Santa Monica City Council
June 13, 2023

City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023 Santa Monica, California

RESOLUTION NUMBER (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ADOPTING THE 2023

ANNUAL WATER SHORTAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT
WHEREAS, the California Legislature enacted Assembly Bill 1414 amending Sections 10608.34, 10609.20, 10609.22, 10609.24, 10609.26, 10621, 10631, and 10632.1 of, and to add Section 10609.25 to, the California Water Code; and WHEREAS, Section 10632.1 of the California Water Code requires an urban water supplier to conduct an annual water supply and demand assessment and submit an annual water shortage assessment report to the California Department of Water Resources consistent with the supplier’s water shortage contingency plan by July 1 of each year; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica is an urban supplier of water; and WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica water shortage contingency plan requires annual water shortage assessment reports to be adopted by City Council after public review and a public hearing, and filed with the California Department of Water Resources by July 1 of each year; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica has prepared and circulated for public review a draft 2023 annual water shortage assessment report, and a noticed public hearing regarding the report was held by City Council on June 13, 2023.

12.A.c
Packet Pg. 551 Attachment: Resolution [Revision 1] (5638 : Public Hearing and Adoption of Resolution for the 2023 Annual Water Shortage Assessment

WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the contents of the draft 2023 annual water shortage assessment report and determined that it complies with Section 10632 of the California Water Code.

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

SECTION 1. The Recitals above are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. The City Council finds that the City is in conformance with all applicable requirements of Section 10632 of the California Water Code.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby adopts the City's 2023 annual water shortage assessment report.

SECTION 4. The Water Resources Manager is hereby authorized and directed to file the 2023 annual water shortage assessment report with the California Department of Water Resources by July 1, 2023.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution of the City Council, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

DOUGLAS SLOAN
City Attorney

12.A.c
Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: Resolution [Revision 1] (5638 : Public Hearing and Adoption of Resolution for the 2023 Annual Water Shortage Assessment From: Amanda Grossman
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 12a - Water Shortage Assessment Report
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 4:03:20 PM
Attachments: 23.04.17_WaterShortageAssessmentPlan.docx
image001.png
Good afternoon,
Attached is a motion made by the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment regarding Item 12a - Annual Water Shortage Assessment Report. Please let me know if you need any additional information. Thank you.

Amanda Grossman (She/Her)
Sustainability Analyst
LEED Green Associate, TRUE Advisor, ENV SP
(310) 458-2201 x 2406
Sustainablesm.org
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Subscribe to City of Santa Monica Email Updates

12.A.d
Packet Pg. 553 Attachment: Written Comments (5638 : Public Hearing and Adoption of Resolution for the 2023 Annual Water Shortage Assessment Report) Memo
To: City of Santa Monica City Counciland City Manager’s Office From: Dean Kubani, Chair,Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment
Signature:

Date: April 18, 2023
Re: City of Santa Monica Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment Motion Regarding the Water Supply and Demand Assessment Report
At the April 17, 2023 regular meeting, the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment discussed and took action on the following agenda item:
a. Water Supply and Demand Assessment
i) Dinaz Kureishy (Civil Engineer Assistant) presented update to the Water Supply and Demand Assessment report. The report
assesses the projected water supply and usage for the City. ii) Staff recommends staying in Stage 2 Water conservation efforts and helps the City meet water self-sufficiency goals and reduces the amount of imported water.
iii) The report will be presented to Council in June and then to the Department of Water Resources in July.

After discussion, the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment made the following motion:

The Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment recommends that Council to support the resolution to adopt the 2023 Water Shortage Assessment Report.

The motion was made by Vice Chair Mearns, and seconded by Member Sokol.

12.A.d
Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: Written Comments (5638 : Public Hearing and Adoption of Resolution for the 2023 Annual Water Shortage Assessment Report) The motion was approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Chair Kubani
Vice Chair Mearns
Member Lempert
Member Sokol
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: Member Pettit and Member Tower

12.A.d
Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: Written Comments (5638 : Public Hearing and Adoption of Resolution for the 2023 Annual Water Shortage Assessment Report) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023
Agenda Item: 12.B
1 of 11
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Resource Recovery & Recycling
Subject: Public Hearing and Adoption of Solid Waste Rate Resolution Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Hold a public hearing.

2. Receive public comment pursuant to Proposition 218 requirements.

3. Consider all protests against the proposed solid waste rate increases that have been submitted in accordance with Proposition 218.

4. Adopt findings of Statutory Exemption pursuant to Public Resources Code 20180(b)(8) and Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15273 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

5. Adopt the attached resolution establishing a five-year schedule of solid waste rates effective August 1, 2023, for FY 2023-24 and July 1 every year thereafter through July 1, 2027, for FY 2027-28.

Summary
The City’s Resource Recovery and Recycling Division (RRR) provides year-round sanitation services to over 93,000 Santa Monica residents plus additional daytime workers and visitors. These services, such as solid waste collection, recycling, organics recycling, alley cleanup, street sweeping, household hazardous waste collection, and zero waste education, are primarily funded through solid waste utility rates. The last solid waste rate increase was approved by the City Council nine years ago in 2014.

In 2020, the City consciously paused a proposed solid waste rate increase at the beginning of the COVID-19 global pandemic to avoid imposing additional financial hardships on ratepayers. After a three-year rate freeze, RRR now relies on spending

12.B
Packet Pg. 556
2 of 11
down reserves in its enterprise fund in order to sustain a $37 million sanitation operation with 93.9 full-time-equivalent (FTE) essential workers who collected over 176 million pounds of organics, recyclables, and landfill trash in Fiscal Year 2022-2023 while trying to keep pace with escalating costs due to inflation, increasing community needs, and State regulatory compliance. Without a rate increase, RRR would deplete its reserves in 2024. In order to preserve the City’s ability to provide residents and businesses with reliable and cost effective municipal solid waste management services while ensuring the RRR Fund remains financially self-sustaining, the proposed rate adjustments are critical and necessary.

The 2023-2028 Five-Year Solid Waste Rate Study (Attachment A) recommends an 11 percent increase per year from Fiscal Year 2023-24 through Fiscal Year 2027-28.

Furthermore, a rate restructuring in the first year is recommended for multi-family and commercial customers to eliminate the livable unit charges and water meter charges and fold in street sweeping services into one bundled solid waste and recycling rate in order to simplify and modernize the rate structure to meet solid waste industry standards.

These recommendations were presented and supported by the City Council during the study session held on February 28, 2023. Even with the proposed increases, Santa Monica’s solid waste rates are still among the lowest in Los Angeles County.

This report discusses the proposed solid waste rates and new or improved community programs funded by the new rates, including the creation of a new income-qualified Solid Waste Rate Assistance Program, a new Community Cleanup Program, and the enhancement of the existing Bulky Item Illegal Dumping Response Program.

Pursuant to Proposition 218 legal requirements, staff recommends that the City Council conduct a public hearing at the Council Meeting on June 13, 2023, receive community comments, and approve the proposed solid waste rates for 2023-2028.

Background
In support of a clean, safe, and sustainable Santa Monica, the 2023-2028 Five-Year Solid Waste Rate Study proposes new rates that will enable the City to meet increasing

12.B
Packet Pg. 557
3 of 11
community needs including regulatory compliance with the new statewide mandatory organics recycling law Senate Bill 1383 (SB 1383), increase alley cleaning frequencies, enhance bulky item and illegal dumping pickup services, support volunteer-organized community cleanup activities, sweep the City’s increasing inventory of protected bicycle lanes, and continue its sustainability efforts to achieve the City Council’s goal of zero waste by 2030, which is defined as lowering the per capita landfill disposal rate to 1.1 pounds per person per day (PPD) by 2030 from the current rate of 3.5 PPD.

12.B
Packet Pg. 558
4 of 11
Discussion
Clean and Safe
At the study session on February 28, 2023, staff presented two rate adjustment options and one alternative outcome in detail (Attachment B) for the City Council’s discussion:

Table 1. Solid Waste Rate Option Summary
Option Additional
Staffing
Level
Proposed
Annual
Increase
Anticipated Outcome
One – Enhanced Clean and Safe
Services (RECOMMENDED)

15.12 FTE 11% Enhanced bulky item illegal dumping collection Proactive weekly alley cleanup
Quarterly community cleanup program
Two – Right-Size Basic Services 8.12 FTE 10.2% Right-size existing basic services No enhanced bulky item illegal dumping collection
No quarterly community cleanup program
Alternative (NOT RECOMMENDED) 0 FTE 9% Staffing shortages persist Missed or delayed collections continue
City’s cleanliness degrades
City Council supported rate adjustment Option One, titled Enhanced Clean and Safe Services, which supports a cleaner, safer, and more sustainable City by providing the tangible community benefits summarized in Table 2.

12.B
Packet Pg. 559
5 of 11
Table 2. Services Included in the Enhanced Clean & Safe Services Proposed Solid Waste Rates Service Category Service
Frequency
Benefits to the Community
On-Site Organics Recycling for All Weekly All residential and business locations will be provided with on-site organics collection and
recycling services of green waste, food waste, and
food-soiled papers at no additional charge
Reliable Curbside Collection Services Weekly On-time weekly collection of landfill trash (black container), recyclables (blue container), and
organics (green containers)
Enhanced Bulky Item and Illegal Dumping
Collection Program
Weekly Proactive and frequent removal of illegally dumped and abandoned items from alleys and sidewalks to
minimize undesirable behaviors and improve the
City’s overall cleanliness
Year-Round Recycling Events Monthly All residents have access to free recycling events that rotate monthly, including compost and kitchen
pail giveaways, paper shredding and recycling,
collection and recycling of hard-to-recycle items
such as electronic waste, mattresses, box springs,
and carpets
New Community Cleanup Program Quarterly A new, volunteer-driven program that empowers residents and businesses to play a part in cleaning
up their neighborhood with City-supported supplies
and resources
Enhanced Sweeping Program Year-Round
As Needed
Routine sweeping of all City streets, alleys, and
protected bike paths; increased removal of fallen
palm fronds from public right-of-way
Enhanced Zero Waste Education and Outreach Year-Round
As Needed
Increased capacity and frequency to provide waste
reduction and recycling education to residents and
businesses through all means, including social
media, mailers, in-person appointments,
inspections, and on-site technical assistance
On-Demand Household Hazardous Waste
(HHW) Collection
Year-Round
As Needed
All residents can request a HHW collection from
their doorstep at no additional charge
The proposed rates shown in Table 3 are for two months of service (the City bills bimonthly, or six times a year) for some of the most frequently chosen landfill trash service levels by customer type. Recycling and organics recycling services are bundled in the rates at no additional charge. RRR offers a wide variety of service levels, ranging from one 65-gallon trash cart with once-a-week collection to multiple 4-cubic-yard trash bins with seven-day-a-week collection. A complete set of proposed solid waste rates for all service levels from 2023-2028 is attached (Attachment C) and posted online at www.santamonica.gov/solid-waste-rates.

12.B
Packet Pg. 560
6 of 11
Table 3. Proposed Rates of Typical Solid Waste Services Customer Type Current Proposed

8.1.2023
Proposed

7.1.2024
Proposed

7.1.2025
Proposed

7.1.2026
Proposed

7.1.2027
Single-Family
One 65-gallon 1x per week collection $83.55 $92.74 $102.94 $114.26 $126.83 $140.78 One 95-gallon 1x per week collection $107.79 $119.65 $132.81 $147.42 $163.64 $181.64 Multi-Family
Four-unit apartment with two 95-gallon
1x per week collection
$198.56 $239.30 $265.62 $294.84 $327.28 $363.28
Ten-unit apartment with one 300-
gallon 2x per week collection
$445.16 $550.00 $610.50 $677.66 $752.20 $834.94
Commercial
One 2-cubic-yard 1x/week
collection with 0.75-inch water meter
$262.67 $309.38 $344.01 $382.45 $425.11 $472.46
One 3-cubic-yard 3x/week
collection with 3-inch water meter
$1,060.22 $1,411.11 $1,566.96 $1,739.94 $1,931.91 $2,144.97 For single-family customers, the proposed rate increase is 11% annually for all five years. For multi-family and commercial ratepayers, the Year One increase on August 1, 2023, is greater than the subsequent years. A rate restructuring is required for these customers in the first year to eliminate the livable unit charges and water meter charges and fold in street sweeping services into one bundled rate to ensure the City’s rate structure is consistent among all customer types and align with solid waste industry standards. Year Two through Year Five increases are identical to single-family customers at 11%.

With the proposed increases, Santa Monica’s solid waste rates for single-family customers are slightly higher than some cities, but it is important to note the City also provides more services to its residents at no additional charge, such as year-round recycling events and on-demand door-to-door household hazardous waste collection.

On the other hand, the City’s multi-family and commercial rates are among the lowest in Los Angeles County because some cities contract out the collection services for those customer types to private haulers, while Santa Monica remains one of only three cities in the County (including Culver City and Claremont) that provide municipal solid waste management services to all customers. This demonstrates the benefits of a municipallyrun solid waste management operation.

12.B
Packet Pg. 561
7 of 11
The new rates would be effective on August 1, 2023, and annually thereafter on the first day of the fiscal year from July 1, 2024, through July 1, 2027. The additional revenues generated from the rate increases are anticipated to keep the RRR Fund in a positive fund balance, but the continued use of RRR reserve funds through FY 2025-26 are anticipated to be required to keep the annual increase to 11% and not at a higher rate.

Barring any unforeseen circumstances, over time, RRR Fund reserves are projected to be restored to an industry best practice standard of a minimum 90-days of operating expenditures.

Sustainability
Besides cost effectiveness, having full, local control of a municipal operation means RRR maintains the flexibility in its service offerings and the ability to set priorities that are important to the community, such as doubling down on bulky item illegal dumping cleanup efforts while recovering recyclable items (e.g. cardboards dumped on the ground) and diverting them from landfills, committing to sustainable waste management strategies, including continued implementation of mandatory organics recycling of all residents and businesses, and striving towards the City Council’s sustainability goal of achieving zero waste by 2030, which is locally defined as reducing the landfill disposal rate to 1.1 pounds per person per day (PPD). Currently, the City generates 3.5 PPD, and much progress is needed in zero waste strategy implementation.

New: Solid Waste Rate Assistance Program
Council supported staff’s recommendation of allocating General Fund resources to create an income-qualified Solid Waste Rate Assistance Program to minimize the financial impacts on eligible ratepayers.

Staff recommends mirroring the eligibility criteria of the City’s existing water and wastewater (sewer) utility rates low-income assistance program. Currently, incomequalified customers who are enrolled in Southern California Edison and Southern

12.B
Packet Pg. 562
8 of 11
California Gas Company’s California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE)1 program can submit proof of CARE program enrollment to the City and apply for discounted water and wastewater rates, which reduces the Tier 1 rate by $1 per hundred cubic feet. The actual discount varies depending on water usage. Instead of creating a stand-alone application process for the solid waste rate discount, staff proposes easing the burden on customers and simplifying the administrative process by automatically enrolling all CARE customers who qualify for the water and wastewater rate discounts in a 10% discount on the solid waste rate. Currently, the City has 444 CARE customers.

Staff believes a 10% discount would provide a significant relief to CARE customers to help offset the proposed 11% increase. Staff analysis indicates 64% of the CARE customers are single-family residents and smaller multi-family building owners. New discount applications are accepted and approved year-round, and the discount would be reflected on the following billing cycle’s utility statement. Proposition 218 prohibits one ratepayer class from subsidizing the utility rates of another ratepayer class, which dictates such discounts must be funded outside of the RRR enterprise fund.

Accordingly, General Fund resource have been identified to support this program.

Enhanced: Bulky Item Illegal Dumping (BIID) Response Team Collection and removal of abandoned items, bulky items, and illegal dumping from the public right-of-way is one of the most frequently requested services in the City’s 311 system. Residents perceive the cleanliness of their neighborhood by not only how timely the City collects the materials inside the trash, recycling, and organics containers, but also items discarded outside the containers and on the ground, in the alleys, and by the curb. RRR recognizes bulky item and illegal dumping collection is a community priority but has not had the staffing to provide proactive daily cleanups of the City’s 200-plus miles of streets and alleys after losing a significant number of contract and as-needed workers during the COVID-19 budget cuts and restructuring in 2020. 1 California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE) program qualification is based on one of two criteria: 1) a household member’s participation in a public assistance program, such as, but not limited to, Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), CalFresh/SNAP (Food Stamps), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Medicaid, or Medi-Cal; or 2) the total combined gross annual household income does not exceed $36,620 for households with a 1-2 people, $46,060 for a 3-person household, and $55,500 for a 4-person household.

12.B
Packet Pg. 563
9 of 11
If the proposed new rates are approved, RRR would be able to hire more permanent, full-time sanitation workers to fully restore and expand the Bulky Item Illegal Dumping (BIID) team. The BIID team would proactively inspect “hot spots,” especially in highly visible/high-traffic locations, because those areas have the greatest impact on our residents and visitors’ perception of the City. The BIID team would also monitor the streets and alleys of a different section of the City every day, removing items from the ground and separating out recyclable items such as clean and dry mattresses and cardboard and diverting them from the landfill. Simultaneously, RRR would launch a community awareness campaign to promote reuse and anti-dumping. Given the necessary time required to hire and train new City workers and establish a public education campaign, it is anticipated the community should experience a noticeable improvement in 311 response time for bulky item/illegal dumping collection and cleaner streets and alleys by the first quarter of the 2024 calendar year.

New: Community Cleanup Program
The new rates would also provide the resources needed to create and support a new, volunteer-driven Community Cleanup Program. Community members want to make a difference in the neighborhood they live in and be part of the solution, and this program would empower them to do that. Under the Community Cleanup Program, volunteers from residents, businesses, schools, or community-based organizations can apply for a neighborhood cleanup day on a specified date. RRR would provide volunteers with gloves, bags, and trash pickers. At the end of the cleanup event, RRR sanitation workers and collection trucks would remove the trash bags and any oversized items.

The BIID team mentioned in the previous section would support the Community Cleanup Program, so the program is anticipated to launch in early 2024 at a quarterly frequency after the BIID team is fully staffed and trained.

Public Outreach and Support from the Sustainability Commission Since the February 2023 study session, RRR staff have presented to and/or shared the rate study information with all seven neighborhood groups in the City; met twice with the major business stakeholders including the Chamber of Commerce, Santa Monica Travel

12.B
Packet Pg. 564
10 of 11
& Tourism, Santa Monica Pier Corporation, and Business Improvement Districts (BID) leaders; advertised in SaMoNews and the Buy Local Newsletter; published a notice of the public hearing in the Santa Monica Daily Press; mailed a full-color educational Proposition 218 public notice to all residents and solid waste account holders; created a website with all the pertinent rate study information and frequently asked questions at www.santamonica.gov/solid-waste-rates; and created an email address for inquiries at [email protected]. Additionally, staff presented twice to the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment. At its April 17, 2023, public meeting, the Commission passed a motion to support RRR’s proposed rate increases and the zero-waste programming funded by these rates (Attachment D).

Pursuant to Proposition 218 legal requirements, the City Council must hold a public hearing at the conclusion of a 45-day notice period on June 13, 2023, to receive public comments. Moreover, the City Clerk will tally the Proposition 218 protests received at the public hearing. Absent a majority protest of one vote per property (50% plus one), the Council can approve the proposed rate increases.

Environmental Review
The establishment of the new solid waste rates is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 21080(b)(8) of the Public Resources Code and Section 15273 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that CEQA does not apply to the establishment, modification, structuring, restructuring, or approval of rates, tolls, fares, and other charges by public agencies which the public agency finds are for the purpose of meeting operating expenses, including employee wage rates. The new solid waste rates would ensure that the City has the ability to continue to provide municipal solid waste management services, and therefore, are exempt from CEQA
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
The proposed new rates will impact the RRR (54) Fund as follows:
• Revenues: An estimated $6.1 million in additional utility billing revenues in FY 2023-24.

12.B
Packet Pg. 565
11 of 11
• Expenditures: An estimated $3.7 million in additional operating and capital expenditures in FY 2023-24.
• FTEs: An addition of 18 FTE permanent positions, offset by a deletion of 2.88 FTE as-needed positions, for a net increase of 15.12 FTE positions.

The proposed revenues, expenditures and positions are included in the FY 2023-25 Proposed Biennial Budget, and one-time vehicle expenditures of $1.2 million will be including in a subsequent budget process.

The estimated subsidy required for the Solid Waste Rate Assistance Program is also included in the FY 2023-25 Proposed Biennial Budget. The General Fund will reimburse the RRR Fund for the subsidy amount annually based on actual need through an interfund transfer. Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Prepared By: Yvonne Yeung, Resource Recovery and Recycling Administrator Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028
B. Staff Report - Five-Year Rate Study 2023-2028 (Web Link) C. Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028
D. Sustainability Commission Letter of Support
E. Resolution - Solid Waste Rates 2023-2028
F. Written Comments

12.B
Packet Pg. 566
REPORT
City of Santa Monica
Submitted electronically: February 6, 2023
Five-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) 405 14th Street, Suite 350, Oakland, CA 94612 | p 916.782.7821 | f 916.782.7824 | www.r3cgi.com February 6, 2023
Ms. Yvonne Yeung
Acting Resource Recovery and Recycling Manager
City of Santa Monica
2500 Michigan Ave, Building 9s, Santa Monica, CA 90404
submitted via email: [email protected]
SUBJECT: Report – Five-Year Rate Study
Dear Ms. Yeung,
R3 Consulting Group (R3) is pleased to submit this Report to the City of Santa Monica (City) detailing our analysis findings, and recommendations related to Santa Monica’s Resource Recovery and Recycling (RRR) Divisions enterprise fund and solid rates for fiscal year (FY) 2023-24 through FY 2027-28.

In 2019, the City engaged R3 to conduct a rate study forecasting revenues, expenses, and necessary rate increases effective FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25. The results of that rate study were completed in March 2020, just prior to start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and were not brought forward for Council adoption because of the economic uncertainty at the time.

This updated rate study follows up on that prior engagement, with findings and recommendations including:

The City’s RRR Division provides comprehensive solid waste, recycling, street sweeping, and other services necessary to fulfill unfunded State and other mandates.

The RRR enterprise fund is currently operating at a budgeted deficit due to not adjusting solid waste rates since FY 2019-20.

The RRR enterprise fund will be nearly exhausted by the end of FY 20223-24 and will not be able to continue operations into FY 2024-25 without immediate increases in rate revenues.

The City provides a comparably high level of service to its residents and businesses compared to other publicly run solid waste operations.

After needed updates to the City’s rate structure and increases to rate revenues, the City’s rates for single-family residents will remain appropriate given the level of service being provided, and rates for multi-family residents and businesses will remain low compared to other communities. * * * * *
We appreciate the opportunity to continue to be of service to the City. Should you have any questions on our Report, please don’t hesitate to reach out directly.

Sincerely,
Garth Schultz | Principal
R3 Consulting Group, Inc.
510.292.0853 | [email protected]

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report TOC

1. Executive Summary & Background
page 1

2. RRR Enterprise Fund Is At Risk
page 3

3. Five-Year Rate Study Overview
page 5

4. Revenue, Expense, & Reserve Projections
page 6

5. Five-Year Rate Projections
page 9
Supporting Figures
1 Cost Increases by Category for FY 2022-23 over FY 2021-22 ...............................................3 2 Expense Projections for Five-Year Rate Study ......................................................................7 3 History and Projections of Revenues, Expenses and Reserves by Year ...............................8 4 Comparison of Single-Family Bundled Monthly Rates (FY 2023-24 Projected) ...................10 5 Comparison of Multi-Family Bundled Monthly Rates (FY 2023-24 Projected) ......................12 6 Comparison of Commercial Bundled Monthly Rates (FY 2023-24 Projected) ......................14 Supporting Tables
1 Single-Family 65-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates ........................................................................9 2 Single-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates ........................................................................9 3 Annual Change in Single-Family 65-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates ..........................................9 4 Annual Change in Single-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates ..........................................9 5 Multi-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates (4-Units) ..........................................................11 6 Multi-Family 2-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (10-Units) .........................................11 7 Annual Change in Multi-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates (4-Units) ............................11 8 Annual Change in Multi-Family 2-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (10-Units) ...........11 9 Commercial 3-CY 1x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (0.75” WM)........................................13 10 Commercial 3-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (1.5” WM)..........................................13 11 Annual Change in Commercial 3-CY 1x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (0.75” WM) ..........13 12 Annual Change in Commercial 3-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (1.5” WM) ............13

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 569 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption)

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & BACKGROUND
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 1 of 14 Executive Summary
The City of Santa Monica’s Resource Recovery and Recycling Division (RRR) provides critical solid waste and recycling, public health, sustainable materials management, short-lived climate pollutant greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction, and Clean & Safe community programs and services to residents and businesses in the City of Santa Monica. Santa Monica is among the few public agencies that provides these services to residents and businesses as a municipal operation, from which the primary benefit is the City’s direct control over programs, flexibility in service, and ability to adapt in response to public needs. 95% of RRR’s funding comes from rates charged via the City’s utility bill – those rates have not been changed since fiscal year (FY) 2019-20 and are overdue for updates.

The City had previously planned to update rates in FY 2020-21, in order to provide the new programs needed to address increasing demand for extra solid waste collection, combat illegal dumping, and fund progress towards achievement of the City’s 2030 Zero Waste Goal. Additionally, important updates to multi-family and commercial rates were needed to align with single-family residential rates and best practices for solid waste rate structuring. Updates to rates were not implemented that year, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the City remains without an approved plan to set rates in future years.

RRR is a well-managed operating providing high levels of service to the community, and had a history of low-rate increases, well-controlled expenses, and stable reserves above target levels. However, since the inception of the COVID-19 pandemic, much of the available reserves in RRR’s enterprise fund have been spent, despite RRR cutting staffing and programs, deferring capital replacements and projects, and leveraging one-time revenues all in an effort to continue providing services while avoiding increases in charges to ratepayers. Today, the RRR Fund is at a critical moment wherein rate increases are required for RRR to continue operating for much longer – without rate increases in FY 2023-24, RRR Fund reserves will be fully exhausted early in FY 2024-25 and RRR will not be able to function.

The results of the City’s new RRR rate study will achieve sustainable funding for operations, restore operations to pre-COVID-19 levels, and replenish reserves to safe levels. Rate increases for single-family rates effective August 1, 2023 and July 1 of 2024 through 2027 of 10.2% to 11% are recommended – with these increases, the average annual increase over the last 15-years is just over 5%, which is directly in keeping with solid waste industry trends. Updates to multi-family and commercial rates to bundle street sweeping charges into solid waste rates is also recommended, resulting in varying changes (from approximately 2% to 50%) in effective August 1, 2023 and 10.2% to 11% on July 1 of 2024 through 2027.

After update and adjustment, the City’s multi-family and commercial rates will remain well below most other comparable agencies, and the City’s single-family residential rates will be comparable to other agencies given the comparably high level of service the City provides.

Background and Services
RRR is an enterprise operation provides solid waste and recycling collection, processing and disposal, and street sweeping services to residents and businesses in Santa Monica. Santa Monica is among a small and unique set of public agencies in Los Angeles County that provide municipal solid waste services to residents and businesses, with only two other cities (Claremont and Culver City) providing full service solid waste programs to their constituents. Publicly provided solid waste services like Santa Monica’s can provide a great deal of control, flexibility, and responsiveness to community needs compared to private operations secured through long-term agreements.

Services and programs provided by RRR are critical to preserve public health and are also required to fulfill State mandates for the reduction of GHG emissions. Per SB 1383 (The Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Act of 2016) the City must implement a variety of programs and services to recover and recycle organic waste (such as food scraps, yard trimmings and paper) and thus reduce GHG emissions from landfills. In support of this objective, as well as the City’s Goal of Zero Waste for 2030, the City employs a team of dedicated staff supporting Zero Waste outreach and education efforts, including in-the-field training and technical assistance to businesses and multi-family dwellings.

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Executive Summary & Background
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 2 of 14 The suite of services that RRR provides to residents and businesses exceed those provided by most other jurisdictions in Los Angeles County and the State.

Unlike most cities, Santa Monica provides:

Trash, recycling and organic waste collection in a bundled package via one rate to all customers, which provides a strong financial incentive to recycle and compost waste and is cost-effective for rate payers.

Unlimited collection of bulky items from residents and businesses, dedicated clean-up and removal of illegal dumping and alley clean-ups throughout the City, and quarterly community clean-up events.

Convenient on-call door-to-door collection of household hazardous waste (“HHW” which includes paints, cleaning chemicals, pesticides, etc.).

Regular and popular recycling events including paper shredding, electronic waste, carpet, mattresses, compost giveaways, used oil collection, City-wide garage sale, and repair café.

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption)

2. RRR ENTERPRISE FUND IS AT RISK
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 3 of 14 The RRR enterprise fund (RRR Fund) is currently operating at a structural budget deficit of $10 million in FY 2022-23 after a three-year rate increase suspension.

This deficit is primarily due to the combined result of $9.5 million in cost increases over the prior year, including:
$1.4 million - Normal increases in collection operations costs, including labor, vehicle maintenance, fuel and other services, and which comprise nearly half (43%) of RRR’s overall expenses.
$2.3 million - Anticipated increases in post-collection costs, including recycling, composting, and processing of trash (instead of direct landfilling) to recover resources to meet State mandates and the City’s Zero Waste Goal, comprising one quarter (25%) of RRR’s expenses. $2.0 million – Increases in property, overhead and shared costs, including new salary deferrals per labor agreements, new costs for debt service on the City Yards project, and increases in RRR’s funding obligations to other City programs (OSE and 311), comprising 12% of RRR’s expenses.
$3.8 million – Increases due to deferred capital replacements and projects, including collection containers and vehicles and RRR’s operating facility, comprising 20% of RRR’s expenses.

Additional detail regarding the changes in cost for FY 2022-23 compared to FY 2021-22 by category are shown in Figure 1, below.

Figure 1: Cost Increases by Category for FY 2022-23 over FY 2021-22 Salaries and Wages,
$837,122
Vehicle Maintenance,
$78,889 Fuel, Supplies,
Professional Services,
$471,197
Recycling and Disposal
Costs, $1,319,897
Transfer and
Transportation Costs,
$835,541
Household Hazardous
Waste Services,
$141,265
Salary and Benefit
Commitments (MOU,
OPEB, EMPC Payout),
$1,129,650
City Yard Debt Service,
$496,268
Environmental
Reimbursement to OSE,
$148,615
311 Team Funding,
$223,534
Trucks and Equipment
Capital Costs,
$3,843,155

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) RRR Enterprise Fund Is At Risk
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 4 of 14 Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, prior plans to update rates and increase effective July 1, 2020 by 15% and annually thereafter by 4% were not implemented. Instead, RRR cut staffing (twelve as-needed frontline employees were laid off plus four permanent positions were eliminated) and other expenses, leading to service issues that remain today. RRR also deferred necessary capital truck replacements and facility projects, leveraged one-time revenues, and drew down the RRR Fund balance in order to sustain operations.

Under present operating conditions, the RRR Fund will nearly exhaust all of its reserves by the end of FY 2023-24. Without immediate increases to solid waste rates charged to residents and businesses, the RRR Fund will run out of money in early FY 2024-25, which will have detrimental effects on the City’s solid waste, recycling and street sweeping operations.

The City must increase solid waste rates in order to continue providing solid waste, recycling and street sweeping services beyond FY 2023-24.

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption)

3. FIVE-YEAR RATE STUDY OVERVIEW
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 5 of 14 The City typically conducts rate studies every five years in order to set rates for RRR’s operations. Rate studies were completed in 2006 and 2014, each of which resulted in Council adoption of five-year rate projections.

In 2019, the City engaged R3 to conduct a rate study forecasting revenues, expenses, and necessary rate increases effective FY 2020-21 through FY 2024-25. The results of that rate study were completed in March 2020, just prior to start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and were not brought forward for Council adoption because of the economic uncertainty at the time.

The City re-engaged R3 to complete a rate study for the coming five (5) fiscal years, from FY 2023-24 through FY 2027-28. A summary of rate modeling projections is included in Attachment 1.

The objectives of this rate study were to:

Achieve financial stability in the RRR Fund by generating revenues to cover costs, fund required capital replacement and projects (collection vehicles and containers) and rebuild healthy reserves.

Rebuild and restore staffing and services that were cut during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Enhance and improve services to support Santa Monica’s Clean & Safe community objectives.

Update, modernize and simplify the City’s rate structure to meet current industry standards.

During the course of completing the rate study, R3 found RRR’s operations to be well-run, comprehensive, and generally very stable.

For example, R3 found that, over the prior ten years from FY 2011-12 through FY 2021-22:

RRR’s annual expenses grew at a pace of 3.8% annually, which is below normal industry trends of 4-5% annual expense growth.

RRR’s residential customer rates grew at a pace of 2.4% annually and commercial rates grew by

3.2% annually, both of which were below the rate of growth in expenses.

RRR successfully navigated downturns in recycling markets resulting from China’s National Sword Policy (2017) while also navigating community compliance with new unfunded State mandates for Mandatory Commercial Recycling (AB 341) and Mandatory Commercial Organics Recycling (AB 1826), as well as the Short-lived Climate Pollutants Act (SB 1383).

The RRR Fund balance was very healthy, well above recommended 90-day operating reserves in recent years.

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption)

4. REVENUE, EXPENSE, & RESERVE

PROJECTIONS
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 6 of 14 In completing the rate study, R3 evaluated and projected RRR’s revenues, expenses, fund reserves, and necessary rate increases over the next five years.

Revenue Projections
The vast majority of RRR’s revenues (95%) are from bi-monthly rate charged to residents and businesses via the City’s utility bills for solid waste and recycling collection, processing, recovery and disposal services (projected to be $27 million in FY 2022-23). The remaining 5% of revenues (projected to be $2.3 million in FY 2022-23) are generated from other RRR services, such as construction and demolition debris management planning, solid waste enclosure plan check review, services to other City departments, events and other services.

RRR’s revenues do not change appreciably year-to-year and are thus projected to remain flat without changes to the bi-monthly rates charged to ratepayers. Though there is the possibility of growth in the number of ratepayers in the future (associated with projection of new housing units included in the City’s new Housing Element), growth in accounts cannot be reliably projected at this time, and thus the rate study does not include an expectation of growth in revenue resulting from growth in subscriptions.

Expense Projections
RRR’s expenses are projected to increase annually by an average of ~4% per year in the coming five years, in accordance with the following projections:

Net addition of 14.12 full time equivalent permanent positions in FY 2023-24 to replenish positions lost during COVID-19 staffing reductions and to enhance the City’s clean, safe, and zero waste programming, with projected increases in these expenses of 5% annually. This also includes creation of a new illegal dumping and bulky item response team, that will increase collection of illegal dumping and bulky items while also improving responsiveness time for these services.

Labor costs (inclusive of salaries, wages and benefits) increasing overall by 3.4% to 5.5%, in keeping with the City’s uniform cost-of-living-adjustment projections per labor MOUs.

Vehicle maintenance costs increasing by 2.4% per year.

Fuel, supplies and professional services increasing by 1.9% per year after one-year increases for insurance, contractual and legal services in FY 2023-24.

Recycling and disposal costs increasing by 8.8% to 13.1% per year as per the terms and conditions of recently procured agreements which include gradually increasing amounts of solid waste processing to capture and recyclable recoverable materials to meet State mandates and the City’s Zero Waste Goal.

Transfer and transportation costs increasing by 2.4% annually.

HHW costs increasing 2.3% to 3.5% annually.

City-wide cost allocation costs increasing 3% annually.

Anticipated doubling of RRR’s rental costs for use of City Yard.

General liability insurance costs increasing 3% to 14.8% annually in accordance with City’s budget projections.

Environmental reimbursement to Office of Sustainability and Environment increasing 3% to 4% annually in accordance with City’s budget projections.

Truck and equipment capital costs set based on replacement projections provided by City’s Fleet Department.

Expense projections by year are shown in Figure 2, on the following page.

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 7 of 14 Figure 2: Expense Projections for Five-Year Rate Study
Expense Allocations
RRR expenses are allocated by service container type – i.e., cart service or bin service – which corresponds to the type of route truck used to perform solid waste collections. Annual expenses are allocated to cart or bin service based on a blended allocation comprised of: revenue (20% weighting), tonnage (65% weighting), number of subscriptions (7.5% weighting) and container lifts (7.5% weighting).

The result is that 38.75% of expenses are allocated to cart service and 61.25% are allocated to bin service.

Fund Reserve Projections
The RRR Fund began FY 2022-23 with available reserves of $22.5 million, $10 million of which are projected to be used to fund operations, resulting in a projected year-end fund balance of $12.5 million.

In order to phase-in rate necessary rate increases and avoid near-term spikes in rates, the City intends to continue to use available fund balance to offset needed increases through FY 2025-26.1 This means that expenses will continue to exceed revenues in FY 2023-24 through FY 2025-26 even if the City adopts and implements recommended rate increases. As a result, R3 projects that the available fund balance will 1 Please Note: Prior rate study draft included larger rate adjustments in FY 2023-24 and FY 2024-25 than those included in this Report – use of fund reserves is keeping near-term rate adjustments lower than they would otherwise be.
15,692,311 17,079,520 18,038,251 18,841,735 19,414,774 20,100,146 20,751,515 7,335,557
9,632,260 10,211,111 11,080,094 11,996,900 12,963,727 13,988,766 2,696,317 4,705,650
5,825,138 5,538,435 5,654,268 5,769,384 5,867,027
1,616,237 1,697,049 1,781,901 1,870,996 1,964,546
4,044,144
7,887,299
5,356,420 5,526,106 4,834,973 4,936,893 5,040,599
29,768,329
39,304,729 41,047,157
42,683,419 43,682,815
45,641,145
47,612,453
-
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
35,000,000
40,000,000
45,000,000
50,000,000
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY26/27 FY 27/28 Collection Operation Costs
Post-Collection Recycling and Disposal Costs
Property, Overhead and Shared Costs
Compliance Programs Costs
Vehicle Replacement and Capital Projects
Grand Total Costs

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 8 of 14 decrease to $6.4 million by the end of FY 2023-24, $3.0 million by the end of FY 2024-2025, and $2.7 million by the end of FY 2025-26.

While spending down available fund balance to stabilize rates and phase-in rate increases is an appropriate and advantageous, it is also important rebuild reserves to safe target levels. R3 strongly recommends that the City set rates to achieve a 90-day operating reserve by the end of the five-year projection period. The 90-day operating reserve is the best practice policy for other solid waste enterprise funds through the state and is also the City’s adopted target for the Water Fund. The rate study measures the 90-day operating reserve as 25% (90 divided by 365) of projected operating expenses (not including truck replacement and capital project costs) and forecasts achievement of the reserve target by the end of FY 2027-28, which is the final year of the rate study. Achieving the 90-day operating reserve in that year would result in an ending available fund balance of $10.5 million.

The primary reason that the City should plan to achieve a 90-day operating reserve for the RRR Fund within five years is due to the fact that expense projections are modest and do not reflect the possibility of long-term inflation. Expenses as projected in the rate study generally use low 2% to 5% cost-of-living adjustments, resulting in overall annual cost increases of approximately 4% per year. If inflation results in higher annual cost increases in range of 5% to 6% per year (as was the case for many cost types in 2022) then actual costs will outpace rate study projections, resulting in precipitously low fund reserves.

To that end, planning to achieve a 90-day operating reserve serves as further rate stabilization and likely avoiding the need for additional rate increases above those already contemplated for the coming five years via the rate study. A history of and projections for RRR’s revenues, expenses and fund reserves by year are shown in Figure 3, below.

Figure 3: History and Projections of Revenues, Expenses and Reserves by Year 0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
$-
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
FY
14/15
FY
15/16
FY
16/17
FY
17/18
FY
18/19
FY
19/20
FY
20/21
FY
21/22
FY
22/23
FY
23/24
FY
24/25
FY
25/26
FY
26/27
FY
27/28
Revenues Expenses
Revenue Trend (5.39% Annual Increase) Expense Trend (5.41% Annual Increase) Fund Reserves as Percent of Expenses

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption)

5. FIVE-YEAR RATE PROJECTIONS
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 9 of 14 Using the aforementioned projections of revenues, expenses, and fund reserves, the rate study yields recommended increases to RRR’s single-family, multi-family and commercial rates effective August 1, 2023 and July 1 of 2024, 2025, 2026 and 2027. Two rate adjustment alternatives are presented for the City’s consideration: Alternative A, which includes funding for all expense projections described on the prior page and is recommended by RRR staff and R3, and Alternative B, which does not include the creation of an illegal dumping and bulky item response team (IDBI-RT), and thus has marginally lower rate increases. Though the City’s rates are listed in its rate sheets and billed to customers in utility bills on a bi-monthly basis, the effective monthly rates are shown for easy reference. The complete set of projected rates for each ratepayer classification is included as Attachment 2 (Five-Year Rate Sheets).

Single-Family Rates
The City’s single-family rates are based on trash container size (65-gallon and 95-gallon trash carts) but cover the cost of all service provided to single-family customers. The “bundled” service package includes weekly collection of trash, recycling, and organics, as well as street sweeping, bulky item pickups, on-call door-to-door HHW collection, and access to periodic recycling events. Tables 1 and 2, below, show the single-family rates for the five-year rate study period for 65-gallon and 95-gallon monthly rates for each of the two alternatives.

Table 1: Single-Family 65-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates
Alternatives Current FY
2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $41.78 $46.37 $51.47 $57.13 $63.42 $70.39
B – No IDBI-RT $41.78 $46.04 $50.73 $55.91 $61.61 $67.89 Table 2: Single-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates
Alternatives Current FY
2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $53.90 $59.83 $66.41 $73.71 $81.82 $90.82
B – No IDBI-RT $53.90 $59.39 $65.45 $72.13 $79.48 $87.59 Tables 3 and 4, below, show the annual increase in the monthly rates, which amount to 11% per year for Alternative A and 10.2% per year for Alternative B.

Table 3: Annual Change in Single-Family 65-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates Alternatives FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $4.60 $5.10 $5.66 $6.29 $6.98
B – No IDBI-RT $4.26 $4.70 $5.18 $5.70 $6.29
Table 4: Annual Change in Single-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates Alternatives FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $5.93 $6.58 $7.30 $8.11 $9.00
B – No IDBI-RT $5.50 $6.06 $6.68 $7.36 $8.10

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 578 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Five-Year Rate Projections
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 10 of 14 It is important to note that, considering the three years of frozen rates (FY 2020-21 through FY 2022-23), the average annual 10-year increase through FY 2027-28 for Alternative A is 6.3% and for Alternative B is

6.0%. Likewise, the average annual 15-year increase from FY 2013-14 through FY 2027-28 is 5.3% per year for Alternative A and 5.05% per year for Alternative B. That average annual rate of increase compares well with industry standards, especially given changes in the recycling market places, new and increasing unfunded State mandates, and the comparably high levels of service provided by RRR.

The City’s single-family rates are comparable to other cities in Los Angeles County that provide municipal solid waste collection services themselves, as shown in Figure 4, below. This shows the recommended FY 2023-24 City rates per Alternative A in comparison to projected FY 2023-24 rates for the seven other municipally provided solid waste services in Los Angeles County for which comparable rates exist.2 Though Santa Monica’s single-family rates are somewhat higher than those charged by the comparable agencies, single-family residents in Santa Monica have greater benefits in the form of street sweeping, on-call door-to-door HHW collection, unlimited bulky item collection, periodic recycling events and funding for Zero Waste Goal achievement, which are not common in most of the other agencies.

Figure 4: Comparison of Single-Family Bundled Monthly Rates (FY 2023-24 Projected) Multi-Family Rates
Like single-family rates, the City’s multi-family rates are also based on trash container size and cover the cost providing collection of trash, recycling, and organics, as well as bulky item pickups, on-call door-todoor HHW collection, and access to periodic recycling events. 2 Please Note: CPI adjustments have been applied to FY 2022-23 rates for comparable agencies where applicable. Additionally, while Beverly Hills also provides municipal solid waste services to single-family residents, that City collects solid waste rate revenues via tax rolls based on square footage with the amounts not being publicly available or comparable. Finally, Culver City does not provide 95-gallon single-family service and Los Angeles does not provide 65-gallon single-family service. $46.37
$35.89 $37.68
$53.49
$36.58
$-
$39.54 $37.60
$59.83
$56.68
$46.85
$-
$41.72
$36.32
$54.82
$38.93
$-
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
Santa
Monica
Burbank Claremont Culver City Glendale Los Angeles Pasadena Torrance 65 Gallons Once Weekly 95 Gallons Once Weekly

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 579 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Five-Year Rate Projections
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 11 of 14 Unlike the single-family rates, however, street sweeping is not currently included as a part of the bundled trash rate and is instead charged separately on per living unit. The practice of separately charging for street sweeping per living unit is inconsistent with standard solid waste rate-setting practice as well as the City’s current practice for single-family ratepayers and is unnecessarily complicated and impractical to continue given a recent Court of Appeals ruling that considered street sweeping to be solid waste collection activity. Therefore, R3 and staff are recommending discontinuance of the separate street sweeping charge based on living units and are instead recommending that street sweeping be included in the bundled rate based on trash subscription.

Also unlike single-family rates, multi-family ratepayers can choose from a variety of subscription levels and sizes, as shown in Attachment 1 (Five-Year Rate Sheets). Tables 5 and 6, below, show examples of common multi-family subscription types (95-gallon of trash at a four-unit complex and 2-cubic yards of trash collected twice weekly at a 10-unit complex) for multi-family rates for the five-year rate study period.

Table 5: Multi-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates (4-Units) Alternatives Current FY
2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $59.25 $59.83 $66.41 $73.71 $81.82 $90.82
B – No IDBI-RT $59.25 $59.39 $65.45 $72.13 $79.48 $87.59 Table 6: Multi-Family 2-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (10-Units) Alternatives Current FY
2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $230.60 $314.78 $349.41 $387.85 $430.51 $477.86 B – No IDBI-RT $230.60 $314.78 $346.89 $382.27 $421.26 $464.23 Tables 7 and 8, below, show the annual increase in the monthly rates. For the 95-gallon / 4-unit complex rates, the projected increase is 1% in FY 2023-24 and 11% in each of the following years for Alternative A, and 0.2% in FY 2023-24 and 10.2% per year in each of the following years for Alternative B. For the 2- cubic yards twice weekly / 10-unit complex rates, the projected increase is 36.5% in FY 2023-24 and 11% in each of the following years for Alternative A, and 36.5% in FY 2023-24 and 10.2% in each of the following years for Alternative B.

Table 7: Annual Change in Multi-Family 95-Gal Bundled Monthly Rates (4-Units) Alternatives FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $0.58 $6.58 $7.30 $8.11 $9.00
B – No IDBI-RT $0.14 $6.06 $6.68 $7.36 $8.10
Table 8: Annual Change in Multi-Family 2-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (10-Units) Alternatives FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $84.18 $34.63 $38.44 $42.66 $47.35
B – No IDBI-RT $84.18 $32.11 $35.38 $38.99 $42.97
As shown in Table 7, above, the effect of bundling street sweeping charges in with trash rates for a small multi-family complex is minimal. Table 8, above, shows that the effect for larger multi-family complexes is

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Five-Year Rate Projections
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 12 of 14 somewhat larger in the first year, though it is important to understand that the City’s bundled multi-family service rates are quite low in comparison to other agencies. Figure 5, below, shows the comparison of Santa Monica’s rates via Alternative A (and inclusive of street sweeping charges) to other agencies.3 Figure 5: Comparison of Multi-Family Bundled Monthly Rates (FY 2023-24 Projected) As shown in Figure 5, Santa Monica’s rates for multi-family customers (inclusive of street sweeping) compare favorably to rates in other jurisdictions while also providing a high level of service including bulky item pickups, on-call door-to-door HHW collection, and access to periodic recycling events.

Commercial Rates
As with the City’s single-family and multi-family rates, the City’s commercial rates are based on trash container size and covers the cost providing collection of trash, recycling, and organics, as well as bulky item pickups, although business don’t have access to on-call door-to-door HHW collection and periodic recycling events and thus aren’t charged for those services (which is why the proposed commercial rates are slightly lower than the single-family and multi-family rates for the same subscription levels – commercial customers do not pay for HHW services and events through their solid waste rates).

Akin to the multi-family rates, street sweeping is also not currently included as a part of the bundled commercial trash rates and is instead charged separately, based on water meter size. The practice of separately charging for street sweeping by water meter size is inconsistent with standard solid waste ratesetting practice as well as the City’s current practice for single-family ratepayers.

As with multi-family rates, it is unnecessarily complicated and impractical to continue this practice given a recent Court of Appeals ruling that considered street sweeping to be solid waste collection activity. 3 Please Note: Claremont, Culver City, and Torrance did not have publicly available multi-family rates for the purposes of this comparison and that Beverly Hills does not provide cart service to multi-family. Also note that multi-family service for all except Santa Monica are rates provided by private contractors, not municipal service. $59.83
$-
$56.68 $41.72
$124.04
$77.74
$314.78
$363.29
$510.20
$744.80
$1,023.02
$975.33
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
Santa Monica Beverly Hills Burbank Glendale Los Angeles Pasadena 95 Gallons Once Weekly 2 Cubic Yards Twice Weekly

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 581 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Five-Year Rate Projections
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 13 of 14 Therefore, R3 and staff are recommending discontinuance of the separate street sweeping charge based on water meter (WM) size and are instead recommending that street sweeping be included in the bundled rate based on trash subscription. Like multi-family ratepayers, commercial ratepayers can choose from a variety of subscription levels and sizes, as shown in Attachment 1 (Five-Year Rate Sheets).

Tables 9 and 10, below, show examples of common commercial subscription types (2-cubic yards once weekly with 0.75” water meter and 3-cubic yards twice weekly with 1.5” water meter) for rates over the five-year rate study period.

Table 9: Commercial 2-CY 1x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (0.75” WM) Alternatives Current FY
2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $131.34 $154.69 $172.01 $191.23 $212.56 $236.23 B – No IDBI-RT $131.34 $154.69 $170.75 $188.44 $207.93 $229.42 Table 10: Commercial 3-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (1.5” WM) Alternatives Current FY
2022-23 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $318.26 $469.47 $521.42 $579.08 $643.07 $714.09 B – No IDBI-RT $318.26 $469.47 $517.64 $570.71 $629.19 $693.65 Tables 11 and 12, below, show the annual increase in the monthly rates. For the 2-cubic yards once weekly with 0.75” water meter, the projected increase is 17.8%% in FY 2023-24 and 11% in each of the following years for Alternative A, and 17.8% in FY 2023-24 and 10.2% per year in each of the following years for Alternative B.

For the 3-cubic yards twice weekly with 1.5” water meter, the projected increase is 47.5% in FY 2023-24 and 11% in each of the following years for Alternative A, and 47.5% in FY 2023-24 and 10.2% in each of the following years for Alternative B.

Table 11: Annual Change in Commercial 2-CY 1x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (0.75” WM) Alternatives FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $23.36 $17.32 $19.22 $21.33 $23.68
B – No IDBI-RT $23.36 $16.06 $17.69 $19.50 $21.49
Table 12: Annual Change in Commercial 3-CY 2x Weekly Bundled Monthly Rates (1.5” WM) Alternatives FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 A – Staff
Recommended $151.22 $51.95 $57.66 $63.99 $71.02
B – No IDBI-RT $151.22 $48.17 $53.07 $58.48 $64.46
As shown in Tables 11 and 12, above, the effect of bundling street sweeping charges in with trash rates for commercial customers is higher in FY 2023-24 than in the following years.

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Five-Year Rate Projections
City of Santa Monica | Five-Year Rate Study – Report 14 of 14 As with multi-family rates, it is important to understand that the City’s bundled commercial service rates are quite low in comparison to other agencies. Figure 6, below, shows the comparison of Santa Monica’s rates via Alternative A (and inclusive of street sweeping charges) to other agencies.4 Figure 6: Comparison of Commercial Bundled Monthly Rates (FY 2023-24 Projected) 4 Please Note: Claremont and Torrance did not have publicly available multi-family rates for the purposes of this comparison. Also note that commercial service for all except Santa Monica and Culver City are rates provided by private contractors, not municipal service.
$154.69
$220.32
$399.30 $368.29 $372.40
$548.38 $588.18
$469.47
$665.74
$1,043.49
$848.80 $812.52
$1,109.16
$975.33
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
Santa Monica Beverly Hills Burbank Culver City Glendale Los Angeles Pasadena 2 Cubic Yards Once Weekly 3 Cubic Yards Twice Weekly

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 583 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) ACTUALS ADJUSTED  BUDGET 12345
FY 21/22 FY 22/23 FY 23/24 FY 24/25 FY 25/26 FY26/27 FY 27/28 Starting Fund Balance 21,169,728 22,549,276 12,569,720 6,420,809 3,005,343 2,679,323 5,033,898 Single‐Family Residential Rate Increase 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0%Multi‐Family Residential Rate Increase RESTRUCTURE 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% Commercial Rate Increase RESTRUCTURE 11.0% 11.0% 11.0% 11.0%Revenues 28,388,780 29,325,172 34,898,246 39,267,954 43,356,794 47,995,721 53,140,822 Salaries and Wages 10,854,075                 11,691,197                 12,249,833                 12,924,498                 13,367,071                 13,918,971                 14,433,795 Vehicle Maintenance 3,521,111                 3,600,000 3,686,397 3,774,874 3,865,471 3,958,242 4,053,240 Fuel, Supplies, Professional Services 1,317,126 1,788,323 2,102,022 2,142,363 2,182,232 2,222,932 2,264,481 Collection Operation Costs 15,692,311 17,079,520 18,038,251 18,841,735 19,414,774 20,100,146 20,751,515 Recycling and Disposal Costs 4,034,019                    5,353,916                    5,825,061                    6,587,666                    7,395,381                    8,252,174                    9,162,365 Transfer and Transportation Costs 2,998,414 3,833,955 3,925,970 4,020,193 4,116,678 4,215,478 4,316,650 Household Hazardous Waste Services 303,124 444,389 460,080 472,235 484,842 496,074 509,751 Post‐Collection Recycling and Disposal Costs 7,335,557 9,632,260 10,211,111 11,080,094 11,996,900 12,963,727 13,988,766 City‐wide Cost Allocation Plan 1,276,612                    1,276,612                    1,302,144                    1,328,187                    1,354,751                    1,381,846                    1,409,483 City Yard Rent (With Contingency) 681,022 666,368 1,332,736 1,332,736 1,332,736 1,332,736 1,332,736 Salary and Benefit Commitments (MOU, OPEB, EMPC Payout) 77,490 1,207,140 1,283,413 1,121,523 1,140,810 1,176,880 1,214,139 City Yard Debt Service ‐ 496,268 776,587 777,266 777,209 777,548 777,096 General Liability Insurance 388,375 414,295 459,491 527,285 583,779 621,443 640,274Environmental Reimbursement to OSE 272,818 421,433 438,290 451,439 464,982 478,932 493,300311 Team Funding ‐ 223,534 232,475 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ Property, Overhead and Shared Costs 2,696,317 4,705,650 5,825,138 5,538,435 5,654,268 5,769,384 5,867,027 Restore and Right‐size Collection Service ‐  ‐  740,194  777,204  816,064  856,867  899,710 Illegal Dumping & Bulky Item Response Team ‐ ‐ 641,355 673,423 707,094 742,449 779,571 SB 1383 Mandatory Compliance & Zero Waste by 2030 Programs ‐ ‐ 122,743 128,880 135,324 142,090 149,195 Right‐Size Sweeping Services ‐ ‐ 111,945 117,542 123,419 129,590 136,069Compliance Programs Costs ‐ ‐ 1,616,237 1,697,049 1,781,901 1,870,996 1,964,546 Trucks and Equipment Capital Costs 4,044,144                    7,887,299                    5,356,420                    5,526,106                    4,834,973                    4,936,893                    5,040,599 Grand Total Costs 29,768,329                39,304,729                41,047,157                42,683,419                43,682,815                45,641,145                47,612,453 Surplus (Shortfall) (1,379,549) (9,979,557) (6,148,911) (3,415,466) (326,021) 2,354,575 5,528,369 Ending Fund Balance 22,549,276 12,569,720 6,420,809 3,005,343 2,679,323 5,033,898 10,562,267 Ending Fund Balance as % of Operating Expenses (Excluding Capital) 40% 18% 8% 7% 12% 25% Santa Monica RRR Fund 5‐Year Forecast and Rate Study
Attachment 1 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study1 12.B.a Packet Pg. 584
Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $92.74 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $314.78 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $185.48 SSZ Shared Container Service $59.83 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $278.22
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $119.65
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $239.30 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $358.95 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $212.39 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $275.00 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $92.74
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $92.74 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $472.17 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $119.65 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $944.34 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,416.51
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $275.00 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,888.68 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $550.00 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,360.85 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $825.00 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,833.02 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,305.19
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,100.00
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,375.00 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $629.56 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,259.12 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,888.68
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $314.78 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,518.24 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $629.56 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,147.80 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $944.34 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,777.36 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,259.12 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,406.92 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,573.90
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $1,888.68 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $55.10 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,203.46 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $110.20 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $165.30
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $220.40 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $275.50 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $27.68 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $330.60 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $113.74 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $385.70 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $59.83
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $62.32
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $124.64 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $186.96
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $249.28
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $311.60
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $373.92
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $436.24

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective August 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 585 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $102.94 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $349.41 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $205.88 SSZ Shared Container Service $66.41 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $308.82
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $132.81
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $265.62 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $398.43 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $235.75 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $305.25 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $102.94
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $102.94 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $524.12 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $132.81 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,048.24 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,572.36
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $305.25 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,096.48 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $610.50 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,620.60 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $915.75 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,144.72 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,668.84
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,221.00
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,526.25 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $698.82 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,397.64 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,096.46
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $349.41 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,795.28 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $698.82 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,494.10 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,048.23 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,192.92 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,397.64 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,891.74 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,747.05
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,096.46 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $61.16 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,445.87 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $122.32 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $183.48
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $244.64 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $305.80 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $30.73 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $366.96 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $126.25 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $428.12 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $66.41
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $69.18
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $138.36 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $207.54
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $276.72
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $345.90
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $415.08
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $484.26

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $114.26 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $387.84 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $228.52 SSZ Shared Container Service $73.71 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $342.78
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $147.42
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $294.84 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $442.26 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $261.68 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $338.83 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $114.26
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $114.26 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $581.78 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $147.42 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,163.56 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,745.34
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $338.83 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,327.12 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $677.66 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,908.90 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $1,016.49 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,490.68 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,072.46
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,355.32
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,694.15 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $775.70 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,551.40 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,327.10
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $387.85 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,102.80 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $775.70 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,878.50 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,163.55 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,654.20 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,551.40 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,429.90 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,939.25
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,327.10 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $67.89 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,714.95 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $135.78 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $203.67
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $271.56 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $339.45 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $34.11 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $407.34 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $140.14 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $475.23 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $73.71
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $76.79
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $153.58 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $230.37
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $307.16
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $383.95
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $460.74
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $537.53

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 587 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $126.83 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $430.50 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $253.66 SSZ Shared Container Service $81.82 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $380.49
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $163.64
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $327.28 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $490.92 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $290.47 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $376.10 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $126.83
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $126.83 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $645.77 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $163.64 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,291.54 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,937.31
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $376.10 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,583.08 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $752.20 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,228.85 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $1,128.30 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,874.62 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,520.39
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,504.40
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,880.50 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $861.02 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,722.04 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,583.06
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $430.51 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,444.08 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $861.02 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,305.10 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,291.53 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,166.12 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,722.04 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,027.14 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,152.55
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,583.06 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $75.36 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,013.57 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $150.72 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $226.08
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $301.44 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $376.80 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $37.86 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $452.16 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $155.56 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $527.52 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $81.82
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $85.24
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $170.48 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $255.72
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $340.96
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $426.20
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $511.44
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $596.68

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $140.78 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $477.86 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $281.56 SSZ Shared Container Service $90.82 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $422.34
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $181.64
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $363.28 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $544.92 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $322.42 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $417.47 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $140.78
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $140.78 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $716.79 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $181.64 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,433.58 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,150.37
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $417.47 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,867.16 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $834.94 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,583.95 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $1,252.41 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,300.74 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,017.53
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,669.88
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $2,087.35 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $955.72 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,911.44 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,867.16
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $477.86 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,822.88 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $955.72 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,778.60 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,433.58 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,734.32 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,911.44 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,690.04 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,389.30
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,867.16 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $83.65 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,345.02 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $167.30 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $250.95
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $334.60 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $418.25 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $42.02 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $501.90 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $172.67 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $585.55 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $90.82
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $94.62
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $189.24 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $283.86
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $378.48
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $473.10
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $567.72
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $662.34

MISCELLANEOUS

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2027 to June 30, 2028

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) #REF! Rate Increase
CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $87.34 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $309.38 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $180.08 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $624.16 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $272.82 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $938.94 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $365.56 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,253.72 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $458.30 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,568.50 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $1,883.28 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,198.06 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $114.25 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $466.77 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $233.90 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $938.94 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $353.55 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,411.11 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $473.20 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,883.28 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $592.85 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,355.45 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,827.62 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,299.79 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $269.60 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $624.16 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $544.60 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,253.72 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $819.60 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,883.28 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,094.60 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,512.84 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,369.60 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,142.40 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,771.96 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,401.52 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $113.74 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $55.10 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $27.68 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $110.20 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $165.30
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $220.40
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $275.50
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $330.60 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $385.70 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $62.32 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $124.64 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $186.96 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $249.28
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDN Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $311.60 CDO Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $373.92
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $436.24
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective August 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $97.54 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $344.01 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $200.48 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $693.42 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $303.42 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,042.83 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $406.36 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,392.24 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $509.30 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,741.65 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,091.06 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,440.47 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $127.41 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $518.72 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $260.22 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,042.84 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $393.03 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,566.96 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $525.84 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,091.08 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $658.65 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,615.20 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,139.32 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,663.44 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $299.85 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $693.42 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $605.10 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,392.24 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $910.35 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,091.06 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,215.60 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,789.88 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,520.85 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,488.70 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,187.52 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,886.34 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $126.25 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $61.16 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $30.73 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $122.32 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $183.48
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $244.64
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $305.80
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $366.96 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $428.12 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $69.18 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $138.36 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $207.54 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $276.72
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $345.90 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $415.08
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $484.26

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 591 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $108.86 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $382.45 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $223.12 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $770.30 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $337.38 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,158.15 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $451.64 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,546.00 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $565.90 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,933.85 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,321.70 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,709.55 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $142.02 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $576.38 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $289.44 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,158.16 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $436.86 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,739.94 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $584.28 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,321.72 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $731.70 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,903.50 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,485.28 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,067.06 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $333.43 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $770.30 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $672.26 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,546.00 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $1,011.09 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,321.70 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,349.92 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,097.40 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,688.75 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,873.10 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,648.80 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,424.50 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $140.14 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $67.89 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $34.11 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $135.78 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $203.67
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $271.56
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $339.45
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $407.34 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $475.23 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $76.79 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $153.58 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $230.37 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $307.16
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $383.95 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $460.74
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $537.53

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $121.43 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $425.11 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $248.26 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $855.62 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $375.09 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,286.13 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $501.92 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,716.64 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $628.75 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,147.15 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,577.66 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,008.17 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $158.24 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $640.37 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $321.88 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,286.14 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $485.52 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,931.91 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $649.16 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,577.68 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $812.80 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,223.45 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,869.22 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,514.99 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $370.70 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $855.62 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $746.80 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,716.64 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $1,122.90 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,577.66 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,499.00 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,438.68 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,875.10 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,299.70 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,160.72 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,021.74 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $155.56 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $75.36 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $37.86 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $150.72 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $226.08
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $301.44
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $376.80
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $452.16 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $527.52 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $85.24 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $170.48 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $255.72 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $340.96
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $426.20 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $511.44
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $596.68

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 593 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $135.38 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $472.46 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $276.16 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $950.32 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $416.94 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,428.18 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $557.72 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,906.04 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $698.50 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,383.90 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,861.76 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,339.62 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $176.24 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $711.39 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $357.88 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,428.18 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $539.52 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,144.97 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $721.16 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,861.76 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $902.80 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,578.55 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,295.34 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,012.13 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $412.07 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $950.32 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $829.54 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,906.04 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $1,247.01 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,861.76 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,664.48 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,817.48 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $2,081.95 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,773.20 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,728.92 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,684.64 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $172.67 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $83.65 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $42.02 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $167.30 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $250.95
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $334.60
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $418.25
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $501.90 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $585.55 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $94.62 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $189.24 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $283.86 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $378.48
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $473.10 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $567.72
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $662.34

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Rates effective July 1, 2027 to June 30, 2028

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.a
Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: Solid Waste Rate Study 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $92.74 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $314.78 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $185.48 SSZ Shared Container Service $59.83 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $278.22
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $119.65
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $239.30 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $358.95 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $212.39 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $275.00 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $92.74
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $92.74 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $472.17 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $119.65 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $944.34 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,416.51
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $275.00 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,888.68 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $550.00 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,360.85 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $825.00 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,833.02 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,305.19
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,100.00
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,375.00 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $629.56 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,259.12 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,888.68
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $314.78 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,518.24 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $629.56 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,147.80 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $944.34 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,777.36 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,259.12 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,406.92 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,573.90
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $1,888.68 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $55.10 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,203.46 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $110.20 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $165.30
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $220.40 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $275.50 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $27.68 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $330.60 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $113.74 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $385.70 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $59.83
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $62.32
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $124.64 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $186.96
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $249.28
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $311.60
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $373.92
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $436.24

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective August 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $102.94 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $349.41 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $205.88 SSZ Shared Container Service $66.41 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $308.82
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $132.81
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $265.62 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $398.43 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $235.75 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $305.25 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $102.94
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $102.94 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $524.12 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $132.81 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,048.24 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,572.36
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $305.25 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,096.48 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $610.50 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,620.60 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $915.75 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,144.72 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,668.84
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,221.00
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,526.25 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $698.82 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,397.64 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,096.46
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $349.41 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,795.28 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $698.82 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,494.10 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,048.23 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,192.92 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,397.64 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,891.74 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,747.05
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,096.46 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $61.16 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,445.87 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $122.32 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $183.48
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $244.64 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $305.80 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $30.73 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $366.96 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $126.25 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $428.12 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $66.41
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $69.18
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $138.36 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $207.54
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $276.72
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $345.90
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $415.08
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $484.26

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $114.26 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $387.84 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $228.52 SSZ Shared Container Service $73.71 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $342.78
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $147.42
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $294.84 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $442.26 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $261.68 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $338.83 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $114.26
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $114.26 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $581.78 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $147.42 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,163.56 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,745.34
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $338.83 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,327.12 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $677.66 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,908.90 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $1,016.49 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,490.68 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,072.46
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,355.32
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,694.15 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $775.70 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,551.40 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,327.10
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $387.85 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,102.80 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $775.70 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,878.50 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,163.55 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,654.20 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,551.40 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,429.90 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,939.25
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,327.10 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $67.89 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,714.95 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $135.78 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $203.67
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $271.56 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $339.45 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $34.11 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $407.34 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $140.14 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $475.23 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $73.71
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $76.79
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $153.58 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $230.37
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $307.16
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $383.95
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $460.74
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $537.53

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $126.83 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $430.50 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $253.66 SSZ Shared Container Service $81.82 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $380.49
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $163.64
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $327.28 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $490.92 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $290.47 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $376.10 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $126.83
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $126.83 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $645.77 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $163.64 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,291.54 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,937.31
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $376.10 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,583.08 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $752.20 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,228.85 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $1,128.30 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,874.62 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,520.39
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,504.40
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $1,880.50 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $861.02 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,722.04 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,583.06
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $430.51 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,444.08 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $861.02 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,305.10 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,291.53 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,166.12 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,722.04 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,027.14 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,152.55
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,583.06 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $75.36 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,013.57 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $150.72 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $226.08
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $301.44 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $376.80 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $37.86 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $452.16 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $155.56 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $527.52 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $81.82
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $85.24
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $170.48 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $255.72
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $340.96
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $426.20
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $511.44
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $596.68

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

MISCELLANEOUS

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 598 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) SSC 1-65 gallon 1x weekly $140.78 SB2 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $477.86 SSD 2-65 gallon cart 1xweekly $281.56 SSZ Shared Container Service $90.82 SSE 3-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $422.34
SSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $181.64
SSG 2-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $363.28 RFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 SSH 3-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $544.92 RFX Inactive Account $0.00 SSK 1-65 & 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $322.42 CRC Recycling Container $0.00 SX3 300 gallon container 1x weekly $417.47 SYC Yard Waste Container $0.00 RUC Residence Under Construction $140.78
MSC 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $140.78 MCA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $716.79 MSF 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $181.64 MCB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,433.58 MCC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,150.37
MXQ 300 gallon Container 1x weekly $417.47 MCD 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,867.16 MXA 300 gallon Container 2x weekly $834.94 MCF 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,583.95 MXB 300 gallon Container 3x weekly $1,252.41 MCE 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,300.74 MCG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,017.53
MXC 300 gallon Container 4x weekly $1,669.88
MXE 300 gallon Container 5x weekly $2,087.35 MDA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $955.72 MXD 300 gallon Container 6x weekly $861.25 MDB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,911.44 MDC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,867.16
MSQ 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $477.86 MDD 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,822.88 MBA 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $955.72 MDE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,778.60 MBB 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,433.58 MDF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,734.32 MBC 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,911.44 MDG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,690.04 MBE 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,389.30
MBD 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,867.16 MBN Bin roll out 1x weekly $83.65 MBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,345.02 MBO Bin roll out 2x weekly $167.30 MBP Bin roll out 3x weekly $250.95
MFV Livable Unit Charge $0.00 MBQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $334.60 MFE No Charge/2nd Meter $0.00 MBS Bin roll out 5x weekly $418.25 MLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $42.02 MBR Bin roll out 6x weekly $501.90 MSY City Bin on City Property Per Bin $172.67 MDT Bin roll out 7x weekly $585.55 MSZ Share Bin/Cart Service $90.82
MCJ Bin truck roll out 1x weekly $94.62
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate MCK Bin truck roll out 2x weekly $189.24 MCL Bin truck roll out 3x weekly $283.86
MCM Bin truck roll out 4x weekly $378.48
MCO Bin truck roll out 5x weekly $473.10
MCN Bin truck roll out 6x weekly $567.72
MCP Bin truck roll out 7x weekly $662.34

MISCELLANEOUS

MULTI-FAMILY CART/BIN RATES

SINGLE FAMILY RATES SINGLE FAMILY RATES
Rates effective July 1, 2027 to June 30, 2028

BI-MONTHLY SINGLE/MULTI FAMILY RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study Attachment 2

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 599 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) #REF! Rate Increase
CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $87.34 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $309.38 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $180.08 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $624.16 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $272.82 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $938.94 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $365.56 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,253.72 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $458.30 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,568.50 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $1,883.28 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,198.06 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $114.25 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $466.77 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $233.90 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $938.94 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $353.55 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,411.11 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $473.20 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,883.28 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $592.85 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,355.45 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,827.62 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,299.79 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $269.60 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $624.16 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $544.60 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,253.72 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $819.60 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,883.28 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,094.60 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,512.84 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,369.60 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,142.40 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,771.96 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,401.52 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $113.74 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $55.10 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $27.68 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $110.20 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $165.30
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $220.40
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $275.50
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $330.60 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $385.70 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $62.32 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $124.64 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $186.96 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $249.28
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDN Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $311.60 CDO Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $373.92
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $436.24
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective August 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 600 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $97.54 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $344.01 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $200.48 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $693.42 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $303.42 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,042.83 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $406.36 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,392.24 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $509.30 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,741.65 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,091.06 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,440.47 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $127.41 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $518.72 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $260.22 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,042.84 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $393.03 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,566.96 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $525.84 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,091.08 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $658.65 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,615.20 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,139.32 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,663.44 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $299.85 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $693.42 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $605.10 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,392.24 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $910.35 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,091.06 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,215.60 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,789.88 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,520.85 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,488.70 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,187.52 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,886.34 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $126.25 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $61.16 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $30.73 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $122.32 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $183.48
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $244.64
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $305.80
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $366.96 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $428.12 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $69.18 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $138.36 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $207.54 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $276.72
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $345.90 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $415.08
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $484.26

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 601 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $108.86 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $382.45 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $223.12 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $770.30 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $337.38 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,158.15 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $451.64 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,546.00 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $565.90 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $1,933.85 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,321.70 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $2,709.55 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $142.02 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $576.38 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $289.44 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,158.16 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $436.86 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,739.94 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $584.28 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,321.72 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $731.70 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,903.50 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,485.28 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,067.06 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $333.43 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $770.30 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $672.26 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,546.00 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $1,011.09 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,321.70 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,349.92 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,097.40 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,688.75 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,873.10 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,648.80 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,424.50 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $140.14 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $67.89 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $34.11 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $135.78 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $203.67
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $271.56
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $339.45
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $407.34 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $475.23 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $76.79 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $153.58 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $230.37 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $307.16
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $383.95 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $460.74
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $537.53

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2026

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 602 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $121.43 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $425.11 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $248.26 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $855.62 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $375.09 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,286.13 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $501.92 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,716.64 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $628.75 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,147.15 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,577.66 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,008.17 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $158.24 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $640.37 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $321.88 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,286.14 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $485.52 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,931.91 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $649.16 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,577.68 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $812.80 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,223.45 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $3,869.22 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $4,514.99 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $370.70 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $855.62 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $746.80 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,716.64 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $1,122.90 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,577.66 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,499.00 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,438.68 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $1,875.10 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,299.70 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,160.72 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,021.74 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $155.56 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $75.36 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $37.86 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $150.72 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $226.08
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $301.44
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $376.80
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $452.16 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $527.52 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $85.24 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $170.48 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $255.72 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $340.96
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $426.20 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $511.44
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $596.68

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Rates effective July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 603 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) CSA 1-65 gallon cart 1x weekly $135.38 CBA 2 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $472.46 CSB 1-65 gallon cart 2x weekly $276.16 CBB 2 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $950.32 CSC 1-65 gallon cart 3x weekly $416.94 CBC 2 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $1,428.18 CSE 1-65 gallon cart 4x weekly $557.72 CBD 2 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $1,906.04 CSF 1-65 gallon cart 5x weekly $698.50 CBG 2 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $2,383.90 CSD 1-65 gallon cart 6x weekly $205.43 CBE 2 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $2,861.76 CSG 1-65 gallon cart 7x weekly $239.67 CBF 2 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $3,339.62 CTA 1-95 gallon cart 1x weekly $176.24 CDA 3 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $711.39 CTB 1-95 gallon cart 2x weekly $357.88 CDB 3 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,428.18 CTC 1-95 gallon cart 3x weekly $539.52 CDC 3 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,144.97 CTF 1-95 gallon cart 4x weekly $721.16 CDE 3 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $2,861.76 CTG 1-95 gallon cart 5x weekly $902.80 CDH 3 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $3,578.55 CTD 1-95 gallon cart 6x weekly $292.34 CDF 3 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $4,295.34 CTE 1-95 gallon cart 7x weekly $341.07 CDG 3 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $5,012.13 CXA 300 gallon container 1x weekly $412.07 CEA 4 cubic yard bin 1x weekly $950.32 CXB 300 gallon container 2x weekly $829.54 CEB 4 cubic yard bin 2x weekly $1,906.04 CXC 300 gallon container 3x weekly $1,247.01 CEC 4 cubic yard bin 3x weekly $2,861.76 CXD 300 gallon container 4x weekly $1,664.48 CED 4 cubic yard bin 4x weekly $3,817.48 CXG 300 gallon container 5x weekly $2,081.95 CEE 4 cubic yard bin 5x weekly $4,773.20 CXE 300 gallon container 6x weekly $620.92 CEF 4 cubic yard bin 6x weekly $5,728.92 CXF 300 gallon container 7x weekly $700.59 CEG 4 cubic yard bin 7x weekly $6,684.64 CSX City bin on City Property Per Bin $172.67 CCN Bin roll out 1x weekly $83.65 CLK Lock Charge/Per Bin $42.02 CCO Bin roll out 2x weekly $167.30 CCP Bin roll out 3x weekly $250.95
CCQ Bin roll out 4x weekly $334.60
CCS Bin roll out 5x weekly $418.25
RCS .75" Per Unit $0.00 CCR Bin roll out 6x weekly $501.90 RCT 1.00" Per Unit $0.00 CCT Bin roll out 7x weekly $585.55 RCU 1.5" Per Unit $0.00
RCV 2.00" Per Unit $0.00
RCW 3.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDJ Bin Truck roll out 1x weekly $94.62 RCX 4.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDK Bin Truck roll out 2x weekly $189.24 RCY 6.00" Per Unit $0.00 CDL Bin Truck roll out 3x weekly $283.86 CDM Bin Truck roll out 4x weekly $378.48
TBD Compacted Waste Per Bin 2x Bin Rate CDO Bin Truck roll out 5x weekly $473.10 CDN Bin Truck roll out 6x weekly $567.72
CDP Bin Truck roll out 7x weekly $662.34

BIN TRUCK ROLL OUT
STREET SWEEPING RATES (based on water meter size)

MISCELLANEOUS BIN ROLL OUT
300 GALLON CONTAINERS 4 CUBIC YARD BINS
95 GALLON CARTS 3 CUBIC YARD BINS

RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING DIVISION
Rates effective July 1, 2027 to June 30, 2028

BI-MONTHLY COMMERCIAL RATES
65 GALLON CARTS 2 CUBIC YARD BINS
Attachment 2 Santa Monica RRR 5-Year Rate Study

12.B.c
Packet Pg. 604 Attachment: Five Year Solid Waste Rate Table 2023-2028 [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Memo
To: City of Santa Monica City Council and City Manager’s Office From: Dean Kubani, Chair, Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment
Signature:

Date: April 18, 2023
Re: City of Santa Monica Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment Motion Regarding the Solid Waste Rate Study
At the April 17, 2023 regular meeting, the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment discussed and took action on the following agenda item:

Waste Rate Study
i) Yvonne Yeung (Resource Recovery and Recycling Manager) presented on the Five-Year Solid Waste Rate Study with rate adjustments for enhanced “Clean and Safe” services. Rates have not been adjusted since 2019.
ii) The rate adjustments will help the City hire more sanitation workers, right-size sweeping services, further SB 1383 mandatory organics recycling implementation, restore bulky item pick-up staff, and develop a volunteer community cleanup program. iii) The proposed rate adjustments would be a 11 percent rate increase for all customers (single, multi-family, commercial).

Additional discounts are being developed for low-income households similar to water rates.
iv) The rate study will be presented to Council in June. If adopted, the new rates will go in effect in August 2023.

After discussion, the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment made the following motion:

12.B.d
Packet Pg. 605 Attachment: Sustainability Commission Letter of Support [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) The Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment recommends Council support the findings in the proposed Solid Waste Rate Study. Understanding the environmental, economic, social and regulatory importance of achieving zero waste, the Commission supports the proposed rate increase of 11 percent associated with the Enhanced Clean and Safe Services option.

The motion was made by Chair Kubani, and seconded by Member Sokol.

The motion was approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Chair Kubani
Vice Chair Mearns
Member Lempert
Member Sokol
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: Member Pettit and Member Tower

12.B.d
Packet Pg. 606 Attachment: Sustainability Commission Letter of Support [Revision 1] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER ______ (CCS)
(CITY COUNCIL SERIES)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SANTA MOINCA, CALIFORNIA,

REVISING SOLID WASTE RATES
WHEREAS, Government Code section 54344 and Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 5.08.250 allows the City Council to establish by resolution the rates of municipal solid waste services; and
WHEREAS, the City provides comprehensive solid waste services to its residential, commercial, and municipal customers using sustainable waste diversion strategies with the goal of achieving zero waste, locally defined as 1.1 pounds per person per day (PPD) of landfill disposal, by 2023; and WHEREAS, the rates established by this resolution are no more than necessary to recover the costs of the services provided, including the establishment of a 90-day (24.7%) operating reserve level; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica, in accordance with Article XIII D Section 6 of the California Constitution, mailed a notice of the proposed solid waste rate increases for a five-year period beginning August 1, 2023, through June 30, 2028, to the owner of record of each parcel in Santa Monica; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk gave notice of the proposed solid waste rate increases by publishing once a week for two weeks prior to the public hearing in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with Government Code section 54354.5; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 13, 2023, to consider the proposed solid waste rate increases; and

12.B.e
Packet Pg. 607 Attachment: Resolution - Solid Waste Rates 2023-2028 [Revision 2] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all written and oral testimony presented at the public hearing.

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

SECTION 1. Effective August 1, 2023, or as soon thereafter practical, solid waste rate shall be increased as follows:

BI-MONTHLY RATE SCHEDULE
(All rates are based on the landfill trash service level. Recycling and organics services are bundled in the rates below at no additional charge.)
Single-Family Residential Customers
Service Description 8.1.2023 7.1.2024 7.1.2025 7.1.2026 7.1.2027 One 65-gallon cart 1x/weekly $92.74 $102.94 $114.26 $126.83 $140.78 Two 65-gallon cart 1x/weekly $185.48 $205.88 $228.52 $253.66 $281.56 Three 65-gallon cart 1x/weekly $278.22 $308.82 $342.78 $380.49 $422.34 One 95-gallon cart 1x/weekly $119.65 $132.81 $147.42 $163.64 $181.64 Two 95-gallon cart 1x/weekly $239.30 $265.62 $294.84 $327.28 $363.28 Three 95-gallon cart 1x/weekly $358.95 $398.43 $442.26 $490.92 $544.92 One 65- and one 95-gallon cart 1x/weekly $212.39 $235.75 $261.68 $290.47 $322.42 One 300-gallon cart 1x/weekly $275.00 $305.25 $338.83 $376.10 $417.47 One 2-cubic-yard bin 1x/weekly $314.78 $349.41 $387.84 $430.50 $477.86 Shared container service $59.83 $66.41 $73.71 $81.82 $90.82 Residence Under Construction $92.74 $102.94 $114.26 $126.83 $140.78 Multi-Family Residential Customers
Service Description 8.1.2023 7.1.2024 7.1.2025 7.1.2026 7.1.2027 One 65-gallon cart 1x/weekly $92.74 $102.94 $114.26 $126.83 $140.78 One 95-gallon cart 1x/weekly $119.65 $132.81 $147.42 $163.64 $181.64 One 300-gallon cart 1x/weekly $275.00 $305.25 $338.83 $376.10 $417.47 One 300-gallon cart 2x/weekly $550.00 $610.50 $677.66 $752.20 $834.94 One 2-cubic-yard bin 1x/weekly $314.78 $349.41 $387.85 $430.51 $477.86 One 2-cubic-yard bin 2x/weekly $629.56 $698.82 $775.70 $861.02 $955.72 One 2-cubic-yard bin 3x/weekly $944.34 $1,048.23 $1,163.55 $1,291.53 $1,433.58 One 2-cubic-yard bin 4x/weekly $1,259.12 $1,397.64 $1,551.40 $1,722.04 $1,911.44 One 2-cubic-yard bin 5x/weekly $1,573.90 $1,747.05 $1,939.25 $2,152.55 $2,389.30 One 2-cubic-yard bin 6x/weekly $1,888.68 $2,096.46 $2,327.10 $2,583.06 $2,867.16 One 2-cubic-yard bin 7x/weekly $2,203.46 $2,445.87 $2,714.95 $3.013.57 $3,345.02

12.B.e
Packet Pg. 608 Attachment: Resolution - Solid Waste Rates 2023-2028 [Revision 2] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Service Description 8.1.2023 7.1.2024 7.1.2025 7.1.2026 7.1.2027 One 3-cubic-yard bin 1x/weekly $472.17 $524.12 $581.78 $645.77 $716.79 One 3-cubic-yard bin 2x/weekly $944.34 $1,048.24 $1,163.56 $1,291.54 $1,433.58 One 3-cubic-yard bin 3x/weekly $1,416.51 $1,572.36 $1,745.34 $1,937.31 $2,150.37 One 3-cubic-yard bin 4x/weekly $1,888.68 $2,096.48 $2,327.12 $2,583.08 $2,867.16 One 3-cubic-yard bin 5x/weekly $2,360.85 $2,620.60 $2,908.90 $3,228.85 $3,583.95 One 3-cubic-yard bin 6x/weekly $2,833.02 $3,144.72 $3,490.68 $3,874.62 $4,300.74 One 3-cubic-yard bin 7x/weekly $3,305.19 $3,668.84 $4,072.46 $4,520.39 $5,017.53 One 4-cubic-yard bin 1x/weekly $629.56 $698.82 $775.70 $861.02 $955.72 One 4-cubic-yard bin 2x/weekly $1,259.12 $1,397.64 $1,551.40 $1,722.04 $1,911.44 One 4-cubic-yard bin 3x/weekly $1,888.68 $2,096.46 $2,327.10 $2,583.06 $2,867.16 One 4-cubic-yard bin 4x/weekly $2,518.24 $2,795.28 $3,102.80 $3,444.08 $3,822.88 One 4-cubic-yard bin 5x/weekly $3,147.80 $3,494.10 $3,878.50 $4,305.10 $4,778.60 One 4-cubic-yard bin 6x/weekly $3,777.36 $4,192.92 $4,654.20 $5,166.12 $5,734.32 One 4-cubic-yard bin 7x/weekly $4,406.92 $4,891.74 $5,429.90 $6,027.14 $6,690.04 Bin roll out 1x/weekly $55.10 $61.16 $67.89 $75.36 $83.65 Bin roll out 2x/weekly $110.20 $122.32 $135.78 $150.72 $167.30 Bin roll out 3x/weekly $165.30 $183.48 $203.67 $226.08 $250.95 Bin roll out 4x/weekly $220.40 $244.64 $271.56 $301.44 $334.60 Bin roll out 5x/weekly $275.50 $305.80 $339.45 $376.80 $418.25 Bin roll out 6x/weekly $330.60 $366.96 $407.34 $452.16 $501.90 Bin roll out 7x/weekly $385.70 $428.12 $475.23 $527.52 $585.55 Bin truck roll out 1x/weekly $62.32 $69.18 $76.79 $85.24 $94.62 Bin truck roll out 2x/weekly $124.64 $138.36 $153.58 $170.48 $189.24 Bin truck roll out 3x/weekly $186.96 $207.54 $230.37 $255.72 $283.86 Bin truck roll out 4x/weekly $249.28 $276.72 $307.16 $340.96 $378.48 Bin truck roll out 5x/weekly $311.60 $345.90 $383.95 $426.20 $473.10 Bin truck roll out 6x/weekly $373.92 $415.08 $460.74 $511.44 $567.72 Bin truck roll out 7x/weekly $436.24 $484.26 $537.53 $596.68 $662.34 Lock charge per container $27.68 $30.73 $34.11 $37.86 $42.02 Shared container service $59.83 $66.41 $73.71 $81.82 $90.82 City container on City property $113.74 $126.25 $140.14 $155.56 $172.67 Commercial Customers
Service Description 8.1.2023 7.1.2024 7.1.2025 7.1.2026 7.1.2027 One 65-gallon cart 1x/weekly $87.34 $97.54 $108.86 $121.43 $135.38 One 65-gallon cart 2x/weekly $180.08 $200.48 $223.12 $248.26 $276.16 One 95-gallon cart 1x/weekly $114.25 $127.41 $142.02 $158.24 $176.24 One 95-gallon cart 2x/weekly $233.90 $260.22 $289.44 $321.88 $357.88 One 300-gallon cart 1x/weekly $269.60 $299.85 $333.43 $370.70 $412.07 One 300-gallon cart 2x/weekly $544.60 $605.10 $672.26 $746.80 $829.54 One 2-cubic-yard bin 1x/weekly $309.38 $344.01 $382.45 $425.11 $472.46 One 2-cubic-yard bin 2x/weekly $624.16 $693.42 $770.30 $855.62 $950.32

12.B.e
Packet Pg. 609 Attachment: Resolution - Solid Waste Rates 2023-2028 [Revision 2] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Service Description 8.1.2023 7.1.2024 7.1.2025 7.1.2026 7.1.2027 One 2-cubic-yard bin 3x/weekly $938.94 $1,042.83 $1,158.15 $1,286.13 $1,428.18 One 2-cubic-yard bin 4x/weekly $1,253.72 $1,392.24 $1,546.00 $1,716.64 $1,906.04 One 2-cubic-yard bin 5x/weekly $1,568.50 $1,741.65 $1,933.85 $2,147.15 $2,383.90 One 2-cubic-yard bin 6x/weekly $1,883.28 $2,091.06 $2,321.70 $2,577.66 $2,861.76 One 2-cubic-yard bin 7x/weekly $2,198.06 $2,440.47 $2,709.55 $3,008.17 $3,339.62 One 3-cubic-yard bin 1x/weekly $466.77 $518.72 $576.38 $640.37 $711.39 One 3-cubic-yard bin 2x/weekly $938.94 $1,042.84 $1,158.16 $1,286.14 $1,428.18 One 3-cubic-yard bin 3x/weekly $1,411.11 $1,566.96 $1,739.94 $1,931.91 $2,144.97 One 3-cubic-yard bin 4x/weekly $1,883.28 $2,091.08 $2,321.72 $2,577.68 $2,861.76 One 3-cubic-yard bin 5x/weekly $2,355.45 $2,615.20 $2,903.50 $3,223.45 $3,578.55 One 3-cubic-yard bin 6x/weekly $2,827.62 $3,139.32 $3,485.28 $3,869.22 $4,295.34 One 3-cubic-yard bin 7x/weekly $3,299.79 $3,663.44 $4,067.06 $4,514.99 $5,012.13 One 4-cubic-yard bin 1x/weekly $624.16 $693.42 $770.30 $855.62 $950.32 One 4-cubic-yard bin 2x/weekly $1,253.72 $1,392.24 $1,546.00 $1,716.64 $1,906.04 One 4-cubic-yard bin 3x/weekly $1,883.28 $2,091.06 $2,321.70 $2,577.66 $2,861.76 One 4-cubic-yard bin 4x/weekly $2,512.84 $2,789.88 $3,097.40 $3,438.68 $3,817.48 One 4-cubic-yard bin 5x/weekly $3,142.40 $3,488.70 $3,873.10 $4,299.70 $4,773.20 One 4-cubic-yard bin 6x/weekly $3,771.96 $4,187.52 $4,648.80 $5,160.72 $5,728.92 One 4-cubic-yard bin 7x/weekly $4,401.52 $4,886.34 $5,424.50 $6,021.74 $6,684.64 Bin roll out 1x/weekly $55.10 $61.16 $67.89 $75.36 $83.65 Bin roll out 2x/weekly $110.20 $122.32 $135.78 $150.72 $167.30 Bin roll out 3x/weekly $165.30 $183.48 $203.67 $226.08 $250.95 Bin roll out 4x/weekly $220.40 $244.64 $271.56 $301.44 $334.60 Bin roll out 5x/weekly $275.50 $305.80 $339.45 $376.80 $418.25 Bin roll out 6x/weekly $330.60 $366.96 $407.34 $452.16 $501.90 Bin roll out 7x/weekly $385.70 $428.12 $475.23 $527.52 $585.55 Bin truck roll out 1x/weekly $62.32 $69.18 $76.79 $85.24 $94.62 Bin truck roll out 2x/weekly $124.64 $138.36 $153.58 $170.48 $189.24 Bin truck roll out 3x/weekly $186.96 $207.54 $230.37 $255.72 $283.86 Bin truck roll out 4x/weekly $249.28 $276.72 $307.16 $340.96 $378.48 Bin truck roll out 5x/weekly $311.60 $345.90 $383.95 $426.20 $473.10 Bin truck roll out 6x/weekly $373.92 $415.08 $460.74 $511.44 $567.72 Bin truck roll out 7x/weekly $436.24 $484.26 $537.53 $596.68 $662.34 Lock charge per container $27.68 $30.73 $34.11 $37.86 $42.02 City container on City property $113.74 $126.25 $140.14 $155.56 $172.67 SECTION 2. Resolution Number 10806 (CCS) is hereby repealed as of the effective date of this resolution.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adopt of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

12.B.e
Packet Pg. 610 Attachment: Resolution - Solid Waste Rates 2023-2028 [Revision 2] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________

DOUGLAS SLOAN
City Attorney

12.B.e
Packet Pg. 611 Attachment: Resolution - Solid Waste Rates 2023-2028 [Revision 2] (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) From: Amanda Grossman
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 12b - Solid Waste Rate Study
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 3:58:03 PM
Attachments: 23.04.17_RRRWasteRateStudy.docx
image001.png
Good afternoon,
Attached is a motion from the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment regarding Item 12b – Solid Waste Rate Study. Please let me know if you need any additional information. Thank you.

Amanda Grossman (She/Her)
Sustainability Analyst
LEED Green Associate, TRUE Advisor, ENV SP
(310) 458-2201 x 2406
Sustainablesm.org
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Subscribe to City of Santa Monica Email Updates

12.B.f
Packet Pg. 612 Attachment: Written Comments (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) Memo
To: City of Santa Monica City Counciland City Manager’s Office From: Dean Kubani, Chair,Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment
Signature:

Date: April 18, 2023
Re: City of Santa Monica Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment Motion Regarding the Waste Rate Study
At the April 17, 2023 regular meeting, the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment discussed and took action on the following agenda item:

Waste Rate Study
i) Yvonne Yeung (Resource Recovery and Recycling Manager) presented on the Five-Year Waste Rate Study with rate
adjustments for enhanced clean and safety services. Rate studies are typically conducted every five years in the City. Rates have not been adjusted since 2019.
ii) The rate adjustments will help the City right size waste and recyclable staff levels, right size sweeping services, further SB 1383 implementation, restore bulky item pick-up staff, and develop a volunteer community cleanup program.
iii) The proposed rate adjustments would be a 11 percent rate increase for all customers (single, multi-family, commercial).

Additional discounts are being developed for low-income households similar to water rates.
iv) The rate study will be presented to Council in June. If adopted, the new rates will go in effect in August 2023.

After discussion, the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment made the following motion:

12.B.f
Packet Pg. 613 Attachment: Written Comments (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) The Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment recommends Council support the findings in the proposed Solid Waste Rate Study. Understanding the environmental, economic, social and regulatory importance of achieving zero waste, the Commission supports the proposed rate increase of 11 percent associated with the Enhanced Clean and Safe Services option.

The motion was made by Chair Kubani, and seconded by Member Sokol.

The motion was approved by the following roll call vote:

Ayes: Chair Kubani
Vice Chair Mearns
Member Lempert
Member Sokol
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: Member Pettit and Member Tower

12.B.f
Packet Pg. 614 Attachment: Written Comments (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) From: City of Santa Monica
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: FW: To the Manager of Recycling, Solid Waste Management, RRR Division Managers Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:30:22 AM
Attachments: image001.png
To submit a 311 request please visit 311.santamonica.gov, email [email protected], or call (866) 311-7266
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
(310) 458-8411
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 1:07 AM
To: City of Santa Monica <[email protected]>
Subject: To the Manager of Recycling, Solid Waste Management, RRR Division Managers

EXTERNAL
June 13, 2023
To Yvonne Yeung, Manager of Recycling
and all the Policy Managers of the RRR Division of Santa Monica:

The comprehensive "Rate Study for Solid Waste Review" fails to fully, fairly consider individual customer's actual production of solid waste. Over recent years, Santa Monica has engaged its residents in pro-active participation in various programmatic and educational efforts to reduce the creation of solid waste, including the new Organics Recycling Program to accelerate the City's goal to achieve "Zero waste for pounds per day per person of landfilled trash by 2030." My whole family has pro-actively accepted the challenge of Zero Waste, and most months we come very close to achieving this goal.

Between the Green Organics and the Blue Recycle bins, sometimes we have nothing to put out in the black bin, and often it goes out for collection with just one lonely paper bag in the bottom, or does not even go out to the curb for collection at all. For years I have called RRR to see if there is a tiny refuse option available that would

12.B.f
Packet Pg. 615 Attachment: Written Comments (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) reflect our family's actual production of solid waste, always to be rebuffed that "the 65-gallon bin" is the smallest size available." 65-gallons is obscenely large for a zero waste by 2030 goal. I would think that any serious plan to incentivize the "Zero Waste Goal" would include encouraging effortful reduction of single-family solid waste through offering the option of much smaller-capacity bins. I don't need a 65- gallon bin, and in all fairness should not be charged for making that obscene amount of solid waste.

It is indeed disappointing to see that Santa Monica's new glossy Prop 218 Notification, "Proposed Rate Increases for Solid Waste Services," does not offer or even consider incentivizing reduced capacity options accompanied by correspondingly reduced rates. Uncreatively, 65-gallons remains the smallest capacity available, which ignores the actual needs and efforts of some families, and thus the proposed plan falls short of being an inclusive project. Moreover, the frontpage, bold heading, Ways to Lower Your Bill, after stating the obvious that "the more landfill trash a customer generates, the higher the bill," then describes/offers NO rate reduction plan for customers who have worked to successfully achieve "zero waste by 2030." Nada, zippo, nothing is offered for residents like myself who have taken to heart and implemented the "zero waste by 2030" reality. So it is not quite true or fully honest to state that "the more landfill trash the higher the bill" when zero landfill trash does not equal a zero bill. In my opinion, this is a glaring omission, and admission really that Santa Monica is not serious about truly incentivizing behavioral change to achieve the goal to which it pays lip service.

Moreover, it is very disappointing to see this meager section, "Ways to Lower Your Bill," as an insincere afterthought to the real goal of jacking increased rates across the board. The little paragraph is void of any substantive ways to lower the bill by conforming to the programmatic goal the objectives of which, we as a single family have already achieved.

Although RRR services claims to "modernize and simplify the rate structure," the actual rate schedule does not rationalize or correspond to reflect the stated goal of ZERO WASTE BY 2030. With no rate or use option to fit my household's ZERO WASTE, my household (and other similarly actively participating residents in the City's collective solid waste goal) is thus effectively excluded from a fair rate and use option offered by all the RRR Services Plans, past and present, and future as now proposed.

I don't need a 65-gallon black bin, do not use it, do not want it, and do not want to be compelled to pay for it. In all fairness, Solid Waste Policy and Collection pricing options need to reflect Santa Monica residents' actual production/participation of solid waste production. Have faith that as policy and in practice, the Zero Waste by 2030 effort does actually work.

Over the years, and long before the articulated goal of "zero waste by 2030," I have called the RRR Administration many times to raise my voice and concerns, always have been told "there are no other service subscription options" for you, "you must pay for the minimum 65-gallon bin." RRR has never been helpful to "assess my disposal activities to choose the right service subscription" as stated in the Proposition 218 Notification. Finally, after all

12.B.f
Packet Pg. 616 Attachment: Written Comments (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) these 25 years, I would appreciate being heard, and receiving a response. Thank you.

Sincerely Yours,
Mrs. Aleta Wallach, owner of
355 25th Street
Santa Monica, Ca 90402
[email protected]
Assessor's ID # 4278004015

12.B.f
Packet Pg. 617 Attachment: Written Comments (5650 : Solid Waste Rate Adoption) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023
Agenda Item: 16.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Library Board for a term ending on June 30, 2025.

Prepared By: Xavier Mota, Staff Assistant III
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. ApplicantListLibrary

16.A
Packet Pg. 618
City of Santa Monica
Boards and Commissions Applicants
Library Board
Application Date
6/14/2022
6/14/2022
1/19/2023
6/1/2023
6/5/2023
6/7/2023
6/8/2023
6/8/2023
Name
Daniel Cody
Dan Hugh-Jones
Jason Lin
Elizabeth Fields
Antonio D Spears
Nick Flaig
Karen McRitchie
Deborah Tuckman
TOTAL APPLICANTS: 8

16.A.a
Packet Pg. 619 Attachment: ApplicantListLibrary (5807 : Appointment to the Library Board 16.A.(5 Mins.)) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023
Agenda Item: 16.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Request of Councilmembers Torosis, Councilmember Zwick, and Mayor Davis that the Council direct the City Manager and the City Attorney to, within 60 days, draft an ordinance for council adoption to restrict the sale of guns in Santa Monica and propose additional gun owner responsibilities. This ordinance should be based on best practices from other jurisdictions, stakeholder engagement, and consultation with subject matter experts.

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

A. Firearm Safety Motion_Torosis 06132023
B. Written Comments

16.B
Packet Pg. 620

5.29.2023
Motion by Councilmember Torosis: Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy
Leading the world in gun ownership, there are more guns than people in the United States. As a Country, we surpass every other developed nation on Earth in gun-related deaths. The United Stated accounts for just 4% of the world’s population but 35% of global firearm suicides and 9% of global firearm homicides.1 Since 1966, nearly 90% of all mass shootings resulting in six or more deaths have occurred wholly or partly in locations where civilian guns were allowed and/or where armed security or law enforcement was present.2
California’s common sense gun safety laws are extremely effective; we have a 37% lower gun death rate than the national average. Santa Monica is still not immune to gun violence. For example, in 2013, a gunman opened fire at Santa Monica College, killing five people. In the wake of the recent tragedies in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay, as well as the continued threat of mass shootings, it’s critical that Santa Monica takes lead on the issue of gun safety and reform. Santa Monica currently has ordinances in place that require gun dealers to obtain a local license to operate, prohibit firearm sales at home businesses, and require dealers to periodically report their inventories to law enforcement.

In recent years, surrounding cities have adopted additional restrictions to ensure that guns are not sold or carried unnecessarily so as to keep our communities safe.

However, in Santa Monica, we have yet to restrict gun dealers from operating near sensitive areas where children or families are congregating, we do not require dealers to videotape sales, we do not prohibit unaccompanied minors from entering gun stores, and we do not require regular police inspections of gun dealer premises. Moreover, Santa Monica has not adopted safe storage laws to require safe storage in the home and in vehicles, nor do we require loss and theft reporting. Culver City, Redondo Beach, Beverly Hills and West Hollywood City Councils have adopted a combination of some or all of these regulations. San Jose became the first city in the nation to require gun owners to pay a yearly fee and carry liability insurance. Fees are levied and collected by a non-profit foundation established to distribute all fee revenue to community-based programs focused on reducing gun violence.

The City Council therefore directs the City Manager and the City Attorney to, within 60 days, draft an ordinance for council adoption to restrict the sale of guns in Santa Monica and propose additional gun owner responsibilities. This ordinance should be based on best practices from other jurisdictions, stakeholder engagement, and consultation with subject matter experts.
1 https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/
2 Ibid.

16.B.a
Packet Pg. 621 Attachment: Firearm Safety Motion_Torosis 06132023 (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: [email protected]
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: City Council 6/13 agenda item 16-B: SUPPORT
Date: Friday, June 9, 2023 5:10:14 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council members,
I strongly support 6/13 agenda item 16-B re the need for an ordinance to restrict gun sales in Santa Monica, plus any additional measures that could help keep guns out of the hands of children.

Thank you for your consideration.

Zina Josephs
16B. Request of Councilmembers Torosis, Councilmember Zwick, and Mayor Davis that the Council direct the City Manager and the City Attorney to, within 60 days, draft an ordinance for council adoption to restrict the sale of guns in Santa Monica and propose additional gun owner responsibilities. This ordinance should be based on best practices from other jurisdictions, stakeholder engagement, and consultation with subject matter experts. New Item Received. 6/09/2023
Staff Report Printout
a. Firearm Safety Motion_Torosis 06132023

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 622 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: Sheila Goldberg
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agend Item 16 B
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 12:06:05 PM

EXTERNAL
I write in support of Agenda Item 16 B. I appreciate the City wanting to make our communities safer for all by restrictions on the sale of guns in Santa Monica.

I hope other cities will follow your lead
Best,
Sheila Goldberg
--

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 623 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: Melody Hansen
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Gun Safety in Santa Monica
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:31:46 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I am asking that you please support the motion made by Council Members Torosis and Zwick and Mayor Davis, to restrict and regulate the sales and future sales of firearms in Santa Monica. It is critically important that during a time when there are over 300 American gun injuries daily, Santa Monica is doing all it can to protect its community from gun violence, including taking precautionary, common-sense measures at sites where firearms are stored, sold and accessed. Please also consider any additional regulations that will increase public safety against the threat of gun violence including gun-owner liability insurance and safe storage standards for homes and vehicles - policies that are supported by many responsible gun owners.

As Santa Monica is a neighbor to many other small cities as well as the west side of greater Los Angeles, your policies directly impact the safety of these other neighboring communities as well.

Thank you,
Melody Hansen

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 624 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: William Perdomo
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Common Sense Gun Measures
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:39:38 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica Council Members,
I am asking that you please support the motion made by Council Members Torosis and Zwick and Mayor Davis, to restrict and regulate the sales and future sales of firearms in Santa Monica. It is critically important that during a time when there are over 300 American gun injuries daily, Santa Monica is doing all it can to protect its community from gun violence, including taking precautionary, common-sense measures at sites where firearms are stored, sold and accessed. Please also consider any additional regulations that will increase public safety against the threat of gun violence including gun-owner liability insurance and safe storage standards for homes and vehicles - policies that are supported by many responsible gun owners.”
As Santa Monica is our neighbor, their policies directly impact the safety of our community here in Culver City.

Thank you
-Will

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 625 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: Peter DiChellis
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 16B Firearms
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 2:57:53 PM

EXTERNAL
In one of the least safe cities in California, a full ten (10) months after LASD transferred responsibility, there is still no Santa Monica CCW application process, yet you demand these restrictions be processed in 60 days? Another lawsuit in the making? The City must be flush with money. “City Could Face Lawsuit Over New Gun Licensing Fee” - in Santa Monica Lookout https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/News-2023/March2023/03_20_2023_City_Could_Face_Lawsuit_Over_New_Gun_Licensing_Fee.html__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!tTO5SCYsvDc1ltOfCNR_XsUmWB6TExNFshllVVKYjL4fZkOBHTBSOHaX2XTYIPSQtV2VtnK-cCVRXn6ogux811CUQj6qV8$ “City Faces Potential Lawsuit For Raising CCW Fees” in Canyon News https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.canyon-news.com/city-faces-potential-lawsuit-for-raising-ccwfees/168267__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!tTO5SCYsvDc1ltOfCNR_XsUmWB6TE-xNFshllVVKYjL4fZkOBHTBSOHaX2XTYIPSQtV2VtnKcCVRXn6ogux811Cu_uwv2o$ Attorney interprets Torosis stated CCW position - on twitter https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://twitter.com/MorosKostas/status/1636167340269404162__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!tTO5SCYsvDc1ltOfCNR_XsUmWB6TExNFshllVVKYjL4fZkOBHTBSOHaX2XTYIPSQtV2VtnK-cCVRXn6ogux811CbAjpdk0$ Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica 90403
-END16.B.b
Packet Pg. 626 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: modistmoz
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis Subject: E-comment request for Item 16-B
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:24:35 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
I wanted to reach out regarding item 16-B on the agenda for tomorrow's meeting and ask that you please support the motion made by Council Members Torosis and Zwick and Mayor Davis, to restrict and regulate the sales and future sales of firearms in Santa Monica. It is critically important that during a time when there are over 300 American gun injuries daily, Santa Monica is doing all it can to protect its community from gun violence, including taking precautionary, common-sense measures at sites where firearms are stored, sold and accessed. Please also consider any additional regulations that will increase public safety against the threat of gun violence including gun-owner liability insurance and safe storage standards for homes and vehicles - policies that are supported by many responsible gun owners.

Thank you for all you do and your consideration of this request.

Michelle
She/Her
"There is no happiness greater than your own. Make today wonderful." - Michelle Parrella, LCSW #26719
www.YourBestLifeTherapy.com

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 627 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: Rhonda Foster
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 16B
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 11:18:18 PM

EXTERNAL
I write in support of Agenda Item, 16B as it is absolutely critical that this type of ordinance be drafted, because it is the very reasonable thing to do. When it comes to limiting the sale of guns and greater safety measures put in place for gun owners to be as responsible as possible, gun violence can be prevented. As an individual that personally knows the impact of losing a loved one to gun violence and caring for another family member that was injured by a gun, your determination to create the ordinance will not be in vain, but will keep loved ones of the community safe.

Thank you,
Rhonda Foster

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 628 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) From: WAGV
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 16B re: firearm regulations
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 10:46:25 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:

I write in SUPPORT of Agenda Item 16B and appreciate the City’s efforts to prevent gun violence and help keep our children, family, neighbors, and community safe.

Thanks you for addressing this important issue.

Loren Lieb
Women Agains Gun Violence, Board of Directors

16.B.b
Packet Pg. 629 Attachment: Written Comments (5810 : Protecting Our Community from Gun Violence as A Harm Reduction Strategy) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023
Agenda Item: 16.C
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre request that the City Manager evaluate various commercial development impact fees and best practices in American cities for tree replacement that can be implemented. In addition, a timeline for further discussion of the private tree ordinance will be established, and best efforts will be made to increase the public tree canopy in Santa Monica.

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

A. Tree Canopy, Private Tree Ordinance and development impact fees_06132023

16.C
Packet Pg. 630
16 Item - Tree Canopy, Private Tree Ordinance, and Development Impact Fees Councilmembers Brock & de la Torre request that the City Manager evaluate various commercial development impact fees and best practices in American cities for tree replacement that can be implemented. In addition, a timeline for further discussion of the private tree ordinance will be established, and best efforts will be made to increase the public tree canopy in Santa Monica.

Background
Maintaining a sustainable community is one of our City Council's top five priorities. It is widely acknowledged that planting more trees is a perfect active response to that priority, mandating real action that will benefit the city for decades and decades to come. Our shrinking tree canopy is an economic and environmental justice issue and a matter of equity in our city. Santa Monica has accepted climate change and global warming as facts; our resilience to climate change is crucial. The percentage of tree canopy in certain areas of Santa Monica may also be a vestige of our community’s racist past. As a city, Santa Monica must focus on eliminating potential heat islands and expanding the pollution-shrinking effects of additional forestation.

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 631 Attachment: Tree Canopy, Private Tree Ordinance and development impact fees_06132023 (5816 : Tree Canopy, Private Tree Ordinance, and City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023
Agenda Item: 16.D
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Request of Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre that the City Council direct the City Manager to provide an update via an Information Item to be published on the City’s website regarding bicycle and pedestrian improvements installed on 17th Street from Pico to Wilshire, known as the “Safe Streets for 17th Street and Michigan Avenue” project, upon completion of the project. In the Information Item, the City Manager is asked to provide an overview of the project, total costs, funding sources, intended outcomes, lessons learned, and adjustments made. As part of the Information Item, the City Manager is also being asked to consider the costs, impacts, trade-offs, and possible funding sources associated with modifying the design of the intersection at Broadway and 17th (i.e., adjusting the configuration of the corner islands) that will enhance vehicular movements while not compromising bicycle and pedestrian safety.

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

A. Written Comments

16.D
Packet Pg. 632
From: Samantha Mota
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: 16D:+Support for 17th StreetBikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 8:48:09 PM
Attachments: VID_29660614_034138_367.mp4

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
As someone born and raised on 17th st., I hope you continue to support the 17th st bike lane and others instead of jeopardizing it for vulnerable users, such as myself.

In 2019, I was hit by a car on 14th (near the former Truxton) while riding my bike in the unprotected bike lane and nearly killed. And, another time on Pico and Lincoln, where the driver failed to stop at the red light and hit me on my bike.

The newly divided lanes provide better infrastructure and mobility justice for people who depend on other forms of transportation instead of driving a car. As someone apart of our younger generation, I hope you all continue to be pillars of progress than pushback.

Attached are some picture from my accidents (Please consider and be wise of cyclists, pedestrians, etc. who are vulnerable to reckless drivers)

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 633 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path)

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 634 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path)

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 635 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path)

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 636 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path)

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 637 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jacob Wasserman
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway as Constructed: Fully Protected Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:39:29 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
As a Santa Monica resident, a bike commuter, a parent of a young kid whom I take on walks in the area, and also a car owner, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica as constructed/planned—i.e., fully protected by concrete separation —and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Jacob Wasserman
90403

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 638 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Aida Ash
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 5:33:20 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Stop taking a note out of the GOP book and pushing our community backwards. Climate change is a real issue and car transportation is a significant contributor to our poor air quality, climate change, and the top source of death for children. Keep our streets safe and think of the future instead of going backwards.

Thank you for your time.

Signed,
Sent from a mobile device.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 639 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: J B
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 5:40:17 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.Signed,
Thank you,
Jesse Budlong

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 640 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: bart petty
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 6:12:46 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Please be aware that there is strong support for the 17th Street Bike Lane Project, as well as future infrastructure of this type. I am a lifelong cyclist and truly appreciate the safety these bike lanes offer. I am confident that this infrastructure will prove its value as time goes on.

Visionary thinking is often not initially rewarded. But time will prove that this is the right way forward.

Incidentally, our 16 YO Son rides to SAMOHI as well as all over the City. The bike racks at SAMOHI are full to overflowing. Kids understand the beauty of being on a bike. I would hope they are afforded safe passage to school and elsewhere around the City and Bike infrastructure is vital for them if nothing else.

I can't make it for the upcoming Council Meeting, but wanted to make sure my voice on this matter was heard.

Sincerely, Bart Petty

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 641 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Susan McCorry
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 8:25:56 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I have lived in Santa Monica for over 50 years, I have been fortunate enough to have worked here as well and was able to ride my bike to work and then up to SMC for classes. I appreciated all the bikeways, along Broadway and 17th street and Main Street! Surely you have noticed the increase in bad, dangerous driving on our streets, seemingly worsened by the pandemic!
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same.

To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Thank you so much, Susan
Susan McCorry 310-392-9244
“We're all just walking each other home." Ram Dass

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 642 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Chasen Daniels
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 10:37:58 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. Signed, Chasen Daniels

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 643 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: greg chasen
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 12:50:44 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. Protected bike lanes are the way forward - as many European cities have shown.

I drive through this area regularly and the design seems to be working as designed - drivers simply need to slow down and pay a bit more attention.

Greg Chasen
1318 10th St

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 644 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Luke Willoughby
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 7:50:47 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. This bike lane has been a boon for my and my families commuting since it’s opening. We now have the safest route from our home to SMC and it has made my four year old daughter’s time on a bike immeasurably safer.

This is also keeping more of our cars off the road, making it easier for drivers to commute and park as well. This step forward has been incredible proof that the cities future infrastructure is built for us and our children. Santa Monica is better everyday we add more people powered infrastructure! Signed,
Lukas Willoughby

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 645 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Michael Etzel
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:40:27 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Looking forward to many more bikeways in Santa Monica for the future, including Pico Blvd.

Further delay on implementation of bikeways will impede hard fought progress.

Signed,
Michael Etzel
2400 Beverley Ave

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 646 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Stacia Vinar
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:16:33 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed, Stacia Vinar

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 647 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Saba Shevidi
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:31:29 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. I use the bike line every day and it is the only step towards progress. It will significantly decrease fatalities in our neighborhood and is good for everyone, especially families. Do not let yourself be inappropriately influenced by the car lobbying culture that is inappropriately ingrained in a select few people.

Signed,
Saba Shevidi, MD

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 648 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Brendon Bolin
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:21:10 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 649 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: jcrtll
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:22:55 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Josh Cretella
[email protected]

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 650 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Robert Coleman
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:23:20 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Robert Coleman

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 651 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Brian St. Onge
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:25:09 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same! To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

I encourage you to rent a Metro bike and ride from the 17th train station to Arizona (in the new bike lane) then East (open bike lane) to 23rd, turn around and head back on Arizona west to 16th, park the bike at the new Metro bike parking. Let’s invite all of the council members to experience the ride.

Brian St. Onge

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 652 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Eos Montana
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 9:23:49 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same.

Bike lanes are crucial to the safety of riders, which encourage bike usage, positively affect our environment and traffic.

Please consider supporting the bike lane.

Signed,
Robert Tardiff
5033816528

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 653 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Oscar Duenas
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:33:23 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. AND A WASTE OF MONEY. Let the current project finish.

Signed,
Oscar

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 654 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: DEREK LEAVITT
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:35:24 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.Signed,
Thanks,
Derek...
310.930.6517

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 655 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Justin Keenen
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:37:11 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same.

Safety for cyclists is non negotiable, lives are at stake.

I regularly use these bike lanes and therefore use less gas and produce less emissions. We should Be encouraging this behavior.

Thank you.

Justin Keenen

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 656 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: [email protected]
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 9:48:20 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Arjun Mody

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 657 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jai Paton
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:51:30 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same.

Those who oppose the bike lane due to driver ineptitude miss the entire point of why they are there in the first place. These drivers who endanger themselves and others should not be pandered to. If you believe that it's worth scoring political points supporting the removal of bike-safety measures then by all means, but know that any further cyclist fatalities are on your hands henceforth.

Santa Monica is a beautiful, easily accessible city. Why are we kowtowing to poor drivers and making our city less safe? Stand with cyclists.

Signed,
Jaikrishan (Jai) Paton

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 658 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Pete Neumann
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:52:36 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Seriously, don't let a bunch of loudmouths on NextDoor sway you to make a poor decision.

Signed,
Pete Neumann

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 659 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Leonora
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:52:51 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. As a parent, my children's safety, and that of all children in our community, is a priority I hold close to my heart. Santa Monica is not just a city to us but our home, a place where we want our children to grow, learn, and play safely. Bicycle riding, an activity our family cherishes, not only provides health benefits and an appreciation for the outdoors, but also promotes a sense of independence and responsibility among our young ones. The importance of maintaining a safe environment for such activities cannot be overstated.

The 17th Street Bikeway presents an opportunity to ensure our city is not just car-friendly, but also bicycle-friendly, catering to users of all ages and abilities. Such an initiative can significantly enhance our community's safety, while also promoting sustainable transportation and a healthier lifestyle among our residents.

Signed,
Leonora Camner

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 660 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jonathan Haski
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:06:48 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. Signed,

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 661 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Karen Meyer-Roux
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:06:48 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mr. Brock,
In your campaign for City Council, you have promised to focus on public safety, have stressed the importance of clean air (https://www.votebrock.org/), and have promised to listen to residents.

I urge you to look at the transformation of the city of Paris where many bicycle lanes have been implemented in the past several years. Residents have noted that the air is much cleaner, there is less traffic, and there has been 0 deaths due to traffic this Spring (see: https://twitter.com/EmmanuelSPV/status/1667080222183768068) This is happening in a city where it rains all the time and where most streets are so narrow, it was hard to imagine how this could be implemented.

Because of its climate and its relatively small size, Santa Monica is the ideal city for a large implementation of protected bike lanes. This would reduce--in the long run--traffic, dangerous gas emissions, and remember:
no pedestrian (or cyclist) has ever been killed by a bicyclist! This would make the city much safer for our children and would allow them to have much greater independence and the ability to ride to school by bike safely.

I have used as a cyclist the bike lane on 17th Street several times since it was recently implemented - it's a wonderful north-south axis for those that need to go to the Metro, to SAMOHI, or to stores like the Coop. It will help with sustainability -- cleaner air -- and will encourage residents in Santa Monica who don't feel safe bicycling (who could blame them?) to do so.

I understand that this was probably an expensive undertaking, but as a cyclist I have felt much more safe using the protected bike lane there than the lanes that are only painted on 11th and 14th street.

I have also driven that street before and after the implementation of the bike lane and find that it's the perfect width for driving at a safe speed. Drivers in the Los Angeles area are used to extremely wide roads that allow them to go at unsafe speeds in residential neighborhoods. As I'm writing this email, I just saw another driver drive at full speed down my residential street ,forgetting also that one not only is supposed to slow down at the sight of stop signs but also do a full stop and forgetting that this is a residential street that is crossed regularly by children. 17th Street will oblige drivers to drive at a speed that is safer for all in a residential community.

I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do as you promised in your campaign for City Council, and do the same.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 662 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) Sincerely,
Karen Meyer-Roux

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 663 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Kush Mittal
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:07:18 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. Me and my family regularly use this route while commuting between our home and the Santa Monica college.

Thanks

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 664 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: yung heartburn
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:09:50 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. Signed, Jake Zambas, a cyclist in Santa Monica
--
jake zambas
310.975.4331

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 665 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Ferris Kawar
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 11:50:50 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
As a driver, cyclists, Santa Monica resident and employee who also works in this City, I ask you to support the 17th Street Bikeway. If we want to avoid being gridlocked with cars, we need to build an infrastructure of safe, separated bike routes to encourage more people to cycle. This new route feeds right to SMC and will help many students and employees feel safe enough ride, rather than drive. If we want to get to the next level of cycling participation, we need the proper infrastructure, otherwise we are doomed to gridlock again and again.

Thank you,
Ferris Kawar
90405

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 666 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Sharon Keasling
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:13:02 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. Instead of undermining this project that the taxpayers have paid for why not look at making the speed limit on that street lower or maybe make 17th a one way street! Please try to work together with the City Mobility Department to advance a bike friendly community. One where all members of Santa Monica are Safe and Protected. Thank you.

Signed,
Sharon Keasling
Sent from my iPhone

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 667 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Sophie Giessel
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:13:47 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. I live on Broadway and use the lanes daily. Since putting them in, I’ve definitely used them to explore my neighborhood more and connect more to my community. Taking them away would be a shame and goes against the ideas that draw people to this city to begin with.

Signed,
Sophie Giessel

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 668 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Allyn George
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:25:23 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally egregious.

Signed,
Allyn George

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 669 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jamie Ehrlich
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:25:27 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Jamie Ehrlich

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 670 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Kathryn Hewitt
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:26:26 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre and all council members, We need more protected bikeways like the 17th Street and the Ocean Avenue bikeways to encourage cleaner transportation and keep bicyclists safe. My husband was hit twice by cars while riding on unprotected bike paths and with more protected bike paths he might be encouraged to try riding again.

I never felt safe going bike riding with our grandson on the green bike lanes, but we love the new protected path and can travel safely so much farther.

Please don’t jeopardize the new biking infrastructure. I understand difficulties with parking and exiting cars and slower traffic these changes cause, but think of the greater good of the community. Our own street in Santa Monica was changed from a four lane roadway into a two lane with bike paths, and traffic has slowed and it is trickier exiting the car, but we adapted. It was worth it to see the increase in bike riders every year which results in less pollution and folks getting more healthy exercise.

Thank you for your time.

Kathryn Hewitt

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 671 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Dan Moses
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 5:26:31 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Dan Moses

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 672 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Daniel Yakobian
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:16:04 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 673 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Lynley Closson
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 3:02:21 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. Many of our Santa Monica neighbors utilize the amazing bike paths that we have in Santa Monica, and we deserve to keep those sacred. It's important to have modes of transit, such as biking and busing, that limit the amount of carbon we put into the air. Please keep our streets safe, walkable, and bikeable.

Signed,
Lynley Closson

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 674 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Timothy Nguyen
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 3:03:14 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. There are improvements that are already being implemented to address most of the valid concerns: any opposition at this point feels unnecessary and poorly motivated.

Signed, Timothy Nguyen

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 675 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Leslie Bogart
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 3:38:50 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. As a biker I feel safer on 17th than in most other areas of Santa Monica.

However care should be addressed for the handicapped who live on the street and please talk to first responders as they might appreciate and even needminor changes to the area in the event of an emergency. .

Signed,
Leslie Bogart

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 676 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Carl Burdick
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 3:42:37 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. I utilize the new protected bike paths in Santa Monica on a weekly/daily basis and they are fantastic! Santa Monica is on path to have the most comprehensive safe cycling network in southern california, and possibly the nation, and this should be something to be proud of. It has the potential to change the way tens of thousands of southern Californians live for the better, and set Santa Monica as a shining example of what a sustainable transportation network can look like! To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong and I urge you to support expanding sustainable transit and safe cycling infrastructure in Santa Monica into the future.

Signed,
Carl Burdick

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 677 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Colbey Waggoner
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 3:48:31 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Colbey Waggoner
Sent from my iPhone

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 678 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Kimmie Nguyen
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 3:50:43 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and the proposal the peel ball hard-won, hard-fought safety improvements is hugely irresponsible. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

I was a bike and transit commuter in West LA for several years before moving more recently.

Over those years commuting to Santa Monica, I had many near misses with vehicles because there wasn’t a dedicated space for me to exist on the road. There are many different things we can blame for our unsafe infrastructure, but this is a systemic problem and the roots of prioritizing cars above people goes deep.

I know a change from the status quo is difficult and scary, but please rest assured that these changes are impacting people like me for the better. Attempts to scale back these improvements are wildly short sighted and irresponsible, and will directly result in injuries and deaths of Angelenos just trying to get home, to school, or work.

Best,
Kimmie Nguyen

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 679 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Alison Rosenman
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 4:27:05 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. I regularly use this bikeway to exercise, commute, and enjoy Santa Monica's local businesses.

Signed,
Alison Rosenman

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 680 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Tessa Pargiter-Hatem
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 5:05:00 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Tessa Pargiter-Hatem

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 681 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Preston Melbourneweaver
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 7:07:01 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.Signed,
Preston Melbourneweaver
(530) 613-2714

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 682 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Cassandra S
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: 16D:+Support+for+17th+Street+Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 1:27:09 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear+Councilmembers+Brock+and+de+la+Torre,I+support+the+17th+Street+Bikeway+in+Santa+Monica+and+urge+you+to+do+the+same.+To+score+political+points+by+jeopardizing+the+safety+of+our+community's+vulnerable+road+users+is+morally+wrong.Signed,

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 683 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Craig Mulligan
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: 16D:+Support+for+17th+Street+Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:27:16 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear+Councilmembers+Brock+and+de+la+Torre,I+support+the+17th+Street+Bikeway+in+Santa+Monica+and+urge+you+to+do+the+same.+To+score+political+points+by+jeopardizing+the+safety+of+our+community's+vulnerable+road+users+is+morally+wrong.Signed, craig

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 684 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: April DS
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: 16D:+Support+for+17th+Street+Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:31:58 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear+Councilmembers+Brock+and+de+la+Torre,
I+support+the+17th+Street+Bikeway+in+Santa+Monica+and+urge+you+to+do+the+same.+To+score+political+points+by+jeopardizing+the+safety+of+our+community's+vulnerable+road+users+is+morally+wrong.

Our future in Santa Monica must include a robust bicycle infrastructure to keep our K-12 and college students, seniors, commuters, and recreational riders safe when riding bicycles. People on bicycles help keep our air cleaner and our streets safer.

I am a resident and voter who uses the bus, my bike, my feet, and my car to get around our city.

Sincerely,
April

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 685 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Helen Fraser
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: 16D:+Support+for+17th+Street+Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 9:14:28 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council-members Brock and De la Torre,
I strongly support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and have been using it daily - I finally feel safe enough to cycle to work now these protected bike paths have been created. Likewise, my kids are now more confident to cycle to school now they feel less vulnerable on the road. We are driving less, spending less money on gas, reducing car pollution and getting more exercise, improving our mental and physical health. The improvements that have been made over the last few months to create these safe bike paths have been a blessing for our community and we feel we are being taken care of. I urge you to not backtrack on these significant improvements in our neighborhood and to fully support them. These bike lanes are making Santa Monica a safer place while reducing the dependence on cars, which is a huge win win.

Sincerely
Helen Fraser
Santa Monica resident.

Sent from my iPhone

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 686 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Debbie Preston
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 17th St Bike Lane
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:34:08 PM

EXTERNAL
Just a Santa Monica resident NOT SUPPORTING the 17th St Bike Lane. What on the world were you people thinking?
Debbie Preston
Sent from my iPhone

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 687 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: madeleine gallay
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: 17th Street Bike Situation
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 9:03:57 AM

EXTERNAL
Good morning,
Sadly this bike path has caused problems and I so encourage the removal of this to allow a better, safer plan.

It's been disruptive with confusion for motorists, and obviously vehicles not understanding what to do can cause great harm and injuries.

Thank you.

Madeleine Rogow
310-871-8292

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 688 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Sheila Goldberg
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agend Item 16 B
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 12:06:05 PM

EXTERNAL
I write in support of Agenda Item 16 B. I appreciate the City wanting to make our communities safer for all by restrictions on the sale of guns in Santa Monica.

I hope other cities will follow your lead
Best,
Sheila Goldberg
--

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 689 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Peter DiChellis
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 16B Firearms
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 2:57:53 PM

EXTERNAL
In one of the least safe cities in California, a full ten (10) months after LASD transferred responsibility, there is still no Santa Monica CCW application process, yet you demand these restrictions be processed in 60 days? Another lawsuit in the making? The City must be flush with money. “City Could Face Lawsuit Over New Gun Licensing Fee” - in Santa Monica Lookout https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/news/News-2023/March2023/03_20_2023_City_Could_Face_Lawsuit_Over_New_Gun_Licensing_Fee.html__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!tTO5SCYsvDc1ltOfCNR_XsUmWB6TExNFshllVVKYjL4fZkOBHTBSOHaX2XTYIPSQtV2VtnK-cCVRXn6ogux811CUQj6qV8$ “City Faces Potential Lawsuit For Raising CCW Fees” in Canyon News https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.canyon-news.com/city-faces-potential-lawsuit-for-raising-ccwfees/168267__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!tTO5SCYsvDc1ltOfCNR_XsUmWB6TE-xNFshllVVKYjL4fZkOBHTBSOHaX2XTYIPSQtV2VtnKcCVRXn6ogux811Cu_uwv2o$ Attorney interprets Torosis stated CCW position - on twitter https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://twitter.com/MorosKostas/status/1636167340269404162__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!tTO5SCYsvDc1ltOfCNR_XsUmWB6TExNFshllVVKYjL4fZkOBHTBSOHaX2XTYIPSQtV2VtnK-cCVRXn6ogux811CbAjpdk0$ Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica 90403
-END16.D.a
Packet Pg. 690 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: [email protected]
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: City Council 6/13 agenda item 16-B: SUPPORT
Date: Friday, June 9, 2023 5:10:14 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council members,
I strongly support 6/13 agenda item 16-B re the need for an ordinance to restrict gun sales in Santa Monica, plus any additional measures that could help keep guns out of the hands of children.

Thank you for your consideration.

Zina Josephs
16B. Request of Councilmembers Torosis, Councilmember Zwick, and Mayor Davis that the Council direct the City Manager and the City Attorney to, within 60 days, draft an ordinance for council adoption to restrict the sale of guns in Santa Monica and propose additional gun owner responsibilities. This ordinance should be based on best practices from other jurisdictions, stakeholder engagement, and consultation with subject matter experts. New Item Received. 6/09/2023
Staff Report Printout
a. Firearm Safety Motion_Torosis 06132023

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 691 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: William Perdomo
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Common Sense Gun Measures
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:39:38 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica Council Members,
I am asking that you please support the motion made by Council Members Torosis and Zwick and Mayor Davis, to restrict and regulate the sales and future sales of firearms in Santa Monica. It is critically important that during a time when there are over 300 American gun injuries daily, Santa Monica is doing all it can to protect its community from gun violence, including taking precautionary, common-sense measures at sites where firearms are stored, sold and accessed. Please also consider any additional regulations that will increase public safety against the threat of gun violence including gun-owner liability insurance and safe storage standards for homes and vehicles - policies that are supported by many responsible gun owners.”
As Santa Monica is our neighbor, their policies directly impact the safety of our community here in Culver City.

Thank you
-Will

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 692 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: John Tapia
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: Fifth generation Santa Monica resident here16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 2:11:22 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Get Outlook for Android

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 693 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Sonya Sones
To: David White; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; councilmtgitems
Cc: sonya Sones
Subject: FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD REGARDING ITEM 16D OF THE AGENDA ON 1/13/23 Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 4:54:24 PM

EXTERNAL
I am 71 and have been riding my bike to get around Santa Monica for decades. I took my first ride this week on the 17th Street protected bikeway. And was it ever WONDERFUL! I felt a thousand times safer than I ever have in the those painted green bike lanes. I will definitely be using it as my go-to north/south street, even if I have to go out of my way for a few blocks to access it! I think once more cyclists try it out, they will positively feel the same way. And as a result, more of us will be cycling more and more.

Cycling is a win-win-win – good for our bodies, good for our pocketbooks, and good for the environment! The more people who are cycling instead of driving in Santa Monica, the healthier they will be, the more money they will have to spend in Santa Monica instead of spending it on gas, the less traffic there will be, the more touristfriendly SM will be, the better the air quality will be, and the more we will all be contributing to Santa Monica’s incredibly important fight to help slow down climate change!
Any steps to roll back (no pun intended) any of the new protected lanes, or to prevent plans for building more of them in the future, would be a real shame... Tragic, even.

Cycle for Santa Monica! Cruise for climate change!
Sonya Sones

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 694 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Melody Hansen
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Gun Safety in Santa Monica
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:31:46 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I am asking that you please support the motion made by Council Members Torosis and Zwick and Mayor Davis, to restrict and regulate the sales and future sales of firearms in Santa Monica. It is critically important that during a time when there are over 300 American gun injuries daily, Santa Monica is doing all it can to protect its community from gun violence, including taking precautionary, common-sense measures at sites where firearms are stored, sold and accessed. Please also consider any additional regulations that will increase public safety against the threat of gun violence including gun-owner liability insurance and safe storage standards for homes and vehicles - policies that are supported by many responsible gun owners.

As Santa Monica is a neighbor to many other small cities as well as the west side of greater Los Angeles, your policies directly impact the safety of these other neighboring communities as well.

Thank you,
Melody Hansen

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 695 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Grace Stees
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I am against item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 11:05:53 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

This is very important to me as a new mother. When I think about my family navigating streets in Santa Monica by biking or walking, as is our main mode of transportation, I feel comfort and pride in knowing that added investments in bike infrastructure will continue to make Santa Monica one of the safer and most bikeable cities in the area. It's a no brainier -- drivers in this area are maniacs and need all the physical guardrails the city can install. Twice this year I have seen cars flipped UPSIDE DOWN in the streets between Wilshire and Montana. This terrifies me. Don't ignore the data -- bike lanes help everyone.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Grace Stees
1131 California Ave 90403

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 696 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Bill Tugurian
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I Do Not Support Item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:59:11 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
William K. Tugurian
921 16th Street, Santa Monica, 90403
M. 917.509.7106
@. [email protected]

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 697 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Michael Karric
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 11:41:43 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%.

Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

As a nearby resident who works in Santa Monica by bike, I love biking to SM, spending my money at your stores and shops and bringing my family here. I feel immediately safer once I reach the city limits because it's clearly being built for PEOPLE not cars.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects and helping support small businesses by continuing to make Santa Monica an accessible and attractive destination, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Michael Karric
Beverly Hills, 90211

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 698 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Adam Faruqi
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 12:52:54 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
Please do not pass Item 16D. The value of protected bicycle infrastructure has been proven over and over and over again all over the world. Santa Monica has in recent years proven itself as a champion for bikeable, walkable streets, and the world has taken notice! I've seen so many youtube videos and articles praising the improved livability of our Santa Monica streets.

It has also been proven in countless studies that making changes to road infrastructure in the interest of vehicle throughput or vehicle travel time is disastrous on the health of everyone in the area, pedestrians, cyclists, and even drivers! So please, ignore the foolish whining from people who want to undo all the excellent work we've done so far. I highly encourage the city to implement MORE bike and pedestrian infrastructure, and reduce car travel lanes and car parking even further! Such measures are being taken throughout such places as the Netherlands and Paris (and Santa Monica) to great effect. These areas have become so much quieter and more livable. There is no need for further study to determine whether bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is healthy, as they so obviously are. So please, vote against 16D.

Thank you,
A concerned citizen,
Adam Faruqi

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 699 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Boris Suchkov
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:50:18 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I moved to Santa Monica in large part because it is one of the few places in all of Southern California where I can live my daily life with minimum need for a car. Where actual progress has been made when it comes to safer streets, and where the quality of life has actually been improving through the build out of a rational network of bike lanes.

My wife and I have been using the 17th St bike lane a lot more now that it is protected. It’s the middle leg of our route when we pick up our daughter from the YMCA by cargo bike. And even when using our car, I find myself driving on 17th St more as well, because the traffic has been calmed.

Any attempt to dilute or slow down the further development of the city’s bike network - approved as a master plan years ago, but caught up in endless red tape as it is - would be a travesty.

I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Boris Suchkov
29th St, 90405

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 700 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: John Lin
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 4:38:50 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
The form is much more sedate, so I'll just stick to that for the most part, but I'll add, if you're just bored, I have a list of issues I'd like addressed to improve the Expo line trail instead of wasting money on 16D.

I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
John Lin
Lincoln Ct 90404

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 701 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Sam Shapiro-Kline
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 9:26:33 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Sam Shapiro-Kline
90403

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 702 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jon Mizrahi
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 9:30:12 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Jonathan

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 703 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Carter Rubin
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 9:30:32 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D, which is an unnecessary and counterproductive exercise that will tie up staff's limited capacity and detract from their important work to make our streets and neighborhoods more livable and connected.

Santa Monica's growing network of protected lanes is coming into its own thanks to the decade of vision and implementation undertaken by the city. Our network is the envy of the region.

Every day I bike my kid to school and see more and more parents with their kids on e-cargobikes. They deserve safe streets. And they are taking cars off the road.

This 16D item is not needed. I bike and drive on 17th regularly and have had no issue navigating through intersections and making turns.

People who say they're having a hard time making turns at the new intersections are telling on themselves and the lack of care with which they normally drive. The new street design is helping them make more prudent, safer turns rather than cut corners at high speed where there used to be a greater risk of vehicle-pedestrian collisions.

Best,
Carter
Thank you,
Carter Rubin
Pico Neighborhood

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 704 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Kevin Cheng
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:03:51 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Kevin Cheng

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 705 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Matt Wiepking
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:38:39 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Santa Monica is improving, becoming safer for cyclists and drivers, and becoming easier to navigate in an environmentally friendly way. The last several months has made me proud to live here and encouraged to stay.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Matt Wiepking
Main St.
90405
Sent from my iPhone

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 706 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Gary Riichirō Fox
To: Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:38:53 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I write in order to urge you not to pass Item 16D. Bike lanes are crucial to Santa Monica becoming a world class city, attracting talent, investment, and livability for future generations.

According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Gary
32nd Street 90405

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 707 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Christian Schnaible
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:50:47 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true.

Specifically, I hope that similar projects to the 17th street bike lanes can begin soon on 11th and 14th. (They are in the master bike plan passed in 2020!) I drive those roads every day to drop my child off at day care and I really, really want a safe option to ride my bike with my child instead of driving. Unprotected lanes are not enough! Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Christian Schnaible
12th and California, 90403

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 708 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Gregg Chadwick
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:51:30 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
As a Santa Monica homeowner, small business owner, and an avid bicycle rider - I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer for my family, Santa Monica residents, tourists, and visitors to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Gregg Chadwick
2308 Schader Drive
Santa Monica, CA 90404

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 709 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jason Mooradian
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: I Support 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 4:42:22 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong. The city moving on the right path of making roads safer and going backwards is a huge mistake.

Thanks,
Jason

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 710 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Allie Mirosevic
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Item 16-B
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:26:13 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I am asking that you please support the motion made by Council Members Torosis and Zwick and Mayor Davis, to restrict and regulate the sales and future sales of firearms in Santa Monica. It is critically important that during a time when there are over 300 American gun injuries daily, Santa Monica is doing all it can to protect its community from gun violence, including taking precautionary, common-sense measures at sites where firearms are stored, sold and accessed.

Please also consider any additional regulations that will increase public safety against the threat of gun violence including gun-owner liability insurance and safe storage standards for homes and vehicles - policies that are supported by many responsible gun owners.

Thank you,
Allie Mirosevic

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 711 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Daniel Hall
To: Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; councilmtgitems; David White; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Item 16D - I Support 17th Street Bicycle Safety Improvements Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:16:06 AM
Attachments: F5ED6388-A8B7-4682-9113-DE7F4FF2DB66.png

EXTERNAL
Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Councilmembers Brock, de la Torre, Parra, Torosis, and Zwick:

I am writing in support of the bicycle safety improvements made on 17th Street and request that we continue to install similar improvements across the city. PLEASE DO NOT WASTE CITY RESOURCES “STUDYING” WHAT IS NATIONALLY

CONSIDERED TO BE A BEST PRACTICE BY POLICY PROFESSIONALS AND ENGINEERS.

Bicycle is my primary means of transportation locally; my partner and I are a one car household. We chose to make Santa Monica our home because of its commitment to bicycle safety and infrastructure improvements (among other progressive values and initiatives).

I run past the intersection of 17th and Arizona every morning with my dog. I can confirm that the bicycle lane corner islands in the intersection ARE WORKING AS INTENDED.

The islands there and on Broadway are designed using National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidelines to slow traffic at the intersection and protect bicyclists. Here is the diagram from NACTO’s Protected Intersection design standards guidelines, which our city uses.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 712 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) Tighter turns caused by the islands require slower speeds, forcing drivers to be more aware of the other vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians at the intersections. With curb radii of 10-15 ft, the curbs guide drivers to take the turn at 10 mph or slower. Below is a graph showing driver yielding rates and travel speeds at intersections (from a 2005 study on drivers yielding to pedestrians). At lower speeds, drivers yield at a higher rate to other users of the intersection.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 713 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) Before the islands on 17th street intersections were installed, I watched vehicles race to beat the lights on their way to appointments or work. I was almost hit a few times even. Now, vehicles ARE NOTICEABLY SLOWER. Any complaints you have received about how one must drive slower now on 17th street are great… it means THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE WORKING.

The protective islands also INCREASE BICYCLIST VISIBILITY. In a conventional intersection, bicyclists spend a longer time in a driver’s blind spot. This sets up an unresolved conflict which forces the bicyclist to be prepared for evasive action even though they have the right of way. With a greater angle of approach to the bicyclist (60+ degrees is ideal), the bicyclist becomes visible sooner and out of the driver’s blind spot. See below images for a pictorial explanation.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 714 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) I highly encourage Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre to not WASTE RESOURCES such as staff time and money for the study proposed in Item 16D.

Thousands of hours of research have gone into these design standards, considered best practice across the country by mobility engineers.

Please see NACTO’s Urban Bikeway Design Guide (https://nacto.org/publication/urbanbikeway-design-guide/) for further research before voting on this item.

Thank you,
Dan Hall
--
Daniel Hall
C: 310.570.6942
LinkedIn
Pronouns: he/him

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 715 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Ananda Day
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: ITEM 16D 6.13.23 & Future Needed Infrastructure Date: Saturday, June 10, 2023 11:05:23 AM

EXTERNAL
Dearest CouncilI wanted to write regarding 16D and the recent improvements to Santa Monica Bike Infrastructure.
- Most importantly: The “Safe Streets for 17th Street and Michigan Avenue” and the concrete barricade on Ocean have been huge improvements. As a cyclist and driver, they are much needed and late in coming.
- After having lived in Santa Monica for five years, I hope we can continue infrastructure improvements such as this to encourage people who want a community and safety to stay in Santa Monica instead of slipping backwards. I look to cities like New York and each borough truly paving the way with new cycling infrastructure. My hope is one day Santa Monica can be regarded as a similar leader and in turn reap the benefits as a municipality and community. - Regarding the turn radius at 17th & Broadway under concern it's utter nonsense and nimbyism at its finest. Please refer to this globally recognized cycling infrastructure resource:

The Global Street Design Guide... And the fact that the corner has been tested from fire trucks to cars today.
https://globaldesigningcities.org/publication/global-street-design-guide/ - If someone has a problem they should learn to drive better. - On that note it would be wonderful to have learning to drive with cyclists as part of our city curriculum and part of our license test requirements. My wife who is English constantly comments on how mind boggling it is that we do NOT have this in the US.

On that note I hope as a city we can focus on increasing the speed and implementation of safe cycling infrastructure and spend less time talking about baseless proposals like 16D.

Best
Ananda Day & Lucy Mannall, 3rd St

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 716 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Brandon Curran
To: Christine Parra; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Phil Brock Subject: ITEM 16D 6.13.23
Date: Friday, June 9, 2023 8:05:41 PM

EXTERNAL
The “Safe Streets for 17th Street and Michigan Avenue” project has already proven to be working very well.

It’s based on robust data, community outreach, planning and engineering done by people who know what they’re talking about (unlike the person behind this item), and it is being used daily by thousands of people either they’re on 2 wheels, on foot, or in ridiculously giant trucks just fine.

The few people who complain that it is too hard for drivers to navigate probably shouldn’t be driving, so modifying the infrastructure for these people’s convenience would be quite ridiculous.

Regarding the turn radius at 17th & Broadway that this council member seems to be concerned about, it was tested by the largest fire truck that the city owns; and yes, it passed the test.

It’s not even completed yet (so close though!(, and it’s already being talked about in a very positive light all over the county.

Just look at the response every time the city posts something about the new bike infrastructure on social, the posts blow up way more than anything else they post, and for the right reasons:
https://twitter.com/santamonicacity/status/1664708762622480395?cxt=HHwWlsC-qZbznZouAAAA https://twitter.com/santamonicacity/status/1662534207556530178?cxt=HHwWhMC9xbSDwZIuAAAA Also making headlines already:
https://la.urbanize.city/post/new-bike-infrastructure-debuts-17th-street-and-ocean-avenue-santa-monica This item would be costly and a waste of staff’s time.

Mobility staff is already extremely busy with much more important/relevant tasks, and understaffed (they lost staff through COVID cuts).

Our safety and our future matter more than some old NIMBY’s uninformed opinion. --
Sincerely,
Brandon Curran
https://brandoncurran.medium.com/

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 717 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jeremy Yoshioka
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Item 16D 6.13.23
Date: Saturday, June 10, 2023 2:45:06 PM

EXTERNAL
I am West LA born and raised (venice/centinela). I rode my bicycle to Beethoven, Mark Twain, and Venice High school, and now I continue to ride my bike to work in the Venice/MDR area. I run errands, visit friends, and enjoy free time at the many restaurants Santa Monica has to offer, all by bike. The Safe Streets projects has made my life better in that I do not feel as endangered riding my bike in the bike lane as I do on Venice blvd and other streets. It is clear that these bike lanes were very well thought out by people with engineering degrees and civil planning degrees.

As long as the design of these bike lanes does not interfere with emergency responders (which I heard that it was tested with the biggest SMFD trucks which is very cool!), I think they should be as protective as possible for our most vulnerable road users: those not inside of thousand pound metal boxes.

Changing the design to accommodate bad drivers seems backwards. Bad drivers should be the ones to accommodate modern
safe street designs by becoming better drivers!
I know the council will do what is best for it’s constituents, and I can’t wait for more awesome protected bike lanes.

Thank you,
Jeremy Yoshioka

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 718 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: samantha karim
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: ITEM 16D 6.13.23
Date: Friday, June 9, 2023 7:48:06 PM

EXTERNAL
The “Safe Streets for 17th Street and Michigan Avenue” project has already proven to be working very well.

It’s based on robust data, community outreach, planning and engineering done by people who know what they’re talking about (unlike the person behind this item), and it is being used daily by thousands of people either they’re on 2 wheels, on foot, or in ridiculously giant trucks just fine.

The few people who complain that it is too hard for drivers to navigate probably shouldn’t be driving, so modifying the infrastructure for these people’s convenience would be quite ridiculous.

Regarding the turn radius at 17th & Broadway that this council member seems to be concerned about, it was tested by the largest fire truck that the city owns; and yes, it passed the test.

It’s not even completed yet (so close though!(, and it’s already being talked about in a very positive light all over the county.

Just look at the response every time the city posts something about the new bike infrastructure on social, the posts blow up way more than anything else they post, and for the right reasons:
https://twitter.com/santamonicacity/status/1664708762622480395?cxt=HHwWlsC-qZbznZouAAAA https://twitter.com/santamonicacity/status/1662534207556530178?cxt=HHwWhMC9xbSDwZIuAAAA Also making headlines already:
https://la.urbanize.city/post/new-bike-infrastructure-debuts-17th-street-and-ocean-avenue-santa-monica This item would be costly and a waste of staff’s time.

Mobility staff is already extremely busy with much more important/relevant tasks, and understaffed (they lost staff through COVID cuts).

The report from Sustainable Communities and ClimateProtection Act, Senate Bill (SB) 375 shows unless we start to do things differently (such as encouraging more cycling) we will NOT be on track for our climate goals with just EV's.

Samantha Karim
ZIP 90404
323 371 0955

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 719 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Leo Ho
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: ITEM 16D 6.13.23
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 11:17:31 PM

EXTERNAL
Hello,
I am writing because I am very happy about the project "Safe Streets for 17th Street and Michigan Avenue." As someone who enjoys biking around Santa Monica, I am really really grateful for the steps being taken to make it a safer city for everyone.

Regarding the corner at 17th street and Broadway, you should certainly be more concerned with the safety of people walking and biking than with the speed at which bad drivers can or cannot make the turn.

It has already been proven to meet safety standards by the Fire Department. This is a non-issue.

Thank you for listening and I am looking forward to seeing what awesome new accessible infrastructure we can get next!
Sincerely,
Leo Ho

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 720 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: chris chandler
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16d on the Agenda: Regarding the bike lane on 17th Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:10:46 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council
I am writing to express my strong support for the new 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica. I am a 25-year resident, and in the last week, I have walked, biked, driven, and taken trains and busses from my home near Colorado and Stewart to the Downtown, Main Street, and Montana areas of our fair City.

The new bike lanes on 17th Street and Ocean are great. Santa Monica is leading the way in the county, the state, and maybe the country in creating safer alternatives to car travel. In the 25 years I've lived here, I've seen the culture of "nobody walks in LA" slowly change. We've got some good options now in SM but adding more options and connections compounds the value of the existing infrastructure.

The 17th St protected bike lane improves the options for cyclists, which obviously encourages more people to choose biking and leave their car at home, reducing traffic congestion and air pollution. The bike lane promotes a healthier lifestyle and fosters community and connectivity among our city's residents.

I would like you to stand behind the fine work that has been done and not be influenced by some overly loud voices on social media that are stirring up a stupid controversy. It is the rarest of public officials who can really lead the way on important issues. Being known as a bike-friendly City will provide social AND economic benefits to our community in the coming years. Don't waste our time and treasure on pointless studies.

Removing or undermining the bike lane would be a step backward in our efforts to lead the nation in being bike friendly. Thank you in advance for considering the well-being of our residents and looking ahead to a glorious future for our fair city.

Sincerely,
Chris Chandler

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 721 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Kevin McKeown
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16-D
Date: Sunday, June 11, 2023 10:57:51 AM

EXTERNAL
YES on information. NO on “study."
Useful information is a good thing, and Councilmember requests for it are almost routinely passed. I anticipate an information item on the 17th Street protected bikeway improvements will detail that project's successes, including staff’s responsive adjustments to accommodate disability parking, etc.

However, the second part of item 16-D should not be passed. As a resident, I call on you to remove it from any motion made.

The intersection of 17th and Broadway was improved in stages. Until the work was completed, legitimate confusion and concerns arose from motorists and cyclists alike. Now that it is finished or near-finished, it is evident that the configuration fulfills the international standard for safety sometimes called a “Dutch crossing.” There is no need to “study" this, which may be just a way of demoralizing our dedicated staff and needlessly delaying further implementation of future elements of Santa Monica’s long-term bike plan.

I realize some of you may not be familiar with the long and tested history of the “Dutch crossing,” but a full explanation of how it works and why it’s safer has been available on YouTube for OVER TWELVE YEARS.

Please see https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=FlApbxLz6pA__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!rB44WNkx3-3II1kI6GGPLiEAMvP1gbSbqyiHcSL60cRM7iwRWuV_O4BqrXjHWg8f43yATeC10Gtfn2W6oZLM_fRvVk$ .

Again, please remove the unnecessary “study” from any motion on 16-A. Staff resources are better focused on moving forward toward safer Santa Monica streets.

In fact, given the confusion and concern generated when street safety projects are partially implemented and left temporarily incomplete, you might consider augmenting staff resources to make the construction of future projects faster and more certain.

Thanks,
Kevin McKeown
————————————
K e v I n M c K e o w n
https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.mckeown.net__;!!OfuUnHCITYtmmjM!rB44WNkx3-3II1kI6GGPLiEAMvP1gbSbqyiHcSL60cRM7iwRWuV_O4BqrXjHWg8f43yATeC10Gtfn2W6oZLTHhHLTg$ Phone (310) 393-3639
“Choose to be conscious”
————————————

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 722 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Webb, Connor (Medical Student)
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 16D: Support for 17th Street bike lanes and bike action plan amendment Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:35:33 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to express my strong support for the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to reject item 16D. Our implementation of this bikeway and the construction of the bike action plan amendment signifies our city’s commitment to the safety of all road users.

Additionally it solidifies the message that we as a community are committed to mitigating climate change, reducing traffic, increasing equity, and making our city a place for vibrant community. I urge you all to fully stand behind it.

In particular, the 17th St protected bike lane is crucial for encouraging people of all ages and all walks of life to find alternatives to driving. Paint (even green paint) is not a viable form of protection for our most vulnerable road users, and this type of lane is our chance to correct those inadequacies. 17th St not only promotes a healthier lifestyle, but fosters a greater sense of community and connectivity among residents.

Removing this lane, or pointlessly stalling the planning and construction of more like it with item 16D, undermines the message that we are serious about creating a safe, sustainable, and livable community. Ultimately, it will risk the lives of road users and residents. It is in our best interest to commit all possible resources to moving forward with building additional cycling and pedestrian infrastructure improvements, and item 16D is a step backwards. Thank you for considering the safety and well-being of our residents and expediting the construction of the bike action plan amendment.

Sincerely,
Connor Webb
Santa Monica Resident
MD-PhD Candidate
UCLA-Caltech Medical Scientist Training Program
UCLA HEALTH SCIENCES IMPORTANT WARNING: This email (and any attachments) is only intended for the use of the person or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. You, the recipient, are obligated to maintain it in a safe, secure and confidential manner.

Unauthorized redisclosure or failure to maintain confidentiality may subject you to federal and state penalties. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify us by return email, and delete this message from your computer.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 723 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Kabir Chopra
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: June 13 Agenda Item 16D - Written Public Comment Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 11:04:10 AM

EXTERNAL
I write to express my deep disappointment in Council Member Phil Brock (“CM Brock”) for his backward decision to request an agenda item that will undermine the 17th Street Protected Bike Lane (the “Protected Lane”) on the City Council’s June 13th Meeting Agenda. In addition to being fiscally irresponsible, undermining the Protected Lane makes no sense for anyone that is forward-looking, cares about the environment, and/or wants to make Santa Monica a progressive city that encourages green transportation. There are plenty of other streets that cars can drive on if some drivers do not like 17th Street's recent improvements. I hope the rest of the Council backs cyclists over drivers.

Coincidentally, when I heard about CM Brock’s desire to forever lock Santa Monica into being the car-only city he grew up in during the 1950s, my family and I were sitting at Emmy Squared Pizza after riding the Protected Lane in the 2020s. When my wife and I received a text update about CM Brock’s plan, we told our kids about the news.

Without hesitation, the kids responded, “No!!!!! Has this person ever even ridden their bike on it? It is so awesome.” Before that protected lane opened, there was no chance my family would have ridden our bikes together to Emmy Squared. I am sure there are plenty of people learning about the Protected Lane’s benefits at the very same time CM Brock is trying to close it off from our community.

I don’t know if CM Brock has ridden the Protected Lane or not, but it will not surprise me if he is offering his antiquated vision for our city without having done so. I reckon most people who use the Protected Lane recognize its benefits. Sure, it is not perfect—there is no way to remove the inherent risk of riding a bike on the streets in a metropolitan area. But, the safety features of the Protected Lane are IMMEDIATELY apparent when riding northbound beyond Wilshire where the Protected Lane converts into a normal bike lane. If CM Brock (or anyone else) wants to see the benefits of the Protected Lane, I suggest riding on it from Santa Monica to California during rush hour a few times to compare the protected lane to a regular bike lane.

I get it. People don’t like change. The Protected Lane also caused some real issues with elderly people and individuals with health conditions who live on 17th Street. Those issues must be addressed. But we should address them while protecting our city’s investment in a greener and healthier future. Many cities in the US have completely closed off car traffic to non-residents! Why is CM Brock’s plan to close off cyclists in favor of drivers, and waste our city's monetary investment while doing so? Don’t undermine the Protected Bike Lane, CM Brock! Improve it by making 17th Street even more bikable! We need a City Council that will usher our city into the future, not drag it back into the past. CM Brock has picked his side. I hope the rest of the Council works together to stop him.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 724 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Michael Schneider
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Please don’t pass item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 1:58:41 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Michael Schneider

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 725 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jacob Wasserman
To: Phil Brock
Subject: Re: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway as Constructed: Fully Protected Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:49:53 AM

EXTERNAL
Cm. Brock,
1) The safety improvements proposed and implemented in the project have been evaluated by experts around the world and here at home over and over again. With the bike lane just open, I see no need to reinvent the wheel now. 2) If you truly support a fair evaluation, please wait until there is data on bike counts, vehicle crashes, pedestrian injuries and deaths, etc. Without those, any evaluation at this stage will find nothing of use, or at least nothing that the project planning studies and the evaluations mentioned above don't already know. 3) "Every civic project should be evaluated once complete"—indeed. I therefore ask you to evaluate the safety of every completed roadway in Santa Monica, prioritized by number of crashes, injuries, and deaths. I would bet that most have not been evaluated, on an individual, block-by-block basis, for safety, perhaps ever but especially not in recent years. Staff time is best spent on the deadliest roads, so start there.

Jacob Wasserman
90403
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 10:41 AM Phil Brock <[email protected]> wrote:

Jacob -
An oral information item sixty days after project completion is not a study. It’s a simple report. Staff have already made numerous changes to the finished design to refine the project and will be making more incremental adjustments. This project was conceived in 2011, went through a decade of change and the final design finished during Covid. Many residents lost sight of the improvements and how it would eventually benefit all Santa Monica residents.

Every civic project should be evaluated once complete. This project is no different.

Best
Phil
Phil Brock
Council Member
City of Santa Monica
P: (310) 458-8201
C: (310) 560-3071
santamonica.gov

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 726 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:29:51 AM
To: Phil Brock <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway as Constructed: Fully Protected

EXTERNAL
Cm. Brock,
Thank you for the prompt response!
However, the fact is that the design is and will improve safety and save lives, including the bulbouts at intersections. Further raising concerns about it, on a project that is already in the ground, and directing staff to study and report on safety/other issues that both our city and cities around the world have already definitively concluded upon is a waste of staff time and taxpayer dollars.

Jacob Wasserman
90403
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 10:23 AM Phil Brock <[email protected]> wrote:

For the record, I voted for the 17th Street bikeway several times as the former chair of the Recreation and Parks Commission. I have never been against more bikeways. I have concerns about the “butterfly outcroppings” on several of the street corners. However, all I have asked for is a simple status report from our city manager and transportation department as they finish and adjust the new bikeway on 17th Street. Whoever has decided that I am against bike paths is dead wrong.

Best
Phil
Phil Brock
Council Member
City of Santa Monica
P: (310) 458-8201
C: (310) 560-3071
santamonica.gov
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:38:40 AM
To: Phil Brock <[email protected]>; Oscar de la Torre <[email protected]>

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 727 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) Cc: councilmtgitems <[email protected]>; Christine Parra <[email protected]>; Lana Negrete <[email protected]>; Jesse Zwick <[email protected]>; Caroline Torosis <[email protected]>; Gleam Davis <[email protected]>
Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway as Constructed: Fully Protected

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
As a Santa Monica resident, a bike commuter, a parent of a young kid whom I take on walks in the area, and also a car owner, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica as constructed/planned—i.e., fully protected by concrete separation—and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Jacob Wasserman
90403

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 728 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jacob Wasserman
To: Phil Brock
Subject: Re: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway as Constructed: Fully Protected Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:30:41 AM

EXTERNAL
Cm. Brock,
Thank you for the prompt response!
However, the fact is that the design is and will improve safety and save lives, including the bulbouts at intersections. Further raising concerns about it, on a project that is already in the ground, and directing staff to study and report on safety/other issues that both our city and cities around the world have already definitively concluded upon is a waste of staff time and taxpayer dollars.

Jacob Wasserman
90403
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 10:23 AM Phil Brock <[email protected]> wrote:

For the record, I voted for the 17th Street bikeway several times as the former chair of the Recreation and Parks Commission. I have never been against more bikeways. I have concerns about the “butterfly outcroppings” on several of the street corners. However, all I have asked for is a simple status report from our city manager and transportation department as they finish and adjust the new bikeway on 17th Street. Whoever has decided that I am against bike paths is dead wrong.

Best
Phil
Phil Brock
Council Member
City of Santa Monica
P: (310) 458-8201
C: (310) 560-3071
santamonica.gov
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:38:40 AM
To: Phil Brock <[email protected]>; Oscar de la Torre <[email protected]>
Cc: councilmtgitems <[email protected]>; Christine Parra <[email protected]>; Lana Negrete <[email protected]>; Jesse

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 729 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) Zwick <[email protected]>; Caroline Torosis <[email protected]>; Gleam Davis <[email protected]>
Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway as Constructed: Fully Protected

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
As a Santa Monica resident, a bike commuter, a parent of a young kid whom I take on walks in the area, and also a car owner, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica as constructed/planned—i.e., fully protected by concrete separation —and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Jacob Wasserman
90403

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 730 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Will Finch
To: David White; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 9:02:51 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
As a lifelong Santa Monican now living on 18th and Oak St, I wanted to express my support for the protected bike lanes. I use the 17th St bike lane for my daily commute which I take to the Expo Line to get to Downtown LA, and the protected lane makes this route much safer for bicyclists. The partner of a friend of mine was killed by a car in Palm Desert on an unprotected bike lane, so I am all too aware that painted lanes do nothing to protect bicyclists.

I also would like to be able to get around Santa Monica by bike with my elementary school aged son, and as things are now it is not safe enough for a child except in those lanes that are fully protected.

Please do not prioritize car transit further which is already so dominant in Santa Monica.

Bicycling is such an important component of lowering carbon emissions. Please maintain the current level of protection, and please expand the protected bike lanes further to more streets so bicyclists can safely get around Santa Monica! Sincerely,
Will Finch

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 731 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Clint
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Subject: In Support of the 17th St Protected Bike Lane Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:33:10 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to express my strong support for the recently implemented 17th St protected bike lane in our beloved city.

As a resident who deeply values the health, safety, and environmental sustainability of our community, I see these bike lanes as a significant step towards these goals. They not only encourage active, healthy lifestyles, but they also provide a safer, greener alternative to automobile travel.

I understand that there may be concerns about traffic flow or parking due to the new bike lanes. In the grand scheme of things and looking toward the future, the potential benefits to our community are vast. Change especially positive change can initially be difficult embrace.

Not only do these lanes help and contribute to a more sustainable city, they also make our streets safer for cyclists, pedestrians, and even drivers alike.

Therefore, I kindly urge you and your colleagues on the City Council to uphold the implementation of the 17th St protected bike lane. As with any change, there will be an adjustment period, but I am confident that with time, we'll come to appreciate the benefits this shift brings to our community.

Thank you for your attention to this matter, and for your ongoing service to our city.

Best regards, Clint Carpenter

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 732 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Yan Lhert
To: Phil Brock
Cc: Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: Subject: Item 16D: Support for the 17th Street Bikeway Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:38:01 AM

EXTERNAL
Hi Phil & SM City Council,
I was born and raised in Santa Monica, attending Lincoln middle school and then Santa Monica High school. My parents were immigrants from europe, and we had very little when I was young. My dad worked night shifts and my Mom moved away, so I had no other option but to bike to Lincoln middle school. Back then, there were no bike lanes of any kind, and it was terrifying sharing the road with cars as a young kid. Drivers had callous disregard, even for a helpless child just trying to get around. Alas, I had no other option, and so I braved the streets on my own as young as 11 years old to bike 4 miles each way to Lincoln.

I'm now back in Santa Monica and I am working on another venture funded tech startup, Oyi Labs, which I may decide to base in Santa Monica along with my future employees. I bring an outsized share of tax revenue to the city, and I plan on becoming more involved in local politics as a donor. Additionally, my wife is an executive at Roku, based in the Santa Monica office.

Santa Monica is my home, and my family has come from so little, but has worked so hard to build and contribute to our society. My ask in return is simple: please support more bike lanes in Santa Monica. Cars are an inefficient means of getting around a beautiful city like Santa Monica, and there is ample evidence to show the massive harm that cars do to our people's health and our environment. We need to give better transit options to everyone who resides here, and not pander to the loud voices who have never tried getting around in anything but a car. We must be open minded and be more realistic about our future, and the future of our children.

Thank you for your time and hard work to make Santa Monica one of the best places to live and do business!
Yan Lhert

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 733 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Kabir Chopra
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; David White; councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: We Don"t Need Phil Brock"s Backward Transportation Policies in Santa Monica Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 11:00:32 AM

EXTERNAL
I write to express my deep disappointment in Council Member Phil Brock (“CM Brock”) for his backward decision to request an agenda item that will undermine the 17th Street Protected Bike Lane (the “Protected Lane”) on the City Council’s June 13th Meeting Agenda. In addition to being fiscally irresponsible, undermining the Protected Lane makes no sense for anyone that is forward-looking, cares about the environment, and/or wants to make Santa Monica a progressive city that encourages green transportation. There are plenty of other streets that cars can drive on if some drivers do not like 17th Street's recent improvements. I hope the rest of the Council backs cyclists over drivers.

Coincidentally, when I heard about CM Brock’s desire to forever lock Santa Monica into being the car-only city he grew up in during the 1950s, my family and I were sitting at Emmy Squared Pizza after riding the Protected Lane in the 2020s. When my wife and I received a text update about CM Brock’s plan, we told our kids about the news.

Without hesitation, the kids responded, “No!!!!! Has this person ever even ridden their bike on it? It is so awesome.” Before that protected lane opened, there was no chance my family would have ridden our bikes together to Emmy Squared. I am sure there are plenty of people learning about the Protected Lane’s benefits at the very same time CM Brock is trying to close it off from our community.

I don’t know if CM Brock has ridden the Protected Lane or not, but it will not surprise me if he is offering his antiquated vision for our city without having done so. I reckon most people who use the Protected Lane recognize its benefits. Sure, it is not perfect—there is no way to remove the inherent risk of riding a bike on the streets in a metropolitan area. But, the safety features of the Protected Lane are IMMEDIATELY apparent when riding northbound beyond Wilshire where the Protected Lane converts into a normal bike lane. If CM Brock (or anyone else) wants to see the benefits of the Protected Lane, I suggest riding on it from Santa Monica to California during rush hour a few times to compare the protected lane to a regular bike lane.

I get it. People don’t like change. The Protected Lane also caused some real issues with elderly people and individuals with health conditions who live on 17th Street. Those issues must be addressed. But we should address them while protecting our city’s investment in a greener and healthier future. Many cities in the US have completely closed off car traffic to non-residents! Why is CM Brock’s plan to close off cyclists in favor of drivers, and waste our city's monetary investment while doing so? Don’t undermine the Protected Bike Lane, CM Brock! Improve it by making 17th Street even more bikable! We need a City Council that will usher our city into the future, not drag it back into the past. CM Brock has picked his side. I hope the rest of the Council works together to stop him.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 734 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: r 8
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; councilmtgitems Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 7:27:41 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre, I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica.

I implore you to look past 20th century infrastructure status quo. It is your duty to conserve Santa Monica from the detrimental impacts of climate change. Improving safe, reliable, alternative transportation options besides car will help in this duty. Not only that but , this bikeway is significantly improving commerce and tourism around this area. It is financially sound to support the bikeway.

To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Hared

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 735 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: James Trapp
To: Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; councilmtgitems
Subject: Bike Lanes
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 6:32:00 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City council, I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes. The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes. Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner. The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration. There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor. Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle. For all these reasons and more we ask you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before. Thank you for you representation Sincerely, James Trapp

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 736 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Gladys Gutierrez
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: I use the bike lanes, Blue Bus and Expo line!
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 7:39:15 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I've been a regular rider of the Big Blue Bus since I arrived at UCLA 23 years ago. After I moved to SM, I cycled or took the Expo line to my job on the Promenade, since we were not offered parking. With this experience, I am speaking up against the ignorant and selfish complaints that are preventing our city from expanding its car-less infrastructure.

Let's face it - 99% of the public (regardless of education or income) are not versed in urban planning and could care less about the greater good. The goal of urban planning is to maximize land use and benefit the most people with the lowest impact. It is not your job to create a system that everybody will love. If London had stopped planning its public transport to avoid inconveniencing the people with carriages (who happened to be the rich), they wouldn't be world leaders with their Underground system now.

The fact is, Americans are addicted to convenience and that would be OK if car infrastructure didn't cost so much. I am not just talking about road maintenance - pollution, congestion, accidents and noise are all impacting us daily.

I am active on Nextdoor.com and I have some rebuttals to the objections for the 17th St bike lanes:

Drivers cannot get into their cars comfortably.

First of all, a car is a massive personal possession and nobody is entitled to that much space on the road for pennies a year. The likely reason people are parking on the street is that they have more than one adult with a car in the household and not enough parking spots. With work from home now more popular than ever and the invention of ride-sharing, one couple can meet all their needs with a single car.

Suggestions: 1) remove the street parking and re-zone so people can only drive cars they can park on-site. Apartments that had no parking would need to drop their rate to attract car-less people. 2) Make 17th St a One-way Street and kill one lane of parked cars 3) close 17th st to only residents, with access via key-card.

The elderly and disabled can't walk or bike to the doctor. The elderly can't see the barriers
If people are that incapacitated, then by logic they are not fit to drive a massive 2 ton death machine either. If they look normal but have a hidden defect that could cause them to lose control, or cannot see, then these are all valid objections to why these people cannot drive
Suggestion: Ride-share vouchers. Free City shuttle. Moto-taxi that fits in the bike lane and can come up right to the curb
Emergency trucks cannot get through
The road is the same width. The green bike lanes that used to be right against the racing cars did not provide the room for a massive truck to get around gridlock. Drivers have always had to maneuver to let these trucks pass
Cars will topple if they take the curb too fast
The problem here is driving too fast. The concrete barrier did its job Slowing down is inefficient
These people are driving too fastI They have never had a loved one get

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 737 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) run over and crippled by a car, but I have. Last year!
Motorized bikes/scooters are going too fast and drivers coming out of driveways can't see them
Who is really in danger here? The driver is not going to be killed by someone else's reckless cycling/scootering
Not having a car sets poor people back because they are unable to get to better places for employment
This is completely out of touch. Car ownership is actually the cause of many families struggling to make ends meet. With installments, insurance, gas and maintenance, poor people are burdened by needing a car in Los Angeles
We don't ask people to cure their own diseases and battle their own legal troubles, we ask doctors and lawyers. The experts! So why would we take what a group of inconvenienced people say to plan our city's major thoroughfares? We need to rely on experts to take the lead.

I want to close by saying, public transport and bike lanes are not the cause of gridlock, it's cars. The more room you give them, the more of them hit the road. However, I do ask that we listen to the concerns around security and work towards improving it for bike riders. Right now, theft is a major issue. We also need to improve the Metro - have officers to guard it, have shelter against the elements, and kill the honor system that allows anybody to board. We have a long road ahead and things are very rough now but I am optimistic.

Thank you so much for reading and I hope we can continue this growth with expert input.

Cordially,
Gladys Gutierrez

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 738 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: JEFF levy
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 16D- please Remove and stop new "protected" bike lanes Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:07:55 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City council, I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes.

The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes.

Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner.

The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration.

There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor. Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle.

For all these reasons and more we ask you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before.

Thank you for you representation
Sincerely,
Jeff Levy

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 739 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: francie kropken
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 16D- please Remove and stop new "protected" bike lanes Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:23:55 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City council,
I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes. The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes.

Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner.

The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration.

There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor.

Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle. For all these reasons and more we ask you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before.

Thank you for you representation
Sincerely,
Francie Kropken
P.S. I have dozens upon dozens of videos and pictures which show the lawlessness and dangers caused by these poorly planned lanes. The needs of the residents, seniors, and handicapped have been ignored. I have receipts which show that I have warned all of you about this, and if these lanes are not removed soon, I will take them to the media.

You have been warned.

A class action lawyer is being consulted, as well an ADA lawyer.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 740 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Steven C Shepherd Architect
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: OPPOSED TO ITEM 16D - BE "DOERS"
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:17:14 PM

EXTERNAL
Santa Monica City Council -
I am opposed to Item 16D. I am a frequent visitor to Santa Monica both for business and pleasure, and I treasure my time there whether it be with business partners or friends. I feel Santa Monica has taken great steps forward in improving public right-of-way accessibility. I notice the new improvements and am always encouraged to see them being used by residents, tourists, and visitors like myself. The thought that you would need any additional study of a proven idea that is already being successfully implemented on the streets of Santa Monica seems daft and counterproductive.

Rather than "studying," I'd really like to see more "doing." As a driver, pedestrian, and cyclist frequenting the streets of Santa Monica, I encourage you to be doers and vote against Item 16D.

Thank you!
Sincerely,
Steve Shepherd
Huntington Beach, CA 92646

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 741 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Sparky
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: please remove bike lanes from 17th St.

Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:05:29 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council-members,
I have been meaning to write you. Any given week I use to take 17th St. often. Now since the new bike lanes were put up, I avoid it completely. It is so congested now. Plus, I was almost hit by someone who opened their car door into my lane. It is completely dangerous. I know it would cost money to remove them, but I really hope you do.

Also, PLEASE do not do this to any other streets. I used to enjoy bike riding until I got my bike stolen here in Santa Monica. As I’m older now, (mid 50s), I need to use my car for everything and biking is not feasible. The buses and metro are not safe. I know that’s not your fault, but it’s the truth. Our city is congested enough and now with more of these high-rise buildings being built, Santa Monica is a stressful place to live in and get around. As you may have noticed, the bike lanes are not use that often while traffic is backed up for blocks. As much as Santa Monica wants to be progressive in so many areas THIS should not be one of them.

Thanks for reading!
Warm Regards,
Linda Sypien
Sent from my iPhone

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 742 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: zev tansky
To: Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Subject: Item 16D- please Remove and stop new "protected" bike lanes Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:14:32 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City council,
I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes. The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes.

Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner.

The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration.

There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor.

Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle. For all these reasons and more we ask you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before.

Thank you for you representation
Sincerely,
Zev Tansky
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 4:59 PM zev tansky <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear City council, I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes. The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes. Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner. The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration. There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor. Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle. For all these reasons and more we ask

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 743 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before. Thank you for you representation Sincerely, Zev Tansky

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 744 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: zev
To: Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Subject: Item 16D- please Remove and stop new "protected" bike lanes Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:15:35 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City council,
I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes. The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes.

Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner.

The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration.

There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor.

Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle. For all these reasons and more we ask you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before.

Thank you for you representation
Sincerely,
Zev Levitansky
On Mon, Jun 12, 2023 at 5:00 PM zev <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear City council, I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes. The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes. Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner. The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration. There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor. Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle. For all these reasons and more we ask

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 745 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before. Thank you for you representation Sincerely, Zev Levitansky
--
ונזכה זעהן זיך מיטן רבי דא למטה אין א גוף והוא יגאלינו
--
ונזכה זעהן זיך מיטן רבי דא למטה אין א גוף והוא יגאלינו

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 746 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: mirel levitansky
To: Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Christine Parra
Subject: Stop the protected bike lanes!
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 5:59:17 PM

EXTERNAL
Please revert the bike lanes to how they were before.

The protected bike lanes have caused lots of harm without enough benefits to offset the harm.

The bike lanes worked well before and now it's not good for bikes or drivers. There have been much more accidents, near accidents and car damage (most are not in the statistics cuz people didn't go to the hospital)
It has caused much more traffic, confession and emissions.

Yes, many drivers may start using other streets, but those that live and work near 17th don't have a choice. Besides that as these protected bikes lanes start on other streets, that won't be a choice anymore either.

Anyone who drives in 17th st comments how awful it is.

We had a get together recently on 17th and all the visitors were so frustrated. With the visibility, the maneuvering, the lack of parking, the tightness of the lanes...

In summary, the current bike lanes are helping a minority but are harming (beyond just inconveniencing) a majority. And the orbits bike lanes were working just fine for that minority.

Thank you,
Mir rodal
Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Get Outlook for Android

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 747 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Santa Monica Forward
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16D - Santa Monica Forward Opposition Letter Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:17:07 PM
Attachments: SM Forward Letter - Item 16D 17th St Bike Lanes.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tempore Negrete, and Councilmembers, Please find attached a letter from Santa Monica Forward opposing item 16 D.

Thank you,
Brad Ewing and Carl Hansen
Co-Chairs, Santa Monica Forward
--
We are working for a diverse, progressive, sustainable and equitable Santa Monica.

SantaMonicaForward.org

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 748 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) RE: Item 16D – Oppose
Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete and Councilmembers,
We urge the Council to oppose 16D.

Santa Monica is blessed to have a hardworking staff that delivers high-quality infrastructure and services, but their resources are not infinite. Saddling our staff with busy work impairs their ability to implement the city’s Bike Action Plan, which is critical to achieving Vision Zero and meeting our city’s climate goals.

Let’s strive to build a city where citizens of any age feel safe and empowered to traverse our 8 sq/mi city for school, work or recreation! The limited protected bicycle infrastructure the city has built has already been a roaring success: the Ocean Ave bike lanes saw 1000% increase in cycling and 18% drop in vehicular traffic.

If we build it, the cyclists will come.

Sincerely,
Brad Ewing and Carl Hansen
Co-chairs, Santa Monica Forward

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 749 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Mat Swatek
To: Phil Brock; [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis Subject: 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 11:09:37 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. To score political points by jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users is morally wrong.

Signed,
Mat Swatek

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 750 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Deborah Dinsmore
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:29:30 PM

EXTERNAL
Thank you again for your street meeting with neighbors about this.I write to oppose the 17th Street bikeway and these hardened bikes lanes. I’m an experienced urban cyclist with years of commuting and running errands both within Santa Monica and beyond. Good traffic management stands on the legs of safety and flow. The bike paths, as installed, interfere with both and add marginal value to the cyclist.

They are touted as sustainable.Are they? Or do they increase traffic congestion and air pollution?
Every car that parks on 17th or Broadway on the parking strip now pushed into the street requires a line of cars behind it to come to a complete stop, idling.Ditto for drivers opening doors. Ditto for delivery drivers on 17th which block the entire lane.

Every one of these is a multiplier of wasted fuel
and brakes that adds unnecessary wear and tear on the car, expense for the driver, more pollution, and greatly increases the opportunities for accidents.

The issue of car doors opening into the typical bike lane was raised.It’s true.They do.And occasionally a bike goes by.The alert cyclist, of course, has their eyeballs open and can slip to the outside edge of the lane.Drivers actually do look.And so do I.

They are touted as a safety solution.Are they?
Bikes moving along the curb can be hard to see when screened behind a row of parked cars until they suddenly pop into view.Even moreso when the bike is not really a bike at all, but motorized and zipping along at speed. This makes all right turns dangerous for driver and cyclist.

I find it curious that I was the only cyclist present at the on-site citizens meeting with Councilman Brock wearing a high visibility safety color jacket.I was also the only one who spoke against the execution of this bike lane as it was done.Not sure what to make of that, but it suggests that some cyclists could take more responsibility for their safety than they do.

The “round about” curbs are a dangerous waste of precious street real estate.

These unmarked mini tank traps at corners are “intended” to help cyclists do what they have been doing forever anyway – turn left without being in a left turn lane.In fact, I find they make it harder to execute that kind of “round about” left turn.Plus they push drivers making right turns farther into oncoming traffic.

I got the impression someone said “well, the code requires x feet of turning radius for our largest vehicle, so we’ll measure it on paper here and make sure we have that and no more.”Based on my experience at the 17th/Broadway corner I have a hard time swallowing the declaration made at the Brock meeting that a large fire truck executed this turn safely.(Wanna sell me a bridge, too?) Overall, narrow streets that were once designed for 4 lanes of traffic (like Broadway), then redesigned to 2 lanes plus a turn lane plus 2 bike lanes, are just too narrow for the kind of bike lane installation done on 17 th Street and Broadway. What pencilled on paper did not translate to good road management.

Deborah Dinsmore
Ninth Street, SM

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 751 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path)

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 752 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Ellis Raskin
To: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick Cc: councilmtgitems; David White; Douglas Sloan; David Martin; Rick Valte Subject: Agenda Item 16-D: 17th St. Bikeway
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 11:48:58 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Hon. Mayor Davis and Hon. Councilmembers:

I am writing to share some brief thoughts and observations regarding the 17th Street Bikeway.

These opinions are purely my own and reflect my personal opinions on this matter.

I live on 17th St., and I have found that the bikeway is a resounding success. I have been fortunate to avoid serious danger while using the bikeway (in large part because it provides well-designed protections for non-automobile users), but I have heard from friends and neighbors that the bikeway has already saved lives.

The streetscape improvements involved a half-decade-long public outreach process (which began in 2017). Indeed, I participated in lengthy public meetings with city staff in 2018 and 2019 to discuss the proposed 17th St. improvements, and the current design reflects both (1) public feedback received during this outreach process and (2) well-understood best practices for intersection and roadway design. I commend staff for their diligent efforts to listen to the community during the design process.

The intersection of Broadway and 17th St. has been radically improved through this process.

The current design of the Broadway/17th St. intersection is much, much safer for nonautomobile users (especially for pedestrians). Nothing should be changed. The whole point of the intersection is to force drivers to slow down. There are no conflicts or problems for automobile users at this intersection as long as they proceed through the intersection at a low rate of speed.

I urge you to not devote further staff time, money, or resources to this issue. As you know, our staff is already overworked, and they have many other priorities (including the tree ordinance update; see Agenda Item 16-C). Let's use our limited resources more productively, and not rehash a 6+ year public process.

Best,
Ellis

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 753 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Randolph Ruiz
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 8:51:04 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I’ve used the not-yet-finished 17th Street protected bike lanes several times in the last week and I can tell you they are a huge improvement for the mobility of my family and me. I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world.

According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Randolph Ruiz
2222 10th St 90405

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 754 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Nicole Burgess
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 6:32:58 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Nicole Burgess
Enjoy the Ride!

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 755 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Willa Rebeccah
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 7:50:22 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city's infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and iniuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%.

Additionally, the city's investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Willa Ross
16th St 90404

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 756 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jesus J
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 8:50:33 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 757 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Josh Graybill
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: I do not support item 16D
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:48:36 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica city council,
I ask that you not pass Item 16D. The added value of bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has been proven throughout the world. According to a recent study, adding protected bike lanes reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. Additionally, the city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

PS: While I am sympathetic to the needs of disabled persons to access care facilities along 17th st, I do not think this means we need to prioritize "vehicular movement" along that street.

Most streets in SM already prioritize vehicle traffic, and slowing down vehicle traffic (via infrastructure) is the only thing that keeps pedestrians and cyclists safe. The 17th street bikeway is a crucial north-south protected bike lane (across the 10 fwy, which has notoriously bisected SM into disparate "opportunity zones"), offering last mile access to transit (Expo), SMC students, etc. I regularly used the new protected bike lane so that my 6 yr old son and I could bike to his little league practices at memorial park (one less car clogging the road for the people who really *need* to drive). SM has made great strides in safe street infrastructure over the last several years and that was a big reason why my wife and I chose to move here to raise our young family.

Thank you,
Josh Graybill
Santa Monica, 90404

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 758 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Mike Terranova
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: Robert Zak; Peter James; [email protected]
Subject: I don"t support Item 16D : 6/13/2023 Council Meeting Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 10:35:47 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I'm writing to express my concerns regarding Item 16D, proposed by Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre. Focusing our resources on improving bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, instead of catering to vehicular traffic adjustments near bike lanes, promotes sustainable transportation, reduces greenhouse emissions, and enhances citywide accessibility for everyone, not solely motorists.

Our city faces other significant issues that demand immediate attention. For instance, we must directly confront the homelessness crisis and make essential improvements by taking on COVID deferred projects like the $5.5M investment for implementation of the Lincoln Corridor Plan. We also must prioritize efforts like continuing maintenance of street lights that are non-functional on major roads such as Pico Blvd, implementation of "no right on red" signs at scrambles, and timely sign replacement and signal maintenance which are crucial to our community's safety for pedestrians. We should direct our city's resources and staff time towards addressing these challenges.

Reassessing the already completed and addressed "Safe Streets for 17th Street and Michigan Avenue" project detracts from these pressing issues and hinders our progress towards safer, more inclusive bike and pedestrian infrastructure.

I support safe streets initiatives like Vision Zero and protected bike lanes and strongly urge you to reject Item 16D, or at least refocus it on tangible problems rather than perceived ones.

Do not indulge the viewpoints of a group of residents who are apparently unable to acknowledge the substantial benefits and necessary change that protected bike lanes provide to our city. The City Manager and staff should be given direction to prioritize their valuable time towards establishing more bike lanes and advancing road safety projects.

Regards,
Mike Terranova
Sunset Park Resident

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 759 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: francie kropken
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 16D- please Remove and stop new "protected" bike lane Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 10:46:00 PM

EXTERNAL
This letter has already been sent to each of you in December time, yet not one of you responded! These problems - which you are just beginning to address were brought to your attention MONTHS ago! Feigning ignorance is not an option! Save our city! Stop the 17th st. project! - part 1 I have sent this letter to every city council member, city planner, and the local news. No one even cared to respond! The city council treats its residents like we are their pawn and personal piggy bank for taxes, while throwing us under the bus time and again. This is a bit long, but I would love it if anyone can refute the claims made in this post. In the coming days, I intend to post pictures I have collected over time to prove these points. The latest city project to help promote biking, and help us reach our climate goals, has proven itself to be another sham, gaslight effort, to take federal dollars and ruin our city even more than they have already: Road diet The planners have been very clear what the point of this project is; a road diet. This means that they want to make driving a miserable experience, and thus “encourage” - read “force” - people to stop using their cars and use public transport or other forms of “green” energy like bikes or electric scooters. Kind of reminds me of this story - often told here in Los Angeles: I just donated the contents of my wallet, my iPhone X, and my $10,000 Rolex watch to some poor guy living on the streets. You wouldn't believe the happiness I felt as he put his gun back into his pocket. We are being forced to “go green”. Sounds like it's a great project? In truth it is a great project; on paper. In reality there are so many problems which are being ignored that I feel the need to address at least some of them, so that the city can not say “we didn’t know”. Elites Vs. peasants. Initially, this project was supposed to run from Montana and 17th, to Pico. Suddenly it started at Wilshire. What happened? Apparently the city was threatened with a lawsuit from those with deeper pockets, if they dared to ruin their streets and take away loads of their parking. So for the peasants in the city center and south, we need to suffer and deal with the virtue signaling efforts of the city. Less parking The city estimated that they will be removing approximately 100 parking spaces. Many people living on the 17th st corridor do not have garages, and rely heavily on street parking.

By taking away parking, it causes people to drive around the block another three times, and burn more gas, thus contributing to the pollution. It also causes more traffic to occur at the intersections, and thus raises the possibilities of accidents. When a spot is found, the person getting into the spot MUST block traffic in order to “back up” into the spot. More traffic, more idling, more pollution. Are we not cutting off our nose to spite our face? Parking set up As the system is set up, the bike lane will be next to the curb, while the parking will be next to traffic. This means that every time someone in a parked car opens their door, they will be at major risk of getting their door taken off, or even get hit themselves when they get out. In addition, if they need to take a child out of the passenger seat, they are at risk of hitting/getting hit by a bike, the very reason for which these “protected” bike lanes were created. It also leads us to another issue No proper visibility. When a car is trying to make a right, and the visibility of the driver is blocked by the cars on their right side, they are more prone to crash into a biker. This is especially true of the electric bikes and

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 760 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) scooters which drive at much faster speeds, and even a most careful driver can be at risk of hitting them. This has been seen along the “new” bike lanes on Broadway. As a driver and a biker, I have nearly been hit by cars, or nearly hit a biker, despite my best efforts. I have heard the same from many other residents both drivers and bikers in the area. Another issue is the flawed planning of these designs. Many cars do not even realize where they are supposed to park. Thus many park IN the BIKE LANE. I personally have dozens of such pictures from my daily bike rides. One of the main reasons for this, because the meters and signs are found on the curb. For those drivers who are a bit smarter, and realize where they are supposed to park, they often do not see the signs or meters, and end up getting cited. What a great deal for the city! Emergency response times; fail! These are purposefully created to cause traffic by design, and make driving miserable. The problem with traffic is that it impedes response time for emergency vehicles. When there is an open bike lane on a two lane street, and an emergency vehicle needs to get through, everyone can move their cars into the bike lane, and create a new lane in the middle for the emergency vehicle. If there is traffic however - as these roads are designed to create - and an emergency vehicle needs to get through, where will the cars move? The bike lanes are “protected”. When lives are on the line, every moment counts! Yet in the name of “going green” we are knowingly risking lives! Will the city want to be sued for ignoring this glaring fact? There are FOUR senior homes on this stretch, which see ambulances come many times a day. Are their lives not worth something?! Since the train came to town, 17th st has been a traffic nightmare as it was, when the train causes traffic to back up for blocks. These lanes will only exacerbate the situation and cause more delays for those who need the help most. A recent fire inspector at a local business confirmed that their response times are ALREADY slower due to the Broadway part of the project. How much worse with this make it? Discrimination Possibly the dirtiest word in these woke times. Yet, the city is knowingly discriminating against the most vulnerable of society; the handicapped and seniors. Despite seeking and "claiming" to be “inclusive”, they target the most vulnerable with impunity.

Firstly, the handicapped do not have a choice of using “green” transportation such as bikes or scooters. The public transport is not reliable, and they thus need to use cars. By created traffic and havoc, this is direct discrimination against those who are dependent on cars.

Additionally, Multiple handicapped parking spaces have been removed, with no plan to replace them. One neighbor has a child with MS who is confined to a wheelchair. Their spot was taken away. Yet another has a child who is blind and lame; also in a wheelchair. Their spot was taken away as well, with no plan to replace it. Yet another has multiple children with various levels of autism whose blue spot was taken away as well. Lastly, the way the parking is set up, they would need to cross over the bike path, potentially go over a curb, and potentially even go into the path of oncoming traffic in order to put their children into the car! How safe is that? How inclusive! And finally the biggest lie of all: Everyone wants it. I have spoken to every neighbor I know. Not one wants it. Not one wants to lose their parking spot - hard to get as it is. Not one wants the dangers mentioned in this article. I dare the city to give us a deadline and a number of signatures - based on households - and we will show them how much people hate their project! Better yet, let them release the number of people who called them about the project, and how many of them called to complain vs. how many called in support! Let the city release the concerns which were raised, and how they are being addressed! Ain’t going to happen. It would show how much dislike there is for this project! As a matter of fact, there has been very little signage about the different construction which is being done. One resident asked the workers why this was, and they responded “the city told us that many people are upset about this, so just try to do it without riling them up any more than they are already”.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 761 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Eugene Lee
To: Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; councilmtgitems; Soyoung Jung
Subject: Item 16D- please Remove and stop new bike lanes Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 9:04:10 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear City council,
I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes.

The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes.

Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner.

The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration.

There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb.

Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor.

Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle.

For all these reasons and more we ask you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was.

We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before.

Thank you for you representation
Sincerely,
Eugene D Lee
925 14th St, Unit 22
Santa Monica, CA 90403

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 762 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: kent Strumpell
To: David White; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; councilmtgitems
Cc: Jason Kligier
Subject: Item 16D, 17th St. bikeway
Date: Monday, June 12, 2023 11:33:27 PM

EXTERNAL
Re: Item 16D,17th St. bikeway improvements
Dear Council Members and City Leaders,
I want to express my strong support for the bikeway improvements on 17th St. that have made cycling there much safer and more comfortable for me.

I understand that some motorists say the improvements are inconvenient and confusing.

I believe this is to be expected with new roadway features, such as we saw with the initial installations of traffic circles on 26th St. and elsewhere. It took locals a while to figure them out and accept them. But now they are just part of the landscape and are playing a valuable role reducing speeds and adding beauty to our neighborhoods.

Likewise, I fully expect the protected bikeway network that our city has planned, of which 17th St. is one part of, will also be accepted by road users in Santa Monica. Of course the small islands that are part of the protected-intersection design causes drivers to slow down and be more cautious; that is their intent. As with traffic circles, I believe the protected bikeway network will become an accepted and valuable part of our mobility system.

Finally, I want to say that the real value of the 17th St. improvements will not come overnight but will accrue when we finally have a complete network of safe, protected bikeways throughout our city. Usage levels of new bikeway installations may be low at first, which is to be expected — the same would be true if our road network for cars was fragmented and dangerous with only a few safe routes. But when our bikeway network becomes a pervasive infrastructure that can be relied on to get around safely, I predict that we will see the same explosion in cycling that has resulted in cities around the world with well-developed bicycle infrastructure.

The many safety, equity and climate benefits of a complete bikeway system will enrich us for generations, long after the difficulties of the transition are forgotten.

Thank you for all you do!
Kent Strumpell
1211 Michigan Ave.

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 763 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) Pico Neighborhood

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 764 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Brodsky, Michael
To: David White; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16D, Support for 17th Street safety improvements Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 11:36:50 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I am a resident of 17th Street.

I fully support the recent improvements to make 17th Street safer.

Every day, I drive my car, ride my bike, or walk on 17th street. I applaud the city of Santa Monica for the recent improvements that are well designed and are an important safety upgrade for all.

Safe streets and intersections need to be our most important priority as we need to make pedestrians and bicyclists more visible to motorists. The new intersection treatments on 17th do an excellent job to make our intersections safer.

We need to reduce tragic traffic related injuries and deaths on our Santa Monica streets and most particularly at our intersections.

My grandfather, Charles Brodsky was killed in an intersection at Wilshire and 10th crosswalk by motorist who “didn’t see him.”
We need to make our intersections more visible and SAFER, not faster.

No excuses.

Sincerely,
Michael Brodsky
Santa Monica

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 765 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: David F
To: Phil Brock
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: item 16D: Support for 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 3:24:19 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre,
I've been watching with interest the improvements on 17th St for quite awhile now. At first I was puzzled, but as work progressed I came to understand what was being done. By now, I have used portions of the bikeway many times and can say, based on personal experience, that I support the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to do the same. I ask you to support this and other similar improvements to our infrastructure for the better future it portends for our community. However, seeking to score political points, by opposing or weakening these improvements, from persons whose only vision is backwards, is pathetic and morally wrong. Our roads must afford safe passage for all who use them regardless of travel mode.

Signed,
David Feuer

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 766 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Jesus
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 16D: Support for the 17th Street Bikeway
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 10:42:24 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to express my strong support for the 17th Street Bikeway in Santa Monica and urge you to stand behind it. Jeopardizing the safety of our community's vulnerable road users for political gain is morally wrong.

The 17th St protected bike lane has had a positive impact on our community since its introduction. It provides a safer route for cyclists, encourages more people to choose biking as a viable mode of transportation, and contributes to reducing traffic congestion and air pollution. It not only promotes a healthier lifestyle but also fosters a sense of community and connectivity among residents.

By supporting the 17th St protected bike lane, we send a clear message that our city is committed to sustainable and inclusive transportation solutions. It also demonstrates our dedication to improving road safety for all users, including cyclists, pedestrians, and motorists.

Removing or undermining the bike lane would be a step backward in our efforts to create a vibrant, livable city.

Thank you for considering the well-being of our residents and prioritizing their safety.

Sincerely,
Jesus

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 767 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Sergio Rodriguez
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: No to Item 16D
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 10:10:54 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I strongly urge to not pass Item 16D. The added value of protected bike lanes to a city’s infrastructure has not only been proven throughout the world, but is critical to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, car traffic, carcausing collisions and injuries. Protected bike lanes have been shown to reduces collisions and injuries for all road users (including drivers) by 30-50%. There already are too many cars in the road - this is how we have our infamous ridiculous traffic and smog. As known, accommodating more cars will only and always generate more traffic - there has never been an exception where more lanes has ultimately reduced traffic. The city’s investment is making it possible to get around Santa Monica outside of a car, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and making the city safer to walk and bike in; but more importantly, we need MORE protections for people moving around our city OUTSIDE of cars.

Staff time should be spent implementing more bike lanes and road safety projects, not studying what we already know to be true. Please vote against 16D.

Thank you,
Sergio Rodriguez

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 768 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: Katie Wassenaar
To: Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; councilmtgitems
Subject: Subject: Item 16D - Please Remove and stop new bike lanes! Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 10:02:34 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear City council,
I understand that almost none of you were part of the city council when the bike lanes were approved, and so it is my hope that you will now listen to the constituents as their elected officials and remove and stop the new bike lanes.

The bike lanes have caused danger to drivers, elderly, disabled, and EMT's. Even cyclists are not necessarily protected as there are blind spots, added distractions, and many cyclists don't even use the lanes. I have personal experience with an almost accident with a cyclist completely unseen because of parked cars blocking traffic's vision of her. I related the entire experience to Phil Brock last week.

Drivers are now opening their doors into traffic endangering themselves and creating situations for property damage to occur. EMT'S cannot access patients in a safe manner.

The removal of the right and left hand turn lanes has caused extra traffic, increased emissions, noise, and frustration.

There have been increased falls in elderly and disabled people, due to the concrete near the cars, and their inability to safely access the curb. Not to mention that many handicap spots have been removed along the bike lane corridor.

Both electric scooters and e-bikes use the bike lane which puts pedestrians at risk as they get to a vehicle.

For all these reasons and more we ask you to please bring 17th street back to the way it was. We are not against bike lanes, but prefer them, the way they were before.

Thank you for you representation!
Best,
Katie Wassenaar | Post Producer
Lifetime Santa Monica Resident
310-650-7440
[email protected]

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 769 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) From: T GROSSMAN
To: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis
Subject: Item 16D: 17th Street Bikeway design problem
Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2023 11:55:22 AM

EXTERNAL
Hello,
I am writing to ask you reconsider the design of the 17th Street bike lane. I am a bicycle rider, a driver and a walker. We need a better design.

The street layout has confused drivers. It has impaired handicapped parking. It has already contributed to some accidents. At certain times, the street is problematic for emergency vehicles who start from Pico - they cannot proceed north quickly enough in high traffic conditions to get patients to the hospitals for timely care.

There are other alternatives that would be wiser for all modes of transportation. Please find a better design, even if you must design one way streets or separate bike streets from driving streets.

Thank you,
Tina Grossman
90405

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 770 Attachment: Written Comments (5817 : 17th Street Bike Path) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023
Agenda Item: 16.E
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Request of Councilmembers Brock and de la Torre that the City Council ask the City Manager to estimate the costs of four Public Services Officers for the City Council to consider at the June 27, 2023, City Council meeting. The City Council should enact additional budgetary measures to address Clean and Safe Initiatives, which include safety and security downtown.

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

16.E
Packet Pg. 771
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 13, 2023
Agenda Item: 16.F
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Request of Councilmembers Brock & de la Torre that the City Council direct the City Manager to develop an estimate of resources needed to provide financial assistance to eligible families and/or partner with community nonprofits to provide free and/or reduced-cost swim lessons at Santa Monica Aquatics facilities to ensure that elementary school-age children have access to learn how to swim.

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

A. Swim Lessons_06132023
B. Written Comments

16.F
Packet Pg. 772
16 Item Swim Lessons
Request of Councilmembers Brock & de la Torre that the City Council direct the City Manager to develop an estimate of resources needed to provide financial assistance to eligible families and/or partner with community non-profits to provide free and/or reduced-cost swim lessons at Santa Monica Aquatics facilities to ensure that elementary school-age children have access to learn how to swim.

Background
All children who reside in Santa Monica should have basic swim skills by the time they exit 5th grade. It is a societal imperative that is especially important for diverse children who face many barriers to becoming acclimated to the water. In our coastal community with direct proximity to the Pacific Ocean, the availability of backyard pools in some areas of our community means that a child can lose their life because they lack a skill that should be common to all Santa Monica children.

It is imperative that all traces of America’s racist past be erased in our time, and one of those areas is the ability and right to be able to swim. In the recent past, swimming was an integral part of physical education classes at Santa Monica middle schools.

The ability to pay for swim instruction should not be a barrier to becoming a proficient swimmer.

16.F.a
Packet Pg. 773 Attachment: Swim Lessons_06132023 (5819 : Swim lessons) From: [email protected]
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: City Council 6/13 agenda item 16-F: SUPPORT
Date: Friday, June 9, 2023 5:20:36 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council members,
I support this agenda item to find a way to make swim lessons available to elementary school children whose families may not be able to to afford the fees. Living so close to the ocean, this is not merely a matter of recreation but of safety.

When I was teaching elementary school in downtown Los Angeles, one of my students, Gregory Gilliard, was finally able to afford to attend a church-related summer camp for the first time after completing 5th grade, but he drowned in the camp swimming pool. No one even realized what had happened until the end of the afternoon, when the pool was cleared and his body was spotted, lying at the bottom.

Thank you for your consideration.

Zina
16F. Request of Councilmembers Brock & de la Torre that the City Council direct the City Manager to develop an estimate of resources needed to provide financial assistance to eligible families and/or partner with community non-profits to provide free and/or reduced-cost swim lessons at Santa Monica Aquatics facilities to ensure that elementary school-age children have access to learn how to swim. New Item Received. 6/09/2023
Staff Report Printout
a. Swim Lessons_06132023

16.F.b
Packet Pg. 774 Attachment: Written Comments (5819 : Swim lessons)