: None
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to:

Collaboration and Communication with the community as a whole; guided by the message of Social Justice, how do we protect and preserve those vulnerable, Health and Safety programs, with better cost recovery; and Resiliency is key where value to spending resources on Mobility and Sustainability.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to divide the money into five buckets in the amount of $400,000 each:
1) increasing the POD program; 2) Youth Programs; 3) Outdoor health; 4) Mobility; and 5) Sustainability.

Friendly amendment Councilmember Winterer, to move the dollar amounts around, with a maximum of $400,000, but relatively equal. Considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

Friendly amendment Councilmember Winterer, to use funds from the Housing Trust Fund to increase the POD program and potentially refund LAFLA. This was considered direction with no addition to the motion.

Friendly amendment by Councilmember Winterer, to find an expenditure neutral way to preserve design review of large projects and continue to provide the ARB’s pro bono services to the Planning Commission. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder of the motion.

Friendly amendment by Councilmember Himmelrich proposed priorities 1) feeding people; 2) keeping people in their homes, including the POD program and then 3) restoring Youth programs. The motion was not considered friendly by the maker.

5.K
Packet Pg. 229 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 5, 2020 3:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 May 5, 2020
Substitute motion by Councilmember Morena to: 1) set aside $110,000 to preserve the agreement with SMMUSD; 2) focus on principles and analysis: look at cuts through a social justice lens, labor negotiations: 3) review of revenue and expenditures per fund; 4) preserving revenue generation processes across departments; 5) re-envision the grants programs; 6) Cleanliness in the City, and look at ways to preserve the best of the city. The motion failed due to a lack of a second.

Mayor Pro Tem O’Day supported the motion.

Friendly amendment by Mayor McKeown, to make the buckets to be more flexible and put more emphasis on the people in need, then distribute the remainder of the money for other priorities, including The Westside Food Bank and Meals on Wheels. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

Councilmember Morena proposed a friendly amendment to earmark the $110,000 for SMMUSD, grant programs for afterschool programs, and consideration for revenue generating programs. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

The motion for direction, with amendments was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 10:46 p.m. in memory of the nine Santa Monica residents who have died from the coronavirus.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Denise Anderson-Warren Kevin McKeown
City Clerk Mayor

5.K
Packet Pg. 230 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 5, 2020 3:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 1 May 12, 2020
(NOT APPROVED)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 12, 2020
A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor McKeown at 5:30 p.m., on Tuesday, May 12, 2020, via teleconference pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 at https://primetime.bluejeans.com/a2m/live-event/qabdpbgt.

Roll Call: Present: Mayor Kevin McKeown
Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Sue Himmelrich
Councilmember Ana M. Jara
Councilmember Greg Morena
Councilmember Ted Winterer
Also Present: Interim City Manager Lane Dilg
Interim City Attorney George Cardona
City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren
CONVENE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:33p.m., with all members present.

CLOSED SESSIONS There was no one present for public comment on closed sessions.

On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:33 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 7:25 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:

1.A. Conference with Labor Negotiator: Government Code Section 54957.6
Agency Designated Representatives: Chief People Officer Lori Gentles and Human Resources Manager Shawn Weiske. Bargaining Units:

Administrative Team Associates, California Teamsters Local 911, Confidential Unrepresented Employees Pay Plan, Executive Pay Plan, Municipal Employees Association, Management Team Associates, Public Attorneys Legal Support Staff Union, Public Attorneys Union, Santa Monica Fire Executive Management Association, Santa Monica Firefighters Local 1109 IAFF, Santa Monica Police Officers Association, Supervisory Team Associates, International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers, Transportation Division Local 1785 (SMART TD).

5.L
Packet Pg. 231 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 May 12, 2020
The Interim City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

1.B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Shawn Joyner v. City of Santa Monica, Ernesto Rodriquez, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case BC599994.

The Interim City Attorney advised this matter was an injury that occurred on the Big Blue Bus. The City Attorney’s Office recommended a Settlement Agreement in the amount of $350,000.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Himmelrich, to approve Settlement Agreement No. 11043 (CCS). The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CONSENT CALENDAR: All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.

There was no public comment on the various Consent Calendar items.

At the request of Councilmember Morena, Item 3.E was removed from the Consent Calendar.

Motion by Councilmember Jara, seconded by Councilmember Morena, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Item 3.E., reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
FOURTH STREET EXPO 3.A. Approval of Contract Modification for Additional Design Services to Obtain Caltrans Clearance for the Fourth Street Expo Linkages Project, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first

5.L
Packet Pg. 232 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 May 12, 2020
modification to agreement #10674 (CCS) in the amount of $130,000 with Cannon Corporation, a California-based company, for additional design and coordination services for an enhanced Fourth Street bridge barrier treatment required by Caltrans for the Fourth Street Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements/Expo Linkages Phase II project. This would result in a four-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $445,000 ($280,000 of the total is state grant-funded by Caltrans’ Active Transportation Program);

2. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget Actions section of this report.

BIG BLUE BUS 3.B. Authorization to enter into Agreement No. 11038 (CCS) with UCLA for Extension of BruinGO Transit Pass Program, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement to renew the Big Blue Bus Transit Pass Program (BruinGo!) with the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) effective July 1, 2020 for a three-year term through June 30, 2023 with two, one-year, mutually agreed upon options through June 30, 2025 at the costs noted in the Negotiated Rates section of the staff report.

TOWING SERVICES 3.C. Award Bid for Towing Services, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award Bid #4388 to:
a) FMG Inc. (a California-based company) for towing services for the City’s fleet of transit buses and heavy-duty fire apparatus; b) Classic Tow, Inc., doing business as Tip Top Tow Service (a California-based company) for towing of the City’s fleet of passenger and light, medium, and heavy-duty vehicles, Police department vehicles, and towing and storage of impounded vehicles for the City’s Police Department; and,
c) EVS Inc. doing business as All City Tow Service (a Californiabased company), for towing and storage of impounded vehicles for the City’s Police Department;

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement Nos. 11039 (CCS) through 11041 (CCS) with:
a) FMG Inc for towing of transit buses and Fire Department heavy apparatus in an amount not to exceed $532,030 over a five-year period, which includes a 10% contingency and a 5% cost escalator in year 5, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and
b) Classic Tow, Inc., for passenger and light, medium, and heavy-duty

5.L
Packet Pg. 233 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 May 12, 2020
vehicle towing and impounding services in an amount not to exceed $1,609,350 over a five-year period, which includes a 10% contingency and a 5% annual cost escalator, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and
c) EVS Inc., for light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-duty towing and storage of impounded vehicles in an amount not to exceed $27,500 over a five-year period, which includes a 10% contingency with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

INTERIM CITY

ATTORNEY

3.D. Approval of Agreement No. 11042 (CCS) with George Cardona for his services as Interim City Attorney, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council:
(1) approve the agreement with George Cardona for his services as Interim City Attorney; and,
(2) authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement on behalf of the City.

COVID-19 EMERGENCY
Councilmember Morena
excused at 7:28 p.m.

3.E. Adoption of Resolution No. 11247 (CCS) entitled “AN

EMERGENCY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA MONICA PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 2.16 OF THE SANTA

MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION OF

EXISTENCE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY AND SUPPLEMENTAL
PROCLAMATIONS THERETO”, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached resolution ratifying the Executive Order issued by the Director of Emergency Services declaring the existence of a local emergency in the city of Santa Monica and the Supplements to that Order.

Councilmember Morena pulled this item to recuse himself to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest because his family owns a restaurant on the Pier.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to approve the recommended action. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Morena
ORDINANCES:

BUILDING STANDARDS

7.A. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2635 (CCS) entitled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

5.L
Packet Pg. 234 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 May 12, 2020
Councilmember Morena
returned at 7:30 p.m.

OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING SECTION 8.08.050 OF THE SANTA
MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT THE 2019 CALIFORNIA

BUILDING STANDARDS CODE REGULATION TO EXEMPT

FREESTANDING WALLS SEVEN FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT FROM

REQUIRING A BUILDING PERMIT, AND ADOPT A LOCAL

AMENDMENT TO THE BUILDING STANDARDS CODE TO

EXEMPT CONCRETE OR MASONRY WALLS FOUR FEET IN
HEIGHT OR LESS FROM REQUIRING A BUILDING PERMIT”, was
presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

Motion by Councilmember Himmelrich, seconded by Councilmember Morena, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ZONING 7.B. Introduction and Adoption of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2636 (CCS) entitled “AN EMERGENCY INTERIM

ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING INTERIM ZONING

REGULATIONS FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY OF THE BC
(PROMENADE) DISTRICT AND THOSE PORTIONS OF THE BC
(2ND AND 4TH STREET) DISTRICT BOUNDED BY SECOND
STREET TO THE WEST, BROADWAY TO THE SOUTH, 4TH

STREET TO THE EAST, AND WILSHIRE BOULEVARD TO THE
NORTH”, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt an Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance establishing interim zoning regulations to support and facilitate the economic recovery of the Third Street Promenade area, bounded by 2nd Street to the west, Broadway to the south, 4th Street to the east, and Wilshire Boulevard to the north.

Members of the public Denise Barton and Shawn Landres commented on the recommended action.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: what are the negative consequences for having permanent land use entitlements; what used to happen with the loading requirements previously; with the activation of the

5.L
Packet Pg. 235 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 May 12, 2020
alleys, is there going to cause any problems with loading; what’s going to happen with non-appeal option for alcohol exemptions if the city receives complaints from residents in the area; is there another alternative for people who live on the Promenade to get notification that an alcohol exemption is being issued; besides a citations, can some other penalty be brought against an establishment for violation; would this allow the Planning Director to approve a tasting room if it is not in the code; don’t establishments have Department of Alcohol Beverage Control licenses which already require them to have a large percentage of food sales; how is the loading in the alley going to affect automobile and non-automobile access; in determining what access is available, will this allow the Planning Director to look at better usage for space; is there some way that complaints can be reviewed post opening to see if operators are acting in bad faith; what’s the on-going process going forward when tweaks are needed; is there a timeframe for the loading, is there something already in place to address impacts, for example sanitation; has there been any complaints since the issuance of alcoholexemption permits; will this plan allow inadvertently a combination of spaces or will there still be limitations on how space can be used; is there anything in this that allows creativity to office space on the ground floor; why not temporarily suspend rules, instead of abandoning them completely which would leave the city with no recourse if a restaurant changes uses; and, with the alcohol provision, is the city able to enforce the law.

Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to, consider our permitting fees and what a reduction in those would yield in terms of activity, and, look for ways to provide non-car travel.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, to introduce and adopt at first reading of the emergency ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

Mayor McKeown proposed an amendment to change the cap to 50 percent on alcohol sales to be in accordance with the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control rules, and rather than having a one-year limit to threeyear limit for any reuse of a site/business. The motion was not considered friendly by the maker or seconder.

Substitute motion by Mayor McKeown, to retain the recommendation and to add the two previous amendments. The motion died due to lack of a second.

Councilmember Himmelrich, proposed a friendly amendment to adopt the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control’s requirement, if only to make it within the city’s ability to enforce it. The motion was withdrawn because this provision is already included in the proposed ordinance.

5.L
Packet Pg. 236 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 7 May 12, 2020
The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Jara, Winterer, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Direction given to staff to prioritize looking for creative ways to let restaurants expand their serving footprint by using space that might not otherwise be available to them such as sufficiently wide sidewalks, closedoff street areas or nearby parking lots.

ECONOMIC RECOVERY 7.C. Introduction and Adoption of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2637 (CCS) entitled “AN EMERGENCY INTERIM

ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA ESTABLISHING INTERIM ZONING
REGULATIONS FOR ECONOMIC RECOVERY IN THE CITY’S

DOWNTOWN, MIXED USE AND COMMERCIAL, EMPLOYMENT,

OCEANFRONT, AND PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC DISTRICTS,

EXCLUDING THE AREA INCLUDING AND IMMEDIATELY

ADJACENT TO THE THIRD STREET PROMENADE SUBJECT TO
DIFFERENT INTERIM ZONING REGULATIONS”, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council introduce and adopt an Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance modifying permitting procedures and use classifications to support the economic recovery of local business impacted by COVID-19 in all commercial areas except for the Third Street Promenade area.

Member of the public Joshua Lickman spoke to the recommended action.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: why the difference in hours for serving alcohol from 2 a.m. to midnight; is this blanket closing at midnight to streamline and simplify; if a restaurant wanted to stay open until 2 a.m. would they be able to do that through the CUP process; does looking at outdoor dining include looking at restaurants expanding their serving space to allow for social distancing; is the extension of the one-year applicability retroactive; is there a reason the light industry was included on Third Street, but not on Main Street; is a to-go window with limited service included; why wasn’t Bergamot included and are there any other areas of the city that should be included in the new rules; any reason why tattoo shops, barber shops or salons weren’t included; does this IZO allow different businesses to fit a round peg into a square box; what was the thinking behind the no standing on outside patio restriction; was the letter from the Main Street Merchants with their additional ideas received and

5.L
Packet Pg. 237 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 8 May 12, 2020
considered; and, was the letter received from a large property owner in the Bergamot area regarding parking requirements received and considered.

Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to:

Main Street restaurants that served alcohol up to 2 a.m. have drawn a lot of complaints in the past; although there are suitable places, not every establishment on Main Street should be able to serve alcohol until 2 a.m.; if an operator wants to serve alcohol until 2 a.m., they can apply for a CUP which will allow neighbors the opportunity to weigh in with any concerns; a CUP would allow the Planning Commission to craft conditions that addresses any concerns; concerns that new businesses will be treated differently than existing businesses on Main Street; concerns that the City may be undervaluing adjacent residential neighborhoods and ignoring serious impacts to those who live close by; the financial viability of alcohol sales, especially between midnight and 2 a.m.

Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to introduce and adopt at first reading of the emergency ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

Councilmember Davis proposed a friendly amendment to pay special attention to the interaction between loading operations and, in general, potential conflicts between automobiles and other forms of transportation such as pick-up zones and cars crossing the bike lanes. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and the seconder.

Councilmember Morena proposed a friendly amendment to include tattoo shops and personal care sites in the IZO. The motion was not considered friendly by the maker.

Councilmember Morena proposed a friendly amendment to offer the alcohol exemptions for Friday and Saturday nights extending until 2 a.m.

The motion was not considered friendly by the maker.

A substitute motion by Councilmember Morena, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day to adopt the recommendation, with the friendly amendment by Councilmember Davis, and include the alcohol exemptions for Friday and Saturday nights extending until 2 am.

The motion failed by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Davis, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day NOES: Councilmembers Himmelrich, Winterer, Jara, Mayor McKeown ABSENT: None

5.L
Packet Pg. 238 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 9 May 12, 2020
The main motion was back on the floor, including the friendly amendment from Councilmember Davis.

Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to introduce and adopt at first reading of the emergency ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, with the amendment as we go through this plan, paying special attention to the interaction between loading operations and potential conflicts between automobiles and other forms of transportation. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Direction to staff that when there’s time, have council change some of the standards in the Bergamot Area, particularly change-of-use issues; prioritize for restaurants to expand their footprint for service; add tattoo parlors, barber shops and salons to be considered the next IZO.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING 7.D. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance to Amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.53.130 to Exempt One Hundred Percent Affordable Housing Projects That Result in the Addition of 16 Residential Units or More from Transportation Allowance Requirements, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council introduce for first reading an ordinance to amend Section 9.53.130 of the Municipal Code to exempt 100% affordable housing projects that result in the addition of 16 residential units or more from the requirement to provide a transportation allowance to residents of the project.

There was no public comment on this item.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Himmelrich, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

5.L
Packet Pg. 239 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 10 May 12, 2020
SHARED MOBILITY 7.E. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Modification to Postpone Launch Date of the Second Shared Mobility Pilot Program and Restructure PROW Fees, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1) Introduce for first reading the proposed ordinance, amending Section

3.21.090 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to extend the term of the first Shared Mobility Device Pilot Program from June 30, 2020 to September 13, 2020, and amending Section 3.22.090 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to change the effective date of permits for the second Shared Mobility Pilot Program from July 1, 2020 to September 14, 2020.
2) Provide direction to staff on the restructuring of the established $1 per device per day PROW fee to a per trip PROW fee.

Members of the public Tim Harder and David Fairbank spoke to the recommended action.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: which operators are left in the city and what kind of devices are they using; when does the Breeze bike contract terminate; does it make senses to do the micro-mobility proposals in September to bridge the gap between the end of the Breeze contract and the other mobility companies; are public-right-of-way fees being considered for other delivery services or is it just applicable to micromobility; when was the original RFA due; how long does this program last; what’s the revenue for devices over the past year; if the similar amount of numbers were applied for ridership, what would the revenue be using the per trip fee; where did the question of mopeds end up with regard to micromobility; where is the $1 going for infrastructure today; if the operator fee is reduced in half, would that be enough to recoup our cost; where does the city stand on mopeds and what are operators supposed to do if they are not included; how long would it take to develop a plan for moped operators to be included in the shared mobility plan; has there been any thought about delaying this RFA proposal and just treading lightly and wait for things to rebound a little from the COVID-19; is there any sense why the previous scooter and bike companies left the city; on the bidder call, what types of devices did the various companies have to offer; do other cities around charge a per trip fee, and if they do, how much do they charge; have there been any comparisons for insurance requirements; can we amend the pilot program as it currently exists to sub other operators; is it possible to take the allocation and split it among the remaining two entities; and, what happens when the Breeze bike contract is up in November.

Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to: how to get affordable, equitable transportation to local residents; given this time

5.L
Packet Pg. 240 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 11 May 12, 2020
of uncertainty, extend the program a year to work out a lot of questions, concerns and address the uncertainty; and, Breeze should be incorporated in with shared mobility.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Morena, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof, with a change to extend the current pilot program with the two current operators for a term through April 30, 2021; direct staff to come back with a proposal to change the fee structure; and give time to figure out how integrating the future of the Breeze Bike Sharing program into the planning process.

Councilmember Himmelrich proposed a friendly amendment to consider including mopeds to shared mobility devices and direct staff to come back with a per-trip fee instead of a per-day fee. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

The motion, with amendments was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Motion by Councilmember Morena, seconded by Mayor McKeown, to direct staff to reduce the per-trip fee by 30% resulting in a per-trip fee of .25 cents. The motion failed by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich,
Mayor McKeown
NOES: Councilmembers Davis, Winterer, Jara,
Mayor Pro Tem O’Day
ABSENT: None
Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to direct staff to set the per-ride fee at .20 cents. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:

CITY EMPLOYMENT

13.A. Request of Mayor McKeown that Council direct staff to prepare for Council approval a resolution or ordinance, as appropriate, temporarily granting, over and above the one year

5.L
Packet Pg. 241 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 12 May 12, 2020
granted by Section 1109 of the Santa Monica City Charter, an additional one year (bringing the total to two) in which an employee discharged from City employment as the result of a decision by the City Council to abolish a position or reduce the number of employees in a given class in the Classified Service shall, should such position be reinstated or any position involving substantially the same duties be created and filled, be appointed thereto, was presented.

There was no public comment on this item.

Motion by Mayor McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to approve the recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC INPUT: Members of the public Denise Barton commented on various local issues.

ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 11:28 p.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Denise Anderson-Warren Kevin McKeown
City Clerk Mayor

5.L
Packet Pg. 242 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 12, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 1 May 26, 2020
(NOT APPROVED)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 26, 2020
A regular of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor McKeown at 5:30 p.m., on Tuesday, May 26, 2020, via teleconference pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 at https://primetime.bluejeans.com/a2m/live-event/argwbkvz Roll Call: Present: Mayor Kevin McKeown
Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Sue Himmelrich
Councilmember Ana M. Jara
Councilmember Greg Morena
Councilmember Ted Winterer
Also Present: Interim City Manager Lane Dilg
Interim City Attorney George Cardona
City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren
CONVENE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:30 p.m., with all members present.

CLOSED SESSIONS Members of the public Chris Pecaut, Adriana Yossef, Denise Barton, Jennifer Wolf, Irma Jarro, and Lauralee Ashe commented on closed sessions.

On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:50 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 7:34 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:

1.A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Request to enter into a lawsuit as an amicus curiae, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9: Eloy Ortiz Oakley, et al., v. Betsy Devos, in her official capacity as the United States Secretary of Education, et al., U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Case No. 20-cv-03215.

The Interim City Attorney recommended that the Council authorize the city to sign on to Los Angeles County’s amicus brief, supporting the California Attorney General’s request on behalf of a number of Community College

5.M
Packet Pg. 243 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 May 26, 2020
Districts preliminary injunction precluding the U.S. Department of Education for enforcing eligibility requirements that would exclude undocumented immigrants, DACA recipients, DPS holders and asylum seekers, among others, from receiving aid allocated by the CARES Act for all students, regardless of immigration status.

Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to join the amicus brief. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor Winterer
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

1.B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 616804, Second District Court of Appeal, Case No. B295935.

The Interim City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

1.C. Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation – Request to enter into a lawsuit as an amicus curiae, pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9: HIAS, Inc., et al. v. Donald J.

Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States, et al., U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Case No. 20-1160.

The Interim City Attorney recommended that the Council authorize the city to sign on to an amicus brief, to be filed by a coalition of cities, counties and Mayors, led by the City of Los Angeles, supporting the affirmance in the United States 4
th Circuit Court of Appeals, of a District Courts issuance of a preliminary injunction that bars the Federal Government from enforcing an Executive Order which gives states and is likely counties a veto when it comes to refugee resettlement, eliminating cities from their traditional role in the consultation process as it relates to refugees.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Morena, to join the amicus brief. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

5.M
Packet Pg. 244 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 May 26, 2020

1.D. Conference with Labor Negotiator: Government Code Section 54957.6 Agency Designated Representatives: Chief People Officer Lori Gentles and Human Resources Manager Shawn Weiske. Bargaining Units: Administrative Team Associates, California Teamsters Local 911, Confidential Unrepresented Employees Pay Plan, Executive Pay Plan, Municipal Employees Association, Management Team
Associates, Public Attorneys Legal Support Staff Union, Public Attorneys Union, Santa Monica Fire Executive Management Association, Santa Monica Firefighters Local 1109 IAFF, Santa Monica Police Officers Association, Supervisory Team Associates, International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers, Transportation Division Local 1785 (SMART TD).

The Interim City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS:

2.A. Commendation: 126 City Employees, was presented.

2.B. Commendation: Katie E. Lichtig, Assistant City
Manager/Chief Operating Officer, was presented.

2.C. City Manager's Report: Economic Recovery Update, was presented.

REPORT ON COUNCIL
TRAVEL
There was nothing to report on Council travel.

CONSENT CALENDAR: All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.

Members of the public Denise Barton commented on various Consent Calendar items.

At the request of Councilmembers Morena and Jara, Item 3.A and Councilmember Morena, Item 3.C were removed from the Consent Calendar.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Himmelrich, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Items 3.A and

3.C, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof.

The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

5.M
Packet Pg. 245 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 May 26, 2020
AFFORDABLE HOUSING 3.B. Affordable Housing Funding Opportunities from the State, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the Resolution Nos. 11248 (CCS) through 11250 (CCS):

1. Authorizing and adopting the 302(c)(4) plan for the Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program for Funding Allocation Years 2019-2023 (Attachment A); and

2. Authorizing the submission of an application for Permanent Local , Allocation Program Funding (Attachment B); and

3. Authorizing the submission of an application for Local Housing Trust Fund Program Matching Grant Funding (Attachment C).

EMPLOYEE

REINSTATEMENT

3.D. Adoption of Resolution No. 11252 (CCS) entitled “A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA

MONICA GRANTING AN ADDITIONAL ONE-YEAR

REINSTATEMENT PERIOD TO EMPLOYEES LAID OFF AS A

RESULT OF THE RESTRUCTURING OF CITY OPERATIONS
CAUSED BY THE IMPACTS OF COVID-19”, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council adopt the proposed resolution recognizing a two-year reinstatement period (increasing by one additional year the reinstatement period set forth in the City Charter) for employees who are laid off as a result of the restructuring of the City’s workforce caused by the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OUTPLACEMENT AND

TRANSITIONING

SERVICES

3.E. Authorization to enter into Agreement Nos. 11047 (CCS) and 11048 (CCS) with Right Management Corporation and with BetterUP Outplacement and Transitioning Services, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Right Management Corporation for professional outplacement and transitioning services for the Human Resources Department.

This recommendation is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (g) and is for a total amount not to exceed $300,000, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with BetterUp for professional coaching services for the Human Resources Department. This recommendation is made as an

5.M
Packet Pg. 246 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 May 26, 2020
exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section

2.24.250 (g) and is for a total amount not to exceed $125,000, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

3. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget Actions section of this report.
1550 BEACH PARKING
LOT
Councilmember Morena
excused at 8:32 p.m.

3.A. Award Request for Proposal and enter into Agreement No. 11046 (CCS) with Film Independent for the Independent Spirit Awards, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award RFP# 249 to Film Independent to use a portion of the 1550 Beach Parking Lot for the Independent Spirit Awards from February 17, 2021 to March 4, 2021, and to return on tentative dates of February 16 to March 3, 2022 and February 15 to March 2, 2023

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a license Agreement with Film Independent for a three -year term. The annual rental for each of the three occupations is approximately $104,000.

Councilmember Morena recused himself from this item because the Spirit Awards are adjacent to the Pier, and to avoid any potential appearance of conflict of interest because his family owns a restaurant on the Pier.

Pulled by Councilmember Jara to ask questions of staff including, what type of revenue would it be for the businesses at the Pier. How much revenue does it mean for those businesses who close down for this event.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to approve the recommended action. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Morena
COVID-19 EMERGENCY 3.C. Adoption of Resolution No. 11251 (CCS) entitled “AN

EMERGENCY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SANTA MONICA PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 2.16 OF THE SANTA

MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE RATIFYING THE PROCLAMATION OF

EXISTENCE OF LOCAL EMERGENCY AND SUPPLEMENTAL
PROCLAMATIONS THERETO”, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council adopt the proposed resolution ratifying the

5.M
Packet Pg. 247 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 May 26, 2020
Executive Order issued by the Director of Emergency Services declaring the existence of a local emergency in the city of Santa Monica and the Supplements to that Order.

Councilmember Morena recused himself to avoid any potential appearance of conflict of interest because his family owns a restaurant on the Pier.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to adopt the resolution by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Morena
ORDINANCES:

AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Councilmember Morena
returned at 8:38 p.m.

7.A. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2638 (CCS) entitled “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 9.53.130 TO EXCLUDE ONE HUNDRED PERCENT

AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS FROM TRANSPORTATION
ALLOWANCE REQUIREMENTS”, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

Motion by Councilmember Himmelrich, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
SHARED MOBILITY 7.B. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2639 (CCS) entitled “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE
SECTION 3.21.090 TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE FIRST SHARED MOBILITY DEVICE PILOT PROGRAM TO APRIL 30, 2021, AND
AMEND SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.22.090 TO

CHANGE THE START DATE OF THE SECOND SHARED MOBILITY
DEVICE PILOT PROGRAM TO MAY 1, 2021”, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

5.M
Packet Pg. 248 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 7 May 26, 2020
Motion by Councilmember Jara, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to adopt the ordinance, reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
STAFF

ADMINISTRATIVE
ITEMS:

CITY RESTRUCTURING

8.A. An Update on City Restructuring and Council Authorization to Restore Priority Programs, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council:

1. Provide direction to staff on proposals to restore priority services not included in the May 5, 2020 restructuring plan;

2. Provide direction to staff on proposal to allocate CDBG entitlement and COVID-19-related funds; and

3. Provide direction to staff on the updated Community Services Pricing Policy on Fees.

Members of the public Ann Hoover, Katie Hoover, Karen Mulick, Leila Tasmini, Denise Barton, Margurita Garcia, Angela Scott, Carole Lemlein, and Ericka Lesley spoke to the recommended action.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: with regard to the Playground Access, was it correct that this was a recommendation from Presidium, and what does that mean; is it correct that an adult is not required to sign out a child in the Playground Access; is the city provided afterschool playground programs different than the Playground Access program; is it correct that the as-needed employees are only needed for onboarding the Preserving Our Diversity (POD) program, but staffing won’t be needed beyond and for maintenance; is there any talk about qualifying people for the POD program, in order to streamline the onboarding; when will the fee study be completed; how does a community partner with the city go about finding funding out there to replace losing funds; does the branding for the Economic Recovery and the branding with the Arts get connected; is there someone on city staff to assist businesses through the Sustainability efforts; how does it work keeping a Crossing guard Coordinator, but no crossing guards, and how does that play out for safety; does this proposal continue the food pantry at Virginia Avenue Park; has there been any discussion about the multiple efforts amongst the School, College and City to make sure that as much effort is being put forth; for community block grants, who would Administrator this effort, and is the city ready to take on the large number of residents; do we have another

5.M
Packet Pg. 249 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 8 May 26, 2020
partner who could work more with our most vulnerable population besides Legal Aid; in youth related programs, is there any possibility to consider any grants; if fees are increased, and families don’t qualify for any assistance after the increase, how will those families be assisted; can we give the public any idea when the city will be able to address the Crossing guard question; if we must eliminate the Architectural Review Board (ARB), when will we get back the proposals for most cost effective design review and when are we going to get back the proposal to reduce the overhead on the Landmarks Commission; will staff come back to Council to decide fees; do we look at private vendors for fees; full cost recovery, or subsidy; and, how is the sliding scale going to work with subsidies as part of the fees.

Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to provide direction to staff on proposals to restore priority services not included in the May 5, 2020 restructuring plan. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Morena, to provide direction to staff on proposal to allocate CDBG entitlement and COVID-19-related funds. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Motion by Councilmember Jara, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to provide direction to staff on the updated Community Services Pricing Policy on Fees to look at a cost-of-living (COLA) adjustment for this year and initiative a fee study for next year. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Morena, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:

STREETLIGHT

13.A. Request of Mayor Pro Tem O’Day that, in light of a majority of the residents affected now opposing the 9th Street Streetlight Assessment District, Council direct staff to prepare for Council

5.M
Packet Pg. 250 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 9 May 26, 2020
ASSESSMENT approval a resolution rescinding Council’s prior authorization, as stated in Resolution 11213 (CCS) adopted November 12, 2019, to pay 50% of the costs of the proposed streetlighting, was presented.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: legally, can we do this:
how do we know that over half of the people don’t want the assessment; are these new people who have rescinded or did the original signers change their minds; do we know why there was a change of mind; and, could the residents bring back another petition and get it passed.

There was no public comment on this item.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to approve the recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, Morena, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC INPUT: Member of the public Bob Adams commented on various local issues.

ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 10:56 p.m. in memory of the 14 Santa Monicans who have died as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Denise Anderson-Warren Kevin McKeown
City Clerk Mayor

5.M
Packet Pg. 251 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of May 26, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 1 November 1, 2022
(NOT APPROVED)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
NOVEMBER 1, 2022
A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem McCowan at 6:01 p.m., on Tuesday, November 1, 2022, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA.

Roll Call: Present: Mayor Pro Tem Kristin McCowan
Councilmember Phil Brock
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre (arrived at 6:02 p.m.)
Councilmember Lana Negrete (arrived at 6:08 p.m.)
Councilmember Christine Parra

Absent: Mayor Sue Himmelrich
Also Present: City Manager David White
City Attorney Douglas Sloan
City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor Pro Tem, the City Council convened at 6:01 p.m., with Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmember Negrete absent.

Councilmember Parra led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.

PUBLIC INPUT FOR
CLOSED SESSION:

There were no members of the public present to comment on closed session items.

CLOSED SESSIONS
Councilmember de la Torre
excused at 6:02 p.m.

Councilmember Negrete
arrived at 6:08 p.m.

Councilmember de la Torre recused himself from Closed Session due to a potential conflict of interest.

On order of the Mayor Pro Tem, the City Council recessed at 6:05 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 9:25 p.m., with Councilmember de la Torre and Mayor Himmelrich absent, to report the following:

3.A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Santa Monica v. The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, et al., LASC Case No. 21STCV36027 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

5.N
Packet Pg. 252 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 1, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 November 1, 2022

3.B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): John VMA Doe, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al., Case No. 22STCV30598; John TAU Doe, et al. v. Santa Monica PAL, et al., Case No. 22STCV19401; John Doe 1-4 v. Does 1-50, Case No. 21STCV34537; John Doe 5 and John Doe 6 v. Does 1-50, Case No. 22STCV08765; John JH Doe v. Police Activities League, et al., Case No. 21STCV24491; John Doe (D.C.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al., Case No. 21STCV47551; John Doe (MU) v. Santa Monica PAL, et al., Case No. 22STCV17022; John Doe #1, John Doe #2 and John Doe #3 v. Santa Monica PAL, et al., Case No. 22STCV03113; John Doe 142 v. Doe 1, Doe 2, and Doe 3, Case No. 22STCV01268; Jose Villaseñor v. City of Santa Monica, et al., Case No. 22STCV17835 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

CONTINUED ITEMS:

ARCHITECTURAL

REVIEW BOARD

8.A. Recommendation to accept Therese Kelly's resignation from the Architectural Review Board and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy, was presented.

Motion by Councilmember Brock, seconded by Councilmember Negrete, to accept the resignation with regret.

The motion was approved by a unanimous by voice vote, with Councilmember de la Torre and Mayor Himmelrich absent.

BREAK/RECONVENE On the order of the Mayor Pro Tem, the Council took a break at 9:30 p.m. to allow time for Councilmember de la Torre to return. The Council reconvened at 9:35 p.m. with Councilmember de la Torre present.

MEASURE A
Councilmember de la Torre
returned at 9:35 p.m.

8.B Request of Mayor Himmelrich and Councilmember Davis that the City Council express its support for Los Angeles County Measure A. Measure A would amend the Charter of the County of Los Angeles to grant the Board of Supervisors authority to remove an elected Sheriff from office for cause by a supermajority (4 out of 5) of the Board, was presented.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McCowan, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was not approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmember Davis, Mayor Pro Tem McCowan
NOES: Councilmembers de la Torre, Brock, Negrete, Parra ABSENT: Mayor Himmelrich

5.N
Packet Pg. 253 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 1, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 November 1, 2022
LINCOLN BOULEVARD 8.C Request of Councilmembers Negrete and Brock that the City Manager evaluate options to enhance the maintenance and appearance of Lincoln Boulevard between Olympic Boulevard (north and south), inclusive of portions of Olympic Blvd east and west of Lincoln, as depicted roughly in the shaded area in the attached map. This is a highly trafficked and visible area of the City and serves as a gateway for visitors to Santa Monica and the City Manager is being asked to return to City Council with options to improve the area, was presented.

Motion by Councilmember Brock, seconded by Councilmember Negrete, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, by all members, with Mayor Himmelrich absent.

SISTER CITIES

COMMEMORATION

8.D Request of Councilmember Brock to direct the City Manager to evaluate the potential of programming the open space along Main Street adjacent to the City Hall North Parking Lot in partnership with the Santa Monica Sister City Association that would commemorate our five Sister Cities: Mazatlan, Mexico (1961), Hamm, Germany (1969), Fujinomiya, Japan (1974), Kizugawa, Japan (2017), and Brighton, England (2022), was presented.

Motion by Councilmember Brock, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem McCowan, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, by all members, with Mayor Himmelrich absent.

PICKLEBALL 8.E Request of Councilmember Negrete to direct the City Manager to develop construction and annual maintenance cost estimates and evaluate the impacts of constructing courts dedicated to pickleball on the Interim Open Space at Santa Monica Airport adjacent to Airport Park as soon as possible while supporting other current and planned uses on the Interim Open Space. The City Manager is also being asked to produce a schedule of permitted and open recreational use of the tennis / pickleball courts at Memorial Park and evaluate the potential to expand the use of the courts at Memorial Park for pickleball, was presented.

Motion by Councilmember Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Brock, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, by all members, with Mayor Himmelrich absent.

SMOKING ORDINANCE 8.F Request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council direct the City Manager and City Attorney to come back with a proposed Ordinance to the City’s Smoking Ordinance, Section 4.44.020(a) of the Santa Monica Municipal Code (“SMMC”), to prohibit smoking in multi-unit residential common areas, and the public right-of-way areas around multi-unit residential buildings, was presented.

5.N
Packet Pg. 254 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 1, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 November 1, 2022
Motion by Councilmember Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Brock, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, by all members, with Mayor Himmelrich absent.

HOUSING 8.G Request of Councilmembers Brock, Parra and de la Torre, in the wake of residents’ concerns about the “Builder’s remedy” permits just filed for 1,000s of new housing units, overwhelmingly market rate and up to 15 stories, that the Council ask the City Attorney to hire appropriate outside legal counsel to conduct a thorough review and write a report regarding the City’s legal options and remedies, including rejecting the applications under all applicable laws. The law firm hired to conduct this review shall be selected by the City Council and shall have the power to obtain documents it deems useful to its legal review and be given full cooperation by staff and elected and appointed officials, was pulled from the agenda by authors.

COUNCIL TRAVEL 8.H Request of Mayor Pro Tem McCowan that the City Council authorize use of her travel funds for costs incurred from her July 27- 30, 2022 travel to Brighton, England for the official Friendship City signing ceremony in partnership with Santa Monica Travel and Tourism and the Santa Monica Sister City Association, was presented.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember de la Torre, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers de la Torre, Brock, Negrete, Davis, Parra, Mayor Pro Tem McCowan
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Himmelrich
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor Pro Tem, the City Council meeting adjourned at 10:31 p.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Denise Anderson-Warren Kristin McCowan
City Clerk Mayor Pro Tem

5.N
Packet Pg. 255 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Nov 1, 2022 6:00 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 1 September 29, 2020
(NOT APPROVED)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 29, 2020
A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor McKeown at 5:30 p.m., on Tuesday, September 29, 2020, via teleconference pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 at https://primetime.bluejeans.com/a2m/live-event/xxxyhdtd Roll Call: Present: Mayor Kevin McKeown
Mayor Pro Tem Terry O’Day
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Sue Himmelrich
Councilmember Ana M. Jara (arrived at 5:32 p.m.)
Councilmember Greg Morena
Councilmember Ted Winterer
Also Present: Interim City Manager Lane Dilg
Interim City Attorney George Cardona
City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren
CONVENE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:30 p.m., with all members present except Councilmember Jara.

CLOSED SESSIONS
Councilmember Jara arrived
at 5:32 p.m.

There was no public comment on closed sessions.

On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:36 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 6:00 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:

1.A. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been Initiated Formally Pursuant to Gov. Code Section 54956.9 (d) (1): Christine Sakatis v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. 18STCV00130.

The Interim City Attorney advised the Plaintiff alleges while being a passenger on a Big Blue Bus, she suffered an aggravation of a previous back injury, as a result of the bus running a red light and colliding with another car. The City does not admit to the allegation in the lawsuit, but to avoid the expense and burden of further litigation, the City Attorney’s Office recommended a settlement in the amount of $75,000.

Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to

5.O
Packet Pg. 256 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 September 29, 2020
approve Settlement No. 11087 (CCS), in the amount of $75,000. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers McCowan, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

1.B. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Christopher Cherry and Debbie Mitchell v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 689680.

The Interim City Attorney advised that Plaintiff Debbie Miller filed her lawsuit alleging that while a passenger on a Big Blue Bus, she suffered injuries to her cervical spine, right shoulder and other areas of her torso, as a result of the bus rear ending a stopped car. The City does not admit to the allegation in the lawsuit, but to avoid the expense and burden of further litigation, the City Attorney’s Office recommended a settlement in the amount of $58,000.

Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to approve Settlement No. 11088 (CCS), in the amount of $58,000. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, McCowan, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

1.C. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Litigation has been initiated formally pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): John JB Doe, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. 20STCV28431
The Interim City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS:

2.A. Presentation on voting options for the November 3, 2020, General Election, was presented.

CONSENT CALENDAR: All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.

There was no public comment on the Consent Calendar.

5.O
Packet Pg. 257 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 September 29, 2020
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to approve the Consent Calendar, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, McCowan, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

TRAFFIC SAFETY
GRANT

3.A. Authorization to accept grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Selective Traffic Enforcement Program and Traffic Records Improvement Project, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Authorize the City Manager to accept a grant awarded in the amount of $252,000 from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Selective Traffic Enforcement Program in the Police Department.

2. Authorize the City Manager to accept a grant awarded in the amount of $24,800 from the California Office of Traffic Safety for the Traffic Records Improvement Project in the Police Department.

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grants and all grant renewals.

4. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.

CITY WELLS 3.B. Approval of Second Modification to Professional Services Agreement #10210 (CCS) with WorleyParsons Group Inc. for Technical Oversight and Support Services was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to agreement #10210 in the amount of $250,000 with WorleyParsons Group Inc. for Technical Oversight and Support Services (TOSS) for the Charnock and Olympic Well Fields for the Public Works Department. This will result in an eight-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $383,443, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

WATER TREATMENT 3.C. Award Bid #4397 to Brenntag Pacific, Inc. for the Purchase of 93% Sulfuric Acid, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Award Bid #4397 to Brenntag Pacific, Inc. for the purchase of 93% sulfuric acid for the Public Works Department;

5.O
Packet Pg. 258 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 September 29, 2020

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a purchase order with Brenntag Pacific, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $110,000 for one year, with four additional one-year renewal option(s), with a 5% increase per year for a total amount not to exceed $608,000 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

MERCHANT

PROCESSING SERVICES

3.D. Award RFP #253 and enter into Agreement No. 11082 (CCS) with Paymentus Corporation to provide Merchant Account Processor Services, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1) Award RFP #253 to Paymentus Corporation, a North Carolina-based corporation, to provide merchant account processor services for credit card payments by members of the public to the City for fees and services; and
2) Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute professional services Agreement No. 11082 (CCS) with Paymentus Corporation in an estimated amount of $5.55 million for five years, with one additional three-year renewal option in an estimated amount of $4.22 million on the same terms and conditions, for a total estimated amount of $9.77 million over an eight-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

WATER RESOURCES

DIVISION

3.E. Approval of First Contract Modification for As Needed Engineering Support for the Water Resources Division, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to professional services Agreement No. 11083 (CCS) in the amount of $390,000 with 4Front, Inc. for engineering support services for the Public Works Department. This will result in a five-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $480,000, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

WOODLAWN

CEMETERY

3.F. Adoption of Resolution No. 11288 (CCS) entitled “A

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF

THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ACCEPTING A DONATION TO

MAINTAIN AND SERVICE THE ETERNAL MEADOW AND GREEN
BURIAL SECTION OF WOODLAWN CEMETERY”, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City Manager to accept

5.O
Packet Pg. 259 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 September 29, 2020
a donation in the amount of $500,000 from Dr. Peter Bing to be used for the purchase of cemetery equipment, California native flowers and plants; design and installation of a new irrigation system; and to establish a maintenance contract for Woodlawn’s Eternal Meadow;

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the donated funds; and

3. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.

LABOR RELATIONS 3.G. Adoption of Resolution No. 11289 (CCS) Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Memoranda of Understanding Nos. 11084 (CCS) through 11086 (CCS) with AFSCME Local 4819, Management Team Association and with the Municipal Employees Association, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt the proposed Resolution entitled “A RESOLUTION OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ACCEPTING THE TENTATIVE AGREEMENTS AND

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

MEMORANDA OF UNDERSTANDING WITH AFSCME SANTA
MONICA LOCAL 4819, MANAGEMENT TEAM ASSOCIATION
AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION”;

2. Authorize budget changes as outlined in Attachment B.

CONFLICT OF

INTEREST CODE

3.H. 2020 Biennial Notice of Review of the City's Conflict of Interest Code, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council, by Motion, receive and file the Fair Political Practices Commission 2020 Local Agency Biennial Notice advising that the city’s Conflict of Interest Code is currently under review.

AGENDA

MANAGEMENT
Due to the legal notice for Item 7.A. stating that the item would not be heard before 6:30 p.m., the Mayor recommended that the two 13 items be heard before the Miramar Development Agreement
Motion by Mayor McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to hear Items 13.A. and 13.B. before 7.A. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers McCowan, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

5.O
Packet Pg. 260 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 September 29, 2020

COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:

DISABILITIES

COMMISSION

13.A. Recommendation to accept Dee Cappelli's resignation from the Disabilities Commission and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy, was presented.

There was no public comment on this item.

Motion by Councilmember Winterer, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to accept the resignation with regret. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, Davis, Himmelrich, McCowan, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

URBAN FOREST TASK
FORCE

13.B. Recommendation to accept Ellis Raskin's resignation from the Urban Forest Task Force and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy, was presented.

There was no public comment on this item.

Motion by Councilmember Jara, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to accept the resignation with regret. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers McCowan, Himmelrich, Davis, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ORDINANCES:
1133 OCEAN AVENUE

7.A. Introduction and first reading of an adopting Development Agreement 11DEV003, Vesting Tentative Tract Map 20ENT-0153, and an amendment to the 1992 Local Coastal Plan Land Use Plan for Redevelopment of the Miramar Hotel at 1133 Ocean Avenue, was presented.

Ex parteCommunications
Councilmember Davis, read a statement into the record: My husband works for Dell EMC, which is a subsidiary of Dell Technologies. Dell Technologies is a publicly traded corporation. My husband has never met Michael Bell, and is not an Officer, Director or Managing Agent for Dell Technologies or any subsidiary. He has no relationship with any person or entity that has any interest in the Miramar/Fairmont. His compensation will not be affected in any way by the Council’s decision on the Miramar. Nevertheless, on September 10, after Planning Commission approved the Miramar project and

5.O
Packet Pg. 261 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 7 September 29, 2020
Councilmember Davis was
excused at 6:35 p.m.

I knew it would be coming to Council, I asked for an opinion of the interim City Attorney as to whether I had a conflict of interest that would prohibit me from hearing or voting on the matter. Sometime later, I received inquiries from members of the public as to whether I would recuse myself. I told them I already had asked for an opinion of the Interim City Attorney and that I would abide by his decision. I spoke with the City Attorney about it on September 21. In that conversation, he opined there was no conflict, but he advised me to contact the Fair Political Practices Commission. I called the FPPC that same day but could not get through until Tuesday, September 22.

The FPPC told me to send a request in writing, which I did. On September 23, I received what the FPPC characterized as conservative, informal advice that I should recuse myself. Although I have asked for a formal opinion, I still have not received it. Therefore, on the basis of the informal opinion, I will be recusing myself from the hearing tonight. My decision on any future items that might relate to this project is subject to my getting a formal opinion from the FPPC.

Mayor McKeown spoke on the phone with Ellis O’Connor who had a couple of questions, specifically about the mailer in the Santa Monica Daily Press over the weekend.

Mayor Pro Tem O’Day met regularly with all sides and community members and met with the applicant on the phone within the last few weeks.

Councilmember McCowan met with the applicant in person, Wilmont Neighborhood Association, toured property, met with SMAME, CCM, met with community members over the phone and in person.

Councilmember Himmelrich, met with applicant for about an hour last Thursday, and over time on multiple occasions, spoken with SMAME, other community groups, and with union members.

Councilmember Winterer, participated in a Zoom presentation with the applicant and their attorneys on September 18th and 4 p.m., walked the site with Elizabeth Vandenburg and Mary Marlow, met with Leadership of Santa Monicans against the Miramar Expansion on September 21st at 3 p.m., follow-up phone calls with the applicant and their attorney to ask questions on September 27th at 5 p.m. and 28th at 11:30 p.m., a phone call from a representative from Unite Here Local11, and phone calls and emails on both sides.

Councilmember Jara, met with the developers as well as Dustin Peterson and Rafael Pelli, the architect, on April 12th 2019 at 5:30, several community members and walked the site parameters, attended events at the Miramar over time, Sept. 19th at 3 p.m., met with Chair and Co-Chair NOMA, Santa Monica Against the Miramar, met with residents from the Pico

5.O
Packet Pg. 262 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 8 September 29, 2020
Neighborhood Community, met with developers: Ellis, Paula, Dustin and Rafael, with 6 members of the Pico Neighborhood Community to bridge any concerns residents might have, read emails received, had conversations with community members.

Recommended Action
It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Affirm that the Miramar Hotel Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15182 of the CEQA Guidelines;

2. Adopt Resolution No. 11290 (CCS) entitled “A RESOLUTION OF

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE MIRAMAR HOTEL PROJECT”;

3. Adopt Resolution No. 11291 (CCS) entitled “A RESOLUTION OF

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA

MAKING FINDINGS NECESSARY TO APPROVE THE

MIRAMAR HOTEL PROJECT, ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF

OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM”;

4. Adopt Resolution No. 11292 (CCS) entitled “A RESOLUTION OF

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ADOPTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE UPDATED LOCAL

COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE PLAN PERTAINING TO NEW
DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 1133 OCEAN AVENUE AND
1127-1129 SECOND STREET, IN THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA”;

5. Introduce for first reading an ordinance adopting Development Agreement 11DEV-003; and

6. Approve the Statement of Official Action approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 20ENT-0153.

The applicant’s representatives, Ellis O’Connor and Dustin Peterson, from MSD Partners presented to Council.

Members of the public Leslie Lambert on behalf of the Planning Commission, Martin Rodriguez, Joshua Christensen, Ivan Heinshaw, Emily McCarran, Becky Warren, Jeff Klocky, Ron Miller, Leonora Camner, Jeremy Stuts, Jonah Breslaw, Matt Stauffer, Avo Guerboian, Eddie Guerboian, Nate Redman, Greg Lewis, Christina Guerboian, Carl Hansen, Valerie Griffin, Evelyn Guerboian , Violet Lox, Carol Lemlein, Shawn Meir, Laura Giillette, Zachary Gissack, Jason Islas, Laurel Rosen, Susan Gabrielle Potter, Marina Eleuthria, Flora Salon, Lupe Stevenson, Sandra Ramirez, Dr. Mike Rooney, Susan Hougher, Mike Simnowski, Rafael Guday, Lores Mendoza, Jeremy Arnold, Luis Pores, Adolfo Navaro, Francis Ingler, Melania Velandia, Libby Russell, Abby Arnold, Beatrice Martinez, Jarrett Lingford, Marina Cepeda, Claudia Purelle, Deltoro Hernandez, Mark Humphrey, Andrew Simon,

5.O
Packet Pg. 263 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 9 September 29, 2020
Elizabeth Perez, Viviana Hernandez, Peter Tren, Josh Trejo, Shawn Manuel, Jonathan Saints, Delfino de la Cruz, Chris Baca, Lida Arivas, Kathleen Rawson, and, Misti Kerns spoke generally in support to the recommended action.

Members of the public Zina Josephs, Ann Thanawalla, Denise Barton, Silky Cohler, Burt Champagne, Wendy Dumbo, Gary Levine, Susan Kunaho, Elizabeth Vandenberg, Nancy Coleman, Mario Fonda-Bernardi, Manuel Vazquez, Betsy Richardon, Ruby Demmo, Phillip Poracko, David Via, Alan Sinder, Steve Lanette, Ann Hoover, Melissa Thompson, Steven Martin, Mike Feinstein, Miriam Halpren, Mark Vervail, Budavon Morra, Kay Ward, Laura Wilson, Sandra Chase, and Laureen Von Calan spoke generally in opposition to the recommended action.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: during the three-year construction timeline, how will the city deal with the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) loss; does the enhanced Transportation Demand Management (TDM) requirement need to be added to the draft development agreement; does the affordable housing component violate any of the current laws and regulations; did the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) look at bluff stability issues and air quality concerns; what processes are in place to ensure that structural integrity is maintained in the surrounding neighborhoods and how wide does that range go; why are there only 42 affordable housing units being proposed; are the affordable housing units geared more for family units; is the future gains in TOT payment really a benefit to the city, or is it more of a benefit to the developer, since borrowing money is currently so cheap right now; if there weren’t condominiums in the project, what amount would go to affordable housing; has there been any discussion about providing offsite transportation for construction workers as a part of traffic mitigation; what would the TOT be if the condos were replaced with hotel rooms; how are you going to keep workers from parking on the side streets, when there aren’t enough parking spaces in the plan; what provisions could be placed in the agreement to address minority hiring in the construction of this project; how does the parking cash-out work; how does the city utilize the $75,000 affordable lodging fee; where does the project go from here, if the Council approves it; is there anything the city can do to make sure they are receiving the fair value from property taxes, if the developer decides they don’t want to go through with the development agreement entitlements; will benefits employees are receiving when the construction starts, be retained by them until the project is completed; will the developer have amenities for public cyclist to park their bikes on the property; would a Landmarks decision change the outside façade or reduce the room sizes; ways to mitigate additional traffic on California Street; what was the designation for the four impacted intersections before this project; does staff have an objection to releasing the amount of number of condos that can be rented to increase the TOT; are people required to buy food in order to have access to the elevated

5.O
Packet Pg. 264 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 10 September 29, 2020
space; and, if there was access to upper level public space, would that create more traffic and congestion issues.

Planning staff provided responses to the Channel Law Group/Angel Law group letter dated September 29, 2020.

Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to: the condominiums should have no cap on how many can be rented; more money needs to go towards senior programs and homeless; local hiring requirement should be included; and, this is a bad project because the developer is not a good community partner because they will not agree to not flip the project with the approved entitlements.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember McCowan, to affirm that the Miramar Hotel Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15182 of the CEQA Guidelines. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, McCowan,
Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: Councilmember Himmelrich
ABSENT: Councilmember Davis
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember McCowan, to adopt Resolution No. 11290 (CCS) certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Miramar Hotel Project in accordance with CEQA. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers McCowan, Himmelrich, Winterer, Jara, Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Davis
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to adopt Resolution No. 11291 (CCS) approving the Statement of Overriding Considerations to support approval of the Miramar Hotel Project based upon the Final Environmental Impact Report and other information provided in the record and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Miramar Hotel Project, with amendments 1) for the condos, no cap on how many can be rented, with an additional 5 percent TOT, and 2) pull forward the incremental TOT over the upcoming years with the one-time payment of $2 million made to plan check, with monthly payments.

Councilmember McCowan, proposed a friendly amendment that the 5 percent in additional TOT from the condominium sales are earmarked specifically 2½ percent for homeless-specific programs with a preference to

5.O
Packet Pg. 265 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 11 September 29, 2020
the downtown area, and 2 ½ percent for the housing fund. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

Councilmember McCowan, proposed a friendly amendment to move $1.35 million from early childcare and allocate $1 million to early childhood programs and $350,000 to senior programs. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

Councilmember Jara, proposed an amendment to make a preference for funding the community kitchen at Virginia Avenue Park, if it has not yet been funded. The motion was considered friendly by the maker.

Councilmember Jara, proposed an amendment to alleviate the requirement to purchase food or alcohol in order to access the upper public view. The motion was considered friendly by the maker.

Councilmember Winterer, proposed a friendly amendment to enhance TDM, if there is a penalty. Motion considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

Councilmember Winterer, proposed a friendly amendment that the developer agrees to pay the difference in the property tax without having the property reassessed, if the developer sells the property or sells 50% of ownership. The motion was considered friendly to the maker and seconder.

Councilmember Winterer, proposed a friendly amendment to have a Building and Safety plan check expediter move the project through as quickly as possible. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

Councilmember Winterer, proposed a friendly amendment to include the historical period of significance and not leave it up to the Landmarks Commission, with a preference to not have the original bricks not be repainted. The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.

The Interim City Attorney provided clarification language that the one-time payment of $2 million made with the filing of the plan check application, then the subsequent 11 quarterly payments (totaling $10 million) would be made in the quarters that follow the later of either the issuance of the building permit or the closure of the existing hotel.

The motion was approved, with amendments by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, McCowan,
Mayor Pro Tem O’Day,
NOES: Councilmember Himmelrich, Mayor McKeown
ABSENT: Councilmember Davis

5.O
Packet Pg. 266 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 12 September 29, 2020
Mayor McKeown stated the reason for his no vote is because his concerns about the project cannot be overridden as long as the luxury condominiums are part of the project and make impossible some of the egress and ingress mitigations.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to adopt Resolution No. 11292 (CCS) amending the 1992 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan (LUP) for 1133 Ocean Avenue (Miramar project site) and 1127-1129 Second Street (100% affordable housing site) to be consistent with the City’s Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan that was adopted by the City Council on October 9, 2018 and is pending certification by the California Coastal Commission. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers McCowan, Winterer, Jara,
Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, Mayor McKeown
NOES: Councilmember Himmelrich
ABSENT: Councilmember Davis
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Jara, to introduce for first reading an ordinance adopting Development Agreement 11DEV-003, with amendments. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Jara, Winterer, McCowan,
Mayor Pro Tem O’Day,
NOES: Councilmember Himmelrich, Mayor McKeown
ABSENT: Councilmember Davis
Mayor McKeown stated the reason for his no vote is because of the inclusion of luxury condominiums.

Councilmember Himmelrich stated the reason for her no vote is because of the 60 luxury condos which she is opposed to. She doesn’t believe the requirements make this project feasible as well as the lack of a viewpoint at the top of the project.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem O’Day, seconded by Councilmember Winterer, to approve the Statement of Official Action approving Vesting Tentative Tract Map 20ENT-0153. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers McCowan, Winterer, Jara,
Mayor Pro Tem O’Day
NOES: Councilmember Himmelrich, Mayor McKeown
ABSENT: Councilmember Davis

5.O
Packet Pg. 267 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 13 September 29, 2020
Mayor McKeown stated the reason for his no vote is because the vesting tentative tract map which makes the luxury condominiums possible which he is opposed to.

ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 1:38 a.m. in memory of Dolores Press.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Denise Anderson-Warren Kevin McKeown
City Clerk Mayor

5.O
Packet Pg. 268 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 29, 2020 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 269
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 270
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 271
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 272
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 273
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 274
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 275
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60

8.A.c
Packet Pg. 276
Attachment: Kiosk Design Concepts (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 City Council Meeting 11-15-2022 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER ____ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA

DECLARING ITS INTENT TO AWARD A DIGITAL WAYFINDING AND OUT-OF-HOME

ADVERTISING KIOSK FRANCHISE TO
BIG OUTDOOR.

WHEREAS, on January 26, 2021, the City Council directed City of Santa Monica staff to issue a Request for Proposals to identify a franchise partner to implement a digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising program to provide interactive information to community members and visitors, enhance public safety with emergency capabilities, deliver community messaging, and generate new revenues through advertising sales; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica issued Request for Proposals #300 on December 1, 2021 for a franchise partner that has successfully deployed, operated, and maintained kiosk programs in a minimum of three other similar markets, has a demonstrated history of producing strong advertising revenues, and is committed to actively managing the program to meet the needs of the City of Santa Monica and the community; and
WHEREAS, City Charter Section 1601 requires that the City Council City pass a resolution declaring its intention to grant the franchises, stating the name of the proposed grantee, the character of the franchise and the terms and conditions upon which it is proposed to be granted; and

8.A.d
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Resolution of Intent to Hold Public Hearing to Award Franchise Agreement (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk WHEREAS, such resolution must fix and set forth the day, hour and place when and where any persons having any interest in the franchises or any objection to the granting thereof may appear before the City Council and be heard thereon; and WHEREAS, the resolution must direct the City Clerk to publish said resolution at least once within fifteen (15) days of the passage thereof, in the official newspaper; and WHEREAS, the time fixed for such hearing shall not be less than twenty (20) nor more than sixty (60) days after the passage of said resolution; and WHEREAS, at the time set for the hearing, the City Council shall proceed to hear and pass upon all protests and its decision thereon shall be final and conclusive.

Thereafter it may grant, or deny, the franchise, subject to the right of referendum of the people; and
WHEREAS, the City initiated the Digital Wayfinding and Out-of-Home Advertising Kiosk Program to provide interactive information to residents and visitors, enhance public safety via emergency capabilities, deliver community messaging, and generate revenues through advertising sales; and
WHEREAS, deployment of the kiosk network would be structured as a franchise agreement with an exclusive vendor that would require no direct costs incurred or investment made by the City, with the franchisee required to install, operate, and maintain the kiosks; and
WHEREAS, compensation for the City and the franchisee would be realized through profit-share of advertising revenues; and
WHEREAS, after an extensive evaluation process, finalist interviews, and reference checks, an internal evaluation team selected BIG Outdoor as the best bidder,

8.A.d
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Resolution of Intent to Hold Public Hearing to Award Franchise Agreement (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk based upon several factors, including a financial package that was significantly higher than all other bidders ($4 million signing bonus and a 50% revenue share offer to the City with a $5 million minimum annual guarantee), significant community benefits, and kiosk technology and design most appropriate for the culture and aesthetic of Santa Monica; and
WHEREAS, BIG Outdoor has agreed that the terms and conditions upon which the digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising kiosk franchise will be granted are as follows: the franchise term will be twenty (20) years; installation of up to fifty (50) digital kiosks; the City will receive a fifty-percent (50%) share of adjusted gross revenues or a minimum annual guarantee of five-million dollars ($5,000,000) per year with a threepercent (3%) escalation every three years, whichever is higher; the franchise grantee will contribute two-percent (2%) of franchisee’s annual net media revenues to community programs and services at the City’s discretion; and a one-time signing bonus in the amount of four-million dollars ($4,000,000) that will be paid to the City prior to the effectiveness of the franchise agreement.

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

SECTION 1. The above referenced recitals are incorporated by reference as true and correct.

SECTION 2. Council hereby declares its intent to grant a digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising kiosk franchise to BIG Outdoor.

SECTION 3. The terms and conditions upon which the digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising kiosk franchise will be granted are as follows: the franchise term

8.A.d
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Resolution of Intent to Hold Public Hearing to Award Franchise Agreement (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk will be twenty (20) years; installation of up to fifty (50) digital kiosks; the City will receive a fifty-percent (50%) share of adjusted gross revenues or a minimum annual guarantee of five-million dollars ($5,000,000) per year with a three-percent (3%) escalation every three years, whichever is higher; the franchise grantee will contribute two-percent (2%) of its annual net media revenues to community programs and services at the City’s discretion; and a one-time signing bonus in the amount of four-million dollars ($4,000,000) that will be paid to the City prior to the effectiveness of the franchise agreement.

SECTION 4. The public hearing at which Council shall hear and pass upon all protests with respect to the proposed digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising kiosk franchise grantee set forth in Section 2 will take place on December 13, 2022, at 5:30 p.m., at 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California 90401.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth the same shall be in full force and effect. The City Clerk shall cause this Resolution to be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________

DOUGLAS SLOAN
City Attorney

8.A.d
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Resolution of Intent to Hold Public Hearing to Award Franchise Agreement (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Bobak Roshan <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2022 8:45 AM
To: Gleam Davis; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra
Cc: councilmtgitems; Denise Anderson-Warren; David White Subject: re: Agenda Item 14A, Digital Wayfinding and IKE Smart City

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
I write this letter to express my support for IKE Smart City’s interactive digital kiosk deployment in the City of Santa Monica. IKE has successfully deployed interactive wayfinding kiosks in over 15 cities across the country. As a local business owner, I believe that IKE will enhance the pedestrian experience in Santa Monica to the benefit of local dining and retail establishments.

IKE’s directory applications naturally drive traffic to local shops through agnostic business listings that focus on the proximity of the user to the business they are seeking, instead of paid listings that tend to dominate normal internet searches. Additionally, IKE’s emergency functionality will enhance safety in the area for our customers.

The IKE team has reached out to small business owners and is committed to working in good faith the City of Santa Monica and our local businesses towards a successful program. During the early days of the pandemic, IKE donated free advertising space on all of its digital screens nationwide, telling residents which restaurants were open for takeout, delivery and dine-in, with scannable QR codes that could take residents to external websites with more information. This is the level of commitment the City of Santa Monica should be looking for in its kiosk partner.

Most importantly, IKE has a proven track record of success with across the county with references from top cities across the nation. Thus, we know they deliver on their promises.

For the above reasons, I support IKE Smart City’s bid for the City’s wayfinding kiosk RFP.

Item 14.A
10/25/22
1 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 2 Best regards,

‐‐
Bobak Roshan
Founder
Demitasse Coffee
cafedemitasse.com
Item 14.A
10/25/22
2 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 20, 2022
Santa Monica City Councilmembers

Via email
Re: Santa Monica IKE Program
Dear Santa Monica City Councilmembers,
I write this letter to express Experience Columbus’ support of the IKE platform. IKE kiosks have been a part of our Columbus streetscape since late 2018 and have continued to provide critical resources to our residents and visitors as they navigate our city. At the touch of a finger, you can find local restaurants, the best public transit route to a museum, or the nearest shelter and the services it provides.

Not only is the product outstanding, but the IKE team is top-notch, very communicative, and is continuously improving the software platform to stay ahead of the game in the field of wayfinding and digital interactive kiosks. The platform supports our small business and non-profit communities with free listings in the directory and significantly discounted advertising rates. The IKE team also ensures that there is continuously a mix of local art, community content and commercial content on each kiosk in our city.

On behalf of Experience Columbus, I fully endorse the IKE kiosks, and I believe Santa Monica would benefit from a partnership with IKE Smart City, just as we have.

Best regards,
Kari Kauffman
Chief Destination Experience Officer
Experience Columbus
277 W. Nationwide Blvd., Ste.125, Columbus, OH 43215
614-222-6107
[email protected]
Item 14.A
10/25/22
3 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Item 14.A
10/25/22
4 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 21, 2022
Santa Monica City Councilmembers
Via email
Re: Kiosks in Santa Monica
Dear Santa Monica City Councilmembers,
On behalf of ABV Agency + Gallery, ,DPZULWLQJWRH[SUHVVP\VXSSRUWIRU,.(6PDUW&LW\ȢVELG for digital kiosks in Santa Monica. IKE is the only bidder with broad experience collaborating with local artists and institutions. Their well-tested kiosk product would be a useful platform to shRZFDVHORFDODUWLVWVȢZRUNWRWKHPLOOLRQVRIpeople that visit Santa Monica each year and will enliven the FLW\ȢVQHLJKERUKRRGVZLWKDUWDQGFRPPXQLW\FRQWHQW Public art has helped create, merge, and sustain communities across the landscapes of artistry, activism, education, and so much more. Through its power, public art largely remains one of the most prominently accessible and reliable means of supporting communal learning, community engagement, social justice, radical imagination, and collective memory. Supporting public art initiatives empowers the vitality of neighborhoods and KRQRUVWKHFLW\ȢVFRPPLWPHQW to its artists.

In addition to being a public-facing platform to host community event information and emergency messaging, this program will support the local arts community by featuring creative works on new, highly visible platforms that will reach a diverse audience. Public art is a powerful form of expression that enriches communities and encourages meaningful dialogue.

These kiosks will give exposure to artists who may otherwise not have had such a far-reaching opportunity to showcase their work.

I am an enthusiastic supporter of IKE Smart City kiosks and endorse the team and product wholeheartedly.

Thank you,
Morgan Andrews, Director
ABV Agency + Gallery
Item 14.A
10/25/22
5 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Letter: Santa Monica City Council -Big Outdoor-221021
Date: October 21, 2022
RE: Adoption of a Resolution Declaring Intention to Award a Franchise Agreement for RFP 300: Digital Wayfinding and Out-of-Home Advertising Kiosk Program Santa Monica City Council
To Whom it May Concern,
We the McKinney Avenue Transit Authority, have worked with Big Outdoor for several years and have always appreciated the ad revenue they have been able to bring to our organization in Dallas.

Big Outdoor manages the sales and marketing of our streetcar /trolley advertising program. They have successfully monetized these assets while making sure all campaigns and advertisers are of the highest quality.

In addition, we have begun work with Big Outdoor in designing interactive/wayfinding kiosk signage for our busiest stations in our system. They’ve helped navigate this process by interfacing with local business owners, associations, and BIDs to assure a successful launch.

During our multi-year relationship, Big Outdoor has proven to be a trusted partner and we look forward to collaborating with them for years to come.

Sincerely,
Vic Cervantes
President
McKinney Avenue Transit Authority (MATA)
Item 14.A
10/25/22
6 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Diana Nawi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2022 7:48 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Denise Anderson-Warren; David White; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Agenda Item 14A, Digital Wayfinding and IKE Smart City Attachments: DNawi_IKE Support Letter.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Councilmembers,
I am writing to express my support for IKE Smart City’s bid for digital kiosks in Santa Monica. Their well‐tested kiosk product would be a useful platform to showcase local artists’ work to the millions of people that visit Santa Monica each year and will enliven the city’s neighborhoods with art and community content. I have worked with Orange Barrel Media to undertake major arts initiatives in cities across the US, chief among them our collaboration to bring arts programing to Los Angeles in the City of West Hollywood. This has been an incredible platform to showcase the work of established and emerging artists, from both the city and abroad. It has brought diverse artworks of the highest caliber into the public sphere and made them accessible for a broad audience.

Orange Barrel Media’s commitment to public art and promoting the work of artists, as well as collaborating with arts professionals based in the region, will only be furthered by the platform IKE will provide. IKE presents a unique opportunity to foster engagement and allow for encounter and it will allow the arts program to reach an even broader public. This is a unique opportunity to bring cutting edge contemporary art and community engaged programming to sites throughout the city.

In addition to being a public‐facing platform to host community event information and emergency messaging, this program will support the local arts community by featuring creative works on new, highly visible platforms that will reach a diverse audience. Public art is a powerful form of expression that enriches communities and encourages meaningful dialogue. Additionaly, these kiosks will give exposure to artists who may otherwise not have had such a far‐ reaching opportunity to showcase their work.

I am in full support of the IKE Smart City kiosk program and am excited to work alongside the Santa Monica arts community to bring more public art to the city. Please find a letter of support attached as well.

Thank you,
Diana Nawi
Independent Curator
Item 14.A
10/25/22
7 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 18, 2022
Santa Monica City Councilmembers
Re: Kiosks in Santa Monica
Dear Santa Monica City Councilmembers,
I am writing to express my support for IKE Smart City’s bid for digital kiosks in Santa Monica. Their well-tested kiosk product would be a useful platform to showcase local artists’ work to the millions of people that visit Santa Monica each year and will enliven the city’s neighborhoods with art and community content. I have worked with Orange Barrel Media to undertake major arts initiatives in cities across the US, chief among them our collaboration to bring arts programing to Los Angeles in the City of West Hollywood. This has been an incredible platform to showcase the work of established and emerging artists, from both the city and abroad. It has brought diverse artworks of the highest caliber into the public sphere and made them accessible for a broad audience.

Orange Barrel Media’s commitment to public art and promoting the work of artists, as well as collaborating with arts professionals based in the region, will only be furthered by the platform IKE will provide. IKE presents a unique opportunity to foster engagement and allow for encounter and it will allow the arts program to reach an even broader public. This is a unique opportunity to bring cutting edge contemporary art and community engaged programming to sites throughout the city.

In addition to being a public-facing platform to host community event information and emergency messaging, this program will support the local arts community by featuring creative works on new, highly visible platforms that will reach a diverse audience. Public art is a powerful form of expression that enriches communities and encourages meaningful dialogue. Additionaly, these kiosks will give exposure to artists who may otherwise not have had such a far-reaching opportunity to showcase their work.

I am in full support of the IKE Smart City kiosk program and am excited to work alongside the Santa Monica arts community to bring more public art to the city.

Thank you,
Diana Nawi
Independent Curator
Item 14.A
10/25/22
8 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 21, 2022
Santa Monica City Council:

To Whom it May Concern,
The Gaslamp Quarter Association located in downtown San Diego has worked with Big Outdoor over the past several years to help monetize our advertising kiosk program throughout our district.

They've been instrumental in bringing in revenue that has helped our business owners thrive and has allowed for us as an association to drive increased business to the Gaslamp. In addition to the sales and marketing aspect, they've implemented cleaning and maintenance procedures that keeps the kiosks and surrounding areas looking pristine at all times.

They've always gone above and beyond to help many of our business owners, oftentimes by promoting their business on the kiosks and helping them drive revenue. Big Outdoor has a community minded approach that works well in the neighborhood. They are always innovating on ways to support the Gaslamp Quarter outside of just advertising.

Big Outdoor has always been available to discuss special events and have helped us in ways outside the standard sales agreement. They're a true partner, and a group that we look forward to working with for years to come. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to me directly.

Best regards,
Michael Trimble
Executive Director
Gaslamp Quarter Association
Item 14.A
10/25/22
9 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Item 14.A
10/25/22
10 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) From: Janet Renner
Subject: Agenda Item 14A, Digital Wayfinding and IKE Smart City Date: Monday, October 24, 2022 10:28:27 AM

EXTERNAL
October 24, 2022
Santa Monica City Councilmembers
Re: Kiosks in Santa Monica
Dear Santa Monica City Councilmembers,
On behalf of FRONT International: Cleveland Triennial for Contemporary Art, I am writing to express our support for IKE Smart City’s bid for digital kiosks in Santa Monica.

The interactive kiosks have been an invaluable publicly accessible platform that showcase cultural and nonprofit organizations and enliven our city’s streetscape. Importantly, IKE has allowed us to engage with residents and visitors to educate about FRONT International: Cleveland Triennial for Contemporary Art that is a free, public contemporary art exhibition comprised of artist commissions, performances, films, and public programs that takes place across Cleveland, Akron, and Oberlin every three years. .

Their well-tested kiosk product would be a useful platform to showcase local artists’ work to the millions of people that visit Santa Monica each year and will enliven the city’s neighborhoods with art and community content.

Public art has helped create, merge, and sustain communities across the landscapes of artistry, activism, education, and so much more. Through its power, public art largely remains one of the most prominently accessible and reliable means of supporting communal learning, community engagement, social justice, radical imagination, and collective memory. Supporting public art initiatives empowers the vitality of neighborhoods and honors the city’s commitment to its artists.

In addition to being a public-facing platform to host community event information and emergency messaging, this program will support the local arts community by featuring creative works on new, highly visible platforms that will reach a diverse audience. Public art is a powerful form of expression that enriches communities and encourages meaningful dialogue. These kiosks will give exposure to artists who may otherwise not have had such a far-reaching opportunity to showcase their work.

FRONT International: Cleveland Triennial for Contemporary Art is in full support of the IKE Smart City kiosk program and believe they are best suited to engage the Santa Monica arts community to bring more public art to the city.

Item 14.A
10/25/22
11 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Thank you,
Fred Bidwell, Executive Director
FRONT International: Cleveland Triennial for Contemporary Art Item 14.A
10/25/22
12 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Item 14.A
10/25/22
13 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Kivland, Kelly <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2022 12:58 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Denise Anderson-Warren; David White; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Sue Himmelrich; Kristin McCowan; Oscar de la Torre Subject: Agenda Item 14A, Digital Wayfinding and IKE Smart City

EXTERNAL
October 18, 2022
Santa Monica City Councilmembers
Re: Kiosks in Santa Monica
Dear Santa Monica City Councilmembers,
I am writing to express my utmost support for IKE Smart City’s bid for digital kiosks in Santa Monica.

IKE Smart City has been a generous supporter of the Wexner Center for the Arts on several past public art initiatives, including with artists Ann Hamilton, Carlos Motta, and Anna Tsouhlarakis. We believe in the power of the arts to illuminate and reflect the complexities of contemporary life and to foster cross‐cultural exchange, understanding, and respect. These projects have enriched our community and encouraged meaningful dialogue, and we look forward to partnering with IKE and Orange Barrel Media on future projects.

The team at IKE and Orange Barrel Media have a longstanding track record of partnering with artists and cultural organizations to advance cultural projects. Their kiosks will be an invaluable platform to showcase cultural organizations and artists’ work and will enliven Santa Monica’s neighborhoods. IKE’s platforms engages citizens and visitors in a more inclusive way by reaching a broad and diverse audience.

I am in full support of the IKE Smart City kiosk program and believe they are best suited to engage the Santa Monica arts community to bring more public art to the city.

Thank you,
Kelly Kivland
Kelly Kivland (she/her)
Chief Curator and Director of Exhibitions
Wexner Center for the Arts
Ohio State University
1871 North High Street
Columbus, OH 43210
website: https://wexarts.org/
Item 14.A
10/25/22
14 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 24, 2022
Santa Monica City Council
To Whom it May Concern,
We have worked with Big Outdoor for the past several years and have always appreciated the partnership.

Big Outdoor manages several supergraphics and digital media kiosks throughout Downtown. They’ve always been responsive to our requests for including content benefiting the community. They ensure all assets and advertisers are of the highest quality.

Big Outdoor has proven to be a trusted partner and we look forward to working them for years to come.

Sincerely,
Shalissa Perry, Chief Marketing Officer
Downtown Dallas, Inc.

Item 14.A
10/25/22
15 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Item 14.A
10/25/22
16 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 296
Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2022 8:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Agenda Item 14. Digital Kiosks
From: Neil Carrey <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2022 6:45 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Agenda Item 14. Digital Kiosks

EXTERNAL
When I saw Agenda Item 14 concerning digital Kiosks, I checked out the IKE Smart City, which seems to be the one whose digital Kiosks and used by other cities and has a long track record, and Big Outdoor, which the staff is recommending, which has no track record and I could find nothing on its website to indicate it has ever installed these types of Kiosks in any city. I then saw a demonstration of the IKE Kiosk and was extremely impressed. I had hoped to also see a demonstration of the Big Outdoor Kiosk but was surprised to learn they did not have a digital kiosk. In my research I was further surprised that staff was recommending the contract be awarded to an advertising and billboard company that has no experience delivering community focused multifunctional kiosks in the public right of way.

Since these kiosks will be very visible in the City and this will be a very long program, the City should take sufficient time to make sure they have selected a trusted and experienced partner that has demonstrated its ability to deliver a Kiosk that meets or exceeds the community and City expectations and delivers value to the community and at the same time will be a revenue generator for the City. In addition, a partner with a proven tract record of successful installation and maintenance of these types Kiosks. IKE has this experience and demonstrated its ability to do so in this arena, which Big Outdoor has not.

It appears to me that staff is recommending Big Outdoor because originally it came in with a better proposal from a financial standpoint. They clearly could not have recommended Big Outdoor over IKE based on its experience or product. While it would have been a mistake to award Big Outdoor the contract under these circumstance, it is my understanding that IKE Smart City has committed to matching the financial offer of Big Outdoor, it now makes no sense for Council to offer the contract to Big Outdoor and a lot of sense to award it to IKE Smart City.

I urge you to do the right thing and not follow staff's advice. Thank you.

Item 14.A
10/25/22
17 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 2 Neil Carrey

[email protected]
[email protected]
(T) 310-451-9188
(C) 310-200-5067
Item 14.A
10/25/22
18 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 25, 2022
Santa Monica City Council
Via Email
RE: Agenda Item 14A, Digital Wayfinding and IKE Smart City Dear City Council Members:

We at the National Federation of the Blind believe in the full capacity of blind and low-vision citizens. The realization of our mission regularly affords us the pleasure of working with companies such as IKE Smart City to collaborate in transformative ways. With IKE, we had the fortune over the last few years of assisting in the company’s journey to developing an innovative accessible wayfinding technology for the blind.

IKE Smart City partnered with our Blind Users Innovating and Leading Design (“BUILD”) program in order to develop and test a solution that would enable blind and low vision users to access the benefits provided by the IKE Smart City kiosk. After twenty-one usability sessions with our BUILD participants, all having varying degrees of vision loss and technological experience levels, the sessions yielded beneficial results that helped determine that a mobile hand-off software solution provides an effective and inclusive opportunity for blind and low vision users to engage with IKE. The BUILD program sessions revealed that use of a personal mobile device while navigating city streets is an effective component for the blind and visually impaired, and this solution further allows IKE to leverage successful 3rd party mobile solutions whose innovations in the accessibility space continue to be an evolution of access to information for the blind and low vision user.

Throughout the BUILD process, our team was impressed with IKE’s willingness to listen, incorporate, and innovate. IKE demonstrated a thoughtful approach and willingness to improve by speaking with software accessibility experts, conducting in-the-field research on tactile keypads for kiosks, and speaking with fast-food kiosk engineers, in addition to continued conversations with NFB and ongoing collaboration with blind community members via the BUILD program.

Our experience with the IKE team has been incredibly positive, and we hope to express our support for the program.

Sincerely,
Anil Lewis
Executive Director, Blindness Initiatives
National Federation of the Blind
AL/pwm
Item 14.A
10/25/22
19 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 25, 2022 Client-Matter: 70128-030

VIA EMAIL
Santa Monica City Council
City Hall
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Agenda Item #14.A, Proposed Award of Contract for Digital Wayfinding and Advertising Kiosk Program
Dear Honorable Councilmembers:

This firm represents IKE Smart City (“IKE”) in connection with the City’s Request for Proposals for the Digital Wayfinding and Out of Home Advertising Kiosk Program (“RFP”).

We are writing to respectfully request that you vote to approve a Resolution of Intent (“ROI”) to Award the Digital Wayfinding and Out of Home Advertising Kiosk Program contract to IKE with its improved financial offer, which you have complete authority to do tonight under California law, the Santa Monica City Charter (the “City Charter”), the Santa Monica Municipal Code, and the RFP. Doing the opposite – proceeding with an ROI to award the contract to BIG Outdoor (“BIG”), on the other hand, would lead to additional delay, violate the express terms of the City’s RFP, and run counter to the public interest.

IKE is fully confident in the City Council’s ability to select IKE tonight and agrees to indemnify the City from any challenge to IKE’s selection under this procurement.

I. California Law and the City Charter Authorize the City Council to Modify the Draft ROI to Select IKE.

The City Charter, which governs the award of the contract under the RFP, does not require the City Council to move forward with a staff recommendation, and in the absence of any such requirement, the City Council has the authority to decide for itself which of the bidders it will name in the ROI and to specify the terms and conditions upon which the City Council proposes to grant the franchise. In California, “[t]he amount of leeway a public entity has in awarding a contract is governed by the statutory or municipal law framework applying to that contract.” Great West Contractors, Inc. v. Irvine Unified School Dist., 187 Cal.App.4th 1425, 1447 (2010).

Item 14.A
10/25/22
20 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Nothing in the City Charter limits the City Council’s leeway to disregard a staff recommendation, which is just that – a recommendation. The City Charter provides the City Council with the sole authority to grant a franchise by ordinance. City Charter, Section 1600 (“The City Council is empowered to grant by ordinance a franchise to any person, firm or corporation […] The City Council may prescribe the terms and conditions of any such grant.”).

The Charter also empowers and requires the City Council to pass a resolution declaring its intention to grant a franchise agreement. City Charter, Section 1601 (“Before granting any franchise, the City Council shall pass a resolution declaring its intention to grant the same, stating the name of the proposed grantee, the character of the franchise and the terms and conditions upon which it is proposed to be granted.”). Nothing in these or any other provisions of the City Charter (nor the Santa Monica Municipal Code for that matter), obligate the City Council to follow staff’s recommendation in making an award. Substituting bidders from the dais is permissible under California law and there are notable examples of other situations when a decision-making body has disregarded staff’s recommendation and substituted an alternative bidder (see Exhibit A for example). The City Council has the ultimate legal authority to select a grantee, as well as “the character of the franchise and the terms and conditions upon which it is proposed to be granted.” The City Council can lawfully exercise this authority to modify the ROI and declare its intent to award the Digital Wayfinding and Out of Home Advertising Kiosk Program contract to IKE, including modifying the terms and conditions upon which the City Council proposes to grant the franchise.

The City Council can also move forward with an ROI for IKE that includes terms that were not in IKE’s Best and Final Offer (“BAFO”). The City Council is not obligated or bound by terms and conditions for the franchise proposed by City Staff, IKE, or BIG, and has the full authority to change the terms in the ROI before adopting it because the Council is the ultimate decision-making body. As detailed above, the City’s Charter provides the City Council with the discretion to include the “terms and conditions upon which [the franchise] is proposed to be granted.” Nothing in the Charter precludes or limits the Council’s discretion to only including terms in a respondent’s prior proposal.

II. The RFP Expressly Authorizes the City Council to Modify the ROI to Select IKE.

Rather than require the City Council to move forward with the staff recommendation, the RFP makes it expressly clear that the City Council may select any proposer it deems to be in the best interest of the City, so long as the selected bidder meets the quality and compliance specifications of the RFP (something which we believe BIG cannot possibly meet under any rational basis). The RFP states:

Notwithstanding the Evaluation Team’s selection, the City reserves the right to award this RFP and the resultant Franchise Agreement in any manner it deems to be in the best interest of the City and make the selection based on its sole Item 14.A
10/25/22
21 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) discretion. The City is the sole and exclusive judge of quality and compliance with proposal specifications in any of the matters pertaining to this RFP.

RFP, Section 5.1 (emphasis added). It was the clear and explicit expectation of the City, and the understanding of the proposers to the RFP, that the City Council could have ultimate discretion to award the Digital Wayfinding and Out of Home Advertising Kiosk Program contract to whichever bidder the City Council determined to be “in the best interest of the City.” As IKE has demonstrated, and as the RFP scoring (aside from the inappropriate and unlawful BAFO) scoring, which completely disregarded the RFP evaluation criteria) reflects, IKE’s proposal and product are clearly the best option for the City. As you are aware, IKE has confirmed it is willing to accept a franchise agreement with financial terms and conditions that exceed BIG’s BAFO. Nothing in the City’s Charter, Municipal Code or RFP precludes the City Council from adopting an ROI that has financial terms and conditions that differ from IKE’s BAFO. As a courtesy, IKE proactively confirmed its willingness to agree to improved terms in yesterday's letter to the City Council, but ultimately it is the City Council that gets to decide what terms are laid out in the ROI, just as it is entitled to negotiate improved benefits for the City prior to awarding any contract or franchise.

Moving forward with an ROI with IKE is clearly in the best interests of the City, both in terms of user experience and financial return to the City. Again, the City Council can lawfully exercise this authority to modify the ROI, as anticipated in the RFP, and declare its intent to award the Digital Wayfinding and Out of Home Advertising Kiosk Program contract to IKE, including modified terms and conditions upon which the City Council proposes to grant the franchise.

III. Moving Forward with Staff’s ROI is a Recipe for Protracted Delay.

Should the City Council choose to move forward with the ROI to BIG as recommended by City Staff, IKE would have solid grounds to protest the award. If that were to happen, the City Council would then need to restart this process, issue and approve another ROI for an award to IKE, and hold a new and fully noticed City Council meeting in the future. And, to make matters worse, the City could then face a frivolous protest from BIG on such an award, necessitating yet another duly noticed City Council hearing and further delay. There is no reason for the City to incur these delays. The City Council should instead exercise its authority to modify the ROI now and notice its intent to award the Digital Wayfinding and Out of Home Advertising Kiosk Program contract to IKE.

Unlike a frivolous protest by BIG, there are several reasons a protest of an award to BIG would be meritorious. BIG’s proposal is nonresponsive for failing to meet the minimum experience and reference requirements of the RFP, and should have been disqualified from the start. While the City enjoys wide latitude to act in the public interest, it cannot award a contract to a nonresponsive or non-responsible bidder, or completely disregard the RFP’s clear product Item 14.A
10/25/22
22 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) and scoring requirements. The RFP called for proposers “who have successfully deployed, operated, and maintained kiosk programs in a minimum of three other similar markets.” RFP, Section 2.1. BIG does not have kiosks in three cities or public rights-of-way, let alone a cuttingedge, diverse city like Santa Monica. The RFP asked bidders to “[p]lease submit at least three references from other public entities.” RFP, Section 4. BIG’s proposal had zero public entity references. Why? Because it has not entered into interactive kiosk contracts with public entities as required by the RFP. The same goes for BIG’s partner, which while not a billboard company like BIG, is only a startup focused on shopping mall directory kiosks with limited functionalities.

Finally, the Evaluation Committee completely disregarded the RFP’s scoring criteria after requesting the BAFOs. It is clear from the BAFO scoring that after IKE and BIG submitted their BAFOs, the bidders were completely re-scored on a new, 100 point scale that was untethered to any evaluation criteria in the RFP. This is a clear violation of California procurement law, which requires that awarding agencies score proposals based on the announced scoring criteria.

And the above is just the tip of the iceberg. You have already received a letter from my client yesterday illustrating some of the deficiencies in BIG’s product. The problems in moving forward with an ROI with BIG are so glaring that it should not merit a detailed protest in the future.
* * *
For the reasons discussed above, we respectfully ask that the City Council modify the ROI, as it has the authority to do, and notice its intent to award the Digital Wayfinding and Out of Home Advertising Kiosk Program contract to IKE.

Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.

Very truly yours,
Victor De la Cruz
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
cc: David White, City of Santa Monica City Manager
Douglas T. Sloan, City of Santa Monica City Attorney
Susan Y. Cola, City of Santa Monica Assistant City Attorney Pete Scantland, CEO, IKE Smart City
Item 14.A
10/25/22
23 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Exhibit A
Item 14.A
10/25/22
24 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 10/25/22, 12:08 PM City Council panel approves three contracts for LAX concessions - Los Angeles Times https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-sep-14-la-me-0914-lax-concessions-20100914-story.html 1/4 City Council panel approves three contracts for LAX concessions

BY DAN WEIKEL AND DAVID ZAHNISER, LOS ANGELES TIMES
SEPT. 14, 2010 12 AM PT
The push to overhaul restaurants, beverage stands and gift stores at Los Angeles International Airport took a major step forward Monday when a special City Council panel approved three retail contracts to a joint venture that features former Lakers star Magic Johnson and the widow of attorney Johnnie Cochran.

The five-member Board of Referred Powers voted 4 to 1 to give the contacts to a partnership involving the Hudson Group, Magic Johnson Enterprises and Concourse Ventures, which is headed by Dale Mason Cochran.

In one of the contracts, board members picked the joint venture over Miami-based Areas USA, which had been recommended by LAX officials.

Council members Janice Hahn, Bernard C. Parks, Ed Reyes and Bill Rosendahl voted for the contracts. Councilman Tony Cardenas, the board’s chairman, voted no, saying he believed the panel had rushed into a decision.

Parks, who was endorsed by Johnson during his unsuccessful 2008 campaign for county supervisor, made the motion to substitute the joint venture for Areas USA.

He said after the vote that he favored Hudson’s bid because it had included two local businesses — Magic Johnson Enterprises and Concourse Ventures — as equity partners.

BREAKING NEWS

5.1 earthquake hits near San Jose, rattling Bay Area
Item 14.A
10/25/22
25 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 10/25/22, 12:08 PM City Council panel approves three contracts for LAX concessions - Los Angeles Times https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-sep-14-la-me-0914-lax-concessions-20100914-story.html 2/4 Giving the contract to the Hudson team is in line with the city’s efforts to put greater weight on contracts with local companies, Parks said.
“They didn’t just bring in a minority female to apply for their 10%" share of the bid package, he said. “They made them equity partners.”
Eduardo Uribe, an Areas USA vice president, said company officials were disappointed that the Board of Referred Powers chose “to ignore the airport staff’s recommendation after a lengthy and thorough process.”
“We look forward to being awarded the food and beverage packages for which we were also recommended in a fair competition,” he said.

The three retail contracts must go to the City Council for final approval. Five other food and beverage contracts will be considered by the Board of Referred Powers on Sept. 20.

Monday’s decisions were greeted favorably by Gina Marie Lindsey, executive director of Los Angeles World Airports, the agency that operates LAX, Ontario International Airport and Van Nuys Airport. “I am delighted to have made this much progress,” she said.

Throughout Monday’s meeting, Cardenas voiced dismay over learning that some of the airport’s evaluators had discarded their notes or failed to make comments on bid forms about their reasoning for scoring a company the way they did.

He called the loss of those notes “extremely terrible and odd” and grilled airport officials about the lack of backup documents.

Cardenas also said he was concerned that airport evaluators did not check bidders’ references until after scoring a company. Lindsey told the panel that references were Item 14.A
10/25/22
26 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 10/25/22, 12:08 PM City Council panel approves three contracts for LAX concessions - Los Angeles Times https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-sep-14-la-me-0914-lax-concessions-20100914-story.html 3/4 eventually checked and that evaluators decided that what was found would not affect any company’s score.
[email protected]
[email protected]
Dan Weikel
Dan Weikel covered local aviation, the California high-speed rail project, Metrolink, the MTA and regional transportation issues for the Los Angeles Times before leaving in 2017. He started with the newsroom in 1989 and previously covered courts and transportation in Orange County, the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach as well as substance abuse, environmental issues and law enforcement as a member of a project team. A native of San Diego, Weikel is a graduate of the UC Santa Barbara and the master’s program at the University of Missouri School of Journalism.

David Zahniser
Twitter Instagram Email Facebook
David Zahniser covers Los Angeles City Hall for the Los Angeles Times.

More antisemitic hate seen in L.A. after Kanye West’s hateful rants Your voting guide to the 2022 California midterm election

FOR SUBSCRIBERS

SUBSCRIBERS ARE READING
Item 14.A
10/25/22
27 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 10/25/22, 12:08 PM City Council panel approves three contracts for LAX concessions - Los Angeles Times https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2010-sep-14-la-me-0914-lax-concessions-20100914-story.html 4/4 Subscribe for unlimited access
Follow Us
eNewspaper
Coupons
Find/Post Jobs
Place an Ad
Media Kit: Why the
L. A. Times?
Bestcovery
Copyright © 2022, Los Angeles Times | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | CA Notice of Collection | Do Not Sell My Personal Information Why so many L.A. people are drawn to this tiny, rustic town north of Santa Barbara Hollywood talent agency CAA cuts ties with Kanye West after antisemitic tirade Thousands of apartments may come to Santa Monica, other wealthy cities under little-known law Item 14.A
10/25/22
28 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Council Mailbox
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2022 2:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Support for IKE Smart City Bid - Item 14
From: Jan Williamson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2022 1:13 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Support for IKE Smart City Bid

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I'm writing as a Board member of SMTT and as the Executive Director of 18th Street Arts Center to encourage you to give new consideration to IKE's proposal to provide new interactive wayfinding in Santa Monica.

I've interacted with their technology in person, and believe their 7 years of real world experience operating their platform and learning from working in other cities like Miami, Berkeley, Atlanta, Houston, will significantly benefit Santa Monica.
• They have the capacity to be up and running in Santa Monica right away. • Their platform is completely interactive and able to communicate with people's mobile phones. • Their platform can accommodate multiple languages
• They've developed good ADA systems by working directly with the disability community. • They commission and pay artists at appropriate rates for their work on their platform. (This is unusual!) • Their hardware is able to endure the extreme weather conditions of Detroit and Tempe Arizona, and the salt-air of Miami.
• It appears that they have a business culture of innovating based on the needs of their clients, which is important for such a long commitment.

I hope you give their proposal the consideration it deserves when thinking about this 30 year contract.

Very best regards,
Jan

Item 14.A
10/25/22
29 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 2 Jan Williamson
Executive Director
she/her

@18thstreetarts
18thstreet.org

SUPPORT
18TH STREET ARTS CENTER
Join Borderless on Patreon
Item 14.A
10/25/22
30 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) October 25, 2022
Re: Big Outdoor reference
To whom it may concern,
Our partnership with Big Outdoor extends over five years. They were the first media firm to secure approval for a digital installation as part of the Atlanta Arts & Entertainment district. Big Outdoor has been a responsive partner that supports the goals and objectives of A&E Atlanta to elevate the district and the local creative community.

Sincerely,
Fredalyn M. Frasier, Project Director, Planning and Urban Design Central Atlanta Progress (CAP)
Atlanta Downtown Improvement Development (ADID)
Item 14.A
10/25/22
31 of 31 Item 14.A
10/25/22

8.A.e
Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: Written Comments (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) RFP 300:

Digital Wayfinding +
OOH Advertising Kiosks
City Council
October 25, 2022

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) RFP Evaluation Team
Scoring/Voting Members:

Susan Cola, City Attorney's Office
Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Finance
Jay Dinkins, Transportation
Sarkis Metspakyan, Information Services
Alex Nazarchuk, Public Works
Melissa Spagnuolo, City Manager's Office
Jennifer Taylor, Community Development
Interna l Consulta nts:

Heidi Duran, Finance
Araceli Esparza, Finance
Ben Delfin, City Attorney's Office
Jason Kligier, Transportation
Kellee MacDonald, Finance
Stephanie Reich, Community Development
Oscar Santiago, Finance

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Background
2019: Budget Task Force Recommendation
2021: Council directed staff to move
forward with OOH RFP
2022: RFP closed with 6 proposals received
2020: Council directed staff to do a
valuation study to look at P3 opportunities

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) RFP Terms &
Requirements
• 20-year franchise term
• 50 kiosks deployed in two phases
• Percentage of ad space for
City/community use
• Revenue projections with
minimum annual guarantee
• Kiosk features and technical
requirements: public Wi-Fi,
emergency blue phone capability,
pedestrian counting, multi-lingual,
ADA accessible, transit info, etc.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

PRELIMINARY

SCORING
Evaluators
reviewed
proposals and
independently
assigned
preliminary scores
by category.

FINAL

SCORING
Evaluators
assigned final
scores based on
the Best and Final
Offers, including
consideration of
interviews and
reference checks.

BEST + FINAL
OFFERS
The two finalists
were asked to
provide Best and
Final Offers.

REFERENCE
CHECKS
Staff selected two
finalists and
contacted
references
provided by each.

PROPOSER

INTERVIEWS
The top 3
proposers were
invited to
interview with City
staff.

SUPERLATIVE

ANALYSIS
The Superlative
Group performed
an in-depth
analysis and
evaluation of the
top 3 finalists.

Evaluation Process

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Best + Final Offers
The only opportunity to amend or modify proposals
based on feedback from the City.

Information from competing proposals will not be
disclosed to other proposers prior to submission of a
Best and Final Offer.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 01 03
02 Offered the greatest
financial benefits to the City
Sophisticated, cohesive team
whose professionalism
outshined other bidders
throughout the RFP process
Fully customizable kiosks that
will be architecturallydesigned to meld with the
unique characteristics of Santa
Monica's neighborhoods
Will hire a full-time team
dedicated exclusively to
Santa Monica
04 Recommended Bidder: BIG Outdoor

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) • 50% revenue share
⚬ City's share of revenues estimated to be nearly $9 million upon deployment of Phase 1, and $13.5-17 million when both phases deployed. • If projected revenues are not met, the City would receive a minimum annual guarantee of $5 million per year, commencing upon full deployment of Phase I.
• $4 million signing bonus
Financial Proposal

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Other Notable Community Benefits
• Custom kiosk design
• Additional 2% of net revenues to be donated to support the City's choice of community programs or service
• 10% of ad space reserved for City/community use
• Discounted rates for local businesses

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Digital Wayfinding & Out
-of-Home Advertising Kiosk Program
for the City of Santa Monica
Submitted by BIG Outdoor
25 October 2022

LINKING TO THE
FUTURE
1 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

1. MEET BIGOUTDOOR...........................3

2. QUALIFICATIONS..............................11

3. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT……...19
.4
. KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES........22

5. PROJECT PLAN..................................22

CONTENTS
2 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

MEET BIGOUTDOOR
3 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Brad Berkely
CEO & Founder
Mr. Berkley currently serves as CEO of BIG Outdoor
and brings 23+ years of entrepreneurial business
experience and a customer base comprised
primarily of Fortune 500 clients. Before founding BIG
Outdoor, Mr. Berkley successfully founded and sold
Base4 Group. Brad has been featured in Business
Week, CNN, Fox News, National Public Radio, and
numerous other media outlets supporting
entrepreneurship. Mr. Berkley also sits on the boards
of select startups in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

Eric Niemeyer
Founder
Mr. Niemeyer is one of the Founders of BIG Outdoor,
where he is responsible for new advertising
opportunities and client relationships. He brings over
16 years of media sales and agency management
experience. Previously, Mr. Niemeyer spent eight
years at Outdoor Media Group, where he managed
OOH investments for clients such as Apple, CBS,
Wells Fargo, and Hilton.

MEET BIGOUTDOOR
KEY PERSONNEL | Founders
Domain Northside, Austin, TX Domain Northside, Austin, TX 4 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Jason Cox
CTO
With 15+ years of experience in managed services and
operating large scale digital platforms, Mr. Cox is a
notable leader in the industry. He has worked with
clients ranging from small startups to industry leaders like Microsoft, Salesforce, and Viacom, helping
develop impactful events, operational strategies, and
push existing systems beyond their intended design. He
is constantly looking for new and innovative ways to
incorporate technology, and relishes hands-on
moments where he can develop and troubleshoot new
solutions. He’s been invited to speak at such
conferences as DSE and SIGGRAPH.

Bill Tagliaferri
President
Mr. Tagliaferri serves as President and heads the real
estate division for BIG Outdoor and develops media
assets throughout the United States. He has over 20
years experience in OOH, construction management
and real estate services. Mr. Tagliaferri has developed and overseen various digital OOH projects throughout
the US and is very proficient in the implementation of
digital signage networks.

Erin Watkins
General Counsel
Ms. Watkins worked at two nationally-recognized law
firms before joining BIG Outdoor in 2015. She
provides expert and strategic legal advice to
management and sets internal governance policies
to ensure all legal objectives are fulfilled.

She also works with property owners, governmental
entities, and other third parties on the development of BIG Outdoor’s signage assets.
5 MEET BIGOUTDOOR
KEY PERSONNEL | Santa Monica Team
Ryan Levine
VP, West Coast Real Estate
Mr. Levine brings over a decade of experience to
managing BIG Outdoor’s existing Landlord partnerships and spearheads new signage developments on the West
Coast. He joined BIG Outdoor in 2014 after four years with Van Wagner Outdoor, where he was responsible for
signage inventory development and alternative OOH
product growth in the Los Angeles market.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Natina Urbano
Director of Operations West Coast
Natina Urbano has a decade of successful
experience in operations management. Ms. Urbano
oversees the expansion of assets and photography
on the West Coast. She hails from the state of Texas
(where she attended Texas State University) and she
is a strong believer in under-promising and always
over- delivering.

Ro Reyes
VP, West Coast Sales
Ms. Ro Reyes handles national sales for the West
Coast. With 12+ years of experience, she is responsible for the company’s relationships with top premier
agencies and accounts such as Apple, Warner Bros,
Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, T-Mobile and CW, to name a
few. She manages a team and ensures the highest
standards of quality control and quality assurance,
both internally and externally. She’s developed and
implemented policies and procedures and oversees
the day-to-day operational duties for Apple.
6 MEET BIGOUTDOOR
KEY PERSONNEL | Santa Monica Team
Emily Lanzillotti
National Sales Representative
Ms. Lanzillotti is a member of our West Coast
Sales Team, responsible for servicing and
growing relationships with our key agencies
and accounts. These include Google,
Youtube, Disney & Universal Studio’s, among
others. With over seven years of OOH
experience, she has worked on both the
Agency and Sales side of the industry, as well
as international experience (she's an
Australian native). This mix of OOH knowledge
helps support her clients’ strategies and
campaign execution.

Nicole Enriquez
National Sales Planner
Nicole Enriquez is a National Sales Planner
for BIG Outdoor's West coast team. She has
7+ years experience in the OOH industry on
both the client and media partner side. Her
agency experience has helped her
develop a deep understanding of client
needs and how to best position BIG
Outdoor within the OOH ecosystem. Nicole
is a Santa Monica native but spent time on
the East coast during college at Boston
University.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 7 MEET BIGOUTDOOR
Markets

PORTLAND

SAN FRANCISCO

SAN DIEGO
AUSTIN

CHICAGO

ATLANTA

PHILADELPHIA
BOSTON

BIGOUTDOOR
2 LOS ANGELES OFFICES

BIGOUTDOOR

NEW YORK OFFICE

BIGOUTDOOR

DALLAS OFFICE

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 8 MEET ROVEiQ
Profile
Rove iQ is a technology company headquartered in Greater Cincinnati, Ohio, with additional offices in Miami, Florida. • BIGOUTDOOR and RoveiQ have a strategic partnership. • BIGOUTDOOR is invested in RoveiQ • RoveiQ has the most interactive kiosks deployed in the state of Florida
RoveiQ’s Brand Promise:

To enrich lives through intelligent software designed to move humans.

Rove iQ is in the following markets:
• Newport Beach, CA • Irvine, CA • Bay Area, CA • Atlanta, GA • Lawrenceburg, IN • Cleveland, OH • Cincinnati, OH • Charlette, NC • Raleigh, NC • Las Vegas, NV • Miami, FL • Orlando, FL • Tampa, FL • Cape Coral, FL

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Nick Duskey
Chief Technology Officer
Mr. Duskey has 10+ years of
technical and development
experience, implementing new
products and processes. Nick
Manages the software
development and security of our
technology.

Russ Middleton
Chief Operations Officer
Mr. Middleton will be responsible
for taking you through the
deployment process of the Rove
iQ user experience. He creates
the user interface and user
experience for all parts of the
digital screens. He has over 10
years of experience in deploying
digital kiosks software, hardware,
and other technologies around
the country.

PJ Thelen
Chief Executive Officer
Mr. Thelen has 25+ years of leadership
experience servicing the IT industry in
hardware, software, and services. Prior
to joining Rove iQ, Mr. Thelen was
President of Sunrise Technology (a
division of the Kroger grocery chain),
an innovative company that
developed strategic technologies like
Edge (an interactive digital smart shelf
system) and Gen 3 Zooter (a powerful
device that tracks merchandising
programs, improves inventory
management, and analyzes customer
engagement trends by leveraging
video analytics, automation, and
machine learning.

Steven McFarland
Vice President of Client
Relations
Mr. McFarland has coordinated the
majority of Rove iQ’s projects and is
responsible for making sure that all
parties are working toward deadlines
together, and are organized to
complete tasks.

CJ Dyas
Product Designer
Mr. Dyas assists in the design of the
User Interface and Experience from
the moment it's sketched out on
paper, until its being used by
residents and visitors of the city.

After installation, Mr. Dyas is
responsible for designing new
features, modifying existing
features, and making adjustments
to the User Experience based on
user behavior and feedback.

Annika Synnestvedt
Customer Success Manager
Ms. Synnestvedt focuses on the
importance of customer
satisfaction, continual service
improvement, and the value of
data analytics.
9 MEET ROVEiQ
KEY PERSONNEL | Santa Monica Team

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Santa Monica Success Ambassador
BIG Outdoor will dedicate full-time staff
to interface directly with the City for all
communications. This will be a
community member who’s intimately
familiar with the neighborhoods, the
community, and the unique businesses
that define it. The job will be to work
closely with these businesses – to bring
them into the program and make it work
for them.

Director of Operations/Field Operations
Associates
BIG Outdoor will hire full-time employees
to interface directly with incoming
maintenance calls from field techs and
community members. The job will be to
work closely with the Field team to ensure
the displays are clean and operational. If
notified by city staff, community
members, or if BIG Outdoor cannot
resolve remotely, the field tech can be
on site immediately and determine if any
additional maintenance or repairs are
needed.
10 MEET BIGOUTDOOR
KEY PERSONNEL | Santa Monica Dedicated Team
Currently recruiting a full-time staff that will be based in Santa Monica.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

QUALIFICATIONS
11 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

QUALIFICATIONS
Dallas, TX Dallas, TX
12 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

QUALIFICATIONS
13 Austin, TX

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

QUALIFICATIONS
Manhattan Beach, CA North Hollywood, CA
14 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

QUALIFICATIONS
Irvine, CA Miami, FL
15 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

QUALIFICATIONS
West Hollywood, CA New York City, NY
16 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) One of our most cherished case studies is BIG Outdoor’s longstanding partnership with Macerich at Santa Monica Place (SMP). It’s a great example of our 360° Partnership approach in action.

BIG Outdoor took over sales operations for three static signs and nearly doubled the sales revenues of the previous operator. Working closely with Macerich and SMP tenants – to explore ways to engage the public and promote their retail businesses – led to ever bigger trust and success:
• In 2013, we began selling static signs at SMP. We built a state-of-the-art digital sign.

BIG Outdoor more than doubled sales revenue on the static signs, prompting Macerich to expand our partnership, & our success with that asset led to the development of the first large-format digital display on the West Side of Los Angeles in 2016.
• In 2019, we expanded our SMP digital network again, with 4 full-motion digital displays.
• The BIG Outdoor team consistently overdelivers on annual projections.

An important ingredient to this success is real, hands-on, grassroots collaboration with the retail tenants—to understand their needs and find affordable, high-impact advertising opportunities for them.

We at BIG Outdoor are extremely proud of the SMP partnership, which helped shape (and serves as a model for) our 360° approach to other partnerships.

QUALIFICATIONS
CASE STUDY | Santa Monica Place
17 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

QUALIFICATIONS
PUBLIC/ PRIVATE | Collective Partnerships
18 SAN DIEGO

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Gas Lamp District Kiosk Program | February 2022 | 219

COMMUNITY

ENGAGEMENT

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) • Full-time program ambassador, based in
Santa Monica. BIG Outdoor will dedicate a
full-time employee to interface directly
with the City for all communications. This will
be a community member who’s intimately
familiar with the neighborhoods, the
community, and the unique businesses that
define it. The job will be to work closely with
these businesses – to bring them into the
program and make it work for them.
• High standards for
advertising
content – strictly
maintained at all
times.

Agencies&
Advertisers
City of
Santa Monica

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
BIGOUTDOOR | 360° Partnership
Local Business
& BIDs
Residents
20 • Discounted local sales program
• 10% free screen time
• BIG Outdoor is a member of
the Santa Monica Chamber
of Commerce
• Intelligent, easy-to-use
wayfinding software

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

INFORM CONSULT INVOLVE COLLABORATE EMPOWER
• public safety and
Emergency alerts
• wayfinding
• safe shelter
• social services
• 311
• local business list
• local events
• photo booth
• social media
• polling
• feedback
• surveys
• workshops
• community service
activities
• art & culture
• job board
• funding for various
civic projects
• ADA compliant
• multilingual
21 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Gas Lamp District Kiosk Program | February 2022 | 222

KIOSK CONCEPTS
& FEATURES

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Concepts
2 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Additional Concepts
24 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
25 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
26 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
27 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
28 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Proven Hardware
Extreme Sustainability
• 100% RoHS compliant
• No air conditioning, no refrigerants (CFCs or freon)
• No disposable air filters necessary
• Made from 95%+ recyclable materials1
Industry Leading Reliability
• Highest reliability/longevity in the industry
• 99%+ uptime based upon nearly 30,000 digital faces
deployed in outdoor environments globally
• Best in class remote monitoring and management
• BoldVu (formerly LG-MRI) hardware is the most reliable in the industry
25-50% less power consumption than the
competition
• Average Monthly Power Consumption: 730 (kWh/mt)
• Average Yearly Power Consumption: 8,760 (kWh/yr)
Endless Options
With many hardware designs and software options
available Santa Monica can create the right solution
for the community.
29 With many hardware designs and software options available, Santa Monica has the opportunity to choose the right design for the community

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Digital Kiosk Hardware Features
30 Thermal Management
• Multi-patented, dual-loop thermal management
system keeps components sealed from exposure
to ambient air and contaminants.
• Ensures full performance in ambient environments of
temperatures between -40°C~50°C (-40°F~122°F).
• No air filters, resulting in less periodic maintenance.

Outdoor Proofing
• Vandal resistance Anti-Reflective (AR) treatment on
both sides of glass minimizes haze and reflection.
• Stainless steel and powder-coated aluminum protect
against vandalism, rust, and salt-air corrosion.
• Design consistent with IP66 standards.

Image Optimization
• Ultra 4K Definition Support.
• Optimal image quality in all lighting conditions.
• Improves color saturation and contrast.
• Dynamically adjust level, gamma values, and backlight luminance.
• Reduces backlight power consumption and heat
generation, extends backlight life.

Video Verification
• Real-time hardware monitoring of every video frame to ensure proper playback.
• Abnormal behavior is addressed via automatic power
cycle on the media player.

Energy Monitoring
• Monitors line current and voltage to report on power
consumption.
• Dynamically sheds power load to prevent tripped circuit breakers when available power fluctuates.

Enduring Luminance
• Maintains specified luminance for 10 years, without
fading over time.
• Auto-brightness adjustment based on geolocation
firmware, adjusting brightness based on time of day.
• Maximum Brightness: 3,500 nits

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) The kiosk has multiple templates you can choose to manage its two modes of operation, which simultaneously reinforce the City’s brand as a premier destination while actively engaging the public. These operation modes effectively mix interactive and commercial messaging.

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Platform | Operational Modes
31 Passive Mode (Loop)
This is the default mode of operation when someone is not interacting with the kiosk. The screen rotates advertising, City messages, and information about upcoming events in full- screen display. Loop timing can be programmed. Kiosk users can access City ads and/or revenue-generating ads.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) The kiosk has multiple templates you can choose to manage its two modes of operation, which simultaneously reinforce the City’s brand as a premier destination while actively engaging the public. These operation modes effectively mix interactive and commercial messaging.

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Platform | Operational Modes
32 Engagement Mode (Interactive)
Once someone touches the screen, the ad loop disappears (or shifts to the top of the screen depending on the template you select) and the interactive applications appear with options similar to a smartphone experience.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Software Platform Use Cases

SEARCH FOR

BUSINESSES

WAYFINDING EMERGENGY & SAFETY

TOUCH ENABLED
33 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

AUGMENTED REALITY SELFIES

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Software Platform Use Cases

WEATHER LOCATE PUBLIC

TRANSIT/MICRO MOBILITY

MULTILINGUAL
34 AUGMENTED REALITY

SELFIES

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Shop
Find a new dress, a gift, or arts
and crafts. Shop brings users to
the nearest store right for them!
Dine
Find the perfect date night
location or a quick bite to eat
during your break. Dine helps
users satisfy their taste buds!
Stay
Stay brings users to hotels and
Inns throughout the city to sleep
peacefully!
Search
The entire city, right at your
fingertips! Search lets users find
anything they need.

Selfie
Augmented Reality Selfie Filters
help users capture moments to
last a lifetime and send it to their
phone.

Transit
View bus schedules and live
arrival estimates by pinging local
transit APIʼs and bringing to one
screen.

Weather
View a local dynamic weather
forecast that updates in real time
so youʼre never caught in the rain!
Events
View upcoming city-wide events,
concerts, block parties and more
as they are announced!
Activities
Find a movie theater, golf field, or
an arcade to enjoy with a group
or solo!
Maps
Intelligent, intuitive and artistic; this
is way-finding reimagined. The
heart of Rove iQ is its industry
leading wayfinding application.

Amenities
Find public restrooms, ATMs,
public parks and more!

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Community Apps – Completely Customizable
35 Service
From banking to auto repairs,
Service provides users with
directions to get the help that
they need!

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
A Commitment to Universal Design & Personal Custom Interface

ACCESSIBILITY
The kiosks will be public resources—and that means
they need to be easy to use for everyone. Our platform is designed for everyone to enjoy the same ease of use. • Partner with Disability Community Resource Center (DCRC) • Universal Design for easy-to-use functionality • Wayfinding curated specifically for people with mobility challenges • User buttons are accessible to all • Toggle contrast and font size 36 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins))

FIELD TECH APP CLEAN & SAFE APP SERVICE TICKETS/ WORK ORDERS

KIOSK CONCEPTS & FEATURES
Maintenance Program
37 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) THANK YOU • Collaborate with community members and key stakeholders • BIGOUTDOOR has already began speaking to dozens of local businesses and non-profits
• BIGOUTDOOR’s dedicated Santa Monica based staff will
consist of community members who directly engage with
city staff, residents, businesses and stakeholders.
• BIG’s Dedicated & Focused Team of software developers, exclusive project management and maintenance staff, content designers, media team and community ambassadors.
• Customizable designs • Hardware & software interface will be fully customized and upgraded throughout the franchise term
• Input from key stakeholders and city staff is critical for this program to be a success
• Financials • Signing bonus upon execution • Guaranteed annual payments • 50/50 Percentage revenue share (greater of guaranteed rent)
• Dedicated city messaging on displays as well as unsold time
• 2% of BIGOUTDOOR’s annual revenue received from
franchise agreement to fund additional city
projects/initiatives
38 8.A.f
Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) Staff Recommendation
Adopt a Resolution of Intent declaring the Council’s intent to hold a public hearing on November 15, 2022 to award a franchise to BIG Outdoor for the installation, operation, and maintenance of a digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising kiosk network, per the terms and conditions stated in the resolution.

8.A.f
Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5470 : Resolution of Intent to Award OOH Kiosk Franchise (60 mins)) 1 City Council Meeting: November 15, 2022 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER_________(CCS)
(City Council Series)

AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION

4.08.095, PROHIBITION AGAINST CAMPING IN PUBLIC PLACES, TO CLARIFY:
(1) THE APPLICABILITY OF THE SECTION’S PROHIBITIONS, AND (2) THE DEFINITION OF “CAMP FACILITY.”
WHEREAS, for many years, the City of Santa Monica has experienced numerous individuals maintaining camp facilities for the purposes of living accommodations in public places, including City parks; and
WHEREAS, an increase in individuals maintaining camp facilities for the purposes of living accommodations in the City’s parks and public places can lead to serious health, safety, and accessibility concerns and an overall deterioration in the physical condition of the community’s parks and public places; and
WHEREAS, Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition against camping in public places, was initially enacted to address these concerns; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to continue protecting public safety in, and access, to Santa Monica’s parks and other public places by prohibiting camping and camping facilities except in designated areas as determined by the City Council; and WHEREAS, recent case law, however, has made clear that cities cannot prohibit, by criminal penalty or administrative citation that may lead to criminal penalty, a homeless individual from sleeping or merely using blankets, pillows, sleeping bags, or other

10.A.a
Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: CC-Ord-Camping Proposed Amendment to SMMC 4.08.095 (5461 : Camping - Emergency Ord) 2 rudimentary protections against the weather on public property, unless there is shelter space available for that individual to use; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to clarify Section 4.08.095 in compliance with recent case law by not enforcing its camping prohibitions against homeless individuals who are merely sleeping with the use of blankets, pillows, sleeping bags, and other rudimentary protections against the weather on public property; and WHEREAS, the City Council also wishes to clarify the definition of “camping facility” for ease of enforcement; and
WHEREAS, to ensure compliance with applicable case law and to protect the due process rights of homeless individuals, the City Council finds and declares that a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and general welfare exists such that this amendment qualifies for an emergency ordinance.

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

SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code 4.08.095 is hereby adopted to read as follows:

4.08.095 Prohibition against camping in public places.
(a) No person shall camp in a prohibited public place.
(b) For the purpose of this Section:
(1) “Camp” means to erect, maintain, store, or occupy a camp facility for the purpose of living accommodations.
(2) “Camp facility” may means the use of, settling, fixing in place, setting up, storing, locating, or leaving behind in a prohibited public place contain any or

10.A.a
Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: CC-Ord-Camping Proposed Amendment to SMMC 4.08.095 (5461 : Camping - Emergency Ord) 3 a combination of the following: tents, huts, other temporary physical shelters, cots, beds, sleeping bags, or hammocks, or bedrolls.
(3) “Prohibited public place” means any of the following: the public parks listed in Section 4.08.091 4.55.020, public beaches, the Santa Monica Municipal Pier, public streets, public alleyways, public parking lots, public passageways, public rights-of-way, publicly-owned landscaped areas or greenbelts, public educational institutions including properties owned by the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District or Santa Monica College, or other government-owned properties located within the City of Santa Monica.
(c) The City Council may, by majority vote, establish one or more specified camping areas. Such camping areas, if any, may be located in prohibited public places, except that such camping areas shall not be located within public parks. (d) This ordinance does not prohibit those who are homeless from using sleeping bags, blankets, pillows, and/or bedrolls while sleeping. This Section shall not take effect until March 1, 1995.

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

10.A.a
Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: CC-Ord-Camping Proposed Amendment to SMMC 4.08.095 (5461 : Camping - Emergency Ord) 4 this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not 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. Pursuant to Sections 615 and 619 of the City Charter, for the reasons stated in the recitals above, the staff report accompanying this ordinance, oral and written testimony received by the City Council, and City Council discussion, the City Council declares this ordinance to be necessary as an emergency measure for preserving the public peace, health, and safety, with the result that this ordinance shall be introduced and adopted at the same meeting and shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________

DOUGLAS SLOAN
City Attorney

10.A.a
Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: CC-Ord-Camping Proposed Amendment to SMMC 4.08.095 (5461 : Camping - Emergency Ord) 1 City Council Meeting: November 15, 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 SECTION 3.23.1055 TO AUTHORIZE THE

DEPLOYMENT AND OPERATION OF REMOTELY CONTROLLED PERSONAL

DELIVERY VEHICLES AND DEVICES AND PROHIBIT THE OPERATION OF

AUTONOMOUS PERSONAL DELIVERY VEHICLES AND DEVICES
WHEREAS, in October 2020, in response to public safety concerns over the national proliferation of autonomous personal delivery vehicles and devices operating on sidewalks and pedestrian paths of travel, the City adopted a moratorium which prohibited the deployment and operation of autonomous personal delivery vehicles and devices; and
WHEREAS, at that time, the City allowed the deployment and operation of remotely controlled personal delivery vehicles and devices, so long as operators participated in the Zero Emission Delivery Zone (ZEDZ) pilot program between the City and the Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator; and
WHEREAS, on December 31, 2022, the ZEDZ pilot program will end, and the City desires to continue allowing the deployment and operation of remotely controlled personal delivery vehicles and devices, subject to rules and regulations drafted by City staff; and WHEREAS, for the same public safety concerns described in the October 2020 emergency ordinance, the City also desires to adopt a permanent prohibition on deployment and operation of autonomous personal delivery vehicles and devices operating on City sidewalks and pedestrian paths of travel.

10.B.a
Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: 3.23 RemotelyControlledPDDOrdinance 11.15.2022 FINAL [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update 2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Section 3.23.1055 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:

3.23.1055 Autonomous and remotely controlled personal delivery vehicles or devices.
(a) At no time shall a person deploy or operate, or cause to be deployed or operated, an autonomous personal delivery vehicle or device, or a semi-autonomous personal delivery vehicle or device, on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel. (b) For purposes of this Section:
(1) “Autonomous personal delivery vehicle or device” means a motorized vehicle or device used to transport items, products, or any other materials on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel for commercial purposes, and guided or controlled without a human operator, whether while sitting or standing upon the device or remotely, actively, and physically controlling the movements of the vehicle or device.
(2) “Semi-autonomous personal delivery vehicle or device” means a motorized vehicle or device used to transport items, products, or any other materials on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel for commercial purposes, where vehicle or device operation technology is a combination of hardware and software, remote and/or on-board, and performs the dynamic piloting task.
(b) A person may deploy and operate, or cause to be deployed and operated, a remotely controlled personal delivery vehicle or device to transport items, products,

10.B.a
Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: 3.23 RemotelyControlledPDDOrdinance 11.15.2022 FINAL [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update 3 or any other materials on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel for commercial purposes. All operations of remotely controlled personal delivery vehicles or devices shall comply with all requirements, including insurance and indemnification requirements, imposed as conditions of the grant to the operator of a required Santa Monica business license, as well as all other rules and regulations pertaining to the deployment and operation of a remotely controlled personal delivery vehicle or device.
(c) The City Manager, or designee, is authorized to adopt rules and regulations consistent with, and necessary to, implement this Section. Such rules and regulations may include, but are not limited to, provisions governing: (1) dimensions of devices and vehicles; (2) yielding of the right of way to pedestrians and bicycles; (3) obeyance of all signs and signals governing traffic and pedestrians; (4) non-interference with the maintenance of paths of travel for persons with disabilities; (5) non-transport of waste or hazardous materials (including flammables or ammunition); (6) mandatory use of headlights that operate at night, sunrise, and sunset; and (7) markings of a size sufficient to be clearly legible to passing vehicles and pedestrians, a unique identifier for the device together with the name and contact information of the device’s operator.

Such rules and regulations shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk where they shall be made available for inspection by the public. Violations of rules and regulations issued pursuant to this Section shall constitute violations of this Chapter, and shall subject the violator to the penalties set forth in this Chapter.

10.B.a
Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: 3.23 RemotelyControlledPDDOrdinance 11.15.2022 FINAL [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update 4 (d) This Section shall not apply to vehicles regulated solely under the autonomous vehicle sections of the California Vehicle Code.

Beginning on October 28, 2020 and ending on December 31, 2022, no person shall deploy or operate an autonomous delivery vehicle or device on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel. For purposes of this Section, “Autonomous delivery vehicle or device” means a motorized vehicle or device used to transport items, products, or any other materials on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel for commercial purposes, and guided or controlled without a human operator, whether while sitting or standing upon the device or remotely, actively, and physically controlling the movements of the vehicle or device. For purposes of this Section, “remotely controlled delivery vehicle or device” means a motorized vehicle or device used to transport items, products, or any other materials on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel for commercial purposes that is guided and controlled with a human operator, whether while sitting or standing upon the device or remotely, actively, and physically controlling the movements of the vehicle or device. Beginning January 1, 2021, or at such time as the pilot program referenced below commences, and ending on October 28, 2022, no person shall deploy or operate a remotely controlled delivery vehicle or device on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel other than as part of the pilot program being overseen in Santa Monica by Los Angeles Cleantech Incubator (“LACI”). All operations of autonomous or remotely controlled delivery vehicles or devices that are not prohibited by this Section (“nonprohibited devices”) shall comply with all requirements, including insurance and indemnification requirements, imposed as conditions of the grant to the operator of a required Santa Monica business license, as well as all of the following operational

10.B.a
Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: 3.23 RemotelyControlledPDDOrdinance 11.15.2022 FINAL [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update 5 requirements: (1) non-prohibited devices shall yield the right of way to pedestrians and bicycles; (2) non-prohibited devices shall obey all signs and signals governing traffic and pedestrians; (3) non-prohibited devices shall not interfere with the maintenance of paths of travel for persons with disabilities; (4) non-prohibited devices may not transport waste or hazardous materials (including flammables or ammunition); (5) non-prohibited devices shall be equipped with headlights that operate at night, sunrise, and sunset; and (6) each non-prohibited device shall bear, in markings of a size sufficient to be clearly legible to passing vehicles and pedestrians, a unique identifier for the device together with the name and contact information of the device’s operator.

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 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

10.B.a
Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: 3.23 RemotelyControlledPDDOrdinance 11.15.2022 FINAL [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update 6 newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty days after adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________

DOUGLAS SLOAN
City Attorney

10.B.a
Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: 3.23 RemotelyControlledPDDOrdinance 11.15.2022 FINAL [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update 1 City Council Meeting: November 15, 2022 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.12.1055 TO

EXTEND THE MORATORIUM ON THE DEPLOYMENT AND OPERATION OF

AUTONOMOUS DELIVERY VEHICLES OR DEVICES ON SIDEWALKS AND

PEDESTRIAN PATHS OF TRAVEL
WHEREAS, on October 27, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2656 (CCS), an Emergency Ordinance establishing a one-year moratorium on the deployment and operation of autonomous delivery vehicles or devices on sidewalks and pedestrian paths of travel; and
WHEREAS, on September 14, 2021, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2683 (CCS), extending the moratorium to December 31, 2022; and WHEREAS, the proliferation around the country of delivery services using driverless, electrified vehicles devices appears to be part of a broader trend of partnerships between robotics firms and goods retailers to deliver goods from a hub to private property via public rights of way; and
WHEREAS, in cities where autonomous delivery vehicles or devices are currently in use, such use has been permitted after extensive consideration, granted on a trial basis, and only after operators agree to various requirements with the aim of evaluating and regulating important areas such as direct human supervision of the delivery vehicles or devices, limitations on speed, limitations on types of infrastructure on which vehicles or devices may operate, compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, limitations on operation in high-risk corridors, limitations on the number of operating vehicles or

10.B.b
Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: 3.23_EmergencyOrdinance ExtendingAutonomousDeliveryVehicleMoratorium_11.15.2022 Final [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission 2 devices, requirements for liability coverage, requirements for operational data disclosures, operation in low visibility weather, and interactions with surroundings and terrain; and
WHEREAS, deployment and operation of autonomous delivery vehicles in the City by one company eliciting numerous complaints from members of the public that the vehicles obstructed sidewalks and created difficulties as people attempted to navigate around the devices; and
WHEREAS, the City has expressed public safety concerns about the unregulated operation of autonomous delivery vehicles or devices on City sidewalks and pedestrian paths of travel, particularly where an infinite number of companies can deploy an infinite number of vehicles or devices, clogging City sidewalks and pedestrian paths of travel, inundating City code enforcement officers, and create a public safety hazard; and WHEREAS, on November 15, 2022, City Council considered on first reading an ordinance permanently prohibiting operation and deployment of autonomous personal delivery vehicles devices, however, the ordinance will not become effective until approximately two weeks after the expiration of the moratorium as extended by Ordinance Number ____; and
WHEREAS, based on the aforementioned preambles, and the staff report accompanying this ordinance, it is necessary to adopt an emergency ordinance to extend the moratorium until the end of January 2023, so that the moratorium does not expire prior to the effective date of the ordinance establishing a permanent prohibition on the deployment and operation of autonomous personal delivery vehicles and devices; and

10.B.b
Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: 3.23_EmergencyOrdinance ExtendingAutonomousDeliveryVehicleMoratorium_11.15.2022 Final [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission 3 WHEREAS, under City of Santa Monica Charter Article VI, Section 615, any ordinance declared by the City Council to be necessary as an emergency measure for preserving the public peace, health or safety and containing a statement of the reasons for its urgency, may be introduced and adopted at one and the same meeting if passed by at least five affirmative votes; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and declares that the unregulated deployment and operation of potentially infinite autonomous delivery vehicles or devices on City sidewalks and pedestrian paths of travel will result in an immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and, as a result, the adoption of an ordinance continuing the moratorium is necessary as both an emergency preservation and emergency preventative measure.

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

Section 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 3.12.1055 is hereby amended as follows:

3.12.1055 Autonomous Delivery Device or Vehicle
Beginning on October 28, 2020 and ending on January 31, 2023 December 31 , 2022, no person shall deploy or operate an autonomous delivery device or vehicle on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel. ‘Autonomous delivery device or vehicle’ means a motorized device used to transport items, products, or any other materials on City sidewalks or pedestrian paths of travel for commercial purposes, and guided or controlled without a human operator sitting or standing upon and actively and physically controlling the movements of the device or vehicle.

10.B.b
Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: 3.23_EmergencyOrdinance ExtendingAutonomousDeliveryVehicleMoratorium_11.15.2022 Final [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission 4 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 affect 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 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. Pursuant to Sections 615 and 619 of the City Charter, for the reasons stated in the recitals above, the staff report accompanying this ordinance, oral and written testimony received by the City Council, and City Council discussion, the City Council declares this ordinance to be necessary as an emergency measure for preserving the public peace, health, and safety, with the result that this ordinance shall be introduced and adopted at the same meeting and shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________

DOUGLAS SLOAN
City Attorney

10.B.b
Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: 3.23_EmergencyOrdinance ExtendingAutonomousDeliveryVehicleMoratorium_11.15.2022 Final [Revision 1] (5299 : Zero Emission November 14, 2022
RE: Item 10-B - Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tempore McCowan, and City Councilmembers, Coco has been thrilled to be part of Santa Monica’s Zero Emission Delivery Zone program and we strongly support City Staff’s recommendation to adopt the ordinance before you tonight, which will allow us to continue to provide more affordable, sustainable, and reliable deliveries to Santa Monica local businesses.

It’s been exciting for us to support Santa Monica’s city-leading efforts to reduce emissions. We have provided local deliveries for over 20 Santa Monica businesses, including: Alfalfa, Ashland Hill, Bangkok West Thai, Bay City Deli, Bru’s Wiffle, Jinya Ramen Bar, Jinky’s Cafe, Lotus Dim Sum & Dumpling House, Sweetfin Poke, Sweet Rose Creamery, Umami Burger and more. Short distance deliveries make up a significant portion of merchants' delivery volume and there is no reason to have these orders carried by fossil fuel powered cars.

Since the launch of the ZEDZ in Santa Monica we have completed over ten thousand deliveries without any serious problems. Had the same deliveries been made by the average car, almost 15,000 lb of CO2 would have been needlessly emitted. Restaurants have found us especially useful during these challenging economic times, as we provide a more affordable local delivery solution (often less than half the cost of car-based delivery companies). Residents appreciate us because we provide contact-free and sustainable deliveries, giving comfort to those worried about COVID exposure and reducing the number of delivery cars double parked in our bike lanes and polluting our air. Earlier this year, Fast Company named Coco one of the 10 most innovative robotic companies – specifically for “making robot delivery work for small businesses”. Please see the attached article.

We look forward to our continued collaboration with City Staff and our local business partners to help keep delivery affordable and reduce traffic and Item 10.B
11/15/22
1 of 3 Item 10.B
11/15/22

10.B.c
Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Written Comment (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update and Follow-up Actions) emissions in Santa Monica. Please support City Staff’s recommendation to maintain and extend the benefits of PDDs as demonstrated through the ZEDZ pilot program.

Thank you,
Zach Rash
CEO and Co-Founder
Coco
Item 10.B
11/15/22
2 of 3 Item 10.B
11/15/22

10.B.c
Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Written Comment (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update and Follow-up Actions) …
Source: https://www.fastcompany.com/90724464/most-innovative-companies-robotics-2022 Item 10.B
11/15/22
3 of 3 Item 10.B
11/15/22

10.B.c
Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: Written Comment (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Update and Follow-up Actions) Zero Emissions Delivery Zone Pilot Program
Trevor Thomas | Sr. Transportation Planner | SaMoDOT, Mobility Division November 15, 2022

10.B.d
Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program 2 Presentation Overview
• Background information &
definitions • Work done through the
Zero Emission Delivery
Zone (ZEDZ)
• Types of interventions • Goals of the ZEDZ
• Program findings • Staff Recommendations

10.B.d
Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Ze ro Em ission De live ry
Zone : Ba c kg round
Inform a tion • Creation of EV-only loading zones • Video-based, privacy-protected data collection around these zones • Testing delivery technologies with program partners • Sidewalk delivery bots (PDDs) • Zero emission vehicles in the roadway • Electric cargo vans • E-cargo bikes and e
-scooters
• Electric box trucks
3 10.B.d
Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Goa ls of the Ze ro
Em ission De live ry Zone • Provide local benefits • Define sustainable delivery and curbside policy
• Demonstrate policy
approaches for other cities
and companies
Safety & Order
Environmental Sustainability
4 10.B.d
Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program Le ssons Le a rne d • Delivery operations displaced emissions. • EV-only loading zones have value as signal. • Santa Monica’s built environment is conducive to green delivery…but more
could be done to facilitate delivery logistics.
• Sidewalk delivery bots are a net positive for
the community.
• Curb cameras provide useful and privacy-
protected data.
5 10.B.d
Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program 6 Staff Recommendations
Move Forward with Robotic Sidewalk Delivery
• Adopt permanent ordinance permitting and regulating
delivery bots
• Make permanent the ban on autonomous delivery bots
• Adopt emergency ordinance to continue moratorium
on autonomous delivery until ordinance takes hold

10.B.d
Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program 7 Staff Recommendations
Continue with Curbside Cameras
• Extend agreement with Automotus through December
31, 2024
• Obtain valuable understanding of our curbs
• Maintain strong data protections currently in place

10.B.d
Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program 8 Staff Recommendation Recap
• Adopt PDD ordinance • Adopt emergency ordinance
continuing moratorium on
autonomous PDDs
• Extend agreement with
Automotus

10.B.d
Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (5299 : Zero Emission Delivery Zone Pilot Program To: Mayor and City Council
From: Derek Devermont, Chair of the Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission
Subject: Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission Annual Update In February 2020, Council voted to create the Santa Monica Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission (PSROC). PSROC was designed to provide civilian oversight of SMPD and to evaluate how the city approaches law enforcement. Since its inception, PSROC has created numerous committees, held multiple hearings, and submitted six reports to Council, two of which are attached to this memo. These reports were authored by either the Commission or the Commission's Inspector General (IG).

These reports addressed the following:
1) SMPD's response to the OIR 5/31/2020 report-Commission Authored 2) SMPD's complaints process-Commission Authored
3) SMPD policy surrounding and use of bodycam technology-Commission Authored 4) SMPD's possession and use of military equipment pursuant to AB 481-Commission Authored
5) OIR report on SMPD's progress in implementing IG proposed reforms-IG Authored 6) OIR audit of SMPD complaint process-IG authored
This memo will focus on a few of these topics.

POLICIES AND USE OF BODYCAM TECHNOLOGY
SMPD uses impressive bodycam technology. Perhaps most impressive is how a single officer activating his camera will start the cameras of other officers in the area. This prevents officers, intentionally or unintentionally, from failing to activate their cameras.

PSROC proposed reforms to remove undue officer discretion regarding what is recorded. The Commission heard from officers that they are trained to decide when to turn a camera off in situations involving witnesses or victims. PSROC feels this discretion should be eliminated.

SMPD responds with a genuine and valid concern for the privacy of witnesses and victims. This privacy, however, is already protected under current law. Cases involving sex crimes, minors,

13.A.a
Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: Attachment A: PSROC November 15 Council Presentation_ (5364 : PSROC Reports) etc., are not subject to public record requests. Additionally, such footage is usually subject to a court's protective order preventing the distribution of protected materials.

PSROC also learned prosecutors prefer to have witness/victim interviews recorded. With the passage of time, memories fade and become warped. Bodycam footage refreshes the memory of those that would testify and prevents inconsistencies that defense lawyers will use. As court cases drag on, a preserved video record prevents the downfalls of time.

There are instances when an officer should not have his camera running (bathroom breaks, interacting with family, etc.), but PSROC feels the cameras should be running absent these circumstances.

PSROC offers drafts of reports to SMPD for input. SMPD wrote a written response to PSROC's report on bodycams and submitted it to Council. It is important to note they responded to a PSROC draft never submitted to Council. Instead, SMPD replied to an initial PSROC draft provided solely for input. The final PSROC draft submitted to the Council addressed many of SMPD's concerns.

COMPLAINTS
PSROC had many hearings on SMPD's complaint process. Council was provided a report with the Commission's findings. The work done in this area shows how SMPD and PSROC working together can benefit the city.

In PSROC's hearings, it was discovered SMPD lacked a record-keeping/tracking system for complaints that were handled informally or quickly dismissed by a supervisor. If an intended complainer was turned away by an officer, a record was not kept of the interaction nor the attempt to file a complaint. The absence of a system prevented effective auditing and oversight.

To SMPD's credit, they have acknowledged the gap and taken great strides to fill it. SMPD has acquired new software that will track every complaint and ensure interested parties within the department and outside are notified of progress. Additionally, all complainers will be provided a form with a reference number to draft their complaints. Once completed, the complainer is provided a copy of the form for future reference,
SMPD and PSROC worked together in this specific circumstance, and the community benefitted.

PSROC still believes areas of concern remain. The Commission tasked the IG with auditing ten complaints to see if they were processed and adjudicated in a manner that was fair to the complainer, the community, AND THE OFFICER. It is important to note that many of the audited complaints were received under the leadership of a previous Chief of Police.

The IG wrote a report, attached to this memo, and found areas of concern. PSROC found the time taken to process complaints to be inexcusably long. Most took ten months or longer.

13.A.a
Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Attachment A: PSROC November 15 Council Presentation_ (5364 : PSROC Reports) Witnesses and complainers were only contacted then. As a result, the potential for faded memories, interest, and loss of contact with relevant parties increases exponentially.

Also, relevant evidence was not obtained or kept in the file. Video footage, pictures, and other records were inexplicably left out of the file preventing an accurate audit of the fairness of SMPD's conclusions.

Perhaps most troubling is the limiting of the scope of the complaint. If an investigator found misconduct by another officer not initially subject to the complaint during the investigation of a complaint, no additional action was taken to hold the malfeasant officer accountable. A glaring example is in the report of a seemingly intentional attempt to hide the use of force by filing it inappropriately in an area where no one would notice. When it was discovered the use of force wasn't filed as a "use of force," the officer who errored was not held accountable.

AB 481-POSSESSION AND USE OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT
In response to Council's referral, PSROC investigated SMPD's possession and use of military equipment. Commissioner Angela Scott and Vice Chair Centeno jointly wrote a report that found possession of all AB 481 equipment in SMPD's arsenal appropriate.

Of particular concern was the famous "Bearcat." This is an intimidating vehicle, and the Commission questioned whether a less militaristic alternative could serve the purpose and function of the bearcat. It was discovered that alternative vehicles would cost twice as much as the bearcat, require an additional vehicle, and couldn't provide the medical services of the bearcat. SMPD was forthright and responsive.

MAY 31, 2020 OIR REPORT
Recently, the IG was tasked with auditing SMPD's progress in implementing the recommended reforms found in the previous OIR 5/31/2020 report. Some recommended reforms were implemented, progress was made on implementing more, and some still needed to be satisfactory. The IG report is attached to this memo.

CONCLUSION
Recommendations: Council should direct the City Manager to work with SMPD to:

1. Eliminate officer discretion in the use of body cams when witnesses who are victims to a crime are involved.

2. Implement all proposed reforms proposed in the Inspector General’s report on complaints and processes.

3. Require all complaint investigations to be processed, investigated, and brought to completion within 90 days.

13.A.a
Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: Attachment A: PSROC November 15 Council Presentation_ (5364 : PSROC Reports)

4. Require all SMPD officer misconduct be investigated fully irrespective of how the misconduct is discovered.

5. Implement all recommendations in the OIR Group’s After Action Report concerning the events of May 2020.

PSROC looks forward to making a presentation on 11/15/2022 and will be open to answering any questions. Please feel free to contact me in advance should a concern arise.

Derek Devermont
Chair-PSROC

13.A.a
Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: Attachment A: PSROC November 15 Council Presentation_ (5364 : PSROC Reports) 1 City of Santa Monica
Inspector General’s REPORT on SMPD
Complaint Investigation Process
October 2022
Michael Gennaco
Stephen Connolly
Teresa Magula
Julie Ruhlin

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 2 323-821-0586
7142 Trask Avenue | Playa del Rey, CA
90293
OIRGroup.com

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 3 Introduction
At its regular public meeting in February of 2022, the Santa Monica’s “Public Safety Reform and Oversight Committee” (“PSROC”) endorsed an audit project that had been recommended by Michael Gennaco of OIR Group, in his capacity as Inspector General.

The project was meant to supplement the work that the Committee had already initiated in learning about the mechanics of the public complaint process as administered by the Santa Monica Police Department (“SMPD”).

The Committee has produced a report and several recommendations as a result of knowledge it gleaned from members’ interactions with SMPD personnel. These interactions related to protocol and procedure with regard to intake, triage, and investigation of complaints, and the Committee identified areas where it thought the processes could become more effective. In proposing an audit of actual cases completed recently by the Department’s Internal Affairs unit, the Inspector General sought to add to the foundation that the Committee had established through its own efforts.

Specifically, an audit by the Inspector General was intended to add two elements to the Committee’s project. One was a perspective drawn from OIR Group members’ extensive experience with oversight and “best practices” for administrative investigations. The other was a substantive, qualitative review, based on the IG’s unique access to confidential SMPD files and records pursuant to the City Ordinance.

An assessment of recently completed cases offered a concrete way to evaluate the effectiveness of the process through the prism of actual complaints and allegations of misconduct involving SMPD personnel.1
Pursuant to the proposal and the Committee’s authorization, the IG reviewed 10 complete investigation files that were provided by the Department. These materials included the following:
• The memo prepared by the investigator that summarized the evidence; • The transcribed interviews of the complainants, witnesses, and subjects of each case;
1 One aspect of the complaint process not addressed in this audit is how “complaints” that are not referred for a formal administrative investigation are addressed by SMPD. As noted below, that issue is sufficiently weighty to comprise a potential future IG audit project.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 4 • Any documents or other evidence relating to the underlying incident (including police reports, photos, body-worn camera and other recordings); and • The written analysis by SMPD executive-level decision makers as to outcomes.

We evaluated the cases along a range of criteria. These included investigative scope, thoroughness, timeliness, objectivity, accountability, remedial steps (if necessary), and overall legitimacy.

The following Report about those evaluations hopes to provide insight in a couple of ways: first by offering a window into the specific allegations that SMPD addressed, and then, based on those particular examples, by drawing larger conclusions – and recommendations – about the process itself. Accordingly, we provide a factual summary for eight of the ten investigations that we reviewed, in terms of both the incident at issue and the Department’s administrative response.2 The ultimate point was not to validate or question or otherwise re-litigate the actual outcomes of these complaints, though we do share our impressions of the findings. Instead, it was to use the cases as a concrete basis for assessing the process more broadly.

In doing so, we sought to identify systemic issues that may warrant attention or revision for the sake of enhancing future effectiveness. Individual issues that arose, as well as collective tendencies we saw across several cases, are discussed with accompanying recommendations.

A few notes are warranted about our interactions with SMPD in conjunction with this project. First, we appreciate the complete cooperation we received from Department supervisory staff with regard to accessing the necessary materials. Next, it bears mentioning that a prior administration was at the helm during the time these matters were investigated. Our hope is that current leadership will reinforce the strengths we identify and embrace opportunities to make positive adjustments, and we have reason to believe this will occur. Finally, we are grateful for thoughtful feedback that the Department provided, and that helped to clarify and otherwise improve this Report.

In terms of an “executive summary” of our findings, we noted a mix of strengths and limitations that we discuss below. One striking aspect of the review was that accumulating the cases for our evaluation required the Department to go back in time – some of the complaints we assessed were raised in 2018. 2 After our initial review, we learned that two of the cases we examined were also the subject of ongoing civil litigation. At the request of the City Attorney, our discussion of those cases will be deferred until the conclusion of that litigation, but the intent is to discuss in an addendum to this public report what we learned from those cases at that time.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 5 The potential causes of this low volume of formal investigations are various. The simplest and most encouraging would be that SMPD rarely provokes the dissatisfaction or grievance of the people it serves and encounters in Santa Monica. We don’t discount this possibility, and agency leadership informs us that it is common for the Department’s self-initiated misconduct investigations to exceed public complaints in the course of a given year. At the same time, we know the pandemic reduced the number of overall contacts by a considerable amount. And we have worked in jurisdictions in which a higher number of complaints is at least partially a function of heightened engagement and receptivity to public feedback as opposed to greater levels of dysfunction. In short, SMPD’s numbers were objectively small, in a way that is best understood as a notable if only partial metric of overall community satisfaction,
We also take note of the potential relevance to this issue of the Committee’s formal findings about the complaint process in its report from earlier this year, particularly those that relate to the initial screening that occurs at the outset of the process. This sometimes results in the resolution of a complaint without the involvement of Internal Affairs.3 We agree that this process merits further inquiry and potential adjustment to existing protocols.

As for the investigations themselves, we noted several strengths. The completed files were generally well-organized and reflected a methodical, thorough investigative approach. Investigative work was often resourceful in gathering evidence from available sources and reconstructing the events underlying the respective complaints.

Complainants were treated respectfully and interviewed with patience and objectivity.

Interviews of the officers who were the focal point of allegations were often impressive in their depth and effectiveness in addressing the key issues. And the analysis that went into consideration of completed cases was consistently thoughtful; it showed a willingness to engage with the issues and reach appropriate conclusions in most of the individual instances we studied.

We were also impressed that the Department goes to the time and trouble of transcribing interviews. In our experience, most agencies are content to rely on recordings and investigator summaries, but the transcripts make evaluation of the actual content of statements much more efficient (and therefore more likely to happen when decision-makers are assessing completed files).
3 Per the Committee’s report, this can be because the handling supervisor “defuses” the issue without a formal complaint being filed, or because of a determination that the conduct as described does not constitute a policy violation.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 6 Overall, we found that the complaints were taken seriously, investigated skillfully, and evaluated thoughtfully by Department management. Naturally, we noted individual concerns with specific elements of the reviews, but these often reflected the close scrutiny of the review more than substantial problems that undermined the cases themselves.

We also found some “common denominators” that were more substantive in nature, and thus potentially applicable to future investigative effectiveness.

The first of these related to the time of completion for the investigations. All of them took at least several months to finalize, and most ran up to – or over – the one-year statute of limitation which constitutes the eligibility period for California agencies to impose discipline against peace officers who have violated policy. As we discuss, this is problematic in a few ways, even when officers are cleared of all allegations and therefore not subject to disciplinary consequences. We note in fairness to the Department that staffing challenges and COVID impacts have been a factor here, and that the current leadership team has not only acknowledged that “sooner is better” but has implemented steps to better monitor the progress of open cases. This is encouraging, and we assume it will pay dividends.

The next concerns the completeness of the files. Specific evidence was sometimes not included for review, even when it is referenced as having been in existence. The Department’s ability to “show its work” is important to the soundness of its recordkeeping and the underlying process itself.

The third relates to the scope of the Department’s investigative inquiries. While the core elements of individual citizen complaints were generally processed, it is often the case that such investigations reveal other shortcomings or performance issues that were not specifically mentioned by the complainant as a concern. (These might include a deficient report or a failure to follow protocol for notifying supervisors – issues that the complainant would not even be aware of.) These would sometimes be noted, but not addressed within the context of the investigation itself. As we explain, even when such matters don’t rise to the level of a policy violation, they often merit attention, and we are not sure whether SMPD is taking full advantage of these opportunities to use the complaint process as a “feedback loop” to improve future operations.

We hope this report and attendant recommendations will serve as a complement to the PSROC’s work in this arena.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 7 Systemic Recommendations
Internal Deadlines for Completion of Internal Investigations As noted above, another recurring issue within the cases we reviewed related to the pace of completion. Investigative work itself often extended for months beyond the intake of the complaint. In other instances, unexplained delays at the executive level extended the process of final resolution. The year-long statute of limitations period for administering discipline is a deadline, not a suggestion, and for many reasons the appropriate investigation and response will occur in a much more efficient manner.

RECOMMENDATION 1: SMPD should develop internal deadlines for completion of internal affairs investigations of no longer than 180 days and require approval from chain of command for any extensions with reasons articulated for any delay.

RECOMMENDATION 2: SMPD leadership should commit to the timely review of completed complaint cases and should engage in prompt decision-making and remediation as needed.

Items missing in investigative files.

While the files that we reviewed were well organized, each was missing materials that one would expect to find in them. As a result, we were not able to even know whether such materials were generated, let alone review the quality of any materials produced.

It is incumbent that SMPD adjust their protocols and practices to ensure that such materials are included in the investigative file.

With regard to closing letters, we were advised by the Department that they typically are not included in the file but scanned and kept in a different file. Even if there may be value in retaining copies of closing letters in another file, a copy should be inserted in the investigative file as well.

RECOMMENDATION 3: SMPD must ensure that, pursuant to state law, complainants are advised of the outcome of any complaint investigation and a copy of the letter is included in the investigative file.

RECOMMENDATION 4: When SMPD takes photographs related to injuries or other relevant aspects of the complaint investigation, it should retain such photographs in the investigative file.

RECOMMENDATION 5: Body-worn camera footage of officers that is relevant to the allegations should be included in the investigative file.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 8 Case Reviews and Recommendations
Case #1: Allegations of Excessive Force and Profanity During Traffic Stop
The complainant alleged that, during the traffic stop that had ultimately led to her arrest, the officer used profane language and assaulted her when he closed the driver’s door on her leg. The complainant alleged that she had been subjected to excessive force by both the arresting officer and by jail personnel. She further alleged that she was wrongly denied her requests for medical attention or to make phone calls until after she had been fingerprinted and booked.

According to SMPD reports, the complainant was read the Department’s complaint policy and provided with a copy of the complaint process, but she was not formally interviewed about her complaint. SMPD reported that when an investigator attempted to interview her, she requested “immunity” from the incident and declined to cooperate further.

According to SMPD reports, the complainant was stopped as a result of a defective taillight. When the complainant was advised of the reason for the stop, she asked if she could see the tail-light and opened the car door. The body camera footage confirmed this discourse and the officer’s response to “stay in the fucking car,” followed by the slamming of the door. The complainant is heard to respond, “Why are you cursing me?” According to SMPD reports, the complainant argued with the officer about signing the citation that he intended to issue her and was advised that she would be arrested if she failed to sign. The complainant eventually signed the citation but then threw the pen she had used at the officer, striking him in the chest. As a result, the complainant was charged with assaulting a police officer and taken into custody. The case was presented to the City Attorney for filing consideration, but it was rejected.

The complainant further expressed unhappiness that her tongue stud piercing and her hair extensions were removed. It was explained to the complainant that jail policy required the removal of these accoutrements. SMPD records indicate that the complainant was eventually examined by jail medical staff, and she was cleared for booking. While these aspects of her treatment were problematic to her, they were consistent with reasonable Department protocol and thus did not constitute misconduct.

The officer admitted that his use of profanity was vulgar and contrary to policy, but that it was in reaction to a threatening situation when the complainant abruptly opened the car door during the stop. SMPD conducted a thoughtful analysis of the incident and determined that the involved officer was “short” with the complainant in a way that may have contributed to escalating the encounter. For example, when the complainant

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 9 continued to argue with the officer, the officer responded by indicating that he was going to give her another citation. It also found that the officer’s use of profanity violated SMPD policy; appropriate remedial action was undertaken. While the complainant’s reaction further escalated the situation that eventually led to her arrest, the Department appropriately concluded that the officer’s initial behavior was not in accord with its expectations.

OIR Group Review and Analysis
The Investigation
The investigation was thorough and detailed. A particularly impressive feature of the investigation was that interviews were transcribed and included in the file.

However, while SMPD reports indicated that photographs had been taken of the complainant’s injuries, no photographs were included in the investigative file.4 Moreover, while the report indicated that the nurse at the jail examined the complainant for injuries, there were no jailer medical records.
5 . And while the investigation refers to
and relies on body-worn camera footage to make its determination, no body-worn camera footage was included in the file, which initially prevented us from corroborating what was reportedly depicted.6 Finally, state law requires that complainants be advised of the outcome of any internal investigation, but no closing letter to the complainant was located in the file.7
The report indicated that the involved officer was able to review body-worn camera video of the incident prior to being interviewed. Best practices warrant that subjects of internal investigations not be afforded the opportunity to review video prior to providing a statement so that the “pure” state of mind of the officer can be obtained. After an 4 We were advised that the photographs were not included in the file because they did not show any injuries. However, even evidence of “non-injuries” is relevant evidence and should be included in the investigative materials. Upon our request, the photographs were retrieved; they did not show any obvious injuries to the complainant.
5 In a recent discussion about this issue, SMPD raised privacy concerns of the complainant if the records were included in the internal investigative file. We appreciate those concerns, and encourage the Department to balance them appropriately with ensuring investigative thoroughness. We suggest a reference in the internal investigative file as to where the medical records have been lodged and that they have been reviewed as part of the investigation. 6 When we raised this issue with the Department, they were able to locate the relevant bodycamera footage, which we were then able to review. The footage is consistent with the investigative findings.
7 It is possible that the proper notification was sent but not included in the investigation file.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 10 initial statement is obtained, the officer should then be afforded the opportunity to review video footage to determine whether that review refreshed the recollection of the officer.

Finally, it took approximately 10 months to complete the investigation and review of this complaint. We recognize that some – but not all – of this delay is attributable to the challenges in gaining an interview with the complainant. Even so, SMPD could have completed the investigation in a more timely fashion. While state law allows for one year to complete the process, agencies should strive to complete investigations well before that statutory deadline. Barring exceptional circumstances, police agencies should strive to complete investigations between 60-180 days.

The Outcome
We concur with the outcome of the internal investigation that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the majority of the complainant’s allegations. We further agree with SMPD’s determination that the officer violated the Department’s profanity policy and the remedial discipline imposed.

RECOMMENDATION 6: When there is evidence of medical treatment by jail staff that is relevant to the allegations received, investigators should obtain and review such records and include them in the investigative file.

RECOMMENDATION 7: When officers are the subject of an Internal Affairs investigation, they should be required to provide a pure interview statement prior to reviewing any body camera or other video footage, with a subsequent opportunity to review recordings and amend their responses as needed (and based on refreshed recollection).

Case # 2: Allegation of Missing Property
This case involved a claim filed by the complainant with the City that he had $1,000.00 in the sleeve of his MacBook carrier when he was arrested for domestic violence, and that the money was missing when he was given back his property. The City’s Risk Management group appropriately forwarded the claim to SMPD; to its credit, the Department then initiated an investigation into the allegation.

Once the investigation was initiated, the SMPD investigator attempted on three occasions to contact the complainant (who lived out of state) with no success. This hampered the investigation. However, a review of the arrest report and related materials noted that the MacBook sleeve in question was unattended and in a public space for several minutes after the complainant’s girlfriend threw it out the window.

Moreover, while the complainant spoke to officers after his arrest of having $100.00 in his personal possession (which was returned to him), he did not mention the larger amount of money that he later claimed was missing.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 11 The Investigation
This investigation took ten months to complete, and efforts were not made to contact the complainant until five months after the investigation was opened. Best investigative practices teach that a complainant should be contacted promptly when an investigative interview is needed to supplement a complaint. This not only assists with the effective framing of issues and compilation of best available evidence, but it also reinforces the notion that the Department is taking the matter seriously and prioritizing it appropriately.

Moreover, as we say repeatedly here, investigations should be completed well before the statutory due date for that and other reasons – including timely resolution for involved personnel and timely accountability and corrective action where warranted.

As with the previous case, there was no letter to the complainant in the investigative file informing him of the results of the investigation nor was there any documentation of the apparent rejection by the City of the claim.

SMPD’s Review
We concur with the determination that there was insufficient evidence to indicate any violations of policy by involved SMPD personnel.

RECOMMENDATION 8: SMPD should strive to contact the complainant of any investigation promptly – ideally within days of receiving the complaint.

RECOMMENDATION 9: SMPD should include any available documentation regarding resolution of a legal claim that resulted in the initiation of the complaint investigation.

Case # 3: Allegation of Excessive Force
The complainant in this matter alleged that he had been subjected to excessive force after he was evicted from a bar, claiming that he had unnecessarily been taken to the ground with his face pushed into concrete.

The investigation established the basic facts of the encounter in question. As a result of a dispute, the complainant had been ejected from the establishment. When police arrived the complainant was aggressively expressing unhappiness about the way he had been treated in the bar. SMPD officers instructed the complainant to sit down, but he declined to do so.

Because of his unruly behavior, a field training SMPD officer told her trainee to go hands on with the complainant, and the trainee first grabbed the complainant’s arms.

When the complainant continued to resist, the officers used a leg sweep to take the complainant to the ground. After he was handcuffed, the complainant was lifted back into a standing position. The complainant was released from the scene after representatives of the bar indicated that they had no interest in pursuing charges.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 12 During the investigation, the trainee admitted to using a leg sweep to take the complainant to the ground. The senior officer stated that she did not know the trainee had used a leg sweep until she reviewed the body-worn camera video after the fact.

The officer said she then asked the trainee why he did not tell her he had used a leg sweep, and he replied he did not know. The field training officer did not take additional action upon learning of this information. The sergeant who was on scene at the time of the incident also said that he was not aware that a leg sweep had been used and believed that the officer and subject had fallen to the ground.

Instead of preparing a formal report documenting the use of force, the force was documented on a field interview card. The sergeant said that it was his decision to document the force in that way.

Investigative Issues
As with other cases, there was no closing letter to the complainant nor any indication that a closing letter was prepared and sent.

Review Issues
We reviewed the reports and body worn camera footage of this incident and concur that there was insufficient evidence that the force used was contrary to SMPD’s use of force policy. However, there were significant issues that were not considered relating to the reporting and documentation of force.

SMPD policy requires officers who use force to report that force to a supervisor and to document that force in a formal report.
300.14.1 NOTIFICATION TO SUPERVISORS
Notification to a sworn supervisor shall be made as soon as practicable following the application of force in any of the following circumstances:
[…]
(j) An individual was struck, kicked, and/or otherwise forcibly taken to the ground. 300.14 REPORTING THE USE OF FORCE
Any use of force by a member of the Department shall be documented by the involved member promptly, completely, and accurately in an appropriate incident/crime report or supplemental incident/crime report before the member completes their shift.

The first issue here is that the trainee had not properly reported the extent of his force (specifically the leg sweep) at the time of the incident, either to his training officer or the sergeant who was on scene. Because of the failure of the trainee to immediately report the use of force to either the training officer or the on-scene sergeant and the way in which the sergeant allowed the force to be informally documented, the use of force

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 13 mechanisms were not effectively activated. This would normally have included an interview of the subject and other investigative steps by the supervisor, as well as certain standardized review protocols as to compliance with force policy.

When that information did subsequently emerge, the field training officer took no action to ensure that the use of force was fully reported and reviewed; instead, she simply inquired of the trainee about his lack of full, accurate acknowledgment at the scene. The field identification card that was originally – and questionably – used as documentation by the sergeant was clearly inadequate to the more significant level of force that had actually occurred, but it was not supplemented. In short, potential violations of the Department’s reporting and documentation policies seem to have occurred, but were not considered and assessed as part of the complaint investigation.

In the executive level review of the complaint investigation, the reviewer failed to identify these deficiencies in force reporting, documentation and on-scene review. Moreover, in discussing the reasons for the force, the reviewer spoke of the “furtive” movements of the complainant in explaining the officer's actions. This sort of vague, catch-all language has become disfavored in current policing, as a greater burden has shifted to law enforcement to explain with precision why physical force was needed. Progressive agencies teach their members that general words such as “furtive” do not provide the level of detail necessary to evaluate the appropriateness of any subsequent actions by officers. Rather, the force analysis should discuss with precision what the individual was observed as doing or saying that became the basis for any subsequent application of force.

RECOMMENDATION 10: In reviewing complaints relating to inappropriate use of force allegations, the internal investigation should expand to include and address potential issues that may emerge in the adequacy of reporting, documentation, and supervisory review.

RECOMMENDATION 11: SMPD should advise its supervisory team that when reviewing or analyzing force reports, it should avoid terms like “furtive movements” and describe with detail what the subject did or said as a basis for any use of force application.

Case # 4: Allegation of Poor Tactics and Excessive Force Officers saw a residential burglary suspect on a bicycle and attempted to stop him; instead, he fled. This prompted an additional response by another set of officers, who soon encountered a different person on a bicycle and confronted him under the mistaken impression that he was their target. The man was uncooperative and eventually taken to the ground in the process of handcuffing him. The initial officers arrived at the location and cleared up the misunderstanding; however, the man was still

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 401 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 14 (understandably) upset and claimed that some pre-existing injuries had been exacerbated during the struggle.8
The administrative interview with the complainant was detailed and included affording him the chance to review available BWC recordings. That opportunity prompted him to acknowledge that some of his specific allegations (including the claim that a “chokehold” had been used against him) were not supported by the evidence. He remained adamant, however, that one of the four involved officers had been particularly excessive and inappropriate. This officer had also failed to engage his body-worn camera – an issue that was not pursued in the investigation, but which very much made a negative impression on the complainant. The complainant also questioned the reasonableness of the mistake by which officers had wrongly confused him for the suspect they sought.

The allegations of misconduct were ultimately unfounded. A detailed “Letter of Transmittal” included a lengthy analysis that delved into the entirety of the incident. (The force had been evaluated separately as part of other SMPD internal review protocols; however, no materials relating to findings were included in the file). The mistaken identity was recognized as unfortunate but not ultimately blameworthy to the extent it constituted a policy violation. The lieutenant’s case analysis also pointed out that the officer who had had the most direct contact with the complainant had come on to the scene in way that compressed the timeline and left little room for de-escalation.

Appropriate counseling was recommended.

OIR Group Review and Analysis
There were strengths to the investigation, including the aforementioned thorough and balanced interview with the complainant. The case also included interview statements from civilian witnesses to the encounter – one of whom acknowledged the complainant’s vocal anger but still had the impression that the officers were too quick to engage physically. The interviews were transcribed, and the case file itself was wellorganized – for the most part. Importantly, it was missing the BWC evidence from one of the involved officers that was supposedly a significant basis for the decision that no policy violations had occurred. The file also did not include a copy of the notification letter that should have been sent to the complainant pursuant to state law.

As for concerns, we noted that this case was consistent with the pattern of a protracted timeline: the final signoff at the executive level occurred within days of the end of the one-year limitations period for any potential imposition of discipline by a California police agency. We were also curious about the lack of any formal intervention with regard to 8 He had been afforded medical care at the scene but not transported to the hospital.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 15 the primary officer’s failure to engage his BWC – a deficiency that was certainly noted by, and understandably bothersome to, the complainant himself.9 Perhaps more significantly, the review and decision-making process (as opposed to the investigation itself) seemed to underplay aspects of the complaint that appeared to have some legitimacy. The complainant questioned how well he “fit the description” of the suspect whom the officers were seeking, and he seemingly had a fair point. Apart from the fact that both men were on bicycles, wore an article of clothing that was the same color (though it was a hat on one and a shirt on the other), and were persons of color (one Black, and one Hispanic), the resemblance was limited. The complainant’s chafing at the supposed justification was accordingly understandable in our view. Even assuming the sincerity of the officers’ confusion and acknowledging the dynamic nature of the encounter, the issue is sensitive enough to have warranted further attention.

Ideally, the complaint process ensures not only appropriate accountability, but also a deeper reckoning with performance or training issues that could lead to improvement for involved personnel and the agency as a whole. The “mistaken identity” problem that leads to the detention of innocent Black people is a notorious source of distrust and resentment. The anger and physical resistance that complicated this specific incident should not completely overshadow the underlying mistake by the officers that started things. While the lieutenant’s analysis made a useful gesture in the direction of improving use of time and distance prior to physical engagement, our sense is that a further exploration would have been beneficial.

Case # 5: Allegation of Parking Officer Rudeness
A woman initiated this complaint against a parking officer after what she alleged was a negative encounter. She said she was with a small group of family and friends in a metered parking area when they were approached and scolded by an SMPD parking officer. He apparently seemed to think someone in the group was adding money to expired meters to thwart his ability to ticket cars, and made a sarcastic remark about the person apparently wanting to work for the Department. The woman found it extremely off-putting and an “abuse of authority” – not least because she asserted that this was not what they were doing in the first place.

The allegation was ultimately “not sustained” in the aftermath of the investigation. The officer claimed not to have a specific recollection of the incident. He also claimed that, even if he had suspected people of the conduct at issue, his practice is to provide education (as opposed to chastising). Although the officer was equipped with a bodyworn camera, he did not record the encounter. This was within his discretion at the time that the incident occurred (the policy has since been made more definitive). 9 This is a different problem than the aforementioned non-inclusion in the file of another officer’s recording that was apparently created and relied upon.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 16 Given the differing versions of the encounter, and the lack of definitive proof that improper conduct had occurred to the level of a policy violation, the Department determined that a “not sustained” finding was the appropriate choice.

OIR Group Review and Analysis
The investigation file was well-organized and thorough, though it did not include a copy of the notification letter. This case also showed examples of resourcefulness and due diligence on the part of the investigator, including interviews with other parties who had been with the complainant at the time of the encounter. (Their stories essentially matched hers in terms of the key components). The complainant chose the parking officer from a “six-pack” identification package, and records of his activity established that he had been on-duty and in the area at the time alleged.

Still, although his denial was more theoretical than adamant (since he said he didn’t remember the incident but doubted that he would have treated people like that), the Department decided that the requisite preponderance of the evidence against him had not been established. This, in our view, was at least arguable. It also illustrated the value of relatively prompt interviews (so as to lessen the likelihood that an “I don’t recall” response will credibly occur)10 and the value of body-worn camera recordings (which would be expected per policy to exist in a similar scenario today).

We do have the sense that the Department took the investigation seriously. And it strikes us as an example of a scenario in which the process presumably sent a message that influenced behavior as much or more as the minor discipline that a sustained violation would have warranted.

Case # 6: Failure To Take a Report
The complainant in this case alleged that he had been a victim of a battery while exercising outside, and was frustrated by what he perceived to be the inadequacy of the initial SMPD response. Two officers did respond to the location, but eventually declined to file a report after locating the suspect, finding him to be somewhat incoherent, and lacking a definitive sense that a crime had occurred.

The complainant contacted SMPD again the next day, upset that no action had been taken. Meanwhile, the suspect had been arrested for a separate burglary allegation; he was ultimately cited for the previous day’s encounter as well. The complainant thought that the initial responding officers had underperformed in not taking appropriate enforcement action at the time of the incident.

The investigation established that one of the officers had in fact fallen short of expectations in terms of the diligence of his investigative efforts and documentation.

The other, meanwhile, was relatively new to the job, had deferred to the more 10 This case was not finalized for some ten months after the complaint was lodged, another extended timeline for a relatively straightforward matter.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 17 experienced officer who took charge of the call, and had done due diligence before being released from the scene by his colleague. Accordingly, he was exonerated of any culpability.

As for the first officer, he was forthright in acknowledging shortcomings in his performance and accepted responsibility. (It should also be noted that there were significant mitigating circumstances, including some ambiguity in the complainant’s original information to officers.)
While the Department determined that the senior officer’s performance had constituted a violation of policy, it was ultimately not able to administer formal discipline. This is because the case was not finalized until after the end of the one-year limitations period.

The problem partly stemmed from the two-week gap between the man’s initial complaint and his more thorough, formal interview with an investigator; the latter date was incorrectly relied upon. Accordingly, the Department characterized the ultimate finding as “miscellaneous.” It was precluded from disciplining the officer, but the record of the case nonetheless was included in his personnel file for future reference.

OIR Group Review and Analysis
This investigation file had many of the strengths of others we looked at, in terms of the organized file, thorough interviews, and meticulous efforts to reconstruct events. The notification letter to the complainant was also included here. Clearly, though these attributes were overshadowed by the failure to process the completed investigation in time to impose an appropriate disciplinary consequence. The actual discipline here would likely have been at a minor level -- perhaps only a written reprimand and at most a one-day suspension. The issue is therefore less about the officer’s avoiding a severe outcome than about the ineffectiveness of the process itself.

Establishing a correct limitations date is as fundamental as any element of a functioning discipline process. But the fact that the error in calculation was relevant at all is itself an indication that the Department was extending the process to a detrimental extent.

Case # 7: Allegation of Intentional Provocation of Third Parties and Other Misconduct
The complainant in this case was the newly divorced wife of a Santa Monica officer.

She contacted the Department to express concern about an incident that had occurred approximately 12 years earlier, when she and the officer were still married. She described being at a Christmas party attended by several SMPD officers and family members, at which a disturbing video had been shown.

The on-duty video was taken by an officer who was not her then-husband, but it did involve him and other members of the “Special Policing District” unit that was assigned

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 18 to the beach in Santa Monica. Per the complainant’s version of events, the video showed a clash between two apparently homeless individuals – a male and female.

The complainant alleged that the officers had in fact goaded the two into conflict in order to film the result for their entertainment.

The investigation was largely able to reconstruct events in spite of the passage of time.

There were records of what was apparently the incident in question – a call for service that had involved a dispute between a male and female on the beach who knew each other. Per the recollection of the involved officers (most of whom were still with the agency and were interviewed as part of the investigation), the woman had defecated on the man while he was sleeping in the sand in retaliation for his owing her money. The officers recalled finding the man to be somewhat confused and non-desirous of officer involvement. They remembered assisting him in cleaning up and then clearing the call.

The officers also acknowledged the accuracy of some elements of the complainant’s story. This included the existence of the video, which one of the officers had created with a personal recorder that he sometimes brought on patrol under his own initiative. (The video itself was apparently no longer available.) It also included the fact of that year’s holiday party, and the showing of the video as part of the evening’s events. They denied, however, that the video depicted them engaging at all inappropriately with the two principals whose conflict had generated their response to the scene. Instead, their collective memory was that video had been shared because the situation itself was humorously bizarre – and not because they had played a role in instigating anything.

Though the propriety of the video’s being taken in the first place, and then being shown in a non-work context, remained open questions (to say nothing of the potential legitimacy of the complainant’s allegations as to what it actually portrayed) the investigation eventually became truncated by a procedural matter. This was the realization that a sergeant had been in attendance at the party.

This individual, now retired, was interviewed for the case. He verified that he had seen the video and was aware of its contents. This meant that, as a technical matter, the statute of limitations for imposing discipline could be said to have begun no later than the date of the party. From that starting point, the end of the one-year limitations period had also long since passed. Accordingly, SMPD decided to reach no conclusions as to the evidence with regard to any of the potential allegations.

OIR Group Review and Analysis
The Department’s “rescinding” of the case left several loose ends. In fairness to SMPD, it should be noted that some of these were unavoidable. For example, though the sergeant’s failure to take action with regard to the video was still potentially actionable (since others in a position to initiate an investigation were not aware), he had retired.

Moreover, the extreme passage of time and the tension between the complainant and her former spouse made it difficult to establish which version of the underlying call for service was the more accurate.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 19 At the same time, the allegations – and the undisputed behavior that was related to them – were attention-getting in a way that merited the Department’s follow-up. Even if there was not a basis for formal disciplinary action, the administration could and should have clarified with those involved parties that the conduct at issue reflected poorly on the agency. Additionally, the complainant raised other concerns about more recent offduty conduct involving her former husband. These were peripheral to her original complaint. To the investigator’s credit, he solicited information and sought assurance that she was getting any assistance that she needed in handling ongoing interactions.

However, as with the main complaint, the file gave no indication of achieving resolution or intervention as to these matters.

The distinctive circumstances of this case certainly posed challenges to the Department with regard to fair or meaningful investigation and/or remediation. That said, there appeared to be enough actionable information for some due diligence and a constructive response to have occurred. We hope but have no evidence that SMPD took advantage of this opportunity. More broadly, we encourage the Department to look at the complaint process as an opportunity for improvement at the individual officer or agency-wide levels, with potential that extends beyond the kind of formal accountability measures that were precluded for this complaint. We also recommend that SMPD add to the relevant case file documentation of any actions taken in response to complaintgenerated issues.

RECOMMENDATION 12: SMPD should work to ensure that it maximizes the potential benefits of rigorous complaint review by addressing identified issues through counseling, training, or other relevant non-disciplinary measures, even when formal accountability is not appropriate or possible.

RECOMMENDATION 13: SMPD should be pro-active in responding to peripheral concerns that emerge in the context of a complaint investigation, and should document any resulting interventions as part of the case file.

Case # 18: Allegations of Excessive Force and Unjustified Arrest A man was arrested after allegedly attempting to shoplift goods and then getting into an altercation with the employee of the sunglasses store where the alleged theft had occurred. The employee said that the man punched him in the face as he tried to block him from leaving so he could summon police. The man ultimately became the complainant when he was encountered by multiple SMPD officers a short time later in response to the call for service. He claimed that the arrest had been unjustified, and that the officers had used excessive force in the process of taking him into custody.

Certain facts were not in dispute. The man was indeed arrested on the day in question, and three officers had engaged with him physically in an effort to place him in handcuffs. The first two officers on scene were struggling when the third officer arrived

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 20 with his K-9 partner – which he quickly deployed in an effort to assist his colleagues.

The dog bit the man in the calf, which was a precursor to the end of the struggle and the successful handcuffing. The bite required several staples to close.

As to whether the officers had been justified in detaining him, he did meet the description of the suspect in the shoplifting/assault case and was proximate to the store when officers first engaged with him.11 Moreover, the officers were consistent in their reports that the man was confrontational and resistant from the outset, and asserted that their struggle to get the man into handcuffs was a function of his refusal to submit.

These assertions were reportedly corroborated by body-worn camera evidence, but there were limitations to this. One of the three involved officers did not turn on his camera. The K-9 officer did, but arrived late to the scene and inadvertently ended up facing in a direction that did not capture significant aspects of the bite. (Nor did his recording establish any of the actions by the complainant that prompted the officers’ initial physical response. It did, however, show the extent of the original two officers’ difficulty in controlling the man.) The third officer reportedly did activate his camera appropriately and to useful effect.

The deployment of the dog to assist in taking the man into custody was perhaps the most significant aspect of the force analysis, insofar as two officers were already “hands-on” with the subject and the resultant bite was responsible for his most significant injury. However, the memo that summarized the case and exonerated all three officers noted that the circumstances did fall within the permissible parameters for “apprehension” under the operative K-9 policy.

OIR Group Review and Analysis
This investigation matched several of the strengths we saw in other cases, including a well-organized file and a resourcefulness in gathering evidence to assess the particular claims. While this did not feature the comprehensive interview with the complainant that we noted in other examples, this was apparently the function of a lack of response by the complainant subsequent to his initial outreach to the Department. the available evidence seemed to refute the complainant’s assertions about his actions prior to being contacted by police, and he in fact showed assaultive behavior just prior to their arrival that is consistent with their assertions about his resistance. SMPD also disagreed with his complaint about the “excessive” nature of the force; this too, seems to have been supported by available evidence.

Our ability to corroborate was limited by technical difficulties with regard to one of the videos. Beyond that, though, this proved to be another case in which the potential “pool” of video evidence was reduced by one of the involved officer’s failure to activate his 11 The reporting party was brought to the site of the arrest and made a positive identification of the complainant.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) 21 camera in this first place. SMPD does not appear to have addressed this issue within the investigation. While these events transpired more than three years ago, and while we hope evolutions in policy and Department expectations have increased both compliance and accountability, we accordingly reiterate our encouragement that SMPD focus on this issue. In particular, we recommend the Department address such lapses formally in the context of complaint cases, even if the issue is not a part of the complainant’s original concerns.

While no discipline attached in this case (thereby lessening the impact of any failure to meet the one-year deadline), we noted that the final “sign-off” for the investigation appears to have been some thirteen months after the incident. This is consistent with the timeliness concerns that we have cited above, and which we encourage SMPD to address.

Conclusion
The proper investigation of public complaints is a hallmark of police agency effectiveness. Ideally, these investigations ensure that officers are accountable for their misconduct, that community members are confident about law enforcement legitimacy, and that the feedback from specific incidents leads to relevant interventions for improvement of future performance.

As explained above, our review of the most recent completed SMPD investigations showed them to be fundamentally sound in ways that correspond to achievement of those positive results. At the same time, we noted recurrent – and readily fixable – issues that merit the Department’s attention; we hope our recommendations will provide useful ideas for strengthening its approach in this important area of operations.

13.A.b
Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: Attachment B: Santa Monica Complaint Review Final 10 7 22 (5364 : PSROC Reports) Santa Monica Police Department
Office of Inspector General

INTERIM REPORT ON THE STATUS OF

IMPLEMENTATION OF OIR GROUP MAY
31, 2020 AFTER-ACTION

RECOMMENDATIONS
September 2022
Michael Gennaco
Steve Connolly
Julie Ruhlin
Teresa Magula

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports)

323-821-0586
7142 Trask Avenue | Playa del Rey, CA
90293
OIRGroup.com

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) Introduction
On May 11, 2021, OIR Group presented an independent After-Action report on the events of May 31, 2020, to the Santa Monica City Council. This report included 44 recommendations to improve the City and Santa Monica Police Department’s response to future incidents and increase transparency and accountability.

In response, the Council directed the Santa Monica Police Department (SMPD) to report on the status of acceptance and implementation of these recommendations. The Department provided its first response to Council on July 29, 2021, in an “Information Item” that outlined the Department’s response to and plans to implement each of the 44 recommendations. In short, the Department reported that it had accepted all of OIR Group’s recommendations and expressed its commitment to rebuilding trust with the community by implementing them.

The Department also experienced changes in leadership with the appointment of a new Chief of Police in October of 2021.

And, in the interim, the City established two new mechanisms for oversight of SMPD:
• The Public Safety Reform and Oversight Committee (PSROC) is a committee of 11 community members, appointed by the City Council to evaluate and make recommendations regarding public safety reform and promote interaction, collaboration, and trust between the community and SMPD. • The Inspector General supports PSROC by reviewing, analyzing, and reporting on policies and practices of SMPD. The City retained OIR Group as its Inspector General.

The PSROC requested OIR Group to report on the Department’s progress of the 44 recommendations. We are pleased to report that the Department has completed 29 recommendations and is making progress toward implementation of the remaining 15.

This interim report will discuss the recommendations and outline the Department’s progress to date.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 2 | P a g e
Recommendation Overview
OIR Group’s 44 recommendations covered various topics, including:
• Department leadership considerations
• Policy changes or updates
• Necessary training
• Technology updates
• Review and accountability mechanisms
• Community engagement
Of these, some were immediately actionable by Department personnel, such as adding new language to its crowd dispersal order, while others required longer-term considerations or actions by the Department, such as development and delivery of training. Still others required collaboration and feedback from external parties, such as other City agencies like Public Works or the City Attorney, or from the community at large.

Audit Findings
As noted above, the Department committed to implementation of all 44 recommendations. While the Department self-reported significant progress in its initial report to Council, our charge was to validate that progress through the review of related materials that supported completion of each item.

To that end, we met with various “subject matter experts” from the Department who provided extensive information for our review. After reviewing this evidence, our review found that:
• 29 of the recommendations have been completed by the Department • 15 of the recommendations are in progress
The audited recommendations are listed below by category. OIR Group’s specific findings regarding each recommendation follow the summary table.

Planning and Intelligence Recommendations
Several of the recommendations were related to intelligence, planning, and communication lapses identified in the OIR Group report. To address many of these recommendations, the Department created a formal “Planning and Intelligence Cadre” within the Professional Services Division in October of 2020. The Cadre is considered

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 3 | P a g e
as collateral duty1for 15 members, who schedule shifts to constantly monitor intelligence sources, such as social media, and create Incident Command plans for planned events.2 These recommendations and their status are summarized in the table below.
1 “Collateral duty” means an assignment that personnel take on or are assigned in addition to their regular duties. Because SMPD is a smaller agency, many officers take on one or more collateral duties. This is commendable but can also lead to burn-out as officers take on multiple roles and responsibilities. And we advise that the Department carefully consider assignments to roles that might conflict; for example, a member of the Planning and Intelligence Cadre is also a highly-trained member of SWAT. When he is assigned to Intelligence during an event, he does not respond to the field with his team.
2 The Department plans to reduce the size of this Cadre and place it under the direction of new command staff. The Department contends that a smaller size will allow for closer collaboration, better communication, and more specific responsibilities among Cadre members.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 4 | P a g e
Rec # Recommendation Policy or Evidence Status
2 The Chief of Police should make clear
to the Department and City leadership
when they will be out of town and
clearly designate an Acting Chief in her
or his absence.
204.5 - Electronic
Mail
701 - Personal
Communication
Devices Completed
3 SMPD should develop written protocols
to ensure that an operations plan is
developed in advance of all potential
crowd control situations, establishing
expectations for the depth and inclusion
as well as a chain of command
approval mechanism.
433.5 - Planned
Event Preparation
Ops Plans are
prepared routinely
now; length and
detail are
determined by the
nature of the event Completed
4 SMPD should develop written protocols
to ensure timely and thoughtful
designation of an incident commander
for special operations.
433.5.2 -
Operational Plans.

IC designation is
part of new plans.

Rank depends on
nature of event,
scope, etc. Completed
5 SMPD should ensure that critical
personnel, including those tasked with
intelligence gathering and other crucial
functions, remain in the City prior to a
major incident and are not sent out as
part of a mutual aid response or
otherwise assigned supplementary
duties.

Intelligence Cadre
schedule in place to
show who is
responsible at each
time of day. That
person does not
report out to field
even if part of their
regular duties. Completed
6 SMPD should establish a dedicated
listserv with “read receipt” functionality
for command to receive intelligence
briefings in a formal and timely manner
and confirm receipt of such information.

Reviewed and
discussed. Completed
26 SMPD should consider who from
command-level staff will take on the
role of Overall Field Incident Command
if the Civil Unrest Annex is activated
and train this/these personnel on the
requirements and expectations of the
plan.

Reviewed ICS
plans; overview from
Intelligence/Planning
Cadre Completed

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 5 | P a g e
27 City leadership, in collaboration with
Public Works, should consider
determining guidelines for use of
barriers in advance of civil unrest, both
protective fencing on public and private
property and for traffic control, that are
practicable and effective.

Reviewed plans
from Public Works Completed
28 City leadership, in collaboration with
Public Works, should consider
establishing guidelines for use of heavy
equipment to support defensive
enforcement action.

Reviewed plans
from Public Works Completed
29 SMPD leadership should work with
Area A partners to develop solutions to
address the bureaucratic challenges
exposed on May 31 and ensure an
equitable distribution of National Guard
assets in future situations involving civil
unrest.

Reviewed currently
used ICS and Ops
Plans showing
advanced calls to
Area A partners. Completed
30 SMPD should reach out to other law
enforcement agencies who confronted
violence and looting in the summer of
2020 and review after action reports
from other jurisdictions to identify best
practices that could be imported to
Santa Monica in responses to future
protest activity.

Reviewed and
discussed. Completed
33 The City and SMPD should continue to
evaluate and refine the ways it
communicates with the Santa Monica
community following any significant
event involving a police response,
guided by principles of transparency,
accuracy and objectivity.

Crisis
Communication
Plan;
Community
Conversation;
Coffee with a Cop
series In Progress
Recommendation 2 deals with communication for intelligence and planning. It requires that the Chief designate and communicate, via email, an Acting Chief. The Department provided an example of an email whereby such a designation was made. SMPD now has the appropriate policy and procedures in place. We consider this recommendation to be completed.3
As detailed in the table above, the majority of these Planning and Intelligence recommendations relate to essential aspects of incident planning and command. The 3 Of course, as with any changed protocol or policy, continued adherence to those written expectations rest with SMPD.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 6 | P a g e
Department provided us with exemplar Operational Plans created and used for various recent events. These included plans for spontaneous events, such as the possibility of unrest after the Derek Chauvin verdict in April of 2021, and plans for pre-planned events, such as an anti-vaccination rally. The Department also provided a plan for a day when multiple events were scheduled to show how resources were assigned to different locations in the City (namely, a pro-Ukraine rally and a Human Rights rally in February of 2022). Finally, the Department provided a plan based on intelligence gathered by the Cadre from social media (posts related to possible looting in the City).

We found these plans, and related written policies, to be responsive to the recommendations as follow:

Recommendation 3 recommends written protocols to ensure that operations plans are developed. These protocols are now explicitly listed in the Department Policy 433.5, “Planned Event Preparation.” The Department reported and the sample plans exemplified that Operations Plans are now prepared routinely. These plans range in length and detail from formal FEMA Incident Command Structure (ICS) plans, which are extremely detailed and include external agencies, to “Event Action Plans” (EAPs) that cover SMPD-specific deployment, such as identification of an incident commander, a briefing, the mission/objectives, communication, location of Command Post, necessary equipment, and assigned personnel. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 4 recommends written protocols to ensure designation of an incident commander. These protocols are now explicitly listed in Department Policy 433.5.2, “Operational Plans.” Here, the designation of “Incident Commander” is explicitly required. The Department shared that the rank of the assigned Incident Commander will vary depending on the nature and scope of event. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 5 recommends that individuals tasked with intelligence gathering remain in the City. The Department shared their current Intelligence Cadre scheduling matrix, which assigns members to the Intelligence function on a rotating basis. The assigned personnel, regardless of his/her regular duties, does not report to the field.

Anecdotally, a sergeant from the Cadre who also serves on the SWAT team shared a recent time when he was assigned to the Intelligence Cadre at a time when the SWAT team was called out; he did not deploy with his team but remained in the Intelligence function. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 6 asked the Department to consider “read receipts” for all intelligence briefings. The Department reported that they did implement this functionality for several months. However, it created two challenges: first, a large

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 7 | P a g e
volume of “read receipt” emails were generated, clogging the inboxes of those who sent them; second, the relative importance of the intelligence briefing was diminished over time. The Department advised that as a result of these difficulties, it currently limits the “read receipt” functionality for intelligence briefings of high importance. OIR Group will continue to monitor this recommendation and how/when intelligence briefings are rated as “high importance.” We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 26 recommended that SMPD consider who would be assigned to Overall Field Command if the City’s Civil Unrest Annex is activated. The Department provided sample plans showing that specific command level staff were assigned to the Incident Commander role in advance, and that a back-up “on-call” commander was also defined if the Civil Unrest Annex were to be implemented. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 27 was one of two recommendations (along with Recommendation 28, below) that directed to City leadership to address some of the Department’s challenges in collaborating with Public Works; Recommendation 27 specifically requested that the City, in collaboration with the Department, determine guidelines for use of barriers in advance of civil unrest, both protective fencing on public and private property and for traffic control, that are practicable and effective. Public Works reported that, for every City-wide event, the “Unified Command” (Office of Emergency Management, Public Works, Fire, and Police) collaborates to prepare an Event Action Plan in which each department details their responsibilities. We reviewed these documents outlining assignments of personnel and resources in advance of possible unrest associated with the trial of Derek Chauvin in Minneapolis and saw evidence of the type of planning and advance coordination needed to mitigate the type of harms experienced on May 31st. In the plans for these incidents, Public Works committed to providing K-rails for barricading, boarding up facilities, performing traffic control, and cleaning up after the events. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 28 specifically recommended that the City, in collaboration with the Department, should consider establishing guidelines for use of heavy equipment to support defensive enforcement action. Here again we reviewed the Event Action Plans for four events. Public Works committed to providing fleet disposal vehicles (that may be used for barricading) and emergency activation vehicles from Public Works that may be used for barricading as a last resort. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Further, the Department’s response to Recommendations 27 and 28 acknowledged the need for greater collaboration to obtain resources and access to Public Works

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 8 | P a g e
equipment for use in incidents of civil unrest. This was evidenced in the collaborative nature of the Event Action Plans reviewed.

Recommendation 29 recommended that leadership work with Area A partners to develop solutions to any bureaucratic challenges related to equitable resource deployment. The Department reported that these meetings have occurred, with more planned for the future. We reviewed the newest Area A Mutual Aid agreement and found it to be sufficient. The Department also showed currently used ICS and smallerscale Ops Plans where Area A partners had been called in advance of operations so that mutual aid was “at the ready” in case of need. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 30 recommended that the Department reach out to other law enforcement agencies to review After-Action Reports. The Department reported that it collected and reviewed the After-Action Reports from the New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago Police Departments and the Portland Police Bureau. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 33 recommended that the Department work with the City to continue to evaluate and refine communication. The Department reported that this recommendation is in progress. While they have established a Crisis Communication Plan and re-engaged with community through sessions such as “Coffee with a Cop,” the Department acknowledged that there is more to do with regard to transparency. In an effort to increase transparency, the Department reported that it is actively seeking to make more information available to the public on their Department website. Like other agencies, SMPD would like to post real-time dashboards with data on calls for service, uses of force, complaints, OIR reports, and other categories of interest. We highly support this effort as it directly ties to Recommendation 33 and the increased need for transparency. We consider this recommendation to be in progress.

Training Recommendations
The training recommendations varied from Department-wide to command-level, and SMPD has responded by providing training to personnel, both that which is required by Peace Officers Standards and Training (POST) and developed in-house to respond to specific needs. These recommendations and their status are summarized in the table below.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 9 | P a g e
Rec # Recommendation
Policy or
Evidence Status
13 SMPD should conduct regular and
ongoing training on use of impact
munitions in crowd situations so that all
officers trained in the use of these
munitions are advised of how to most
effectively deploy them and have a clear
understanding of Departmental
expectations.

Training
documents &
Attendance log Completed
16 Training for supervisors on unlawful
assembly should emphasize the need to
follow Department policy and reach out to
event organizers or participants with the
goal of gaining voluntary dispersal prior to
issuing formal dispersal orders.

Training
documents &
Attendance log Completed
19 SMPD should continue to impress upon its
supervisors the need to follow all dispersal
order protocols before any introduction of
less lethal munitions.
433, First
Amendment
Assemblies Completed
21 SMPD should continue to provide
command level staff with updated training
on the ICS so that command staff is
knowledgeable about its use and benefits.

Training
documents Completed
22 SMPD should ensure that all command
staff personnel are well versed in
contemporary crowd control responses,
particularly in the First Amendment
context.

Training
documents, list
of organizations Completed
23 SMPD should continue to regularly train all
officers in Mobile Field Force tactics, to
include the newest techniques with live,
hand-on scenario training and new laws
related to First Amendment Assemblies
and civil unrest.
"SMPD Training
Announcement,"
SMPD April
2021 Training
Curriculum In Progress
24 SMPD should consider additional
Department-wide trainings on topics such
as use of de-escalation techniques and
other tactics to reduce tension in civil
unrest or other similar scenarios.

Training
documents &
Attendance log In Progress

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 10 | P a g e
25 City leadership (specifically, the Office of
Emergency Management) should hold a
City-wide training event with all relevant
City agencies to review the Civil Unrest
Annex so that all agencies are aware of
their role and expectations during times of
spontaneous civil unrest. In Progress
36 SMPD should complete the two
Department-wide training items identified
in the Internal Review Board memo related
to uses of force on May 31: (1) review of
body-worn camera policy and (2) review of
the Department use of force reporting
policy.
"Training
Bulletin: Body
Worn Cameras"
425, Portable
Audio/Video
Recorders Completed
37 SMPD should develop and deliver ongoing Department-wide training related to documenting and reporting use of force in
civil unrest situations or other large-scale
incidents, and incorporate body-worn
camera procedures and use of force
reporting into all department tactical
training.

Scribe position
assigned and
tested In Progress
38 SMPD should remind all officers – in daily
briefings, a Department-wide training or a
Training Bulletin, and specifically in
briefings prior to any protest activity – of
the requirement to activate their bodyworn camera generally per policy and during crowd control incidents in specific.
"Training
Bulletin: Body
Worn Camera" Completed
42 SMPD should review its systems for
supporting officer wellness, including the
availability of counselors and other
professionals, and should consider ways
to encourage officers to take advantage of
those programs who may be struggling
with the trauma of the events of May 31
and other events of the past year.

Wellness
presentation Completed
Recommendation 13 recommends regular and ongoing training on the use of impact munitions in crowd situations. The Department responded by recruiting and training a new Mobile Field Force “cadre,” to join and supplement its Use of Force Cadre. These Cadres serve two functions.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 11 | P a g e
• Deployment. These specialized units deploy to incidents and calls for service where their specific skill-sets are needed (for example, members of the Use of Force Cadre are trained and certified in use of certain less lethal munitions). • Train-the-trainer. Members regularly attend specialized instructor-level training sessions offered nationwide, such as the “Less Lethal and Chemical Agents” training from the National Tactical Officers Association (September 8, 2020) and a “Lessons Learned” presentation from a nationwide expert about the 2020 civil unrest (Winter 2021). Once certified as trainers, the officers train the Department personnel in-house.

Using the “train-the-trainer” model, Department then delivers training to personnel at all levels related to use of less-lethal impact munitions in its on-going Advanced Officer Training detailed below (see Recommendations 23). We received and reviewed anticipated and current course outlines for these topics and found them to be aligned with current best-practices related to these topics. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

We did identify one area of possible concern in a 2011 training outline from the National Tactical Officers Association, which discussed firing “skip rounds” into the crowd, noting that it is “difficult to control skip shots.” When asked, the SMPD Training Division responded that the Winter 2021 training did not advise use of any skip rounds. Further, SMPD Training Division reported that SMPD does not have any less-lethal munitions that are intended for use as “skip rounds” – commonly called “wood batons” or “foam” -- in their current less-lethal inventory nor do they train officers to skip fire any type of munition off of the ground.

Recommendation 16 recommended that the Department train supervisors in the need for reach out to event organizers or participants in advance of dispersal orders. First, we saw this requirement in the “Crowd Management and Intervention Control Strategies” matrix, a training document related to Policy 433, “First Amendment Assemblies,” that lists the different actions to be taken, step by step, when managing a crowd event. (e.g., “use organizers and monitors to gain voluntary compliance” is one step in the matrix). We also saw this in practice: several of the example Operation Plans listed above (see Planning and Intelligence) had contact information for organizers and/or a designated “Liaison Officer” and Public Information Officer role. The Department also covered the topic in MFF training and in the Advanced Officer Training detailed later (see Recommendation 23, below). We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 19 recommended that the Department continue to train supervisors on the need to follow all dispersal order protocols prior to deployment of less lethal munitions. In addition to including this language explicitly in Policy 433, “First

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 12 | P a g e
Amendment Assemblies,” the Department also covered the topic in MFF training and in the Advanced Officer Training detailed later (see Recommendation 23, below). We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 21 recommended that the Department continue to provide command level staff with updated training on the ICS so that command staff is knowledgeable about its use and benefits. The Department reported that it directed all command level personnel, sergeants and above, to attend Incident Command training sessions offered in the Los Angeles area and taught by FEMA and the Los Angeles Police and Fire Departments. It also recommended that command staff become members in national organizations; the Department reported that command staff are members of organizations such as the California Police Officers’ Association (CPOA), the California Police Chiefs Association (CPCA), Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC), Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the National Tactical Officers Association (NTOA). We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 22 recommended that the Department ensure that all command staff personnel are well versed in contemporary crowd control responses, particularly in the First Amendment context. Here again, the Department reported that all command staff attend the Incident Command training sessions regularly, where contemporary crowd management responses are trained and discussed. Membership in national organizations (see Recommendation 21, above) and participation in their respective conferences will further their training. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 23 was the most directly relevant to the May 31st unrest and recommended delivery of Department-wide Mobile Field Force (MFF) training. This training was delivered in-person June of 2020 and April of 2021 to 126 officers. 4 We
reviewed the training deck and found the materials to be a refresher on basic MFF definitions, crowd management concepts, and formations. These are consistent with modern-day best-practices but are very basic, and further training is scheduled to expand on the concepts.

The Department has also committed to providing on-going Mobile Field Force training to all personnel during its regular, two-year “Advanced Officer Training” cycle beginning in 2023. This commitment ensures that personnel will have continued and up-to-date training on a regular basis. We will review these training materials when they are available to ensure that they fully cover modern-day crowd management tactics. In 4 The Department provided attendance logs for these and all relevant training sessions so that we could confirm that the appropriate personnel had, in fact, received training.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 13 | P a g e
particular, we recommend that the Department train on acceptable uses of force in the crowd control context; this was not explicitly trained in the June 2020 and April 2021 training sessions.5 While the general use of force policy applies to all situations, a refresher for use in crowd management is advisable. Because this training has not yet occurred, we deem Recommendation 23 to be in progress.

Recommendation 24, which recommended Department-wide training on topics such as de-escalation, is also in progress. The Department plans to train on these topics in upcoming training cycles. Because this training has not yet occurred and we have not reviewed materials, we deem this recommendation to be in progress.

Recommendation 25 recommended that City leadership conduct a City-wide training event on the Civil Unrest Annex. The Department reported that the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) held this training in October of 2020, but we did not receive information to review regarding this training. As such, we consider this recommendation to be in progress until we receive more information from City and OEM leadership.

Recommendation 36 recommended completing two actions items that emerged from the Department’s own Internal Review Board of the May 31st incident: review of the body-worn camera policy and review of the use of force reporting policy. As we also stated in Recommendation 38, below, the Department issued a Department-wide Training Bulletin regarding the body-worn camera policy and the requirement to activate. We encourage the Department to frequently reference this Training Bulletin in shift briefings and especially in advance of any deployment to major incidents. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

And, as we detail in Recommendation 37, below, the Department is currently training officers in the use of force reporting policy. The Department also updated its use of force policy, Policy 303, to require that all uses of force, including those that occur during civil unrest, be accurately reported before the end of an officer’s shift (see Training, Recommendations 34 and 35).

As such, we consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 37 recommended that the Department develop and deliver training on documenting uses of force in civil unrest. The Department reported that this recommendation is in progress. The Department reported that it assigned the role of “scribe” to two civilian personnel. In addition to documenting uses of force and counting expended munitions (e.g., canisters), the scribe also documents items of importance, 5 Recent changes in state law, have also placed limitations on the use of less lethal munitions in crowd control situations; SMPD should also be trained on the new state law requirements.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 14 | P a g e
such as the time and location of dispersal orders and conversations by command staff and supervisors. The Department has successfully used scribes in all the recent deployments listed above.

However, this new role has not been codified in any policy or procedure. We recommend that the Department formalize this role by including it in the relevant procedure (e.g., its “Use of Force” and/or its “First Amendment Assemblies” policies).

We also recommend that the Department create and formalize a training program for this position to ensure that every assigned individual understands the role, purpose, and implementation of the scribe position.

The Department also plans on training personnel to verbalize all force deployments on body-worn cameras when in crowd management incidents (see Recommendation 23 on Advanced Officer Training). Officers are trained to verbally identify their intended target, the subject’s actions that necessitate force, and the outcome.6 This direction, and the reminder to activate the body-worn camera, is also included in all new Operations Plans.

We were not provided specific lesson plans that included this training. We look forward to reviewing these materials as they are developed by the Department.

Because these are on-going developments with more work to be done, we consider this recommendation to be in progress.

Recommendation 38 recommends regular and frequent reminders to activate bodyworn cameras, especially before deployment to crowd management incidents, the Department issued a Department-wide Training Bulletin regarding the body-worn camera policy and the requirement to activate. We encourage the Department to frequently reference this Training Bulletin in shift briefings and especially in advance of any deployment to major incidents. The Department agrees, and informed us that it is including the body-worn camera reminder in its Operations Plans. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 42 acknowledged the impact of the events of 2020 on officers’ wellbeing and recommended that the Department evaluate its systems for supporting officer wellness. The Department has had a Peer Support Program for over 20 years, supplemented and supported by psychologists and chaplains, to help personnel process trauma and other job-related stressors. Following May 31, 2020, and on its one-year anniversary, the Peer Support Team hosted “group stress debriefs” facilitated 6 For example, an officer might state, “the man in the red shirt with a black backpack is actively throwing rocks at the skirmish line. I am deploying one 40mm round. It struck the man on the torso and he fled.”

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 15 | P a g e
by licensed professionals. There has been a significant increase in the number of personnel utilizing services from both the Peer Team and licensed professionals since 2020, and the Peer Support Team membership itself has grown by 20% each year.

These are positive and worthy responses to the trauma and stress of a difficult year, but the Department has also sought to take a more proactive approach that looks toward preventing harmful stress responses. In 2020, it created a new Wellness Team that pairs the Peer Support Program with a broader initiative to promote a “culture of wellness” that addresses emotional and mental health as an officer safety issue. We had the opportunity to meet with the Sergeant who leads the Wellness Team and were impressed by his approach to these issues and his passion for delivering his message to the rest of the Department. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Finally, while not tied to any particular recommendation, we also noted that the Department has implemented new technology to track and report on personnel training status. This technology ensures that officers comply with training requirements, including all in-house training such as Roll Call Briefings. It also allows the Department to accurately report out statistics related to training, as they did for our review. We commend the Training Sergeant for identifying the need for, and implementing, this technology.

Policy Recommendations
Seven recommendations related directly to changes and/or updates to Department policies. The Department reported, and we confirmed, that it has updated their current policies and drafted new language to align with the recommendations. We detail the updates and policy modifications as they pertain to each recommendation below this table.

Rec # Recommendation
Policy or
Evidence Status
7 The Department should regularly review
and update its Mass Booking Procedures
policy to ensure that the listed contact
information and location and availability of
all itemized equipment is current and
correct.
901.11, Training
and Policy
Section
901.12 Policy
Review Completed
11 SMPD should revise its use of force
policies to either specially define “riotous”
or eliminate the terminology from its
policies.
433, First
Amendment
Assemblies Completed

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 16 | P a g e
Rec # Recommendation
Policy or
Evidence Status
12 SMPD should amend its policy to provide
further guidance regarding deployment of
less lethal munitions, particularly to guard
against injuries to the face and head.
303, Control
Devices and
Techniques Completed
17 In crafting dispersal orders to instruct
crowds about the routes of egress from a
protest, SMPD policy and training should
require officers to consider conditions such
as traffic and officer deployment to ensure
the feasibility and safety of any direction
provided about dispersal routes.
433, First
Amendment
Assemblies Completed
18 SMPD policy and training regarding
dispersal orders should be revised to
require personnel officers to include
express warnings about the potential use
of force should the order be defied.

Dispersal order
cards Completed
34 SMPD should develop and approve a use
of force reporting policy/procedure
requiring officers to document force used
in civil unrest situations, or any
circumstance where the subject of a use of
force cannot be identified, and make clear
that in crowd control situations, officers are
expected to document all reportable force,
including each deployment of less lethal
munitions.
303, Use of
Force Completed
35 SMPD should revise its force reporting
policy to require that all documentation of
use of force be completed prior to an
officer completing her/his shift and entrust
supervisors to enforcement of this policy.
303, Use of
Force Completed
Recommendation 7 recognized the new policy on Mass Booking Procedures, Policy 901, the Department created and implemented in the months after May 31, 2020 (and well before the OIR Group report). The written procedures are commendably detailed, including requirements like obtaining contact information and itemized lists of equipment, and our recommendation focused on the need regularly update the policy to account for changes. The Department asserts in its response that the policy will be reviewed every two years. The Department’s commitment to regular review, and assignment of the task to a particular officer responsible for police and procedures updates in the Personnel and Training Unit (within the Professional Standards Section), is sufficient to consider this recommendation to be completed.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 427 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 17 | P a g e
Recommendation 11 recommended revising the use of force policy to either specifically define “riotous” or remove the word. We reviewed Policies 303 and 433, “Use of Force” and “First Amendment Assemblies,” and confirm that the Department removed the word “riotous” and replace it with “civil unrest.” We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 12 recommended providing further guidance on deployment of less lethal munitions. We reviewed Policy 303 and found that the Department updated the target areas that “shall be avoided” to include the spine and groin. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 17 recommends that the Department update its Dispersal Order policy to include information about safe routes of egress. We reviewed Procedure 433.0.3, First Amendment Assemblies – Santa Monica Dispersal Order, and found that the new policy, and the related “Dispersal Order Card,” includes this language. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 18 recommends that the Department update its Dispersal Order policy to include warnings about the possible use of and injury from less-lethal munitions. We reviewed Procedure 433.0.3, First Amendment Assemblies – Santa Monica Dispersal Order, and found that the new policy, and the related “Dispersal Order Card,” includes this language. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 34 recommends development of a use of force reporting policy/procedure. The Department updated Procedure 303, Use of Force, to require that officers document and report all uses of force in all situations, including civil unrest.

We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 35 recommends revising the reporting policy to require that all force reports must be completed before the officer’s end of shift. The Department updated Procedure 303, Use of Force, to require that officers document and report all uses of force before their end of shift. Further, supervisors are required to complete their reviews of force reports before the end of the work week.

We discussed the related practical application of use of force reporting and tracking in Training, above. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Accountability, Audit and Oversight Recommendations
Eight recommendations related to issues of accountability, on-going auditing, or oversight. These are summarized in the following table, and individually discussed below the table.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 428 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 18 | P a g e
Rec # Recommendation
Policy or
Evidence Status
8 SMPD should develop a tracking
mechanism, such as a log for less lethal
munitions, specifically to track how many
of which types of munitions are used and
by whom.
303, Control
Devices and
Techniques In Progress
9 SMPD should examine the use of the
flashbang device on May 31 through the
lenses of accountability, advisability, and
remediation.
303, Control
Devices and
Techniques Completed
10 SMPD should conduct a detailed analysis
regarding whether the Pepperball
deployments on May 31 were consistent
with Department policy and expectations.

Training Docs &
Attendance log In Progress
39 SMPD should identify and consider
appropriate remediation for those officers
who failed to comply with the Department’s
body-worn camera policy on May 31,
2020.

IRB process
under
consideration Completed
40 SMPD should regularly audit body-worn
camera use by officers to ensure that
policy requirements and expectations are
being met in the field regarding activation.
425.10, Review
of Recordings In Progress
41 SMPD should conduct and document a
meaningful administrative review of
officers’ uses of force following civil unrest
situations or other large-scale incidents
and should consider “investigative referral”
of specific uses of force that may be out of
policy or require specific remedial action.

IRB process
under
consideration In Progress
43 The City should request that SMPD
prepare a response to this report indicating
the degree to which it accepts each of the
recommendations made and setting out a
plan for implementation. Completed
44 The City should develop a plan for
independent evaluation and public
reporting on the status of SMPD’s
implementation of the recommendations.

OIR Group
Interim Report Completed

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 429 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 19 | P a g e
Recommendation 8 recommended an on-going tracking mechanism for less lethal munitions. As we detailed above in both the Training and Policy sections, the Department reported that it now includes a scribe function in all crowd management deployments. One function of the scribe is to document uses of force. And, to the extent possible, the scribe will collect and count expended less-lethal cartridges. While this somewhat addresses the recommendation in practice (assuming it is used effectively), we found that the Department has not yet documented/defined the new role in policy or procedure.

As a result of Assembly Bill 481, a state-wide law that requires all law enforcement agencies to publish a full account of their military weapons, the Department recently conducted a comprehensive inventory of current munitions and developed a new policy for reporting use and inventory annually that, per statute, requires City Council approval.

The consideration by Council is pending.

The Department also reported that it is developing a worksheet for officers to individually count munitions in their own inventory to better track what each officer carries into the field.

Because these items are still in development, we consider this recommendation to be in progress.

Recommendation 9 recommended that the use of the flashbang device on May 31st be reviewed. The Department reported that the officer who used the device was immediately counseled in the field; we observed this “counseling” on body-worn camera footage of the day. More importantly with an eye to the future, the Department updated Procedure 303 to prohibit the use of flashbangs (also known as noise-flash distraction devices, or NFDD) on persons in a crowd.

While we would have preferred a more formal remediation for use of the device, as we detail in our discussion of Recommendation 41, below, we consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 10 recommended that the Department conduct a detailed analysis of Pepperball deployments on May 31st. To date, we have not received any such analysis so consider this recommendation to be in progress.

Recommendation 41 is also a work in progress. We recommended that the Department conduct a “meaningful administrative review” of all force used on May 31st.

In our original report, we commented that the findings of the Internal Review Board (IRB) held by the Department after May 31st, were too broad and lacked accountability for officers’ specific actions.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 430 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 20 | P a g e
The Department reported that upon receiving our recommendation, it conducted a secondary review of all available body-worn camera footage. After that review, the Department informally reported to OIR Group that it did not observe any incidents on May 31st that rose to the level of misconduct. To date, the Department has not provided any documentation of this secondary review to OIR Group but has committed to evaluating May 31st uses of force.

But perhaps the more important aspect today is the Department’s commitment to its IRB process, a process that is designed to hold officers accountable for their actions, whether the “accountability” is formal discipline, directed training, or documented counseling. Department leadership reported that it is currently working to reform the IRB process. These updates will ensure that the Department has an adequate “feedback loop” to ensure that their recommended actions were taken and create a more robust review system.

Because this is an on-going process, we consider these recommendations to be in progress.

Recommendation 39 recommended “appropriate remediation” for officers who failed to activate their body-worn cameras. The Department reported that the remediation was training. And, as described in Recommendation 38 in Training, the Department completed this training Department-wide. While it would have been preferrable for the Department to direct training for the specific officers who failed to activate their bodyworn cameras on May 31st, we consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 40 recommended regular audits of body-worn cameras. The Department reported that, per its existing policy (425.10, “Review of Recordings”) supervisors are required to conduct monthly, random body-worn camera audits.

Unfortunately, the Department does not currently have a system in place to verify that supervisors are conducting these audits on a regular basis. The Department was candid in its admission that it could do better on this score, while also asserting that supervisors are regularly viewing body-worn video in their review of force incidents or public complaints.

New technology – an equipment upgrade of the body-worn camera itself to a new model and of Department technology systems that the Department’s technology officer demonstrated for OIR Group – will enhance the ability to audit and review body-worn camera footage. When the new systems are fully functioning, the Department will have a mechanism to easily and formally confirm that supervisors are performing regular audits in accordance with SMPD policy. We noted that the Department is ahead of other jurisdictions in technology enhancements, especially those related to body-worn

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 431 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 21 | P a g e
cameras. We consider this recommendation to be in progress and look forward to reviewing the Department’s new systems when they are in place.

Recommendation 43 recommended that SMPD prepare a response to our May 31st Report, indicate the degree to which it accepted each of the recommendations made, and set out a plan for implementation. This recommendation was completed by creation and presentation of the Information Item delivered in July 2021 and by collaborating on this public report. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Recommendation 44 recommended that the City develop a plan for independent evaluation and public reporting on the status of SMPD’s implementation of the recommendations. That has been fulfilled by this document – a useful starting point for our work on this report, and for our ongoing validation efforts. We consider this recommendation to be completed.

Community Engagement Recommendations
Four of the recommendations required that the Department seek community input regarding decisions on use of tear gas, declaration of an unlawful assembly, use of curfews, and communication. Department leadership reported that it is actively seeking a Project Manager to manage the community engagement aspect of these recommendations so that the community is given an opportunity to collaborate and provide insight.

Rec # Recommendation
Policy or
Evidence Status
14 SMPD should engage with its community
and City leaders to determine whether and
to what degree gas and other less lethal
munitions should be used in the First
Amendment activity context. In Progress
15 After having the above discourse, SMPD
should revise its use of force policy related
to deployment of tear gas and less lethal
impact munitions in crowd control
situations to specify the circumstances, if
any, under which they may be used.
303, Control
Devices and
Techniques In Progress

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 22 | P a g e
20 SMPD and the City should engage with
the community as it considers the
circumstances required for a public protest
to be declared an unlawful assembly. The
resulting guidelines should be publicized in
a way that provides City residents and
stakeholders a clear understanding of
under what circumstances the SMPD will
declare an unlawful assembly. In Progress
32 The City should engage with its community
in developing guidelines on whether and
how curfews should be deployed,
particularly when adjacent to First
Amendment protected activity. In Progress
Recommendation 14 recommended that the Department engage with its community and City leaders to determine whether and to what degree gas and other less lethal munitions should be used in the First Amendment activity context. The Department reported that it is currently working to retain a community engagement specialist/facilitator who will manage this community outreach/conversation process.

We consider this recommendation to be in progress.

Recommendation 15 recommended that, after completing the community engagement listed in Recommendation 14, the Department should revise its use of force policy to incorporate the community’s feedback, specifically as it relates to deployment of tear gas and less lethal impact munitions in crowd control situations; we note that the Department has already made some revisions to the related policies (see Recommendations 11, 12, 17, and 18), but the community outreach piece has not yet occurred. The Department expressed its commitment to further revisions and, again, is in the process of retaining a facilitator to manage the outreach process. We consider this recommendation to be in progress.

Recommendation 20 recommended that the Department and the City should engage with the community as it considers the circumstances required for a public protest to be declared an unlawful assembly and publicize the resulting guidelines in a way that provides City residents and stakeholders a clear understanding of under what circumstances the SMPD will declare an unlawful assembly. The Department expressed its commitment to creating these guidelines in collaboration with the City Attorney’s Office, PSROC, and the community. The Department reported that, here, too, it will use the facilitator to manage the community outreach process, which is the first step to this recommendation. We consider this recommendation to be in progress.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 23 | P a g e
Recommendation 32 recommended that the Department engage with its community in developing guidelines on whether and how curfews should be deployed, particularly when adjacent to First Amendment protected activity. The Department reported that the City Attorney’s Office is also participating in completion of this recommendation by conducting outreach and legal research on the topic of curfews. Here again, the Department plans on using their community outreach facilitator, when hired, to help complete this recommendation. We consider this recommendation to be in progress until we receive more information from the City Attorney’s Office and the Department.

While community engagement specifically applies to these four listed recommendations, the Department may choose to elicit community input on other items as well.

Next Steps
We appreciate the progress that SMPD has made in implementing the 44 recommendations and look forward to receiving additional information regarding implementation of the outstanding recommendations as it becomes available.

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports)

13.A.c
Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: Attachment C: Santa Monica PD OIR Group Recommendation After Action Status Final (5364 : PSROC Reports) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Darlene <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 12:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Comment on Agenda Item 13A

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
I applaud the work of the PSROC contained in their reports, and request council to review and approve the Recommendations contained in their reports.

Darlene Evans
Item 13.A
11/15/22
1 of 2 Item 13.A
11/15/22

13.A.d
Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5364 : PSROC Reports) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Natalya Zernitskaya <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2022 3:15 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Sue Himmelrich; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Kristin McCowan; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; David White; Attorney Mailbox
Subject: City Council Meeting 11/15/2022- Agenda Item 13A Public Comments

EXTERNAL
Good Afternoon Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tem McCowan, and City Councilmembers, I am grateful for the Council's approval to form the City's Public Safety Reform and Oversight Commission and look forward to your continued support of independent civilian oversight to strengthen our civilian community's relationships with our public safety organizations and officers.

I urge you to continue supporting the work of the PSROC by thoughtfully reviewing their report and taking the necessary action to adopt the commission's recommendations as laid out in Attachment A to the agenda item including the following:
"1. Eliminate officer discretion in the use of body cams when witnesses who are victims to a crime are involved.

2. Implement all proposed reforms proposed in the Inspector General’s report on complaints and processes.

3. Require all complaint investigations to be processed, investigated, and brought to completion within 90 days.

4. Require all SMPD officer misconduct be investigated fully irrespective of how the misconduct is discovered.

5. Implement all recommendations in the OIR Group’s After Action Report concerning the events of May 2020." Thank you for your continued focus on this incredibly important topic.

Best Regards,
Natalya
Natalya Zernitskaya (she/her)
[email protected]
Item 13.A
11/15/22
2 of 2 Item 13.A
11/15/22

13.A.d
Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (5364 : PSROC Reports) Revised 11/09/22 at 4 pm
City of Santa Monica
Boards and Commissions Applicants
Airport Commission
Name Application Date
Margaret Falk 5/25/2022
David J. Hopkins 9/27/2022
Eve Lopez 1/23/2022
Joseph A. Pertel 11/07/2022
Kate Scott 5/22/2022
TOTAL APPLICANTS: 5
*Incumbents listed in red

16.A.b
Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: Applicant List (5387 : 16.A. Appointment: Airport Commission (5 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: nicole faries <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 3:45 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16(A) - Airport Commission

EXTERNAL
I strongly support longtime Sunset Park resident Joe Pertel for the Santa Monica Airport Commission. His legal experience, knowledge, and dedication to our community make him a wonderful candidate. Please appoint him.

Nicole Faries
Sunset Park
Item 16.A
11/15/22
1 of 169 Item 16.A
11/15/22

16.A.c
Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: Written Comment (5387 : 16.A. Appointment: Airport Commission (5 mins)) 2 Vernice Hankins
From: Patti Braun <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 3:12 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16(A) Airport Commission

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Himmelrich, Mayor Pro Tem McCowan, and esteemed Councilmembers, I am writing today in support of my friend, long-time Sunset Park resident, Joe Pertel, for appointment to the airport commission.

As a Sunset Park resident since 1991, I am committed to insuring that we continue to move forward on the closure of the Santa Monica Airport in 2028, and I and my husband support its conversion to a “great park” with open green space and recreational facilities, as approved by the majority of our residents in 2014. Joe Pertel shares this commitment and will make a great airport commissioner.

He is a long-time Sunset Park resident who has served on the boards of many local youth organizations. He has worked to create opportunities for our Santa Monica students and advocated alongside myself and other parent leaders in support of our excellent schools. He is also a public interest attorney with decades of experience analyzing complex legal issues.

As a representative of our neighborhood, Sunset Park, Joe will keep our community interests in mind during the next few critical years of the Santa Monica Airport (SMO). Joe is dedicated to mitigating SMO health impacts, and will promote sustainable use with the expansion of Airport Park. He will staunchly support the Commission, and City Council in preparing for the successful closure of the airport and its conversion to a park in 2029.

Thank you for your consideration of Joe Pertel’s appointment to the Airport Commission.

Patti Braun
Resident and Homeowner,
1811 Pier Avenue, Sunset Park
Item 16.A
11/15/22
2 of 169 Item 16.A
11/15/22

16.A.c
Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: Written Comment (5387 : 16.A. Appointment: Airport Commission (5 mins)) 1 Vernice Hankins
From: Lyn Greenberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 10:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16(A) - Airport Commission