More Written Comments — Santa Monica City Council, July 25, 2023

From: Robert Wright
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 3C and 3D
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 9:55:46 PM

EXTERNAL
Do not sell the civic! It needs to be saved!
Robert Wright
Ocean Park
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Connie Sonderegger
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 3C3D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 6:13:42 PM

EXTERNAL
Come on you guys! This city has been destroyed by developers greedily taking everything they can get their hands on-thank you city council as well for helping them out-can’t they give back a tiny fraction of that by renovating the Civic? We, who actually grew up here, would really like just a small piece of history to survive. Please?!? Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Kelli
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda 3c and 3d
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 5:56:39 AM

EXTERNAL
As a resident- tax paying citizen and business owner I believe it is NOT up to you elected officials to decide what to do with the civic center and it is NOT ok to do this behind closed doors without the residents of Santa Monica knowing what is going on! It should be up to the residents to vote on what stays and what goes and how we want our city since it is being ruined by overbuilding. There are so many empty, for lease shops and that won't change until safety of residents become your #1 concern! Stop the overbuilding of our beach town! It is not just your decision to make! ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Evelyn Lauchenauer
To: David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; councilmtgitems; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Attorney Mailbox; Santa Monica City Manager"s Office
Subject: Agenda Item 3 C/D.

Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 12:31:20 PM

EXTERNAL
Every City needs a Civic Center & we need to retain ours - it will further stimulate our economy and, hopefully, help to restore our sense of community.

City of Santa Monica Government Facebook Page:

The information in here is misleading & should be revised for clarity and accuracy. The City did not have to declare the Auditorium surplus. That was a discretionary decision by Council at its October 11, 2022 meeting, although Staff told Council in its report to Council that the Auditorium had to go through this process before the City could entertain short-term lease proposals. That is false, legally incorrect. You all need to take part in sorting this out.

Do what's best for the residents of Santa Monica.

I, like many care. The community has the right to influence what happens with the Civic Auditorium.

Many of us want the actual revival for cultural, arts, community or performance purposes. A revived Civic Auditorium and center wi be a win for the City as well. We have lost millions of dollars in revenue by not having a Civic Center.

Sincerely,
Evelyn Lauchenauer
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Marc Verville
To: Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis Cc: David White; Douglas Sloan; councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 3.D. Real Estate Negotiations re the Civic Auditorium (1855 Main Street) Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:11:13 AM
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
In reviewing both the newly posted “FAQs For Designation Of The Civic Auditorium (the “Civic”) as Surplus Land” (the “FAQs) and the referenced documentation of the October 11, 2022 City Council Meeting, it has become abundantly clear that the decision taken by the council on October 11, 2022 to declare the Civic Auditorium as “Surplus” Property under the provisions of the state’s Surplus Lands Act was based on false premises presented to the Council by the city staff.

The decision to call the Auditorium surplus last October 11, 2022 was presented to Council by staff as a legally-mandated, not discretionary, when in fact it was entirely discretionary. This legally and factually incorrect assertion has not been corrected in the FAQs posted Friday.

Given that much of the disposal discussion revolves around entities related to the city, namely the Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District and Community Corp. of Santa Monica (a key housing supplier to the City and the beneficiary of substantial City land acquisition subsidies), the staff motives for such a misleading staff presentation to the Council on October 11, 2022 appear to be highly questionable at best.

It is beyond ironic that Item 16.C. (sponsored by Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete and Councilmember Zwick) in this evening’s agenda “…directs the City Manager to explore and propose policy and regulatory changes needed to elevate Santa Monica's attractiveness as a major event venue. Positioning Santa Monica as a sought-after location to attract both local and international events would facilitate the City’s ability to proactively capitalize on several upcoming opportunities and support local businesses, stimulate economic recovery, further promote tourism, and provide new revenue sources to fund community programs and services for Santa Monica residents.” The unbridled densification of this city approved by a prior council (and also based on false pretenses) places a premium on spaces with the ability to bring the community together. Assets like the Civic cannot be duplicated.

As such, this entire sale process should be immediately terminated and a ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
formal business planning process launched to determine the commercial programming and revenue generating options available to the Civic. These options should include the Civic as part of an integrally programmed venue to leverage off the Pier and the venues available in the Downtown and Promenade.

It is way overdue for this process to begin in earnest, as Item 16.C. acknowledges.

The Civic is an irreplaceable cultural asset for the people of Santa Monica. It must remain that way and be revitalized to deliver the social cohesion and monetary value that is entirely within reach.

Respectfully,
Marc L. Verville
Sunset Park
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ann Thornycroft
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Items 3C and 3D
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 2:00:48 PM

EXTERNAL
To Whom it May Concern,
The Civic Auditorium is a very important institution in the story of Santa Monica and it has meant so much to so many people.

Please let there be no final sale or other decision on the Civic until and unless Santa Monica’s residents and voters and other interested persons have an opportunity to weigh in.

Thank you for your consideration.

Ann Thornycroft
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Lois Bostwick
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Items 3C and 3D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 9:42:32 AM

EXTERNAL
Please let our community be part of the decisions and plans for the Civic Auditorium, before bargaining away this important cultural resource. If we lose it, and regret that, it will be impossible to replace.

Lois Bostwick
Santa Monica resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Peter Altschuler
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda items 3C and 3D
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 1:09:08 PM
Attachments: PastedGraphic-1.tiff

EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium is iconic… and public. The Council’s in-secret consideration of making it a private enterprise is a disservice to the community and a violation of the public trust.

There are multiple sources of grants and funding to restore historic properties and to underwrite earthquake retrofitting. The Civic would qualify for both. The Council just has to make the effort to obtain that money and invest it in a structure that enhances the City’s cultural life and enriches the lives of its residents.

Audiences at the Civic have, over the years, dined in local restaurants, stayed in Santa Monica hotels, and parked their cars in fee-based lots. All of those expenditures benefit local businesses and contribute to the City’s tax revenues. It is possible, given the business benefits, that hospitality corporations with facilities in the city would contribute to the cost of restoration. If the restoration effort is done under the auspices of a 501(C)3 organization, the contributions will qualify for tax advantages.

Yet any effort to privatize the Civic will create a backlash among city residents that will generate enduring ill will. The only discussions that should be held with respect to the Civic Auditorium deserve to be public, deserve to solicit input from residents, and deserve the effort required to find a way to save the building and put it back into service as a public, City-owned venue.
p
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ursula Fox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda: Sale of Civic Auditorium
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 9:22:45 AM

EXTERNAL
Sell it.

Ursula Fox
[email protected]
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Bea Nemlaha
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; [email protected]; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems Subject: Champion the Civic: Agenda 3C, 3D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 2:46:13 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
The Civic is the people’s cultural center. For 55 years it brought to Santa Monica, the greater West Side, and their visitors the people’s music - - folk, jazz, blues, rock and roll - - and the people’s heroes - - JFK, the Dalai Lama - - and the people’s arts and passions - - photography, modern art, arts and crafts, cats, old cars, and more. The Civic could be the people’s cultural center again, opening its doors to new, emerging communities.

This valuable public asset should not be narrowed for use by a few high school students or renters.

The Civic’s fate should not be decided in a rush behind closed doors, barring the public it belongs to. That is not right.

Please vote against any effort to rush a fire-sale or lease to a narrow chunk of Santa Monica’s people. Hold public hearings. Put it on a ballot.

Create a Citizen’s Task Force. Reach out to entertainment organizations and deep pocket individuals who might be interested in re-opening the Civic in partnership with the City. Publicize opportunities. Take the time to do this! Engage your constituents - - your voters, your people. The Civic belongs to ALL of us.

Bea Nemlaha
43 year Ocean Park Resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Victoria Robinson
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cline; David Martin; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 10:29:35 AM

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica Council Members:

Please Do not sell or Demolish the Civic Auditorium landmark Please stop destroying Santa Monica Historical Buildings.

Victoria Robinson
Santa Monica Resident
Parent of Santa Monica High School Student
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Tom Richards
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 8:02:55 AM

EXTERNAL
Please do not agree to tear down or privatize the SMC civic auditorium Tom Richards
2913 10th st
Santa Monica
90405
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Nancy Morse
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D 7/25/23
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:17:15 AM

EXTERNAL
To: Santa Monica City Council
From: Nancy Morse, Santa Monica resident since 1990 (most recent) Re: 7/25/23 City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Do not sell the Civic Auditorium, nor enter into a long-term lease for it. Privatizing the public space is not acceptable, nor responsible.

The city can control or have a voice in its future use only if the city owns it and has not leased it out long term.

The Civic Auditorium belongs to the citizens of Santa Monica, should remain in possession and control of the city.

The Civic Auditorium is a Gem in Santa Monica. It has a good history here, wonderful concerts, academy awards, etc. The building is beautiful. The city long term should find a way to make it fit to retain in public use and city control.

I think it cowardly of city council to hold discussions on the fate of the Civic Auditorium in closed session where public cannot hear the comments. Perhaps individual councilmembers fear public reaction, or perhaps they don’t want public to know the fate has already been informally decided.
-Nancy Morse
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Elda Lazaro
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:38:08 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council members:

As a semi-recent resident of Santa Monica, I wish I would have moved here years ago when the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium was at its heyday. I wasn't born back when Fleetwood Mac, Bowie, Queen, Tom Petty, Clapton, Pink Floyd graced the stage and this is likely the only time I wish I were in my 60s to have experienced the beginning of this musical cultural shift in society. Preserving the Civic Auditorium, contracting with a concert events organizer and bringing back this much-needed live music venue will bring Santa Monica back to life. It will also bring revenue to the city through taxes and help the local downtown business community. We can host live events with renowned guest speakers, dignitaries, and SMC or SaMoHi graduations. We now have the infrastructure to travel easily through light rail. Downtown Santa Monica needs a revival so its residents feel safe and look forward to coming to the area. (For one, I avoid this area at all costs; there's nothing to do for live entertainment in a closed venue space.) As a patron of the live arts, I appreciate the history of the auditorium and wish for it to be restored back to its glory days. You've already approved densifying our once-small beach community with housing and large developments. Do not be the reason why we lose a much-loved venue. Please consider saving the civic so that my generation and future generations can experience what lifelong locals had for years.

Sincerely,
Elda Lazaro
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Steve Housden
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 5:07:29 PM

EXTERNAL
Please do NOT allow the destruction of the Civic. It would be a major tragedy.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Tracie Grossman
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:40:28 AM

EXTERNAL
To all City Council members and Staff,
Please stop the sale of the Civic Auditorium! This is part of the history of Santa Monica.

Instead spend the money to refurbish and restore the property. We don't need more apartments or condos that will add to more traffic and congestion in that area.

Sincerely,
Tracie Grossman
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Faustino Garza
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 10:41:30 AM

EXTERNAL
Santa Monica Council members:

Please do not permit the sale of our City Civic Center. It is an historic property proudly owned by the citizens of our city, whose wishes should be respected.

Faustino Garza
36-year homeowner and resident of Santa Monica
Sunset Park
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: H Gordon
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cline; David Martin; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cline; David Martin; Susan Cola
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 7:50:07 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis, Council members, City Manager,
Do not sell the Civic or the land it's on. the Civic is a great untapped asset that the city will never be able to replace.

We have a world class city and we need a civic center reflect that. The architecture is iconic and the location is iconic don’t destroy it, it could be resurrected and we could have it all done in time for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games.

Heidi Gordon
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Steven Naftali
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 1:49:01 PM

EXTERNAL
Honorable City of Santa Monica Council Member:

This is to respectfully request you vote against the proposed sale of our Civic Auditorium. I will appreciate that you please preserve this landmark that belongs to all of us as the City's own property.

Respectfully submitter.

Regards,
Steve Naftali
[email protected]
The information transmitted is intended only for the person which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: girltunes
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 11:26:22 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
I implore you to preserve the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. This building is a unique architectural masterpiece and has a rich history of epic performances and events such as the Academy Awards having been held there.

Over the years, the City Council has decimated the unique character of Santa Monica by allowing unique California beach-style architecture to be replaced by ugly oversized boxy buildings -- for example along Ocean Avenue which once had a relaxing beach town feel to it and now feels claustrophobic and generic.

What is left to admire in Santa Monica as you continue to cave to the construction interests and mow down our heritage and replace it with buildings that represent nothing but a greedy deal that someone profited from much to the detriment of the community? Saving the Civic Auditorium would be a step in the direction of preserving the unique architecture and beauty of Santa Monica and could inspire a new renaissance of cultural activities there that would attract visitors from all over the globe.

Please do not destroy this building. You will be destroying much more than the structure itself.

Sincerely,
Ferris Gluck
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Kathy Knight
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; Ben Hamilton; Kathy Knight
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:54:45 AM

EXTERNAL
July 25, 2023
To Santa Monica City Council:

Please DO NOT sell or do a long term lease on our wonderful Santa Monica Civic Auditorium without a public hearing on this issue.

No public documents like a Staff Report or other relevant items have been given to the public.

We need to have a chance to review undisclosed deals made behind closed doors without our opportunity to participate.

We need to have a PUBLIC HEARING on this very important issue to us citizens of Santa Monica. We had a public hearing on saving our wonderful Santa Monica Pier and it is still a treasure of our coastline.

Sincerely,
Kathy Knight and Joe Faris
Residents of Sunset Park for 35 years
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Nancy
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:31:55 AM

EXTERNAL
To the Santa Monica City Council Members and Staff,
It has come to our attention that the City Council may sell, lease or privatize the Civic Auditorium. This should NEVER happen. The Civic Auditorium is an iconic landmark and should remain a city site and gathering place for the benefit of the citizens of Santa Monica and its visitors.

Ashland Avenue residents,
Wes and Nancy Hicks
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Michele Cole
To: Caroline Torosis; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:50:48 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmember Torosis
I oppose designating the civic auditorium as surplus land. It is a historic landmark that should be restored.
thank you
Michele Cole
1930 Stewart St. #A9
Santa Monica, CA 90404
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Donna M Speckman
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 8:50:28 AM

EXTERNAL
I am writing to urge you to stop the privatization of the Civic Auditorium landmark. We have too few historical landmarks left on the Westside, and the public deserves to keep such a magnificent piece of our history. The sale or long-term lease of public land should be decided by the *residents* – and not by a few individuals. Once lost, this piece of history can never be recovered. Please show some respect for this iconic landmark.

Thank you,
Donna Speckman, Ph.D.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: kathryn Turk
To: [email protected]; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; [email protected]; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; [email protected]
Cc: David White; councilmtgitems; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:20:54 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members and Staff"
My husband and I are very saddened to hear that the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium is being considered as surplus land and might be slated for sale. This auditorium has been a landmark for Santa Monica residents and even those from the surrounding communities. We all remember the wonderful variety of events that were held in this civic auditorium. It is part of the community. As residents we have been able to come together to enjoy the interesting venues right here in our city. Where will we go now?
As a City, we need an indoor large local gathering place for entertainment and other inspiring, educational and informative offerings. Kindly keep Santa Monica as a City and not one huge housing development.

As a third generation Santa Monica resident, I plead with you to honor our City's heritage and not to discard what has been a valuable resource for its residents.

Thank you,
A. Marco Turk and Kathryn Turk
1111 Pine Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ric Mondragon
To: Ric Mondragon
Subject: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 8:56:22 AM

EXTERNAL
Council and Staff,
As a native Santa Monican, I request that you not allow the sale of the historic Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. If sold, then it would most certainly be demolished and that would destroy a huge part of Santa Monica's history.

I realize it's been closed for a while but, I'm sure Santa Monica could find a creative way to restore this architecturally unique and iconic landmark and generate income for the city.

Perhaps in a joint venture with an investor that truly wants to preserve and restore the building for performances and special events like it used to have.

It would be a devastating blow if the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium were to be sold and destroyed. You are able to stop this from happening so I strongly urge you to please not allow the sale of this historic building that is an essential part of the history of this very beautiful seaside community.

As a 60 year old lifelong resident of Santa Monica that has participated over the years in so many of the events that took place at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, I thank you very much for reading my request and understanding my concern.

Sincerely,
Richard Mondragon
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Carol Dickinson
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Items 3C and 4D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 5:21:34 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
Please stop the sale of our treasured landmark, the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. We residents do not want it destroyed to make way for housing or a gymnasium. Discussions concerning the Civic should be open to the public. It is shortsighted to give up on our beloved Civic. It can again become a beacon for those who love music and entertainment.

Sincerely,
Carol Dickinson
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Daniel Galamba
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: City Council Meeting July 25, 2023 agenda items 3C and 3D: Please halt Closed Negotiations about the Fate of the Civic Auditorium and begin Open Public Discussion
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 8:37:11 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
My comments below still apply. Please halt Closed Negotiations about the Fate of the Civic Auditorium and begin Open Public Discussion. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Dr Daniel Galamba
________________________________________
From: Daniel Galamba <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 8:34 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: City Council Meeting July 18, 2023 agenda items 3E and 3F: Please halt Closed Negotiations about the Fate of the Civic Auditorium and begin Open Public Discussion Dear City Council,
Please halt closed negotiations about the fate of the Civic Auditorium and begin open public discussion. Public spaces should not be sold or leased without the public’s approval.

The landmark-designated Santa Monica Civic Auditorium served our community from 1958 to 2013, providing concerts, forums for national speakers, arts and crafts shows and other cultural events (including The Oscars) well attended by residents and visitors. While we recognize The Civic has since fallen into disrepair, there is no similar public venue in our city, and we are bereft without it. The option should be considered of refurbishing the Civic Auditorium and bringing it up to current earthquake standards and this should be discussed in an open forum and not behind closed doors.

As stewards of public assets, including the Civic Auditorium, you owe it to your constituents that discussions such as this be held in an open forum so that the views of the people of Santa Monica can be considered before any decisions are made. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Dr Daniel Galamba
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Francesca Bress
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic Auditorium
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:34:22 PM

EXTERNAL
Do not demolish this!
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Jim Pickrell
To: Ann Maggio
Subject: Civic Auditorium to be sold
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 11:41:03 PM

EXTERNAL
So the city has declared the Civic Auditorium is surplus land? What a shame. It looks like a done deal, and the people we hoped would defend resident interests, didn't.

Now we are going to see another valuable city asset being squandered. Who will end up with the civic? Neil Scheckter?
It seems too late to have a debate about the wisdom of this. Was this a secret vote? If so, it seems the purpose of the Brown Act is to encourage debate BEFORE decisions are made, not after, when there is nothing to be done.

I feel powerless, and very unhappy with all involved.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 8:21 AM Ann Maggio <[email protected]> wrote:

Oct 11, 2022 Staff report: https://publicdocs.smgov.net/WebLink/DocView.aspx? id=3523153&searchid=401bbf73-5685-430a-8ec3-
4da9c97b15ee&dbid=0&repo=SMGOV
Meeting minutes: None found
Council video: Negrete asking questions about landmarking and housing. Susan Cola explaining what has to happen with Housing Provider offering. Explains that HCD still considers the East Wing to be under the Surplus Land Act. https://youtu.be/WHRBtDKcftQ?t=17137
Hotlink to the video of the vote:
https://youtu.be/WHRBtDKcftQ?t=17374
Ann Maggio Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 9:58 PM Ann Hoover <[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are completely accurate.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-of-the-civic-auditorium-as-surplusland This also can be found on the City’s homepage santamonica.gov under "Around Our City" https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please consider including the Brown Act violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that every person present for the discussion of either or both of those items will be committing a certain violation of the Brown Act because that Act only allows consideration of the “ Price and Terms of Payment for Sale” of the real estate being discussed. It is certain that the discussion, and any decisions made, will include dozens of matters concerning a disposition other than the very limited permitted scope specified above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session is not cancelled, a report of the meeting will be sent by me to the Director of the Public Integrity Division of the LA County DA’s office, with complaints against all Council persons present, the City Manager, City Attorney and Susan Cola, City Clerk( for placing the items on the Agenda) and both City Negotiators.In addition, I would expect that any and all decisions reached at that illegal meeting would be considered by a court to be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as requested by Oscar, has provided him and his colleagues with a memo relating to some of the points raised at the prior meeting.This note will surely say that Ms. Cola and Gleam were knowingly 100 % wrong in stating Tuesday that , under the Brown Act, real estate matters can be handled only in Closed Session.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The strong argument of SMCLC, made today, against a Closed Session,and for public discussion on a matter of huge significance, should be of great influence to Council and senior staff, and supplement the legal analysis above that the Brown Act prohibits Council from discussing behind closed doors the many broad issues involved in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who were involved in considering Civic Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”, meaning “non essential land”, that has to be sold or leased for housing or educational institution passed by councils on October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors! Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices! [email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: [email protected]
To: Council Mailbox
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic Auditorium
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 1:11:39 PM
Attachments: Blue.png
Facebook.png
Top Agent Network - Verified Member.png
1_Email Signature_Kate Bransfield.png

EXTERNAL
Council members,
I am vehemently opposed to any sale of our Civic Auditorium.

This must be discussed and decided publicly.

Thank you,
Kate
Estates Director
Global Luxury Specialist
CalDRE # 01218699
310.395.1133
[email protected]
www.SantaMonicaListings.com
Coldwell Banker Realty
1608 Montana Avenue
Santa Monica, 90403
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Peter Spelman
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic Center -- Agenda items 3C & 3D
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 2:56:35 PM

EXTERNAL
7/23
Hello Council Members:

I write to you as a 45 year resident of Santa Monica, first as a renter and now a 26 year homeowner. I've learned that you will decide the fate of our landmark Civic Center in closed session with no public input (other than letters). That's insane. It violates every principle of democracy in this most democratic (small 'd') city of ours. I actually thought it was a joke when I heard it. How could any reasonable person believe such a huge decision would be made in closed session? I therefore ask you to not make this momentous and generation-impacting decision in private, but open it to robust and well-advertised (in advance) public input. You are our representatives, and this is one of them asking you to respect that.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Peter Spelman
730 Marine St.

SM 90405
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Brian Lasky
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic Center -
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 4:50:01 PM

EXTERNAL
Hi All -
Ill make this short.

1. I oppose any decision about the Civic Center without public input.

2. The sale or long term lease of the Civic Center should be decided in public view (not behind closed doors).

3. I am curious why this is being done in private. MANY residents already feel that the City Council does not have the residents interest as a top priority. This only adds to our distrust of the council.

4. I understand the City is broke. However, that is based primarily on bad decisions of past city council members and poor planning. Bad planning on the City's part does not constitute negotiating the fate of PUBLIC lands without our input.

Please consider the thoughts of the residents you represent when making long term decisions for the City. You can always grab more money... but once you give up land, its gone for good. Public land should benefit the residents. Not a select few.

Thanks for your time,
Brian
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Beatrice Felix
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: CIVIC CENTER Discussions- What are you hiding??? Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 1:11:19 PM

EXTERNAL
Greetings City Council members,
When you were running for office you lobbied for our votes promising to represent us.

You got our votes. Now we want to see and hear what you are planning and agreeing to on our behalf with regards to the CIVIC CENTER property.

Why are you doing this behind closed doors?
IF you are acting in our best interest, then there should be no reason to hide.

PLEASE conduct these discussions openly in a public forum so we that we can know who stands for our interests and who doesn't.

If you don't, we'll assume you are all in the pockets of developers, and we will lobby to vote you out.

Beatrice Felix & Thomas Hartman
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Martyn Burke
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: CIVIC CENTER
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 7:21:06 PM

EXTERNAL
SAVE IT!
Do not be one of the cultural vandals who trash civic gems only to be cursed by future generations.

All these places go out of fashion for a while—and then come back as treasures —if the politicians have a scintilla of taste and an understanding of cultural history
Martyn Burke
Laura Morton
Ocean Avenue 90403
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: John Cyrus Smith
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Jesse Zwick; David White; David Martin; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; Susan Cline; [email protected]
Subject: CIVIC SURRENDER IS NO STRATEGY
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 1:12:52 PM

EXTERNAL
SM SYMPHONY (1).MOV
Dear Mayor Davis, Council members, City Manager,
I'll be brief. Do not sell the Civic or the land it's on and most certainly do not sell or lease it to the School District. (We all know where they get their money) Instead, exhibit some real leadership and commit to recreating a new Civic Auditorium for the 21st Century that retains its beautiful, landmarked North face, is versatile enough to host a variety of events and welcomes the best entertainment the world has to offer.

And have it all done in time for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games.

Do it in the most public way possible and begin TONIGHT.

Address whatever state law obstacles need to be addressed and direct the City Manager and staff to begin the process for the new Civic. --A new Civic that revitalizes international excitement about our city. --A new Civic that draws the finest entertainment anywhere. --A new Civic that draws film fests and conventions and hosts city events. --A new Civic that revitalizes everything south of the 10 freeway.

DO NOT BE REMEMBERED AS THE COUNCIL THAT SURRENDERED THE CIVIC AND SOLD OUR CITY'S SOUL.

Be the Council that saves it.

No one wants to hear excuses.

Start leading. Get it done. A bold public push to create a 21st Century Civic in just five years is about the best thing this Council could do for our city.

Just Do It.

Thank you!
John Cyrus Smith,
Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commissioner
[email protected]
[email protected]
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
P..S.

I've attached a video I shot in May of 2013 of the LAST LIVE MUSICAL PERFORMANCE at the Civic Auditorium... the Santa Monica Symphony performing tchaikovsky, Guido Lamell was conducting I believe.

SAVE THE CIVIC LOGO.jpg
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Karla Klarin
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 12:46:32 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear CouncilmembersPLEASE DO NOT DESTROY THE CIVIC AUDITORIUM! It is a piece of our history and we cannot throw our city's history away, once it is gone we can never get it back.

Please save the Civic!
Karla Klarin
--
karlaklarin.com
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: E Arias
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Council agenda items 3C and 3D --- Santa Monica Civic Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 9:24:57 PM

EXTERNAL
Please do not sell or lease the Santa Monica Civic nor have any further "closed door" meetings that do not include public input.

The sale or long-term lease of public land should be decided by the public.

Specifically, any decision regarding the Santa Monica Civic should NOT be made in secret, closed door meetings.

Mr. E. Arias
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ed Harker
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Council agenda items 3C and 3D
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 1:54:06 PM

EXTERNAL
If you represent us, the residents of Santa Monica, give us a voice in the decision regarding The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

What are you really afraid of?
If you don't represent us, why should we ever vote for you again.

Thanks,
Ed Harker
2029 20th St
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: SD
To: Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick Cc: Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis Subject: Council agenda items 3C and 3D
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 1:12:17 PM

EXTERNAL
Do not sell .. privatize or liquidate The Civic Auditorium I’m a citizen Of Santa Monica since 1970 I feel very strongly that the council restores the many venues that took place for the citizens of Santa Monica and beyond it was a $$$ maker Sandra Dean
847 18th st
#2
Santa Monica CA
90403
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Lisa Lipman
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Council agenda items 3C and 3D: Santa Monica Civic Auditorium Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 8:21:22 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing as a very concerned Santa Monica resident to plead with you NOT to continue negotiations with private or public entities to sell or lease the City owned Santa Monica Civic Auditorium (or hold closed session meetings about its fate), without the public’s participation in these discussions.

Public spaces shouldn't be sold or leased without the public’s aggreement. These spaces belong to all of us,
The iconic, Crown Jewel, landmark-designated Santa Monica Civic Auditorium served our community for many wonderful years, providing concerts, arts/crafts shows and other cultural events well attended by residents, including myself as well as visitors. While I understand The Civic has sadly fallen into disrepair, there isn't a similar public venue in our city, and it would be beyond devasting to lose it. I strongly and passionately urge the Council to open this discussion to residents. It is ours to decide.

Thank you for your time and considerations.

Best regards,
Lisa Lipman
Santa Monica resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Phyllis Chavez
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Council agenda items 3C and 3D: Halt The Lease/Sale of the Civic Auditorium Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 10:47:03 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
This matter is so important to me that I am writing again! The sale or the long-term lease of PUBLIC LAND should be decided by the residents. I am positive that these decisions SHOULD NOT be made in secret! You are the stewards of our public land. Secret meetings about public land is not acceptable.

Make the meetings public, get the residents input now. This is really a bad look for the City Council.

Thank you,
Phyllis Chavez
Sunset Park
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Burt Goldstein
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Council agenda items 3C and 3D:

Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 11:05:14 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
I, and all my friends and neighbors that I have “polled” on the subject strong object to:

1. ANY use of public land absent a vote by the public
a. Obviously this comprises a strong objection to ANY use of public land absent well-publicized public hearings

2. ANY privatization of public land.

In addition no one I spoke with is without suspicion that there is something illegal about the Council’s actions with regard to the use of public land, especially the notion of “private negotiations” between City workers and/or Councilmembers.

Sincerely,
Burt GOldstein
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Jeffrey Gordon
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White
Subject: Council Items 3C/D on July 25, 2023 Agenda
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 2:51:51 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and Councilmembers,
Whose spaces are Santa Monica’s “public spaces”? By definition they belong to the public and primarily residents. And this especially holds true when dealing with the future of our iconic and irreplaceable Civic Auditorium.

While the Civic’s facade is important, so is its use: Its use as a public place open to all and for public uses is particularly fragile. Easily lost in a sale or long-term lease. The City may not have the money at this time to renew it as a public space, but that will change.

So much of the publicly owned space around the Civic has already been given over for special interest use. It is vital that this not be the sad fate of the Civic itself, with a future Council lamenting the action of this Council—a cycle we’ve unfortunately witnessed too frequently.

The Council must open the Civic’s fate to a robust public debate. As can be seen already from the many strong letters to the Council, giving over the Civic to sale or long term lease isn’t what residents or the public as a whole wants.

Jeff Gordon, SM Resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: D"Orsogna, Maria-Rita R
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: Tricia Crane
Subject: DO NOT SELL THE CIVIC AUDITORIUM
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 1:16:39 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear all,
Do not sell the Civic Auditorium to any third party. Do not. Do not slap democracy in this way.

Do not destroy this place and erase its history more than you have already done. It is truly a shame that you are even considering this in a closed-door setting.

Perhaps you don't know what you are doing, but I hope you have taken some time to study who Welton Becket (the architect who built the Auditorium) is and what he gave to LA. I am not from here, but I have lived in this city for almost 25 years and spent lots of time learning the great things about it. One of them is the great urban planning and modernist design that went on in this city throughout the 1960s - all the classy mid-century stuff we all love. LA was young, unburdened by constraints of more historic places, the aerospace industry brought lots of ideas that could be incorporated in architecture and architects came up with beautiful, elegant solutions that the crap that is built today does not hold a candle to.

At the center of all this was Welton Becket. He designed some of the most iconic buildings in this town and
is responsible for coordinating the master urban planning for Century City. (BTW: It is such a pity we never really had a decent urban plan in Santa Monica, where stuff get built at random, to the contrary of all major Northern European cities). His designs were innovative, graceful, parsimonious - they are still beautiful today.

Welton Becket built the Federal Building in Westwood, the LA Music Center (Dorothy Chandler Pavillion), the Beverly Hilton Hotel, the Capitol Records Building, the Cinerama Dome, the Fashion Island in Newport Beach, and the Bullock in Pasadena. His son later took over his firm.

The SM Civic Auditorium, a Modernist building, was a marvel of technology for its time: the floor could be maneuvered from a flat surface to a raked floor, depending on the intended use. The acoustics were impeccable. All these things made it so that it could function as a theater, concert hall, music chamber, trade show, convention mini-center, movie house, even a boxing venue. The AIA gave it an award in 1960, two years after its completion.

We need to preserve the SM Civic Auditorium so we can pass on the ingenuity and beauty of those who came before us to the next generation, together with all the beauty and history ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
that happened inside that building - iconic stars of the era performed in it, the Oscars were celebrated there in the 1960s. There is a reason the place is designated as a historic landmark.

So, do not sell it to anyone. Who will we be if we keep destroying all the historic built world around us and replacing it with soul-less condo boxes or parking structures? Because whoever you are going to sell it will certainly demolish it to make money out of it.

The SM Civic Auditorium belongs to SM, we paid for it, and even if not in use anymore, it is part of our identity as a city. Instead, find a way to make it viable for future generations. A museum of SM? A more targeted entertainment venue? Restore it to make it something beautiful that speaks to positivity.

Here are some websites for you:
https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/santa-monica-civic-auditorium https://smconservancy.org/property/santa-monica-civic-auditorium/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welton_Becket
https://dahp.wa.gov/historic-preservation/research-and-technical-preservationguidance/architect-biographies/bio-for-welton-d-becket Come to your senses and do not sell the SM Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Maria R D'Orsogna
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: 3-C and 3-D unaccounted
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:25:03 AM
From: s. g. <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2023 12:42 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: 3-C and 3-D unaccounted

EXTERNAL

PLEASE DO NOT SELL THE CIVIC
REALLY?
Behind closed doors??
UNACCEPTABLE!
Susan Grant
30 year SM homeowner.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: 3C and 3D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:23:56 AM
From: Robert Wright <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2023 9:51 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: 3C and 3D

EXTERNAL
Do not sell the civic! It needs to be saved!
Robert Wright
Ocean Park
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: 3-C and 3-D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:23:30 AM
From: D M <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2023 4:16 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Cc: Charles Andrews <[email protected]>
Subject: 3-C and 3-D

EXTERNAL
Hello council members,
As a nearly 40 year resident of Santa Monica whose grandmother was raised here and great grandfather is buried at Woodlawn Cemetary I have a long history with our city and especially a great affection and appreciation for the Civic Center. Please do not sell it. Please gather the people’s feedback.

Sincerely,
Dian Andrews
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Council meeting July 25, 2023 Items 3-C and 3-D Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:25:26 AM
From: Dave Hopkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 9:46 AM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Council meeting July 25, 2023 Items 3-C and 3-D

EXTERNAL
Do not sell the Santa Monica auditorium. This is a public asset to be used and appreciated by all the residents of the city of Santa Monica.

Best regards, Dave.

Dave Hopkins
Resident of Ocean Park,
Santa Monica
[email protected]
Tel: (310) 990-2045
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Item 3-C and 3-D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:25:48 AM
From: James Lawson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2023 3:17 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Item 3-C and 3-D

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
Please do not sell the Civic Auditorium!
Jim
Jim Lawson
2913 3rd Street, Unit 202
Santa Monica, CA 90405
(213)718-2229
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Items 3-C and 3-D Re Santa Monica City Council, closed-door meeting on Tuesday, July 25th.

Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:26:11 AM
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2023 5:39 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Items 3-C and 3-D Re Santa Monica City Council, closed-door meeting on Tuesday, July 25th.

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members:

I have been a resident of Santa Monica for over 40 years. I am dismayed at, and object to, the present city council members' desire to sell the land-marked Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, built in 1958. It seems to me that you have an inherent obligation to the residents of Santa Monica to preserve and protect previously landmarked buildings which are of historical value to the City. It is extremely short-sighted of the council members to not take into consideration the future negative ramifications of such a sale.

I hope each of you will rethink your position on this matter and ultimately decide that selling the Santa Monica Civic Center is a mistake of grand proportion, when there are so many other services it could provide to the entire community rather than to a small portion of it.

Sincerely,
Diane Fella
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Items 3C and 3D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:25:16 AM
From: Jennifer Blum <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2023 2:22 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Items 3C and 3D

EXTERNAL
Dear council members,
Please save the Santa Monica Civic Center Auditorium. There is undoubtedly a very good use it could be put to in the coming decades. We are losing so much of Santa Monica’s unique and historical flavor to boxy apartment buildings that will probably look obsolete in a decade or so.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jennifer Blum
310-418-0500
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Items 3C and 3D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:24:35 AM
From: Dawn Saucier-Green <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2023 10:26 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Items 3C and 3D

EXTERNAL
I want to lend my support to save the few landmarks left in Santa Monica from the wrecking ball for the soulless mixed use architecture that is making Santa Monica a bland place to visit.

Hundreds of thousands of tourists and long time residents love Santa Monica for the unique place is and is quickly fading away. The Civic Auditorium still has a place and usefulness that is irreplaceable.

Please consider preserving the little architectural history you have left and repurpose it instead of demolishing everything like you have done on Lincoln Blvd. The last thing Santa Monica needs is more over price mixed use apartments that are going to "save" us from limited housing. Builders could care less about preserving anything or making it affordable.

Santa Monica used to be a destination that people preferred over Venice, and now it's the opposite. People don't want to live in over sanitized bland places.

Let's focus on upholding, embracing, and celebrating Santa Monica's past, and giving it a place in the cities future.

Thank you,
Dawn Saucier-Green
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: Save the Civic Center
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 8:23:37 AM
From: Jamie Zazow <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2023 4:34 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: Save the Civic Center

EXTERNAL
How short sighted a decision it would be to let this valuable (and I believe refurbished) public resource go. It should be rented more! And the resources from rental income should go towards upkeepng it and making it pay for itself!--
Jamie Zazow
5187 Oak Hill Lane #625
Delray Beach FL 33484
203-383-0204
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: SAVE THE CIVIC!
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:24:28 AM
From: haRa <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2023 6:10 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: SAVE THE CIVIC!

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, by noted 20th Century architect Welton Becket, is a Santa Monica TREASURE. The Civic has been the venue for countless performances, meetings, concerts, and exhibits. From the Academy Awards, to groundbreaking rock and soul concerts, to powwows, and so much more, this has been a place where people of all kinds have gathered. Part of my brother Ken Genser’s memorial was held here. Becket designed this space with several kinds of flooring to make it adaptable to anything from craft shows to concerts. It’s been a Mecca for artists of all types.

As a twelve year member of the Santa Monica Arts Commission, I urge you to save the Civic! Find a way to finance its repairs.

Because, if the Civic is sold, we are ALL losing a great landmark AND a great part of our heritage.

And we’ve lost so much already.

Find another way.
haRa Beck
Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Council Mailbox
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fw: WE ARE AT A LOSS?????
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 3:47:30 PM
Re: Items 3C & 3D
From: Carol Hile <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 3:07 PM
To: Council Mailbox <[email protected]>
Subject: WE ARE AT A LOSS?????

EXTERNAL
Why tear down a Santa Monica “ICON” of a building…EVER? The SM Convention Center has more memories over the years to fill volumes…AND THEY NEED to be shared Not swept under the “rug” and forgotten . I remember when “some” were ready to tear down the Pier , the Merry go Round included……
Shocking I know but common sense and the PEOPLE Stopped the idea of removing this historic oneof-a-kind ICON….So Here we go again! SAVE THE CONVENTION CENTER NOT Destroy it.

What will
replace it???? And who will Vote???? THE PEOPLE, THE CITIZENS? HMMMMMM I wonder??? ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Tricia Crane
To: Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White; Douglas Sloan
Subject: Fwd: Stop Negotiations re the Civic Auditorium - Item 3.D. , Council Agenda for July 25, 2023 Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 12:04:10 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
Given recent revelations by the City, the Council must vote tonight to stop the process to consider selling the Civic Auditorium (Agenda Item 3.D. Real Estate Negotiations re the Civic Auditorium,1855 Main Street).

Last Friday the City posted “FAQs For Designation of The Civic Auditorium (the “Civic”) as Surplus Land.” This document has rocked the community because it revealed that Council’s decision at that time to declare the Civic Auditorium as “Surplus” Property under the provisions of the state’s Surplus Lands Act was based on false premises and interpretation of the State Surplus Lands Act.

The decision to call the Auditorium surplus last October 11, 2022 was presented to Council by staff as a legally-mandated, when in truth it was discretionary.

The sale of the Civic is entirely discretionary and should be stopped.

Tricia Crane
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
FYI - The council emails are in this thread. If you need to write to the group, pay attention to that!
I saw it after sending my email!
Jaleh
Begin forwarded message:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ellen Mark
To: councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick
Cc: Stephen Mark; Daniel Mark; Hanna Mark
Subject: Halt Closed Negotiations to Sell or Lease The Civic and Institute a Public Process to Transparently Discuss its Future (7.18.23 City Council Closed Session Items 3E and 3F) Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 12:39:40 PM
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
To The Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing to urge you NOT to continue negotiations with private or public entities to sell or lease the City owned Santa Monica Civic Auditorium (or hold closed session hearings about its fate), without the public’s participation in these discussions.

Public spaces should not be sold or leased without the public’s approval. These resources belong to all of us, not just to those who happen to be holding office at the time. Public officials are stewards of public land, which imposes a high standard of transparency and accountability to the public. Holding closed session hearings to discuss the sale/lease of The Civic falls below that standard.

While state law allows some aspects of property negotiations to be conducted in secrecy, I believe that the importance of public space, especially this iconic space, necessitates an open and transparent community discussion.

I urge the Council to open this discussion to residents. It is ours to decide.

Sincerely,
Ellen Mark
Sana Monica
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Robb Curtis Brown
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 7:14:09 AM

EXTERNAL
The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium is an iconic local landmark. DO NOT CONDEMN OR DESTROY THIS IMPORTANT AND BEAUTIFUL BUILDING! There are plenty of empty office spaces and plenty of other options for building housing. Once this is gone, it's gone. Do not erase this historical gem.

Robert Brown
Pier Av, Santa Monica
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: [email protected]
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Item 3C and D
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 2:24:04 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Members of the City Council: Of course the sale or long-term lease of public land should be decided by residents. Of course any decision about a publicly owned and historic resource, especially one as iconic as the Civic Auditorium, should not be made in secret.

Sincerely,
Susan Suntree
1223 11th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Richard Orton
To: Council Mailbox
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 3-C and 3-D Save the Civic Tuesday July 25 Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 1:08:01 AM
Attachments: Screen Shot 2023-07-21 at 2.25.03 PM.png

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Please save the Civic Auditorium. Here’s what happened in another city when they were faced with losing their precious auditorium…
In 1943 the Munich Opera House, an ornate exquisite treasure built in 1811 was leveled in an Allied bombing raid. The interior was like a jewel box full of carvings, gold leaf and red velvet. After the war the people of Munich decided it was part of their heritage and rebuilt it down to the tiniest Baroque detail.

Today it looks as beautiful as it did in 1811,
Though newer, The Civic Auditorium is our heritage with a legacy of performers that include Frank Sinatra, Ella Fitzgerald, The Eagles, The Doors and countless others. We should take pride in our heritage and not cast this historic treasure aside. In the future, having this building alive and thriving will tell the world that Santa Monica has a soul. Save the Civic Auditorium as an entertainment venue.

Thank you,
Richard Orton
Ocean Park
Below, The Munich Opera House as rebuilt 1946-1963
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: [email protected]
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 11:01:14 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members: I & many others do not want the SM Civic Auditorium to be given away for luxury condos etc. Do not sell it or lease it out. Preserve it!
We are concerned about the un -landmarking of buildings in our city. The SMCA is one such example. It was Landmarked for a reason. It is an architectural gem loaded with a rich cultural history.

Some years ago I personally got involved in finding a viable way to save the SMCA. I got in contact with the Grammy Museum in Los Ángeles. They were open to discussing turning the building into a Grammy Museum West.

I presented this proposal at a workshop held for public input for saving the civic auditorium. The officials there were not even interested. It was clear that it was a dog & pony show. I felt the Civic Center was good as sold/written off.

Please prove me wrong that there are city officials that truly want to preserve our history not sell it to the highest bidder.

Lou Steiner
Santa Monica Resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Elizabeth Lerer
To: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 3-C and 3-D Civic Auditorium
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:58:31 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
Please do not be the City Council responsible for quashing any chance of bringing back a fully functioning Civic Auditorium!
Thank you,
Elizabeth Lerer
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Karen Croner
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 3C and 3D
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 6:17:08 PM

EXTERNAL
I am writing as a resident to strongly oppose any closed door sessions regarding the future of our Civic Center. The residents want to restore it as a performance venue. You cannot make a decision without our input. Yes, we face budget challenges. Certainly naming rights will be valuable. It will bring revenue to the city as people go to restaurants etc before and after events. I strongly oppose it being used for Samo High School. You just tore down the history building and built an expensive new building. Enrollment is down and you are building tiny expensive apartments not meant for families. If we have budget problems, it is not only due to the settlement of the tragic sexual abuse case. You built an expensive annex to city hall and we have the largest staff for a city of this size. I love Samo High. I went to Wonderland, Bancroft and Fairfax and believe strongly in public education. But this is a Civic Center, desperately needed in a town that lacks civic pride right now.

Most importantly you have the chance to do something wonderful for the city, give it back its identity as a cultural center. Half our apartments are empty. There is no bowling alley, though there is an absurd sign that says Bowl that will simply taunt families and kids who will think it means they can bowl there.

Make us proud. Do the Right Thing. Let the residents decide.

Thank you.

Karen Croner
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Katharine Dreyfuss
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 9:40:40 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council members:

I address you once again to urge you not to take action on selling our historic Civic Auditorium until you have heard more input from city residents about alternative ways to balance our city's budget.

I remember our struggle, with a previous City Council, to prevent the sacrifice of another Santa Monica treasure, the internationally honored Peace Sculpture, Chain Reaction. In that case, Chain Reaction supporters were able to raise funds to help the City save our monument.

I believe that the City remains proud of its decision to support its residents' commitment to preserve that sculpture.

Whether or not a fund-raising campaign will be considered in your decision regarding the Civic Auditorium's future, I entreat you to respect the opinions and suggestions of the residents who elected you before rushing into a sale.

Thank you for considering my request.

Best,
Katharine Dreyfuss
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ann Hoover
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; David White
Cc: Susan Cline; David Martin; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cola; Roxanne Tanemori; Jennifer Taylor; jaleh mirhasemi; Maryanne LaGuardia
Subject: July 25, 2023 Council Meeting - Civic Auditorium Negotiations (3.C. and 3.D.) - Susan Cola FAQs Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 8:42:55 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis, Esteemed Councilmembers and Mr. White - I believe you know that I and many others in our City are deadly serious about preservation of public assets, community space & use, and no privatization of our Civic Center land and Auditorium.

The FAQs about the Auditorium that Councilmember De La Torre asked for last week and that Assistant City Attorney Susan Cola posted Friday are completely misleading about the law. The decision to "SLA" the Auditorium was discretionary NOT mandatory as Jennifer Taylor erroneously represented to Council last October.

Hopefully everyone on Council (and of course on Staff) understands that now. Council did not have to do this.

I don't want to speculate about what Council knew or didn't know when they voted last October 11, 2022 to put the Auditorium in this process, but it's become clear to me that it's now going to be a very long one & not over after the 90-day mandated negotiation period as I'd hoped. This now completely ties our collective hands regarding moving forward with other community-serving + economic opportunities.

Meanwhile, the public is completely shut out and left in the dark. No input, review or dialogue and we face the specter of yet another "Done Deal" with zero meaningful process for the public just like as with the Early Childhood Lab School and there goes our Civic Center & community heart right down the drain. It's very, very bad what you have done.

Ideally Council would rescind the October 11, 2022 vote and exit the SLA process (there are Council rules to revisit a prior vote; I don't know how or if you can exit SLA once an asset is in it but rules of fundamental fairness would militate that a city can). Negotiations could still move forward with either "bidder" (because neither are a proposed purely commercial or industrial use) but with significantly more control, public input and transparency, and NO STATE OVERSIGHT, which is overreach in the extreme.

I will be communicating with Susan Cola in an attempt to modify the outrageously misleading FAQs for more transparency and accuracy today.

Best to you always, I know you have a tough job -
Ann Bowman
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ann Hoover
To: Susan Cola
Cc: Jennifer Taylor; Douglas Sloan; David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; Anuj Gupta; Roxanne Tanemori; Heidi von Tongeln; jaleh mirhasemi; Maryanne LaGuardia; councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Denise Anderson-Warren Subject: July 25, 2023 Council Meeting - Items 3.C. and 3.D. - Revisions to the FAQs for Designation of the Civic Auditorium as Surplus Land (posted on 07/21/23)
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 3:40:15 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Ms. Cola -
Given the realities of the Surplus Lands Act application to the Civic Auditorium (a completely discretionary decision by Council) and Staff's misleading presentation on October 11, 2022 to Council, the FAQs you prepared and posted this past Friday are not sufficiently responsive to Councilmember De La Torre's request at the Tuesday, July 18, 2023 Council Meeting and also continue the legal and factual misrepresentations.

To be transparent with the public and responsive to the request made to you last week, following are suggested revisions and additions to the FAQs:

FAQ1 -- Please add the following 2 sentences at the end of the current FAQ1 ANSWER:

Please insert the first sentence of FAQ2 after the first sentence of the FAQ1 ANSWER. (i.e., Insert: Under the SLA, "surplus land" may be designated as such by a local agency when the land is surplus and "is not necessary for the agency's use". Gov't Code Section 54221(b)(1). )
Please add the following 2 sentences at the end of the current FAQ1 ANSWER:Council's decision to designate the Civic Auditorium as "surplus land" was a discretionary and not legally-mandated one, although Staff represented to Council at the October 11, 2022 Council Meeting that the designation was REQUIRED, which in fact it was not. It nevertheless ultimately was Council's choice to do so.

FAQ2 --
Please delete the first paragraph of the FAQ2 ANSWER in its entirety as it is irrelevant and therefore misleading and unresponsive to the question.

Please add the following sentence at the beginning of the Second Paragraph of the FAQ2 ANSWER: Council may have been persuaded to declare the Civic Auditorium "surplus land" for a variety of reasons.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Please delete the last sentence of the Second Paragraph of the FAQ2 ANSWER in its entirety as it is not responsive to the question and also is seriously misleading because it implies once again that Council was REQUIRED by law to declare the Civic Auditorium surplus, when in fact it WAS NOT.

NEW FAQ3 --
Please add a new FAQ3 that says: What now are the Surplus Lands Act legal requirements the City must comply with since Council declared the Civic Auditorium as "surplus land"?
Please add a new FAQ3 ANSWER that says (using the sentence from the end of the FAQ2 ANSWER): The City must comply with SLA noticing and good faith negotiation processes with affordable housing, parks and recreation, and education providers before it can negotiate and/or enter into any agreement for sale or leasing of the property for any commercial purpose. [Reference the Statute]
Current FAQ3 --
Please renumber as FAQ4 and FAQ4 ANSWER.

Please add the following sentence at the end of the NEW FAQ4 ANSWER:

The City, however, could have entered into the short-term leases (under 5 years) that Economic Development Staff spoke to Council about during the October 11, 2022 Council meeting WITHOUT subjecting the Auditorium to the Surplus Lands Act process.

Current FAQ4 --
Please renumber as FAQ5 and FAQ5 ANSWER.

Please delete the first two words of the ANSWER ("Under the") and replace with the words "Once subjected to".

Please insert the following sentences prior to the last sentence of the NEW FAQ5 ANSWER: The required minimum period of a 90-days negotiation with any affordable housing developer has expired. Any SLA-mandated negotiation period with the school district likewise has expired. The City now may terminate negotiations with either the School District or Community Corporation at any time.

Current FAQ5 --
Please renumber as FAQ6 and FAQ6 ANSWER.

Please let me know if you have any questions about the foregoing. Again, the original FAQs in several instances are factually misleading, non-responsive, and/or legally ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
incorrect, which mandates their revision.

I refrain here from even mentioning the fact that Staff also seriously erred in telling Council on October 11, 2022 that Staff could not entertain short-term lease proposals (under 5 years) without SLA-ing the Auditorium. I have no idea what's been going on here, but the degree of Staff mendacity on the issue of applicability of the Surplus Lands Act to our Civic Auditorium is astonishing.

As I've expressed already, I am disappointed by this high level of obfuscation and mendaciousness exhibited by both the City Attorney's office and Economic Development Staff in this matter beginning with the October 11, 2022 Council Meeting and continuing on with these FAQs.

Thank you very much for your time in attending to these revisions and please let me know when the current FAQs have been revised, which I then will review.

Sincerely,
Ann Bowman
Former corporate and entertainment attorney, PTA President, non-profit fundraiser, Co-Chair - Civic Center Task Force
Resident, 26+ years
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ann Hoover
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; David White; councilmtgitems
Cc: Susan Cline; Anuj Gupta; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; David Martin; Roxanne Tanemori; Heidi von Tongeln; Melissa Spagnuolo; Sofia Klatzker; [email protected]; jaleh mirhasemi; Denise Anderson-Warren
Subject: July 25, 2023 Council Meeting - Items 3.C. and 3.D. - Closed Sessions Civic Auditorium Sale Negotiations Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 6:20:10 PM

EXTERNAL

SALE OF CIVIC AUDITORIUM - OPPOSE
Dear Mayor Davis, Esteemed Councilmembers, and Mr. White - Please do not sell the Civic Auditorium & underlying land ever.

Please put a period ASAP on whatever Surplus Lands Act procedural requirements remain as any required negotiation period(s) should have expired by now.

Further, any leasing or other proposed use/disposition of this landmarked property should be discussed with plenty of notice, in public, and with robust opportunity provided for community input and DIALOGUE.

This is a once-in-a-lifetime legacy project. Let's get it right.

Thank you!
Sincerely,
Ann Bowman
Former corporate and entertainment attorney, PTA President, non-profit fundraiser, Co-Chair - Civic Center Task Force
Resident, 26+ years
Here come the boosters!
On Monday, July 17, 2023 at 02:39:11 PM PDT, Ann Hoover <[email protected]> wrote:

OPPOSE - ANY SALE OF THE CIVIC AUDITORIUM
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Dear Mayor Davis, Esteemed Councilmembers, and Mr. White - Please do not proceed any further with negotiations to sell the Civic Auditorium.

The City should never, EVER sell an asset of this magnitude. That's Real Estate 101.

Given its unique history & with a major acoustics upgrade, many of us believe that a restored Auditorium will be a massive tourist attraction if revived as a quirky but topnotch performance venue. It also would once again be able to support other arts, convention, sports, and community functions as it did for over 60 years. So many people (locals and tourists alike) in this increasingly soulless, ever-corporatized world are desperate for authenticity. For something real, with roots.

Let's please have the discussions and exchange elevated visions alongside concrete plans to make them happen. Possibly they will still involve community partners and/or corporate partners. There's an opportunity for cross-collaboration among City Staff departments, political leadership, and other local players as well. There also may be an opportunity for private philanthropy. Let's be a team. Maybe some civic boosters are back. To find out, you have to give them a chance.

We won't know how great we could make this if we don't sit down and get it all out on the table, give it the old college try. The community owns this land. You owe the community a chance to will something truly great into existence here that could end up juicing our civic life and super-sizing the entire Santa Monica economy for the next century. Don't miss this opportunity!
So THIS is your Plan A - listening to people who aren't economically self-interested who have IDEAS. The far distant Plan B, should all else fail, is picking back up talk of a sale. Which would be so lame and so sad. No more "done deals", please, ever.

PLUS, this would truly be a LEGACY PROJECT for this Council and Mayor and City Leadership. Please don't be the people who threw it all away.

Financial obligations due to Mr. Uller's crimes, staff gross negligence in ignoring them, and pressing unfunded pension obligations cannot ever justify the sale of something that is essentially priceless and once gone, would be gone forever, not just as a tangible asset but as an intangible locus of civic identity.

Additionally, the public has grown weary of the refrain that "well, the redevelopment money dried up." Well, yes it did, but recent Council, including Mayor Davis, and Staff also just spent $141 million on the City Hall Annex and gave away 3 acres of our Civic Center public land for FREE ($1 a year), alongside a multi-million dollar contribution towards construction of the private perk Early Childhood Lab School. The money to rehab the Auditorium could have been identified all along if Council/Staff had cared to make it so, but the will has been lacking.

Now, since October 2022 you've gone zero-to-sixty on this sale issue with no ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
substantive public discussion or community input. The Auditorium has been the cornerstone of our City's civic identity since the late 1950s - HALF of our City's incorporated existence.

Please DO NOT allow yet another public-to-private (or with SMMUSD, effectively private) land grab like past Council and the City let happen with the ECLS. The most recent Civic Working Group process was a public land grab masquerading as a community input process. Getting ahold of this land has been one of private interests' main goals for well over a decade.

Key takeaways for Council and Staff: LEGACY PROJECT..... JUICE OUR ECONOMY..... RESTORE CIVIC LIFE.

Thank you for your time reading this and look forward to seeing you tomorrow night.

Sincerely,
Ann Bowman
Former corporate and entertainment attorney, PTA President, non-profit fundraiser, Co-Chair - Civic Center Task Force
Resident, 26+ years
IS BOOSTERISM BACK?
And in the immortal words of Peanuts' Lucy van Pelt:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
The designation of the civic center as surplus property happened when North of Wilshire NIMBYs who don't want low income housing in their neighborhood voted to designate the historic Civic Center as surplus property. This means the almost 4 acres could probably be developed with over 700 units of high density low income housing.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
Subject: Surplus and Nonessential staff
I realize that our city has budget questions.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Jaleh MIRHASHEMI
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David White
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Jennifer Taylor; David Martin; Ann Bowman ; Zina Josephs; Larry Arreola; Dr. Anna Rogers; Maryanne Laguardia Subject: OPPOSE - City Council Meeting July 25, 2023 - Items 3.C. and 3.D. - Closed Sessions Negotiations for Sale of Civic Auditorium)
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 9:53:35 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis, Esteemed City Council Members, and Mr. White, As we learned, the decision to Surplus Land Act/SLA Auditorium was discretionary NOT mandatory when the city staff presented to Council last October. As the representative of residents, you did not and DO NOT have to put our Auditorium and civic land through this process. Unless you don't want to make people already angry more angry, please DO NOT make a deal behind the closed door and exit the SLA process. DO NOT SALE THE AUDITORIUM AND THE RESIDENTS!
Our Civic Center is a symbolic part of our city. The civic land belongs to the community, and it should remain for the public and in the public use. The Civic Auditorium, as the landmark, can be revitalized as a cultural and economic center for the public the same as how it was before.

The city must retain the ownership of Civic Auditorium and make a public announcement for the possible philanthropist if the funding is an issue. However, any decision on the Civic Center land and Civic Auditorium should be through community input and not through closed doors.

As a concerned Santa Monica resident, I urge you to give a chance to our Civic Auditorium, DO NOT SALE it and plan to find a better solution. Please let us residents be involved and help if needed.

This is YOUR CHANCE to make a history. Please do it right! Thank you,
Jaleh Mirhashemi
Santa Monica resident 22+ years
Former Aviation Planner at SCAG
Former Co-Chair, Civic Center Field Task Force
Former PTA member for Safety, Cultural, and Improvements 15 years ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: janine autolitano
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: OUR Auditorium
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 2:33:54 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilpeeps,
It has been with great dismay to witness our beloved Santa Monica Civic languish due inaction over the past 11 years since it held its last concert.

We can agree that the arts are vital, correct? We sure talk the talk about that. It's time to get real and walk the talk before our most precious cultural resource is lost.

My golden twofer would be to convince the relevant party to invest in The Dell Auditorium and leave the Miramar alone. That would be truly visionary and our hotels, along with the flush new ones coming in would be thrilled to have a beautiful, iconic auditorium for concerts, conventions, trade shows, art fairs, you name it, all within walking distance! Of course, there are many other options if the will is there. Please help save what makes Santa Monica special and unique.

Thank you,
Janine Autolitano
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Gail Gordon
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Our Civic Center
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 12:59:19 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council-member,
I hope we can access the funding to restore our Civic Center. Santa Monica should not continue to be stripped of her identity by builders who don’t care about the heart of and soul of our city Please restore our Civic Center!
Thank you
Gail Gordon
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Esther Hickman
To: councilmtgitems; David Martin; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cline; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; David White; Gleam Davis; Jennifer Taylor; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Nia Tang; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Susan Cola Subject: Please allow the PUBLIC to use the CIVIC Auditorium Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 11:15:06 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers,
We all know that below market and moderate income individuals and families appreciate and benefit from the arts.

In addition to all the affordable housing opportunities that you are creating for people within the community, perhaps quality of life within that community can continue to be prioritized.

Arts for All! Even the marginalized.

Please prioritize revitalizing downtown by finding ways to restore the Civic.

When I talk to my below market and moderate income friends and neighbors in the community, they want community gardens, arts for all and safer streets. Art is not just for the elite and affordable housing is just part of a healthy society. There has to be a way to continue producing affordable housing and letting us all enjoy the benefits that only well run cities can offer their socio economically challenged citizens.

There are still many more opportunities to create affordable housing throughout the City.

Why not make it easier for developers to adopt 80/20 (80 percent market/20 percent affordable housing) like in other major cities? Why do efforts to create affordable home purchasing opportunities keep on getting blocked and impossible to produce? Thank you thank you thank you to you all!
--
Esther Hickman
310.600.7306
--
Esther Hickman
Broker Associate
CalDRE#: 01993403
m: 310-600-7306
https://www.compass.com/agents/esther-hickman/
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Metin Mangir
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: PLEASE ask for public input for Civic Auditorium Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 1:13:07 PM

EXTERNAL
In reference to Council agenda items 3C and 3D:

I ask you NOT to sell or long-term lease of public land without public decision.

It should be decided by residents.

Metin Mangir PhD
36 year resident of SM
536 16th street
SM CA
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Randolph Visser
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Please hold public hearings
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 4:28:11 PM

EXTERNAL
on the future of the Civic Auditorium. I am a 50 year resident and urge you not to hold secret meetings. Where is the transparency. Ignoring the voters contravenes our democracy.

Thank you
Randy & Linda Visser
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: [email protected]
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: PLEASE save the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium
Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 12:03:21 AM

EXTERNAL
To Whom It May Concern:

As a resident of Santa Monica since 1977, I am deeply concerned about the future of the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium and the important preservation of Santa Monica's history, especially when it comes to the arts.

Please preserve and renovate the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, and designate it as a performance venue. I will be watching carefully to see how you vote on this issue, and will consider your decisions when I'm voting in future elections for City Council positions. There seems to be a frightening trend in this City Council to ignore the residents, over develop our residential streets with too many buildings, and turn this unique city with so much culture into another Marina del Rey or Beverly Hills.

Please help Santa Monica to preserve history; so many wonderful events happened at the Civic Auditorium over the years, including SMMUSD's Stairway of the Stars, Academy Awards, Tami performances and other events which are an integral part of Santa Monica's history.

I'm sad that Santa Monica is losing so much of its cultural history to useless office space, high end "Beverly Hills" types of chain stores, and is neglecting the needs and wishes of its residents.

We VOTE and we are watching.

Sincerely,
Emily Sanders
Santa Monica resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Dr. Anna Rogers
To: councilmtgitems; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Preserving our historic Civic Center Auditorium Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 3:15:27 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
The serious problems arising from attempts to sell our Civic Auditorium go well beyond the ethics and futility of
pursuing the destruction of a beloved, well-established Santa Monica landmark which, when refurbished, would
bring in significant revenue from events and tourist
business. Firstly, there is the glaring violation of the Brown Act on several levels, and utilizing wording of the Surplus Lands Act does not change this fact. If a closed session is actually held, any and all actions taken would be
considered null and non-enforceable. Clearly there is no legal mandate for subjecting the Auditorium to the Surplus Lands Act—this unfortunate decision is obviously
discretionary with no basis in legal protocol.

I urge you to remember that excessive and useless
development opportunities for private interests to the
detriment of our community, especially attempts to sell our public land, has and will continue to result in complicated legal action on many levels, and the vacancy rates will continue to climb as will the anger of residents and workers within the city. You need to pay attention. If laws continue to be violated and certain minds are closed tightly under the direction of special interest corporate donors, the ensuing accountability and legal consequences will gain national and international news and interest, which would most certainly be the tip of the iceberg.

Four of our very dedicated councilmembers have worked
courageously and tirelessly to put the brakes on
contributing to our vanishing heritage, culture, and
architectural history. For those efforts the community is most grateful. Profit is one variable—but profit based on ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
greed, ambition, and obsequious behavior towards donors and endorsing organizations is quite another.

I urge common sense, some semblance of ethical
considerations, and a clear interpretation of the law
WITHOUT yet more flimsy excuses regarding this specific incident.

Anna M. Rogers
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Stanley H Epstein
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; Douglas Sloan; David White; Denise Anderson-Warren; Susan Cola Subject: Re: Automatic reply: Automatic reply: LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE ABOUT THE CIVIC AUDITORIUM Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 1:39:08 PM

EXTERNAL
Thank you for acknowledging that the public record remains open this moment on Agenda Items 3C and 3D this evening. Stan Epstein
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 1:31 PM, councilmtgitems
<[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you for your email. Please be advised that this email will: 1) become part of the public record, 2) be filed with the City’s official records, and 3) be posted online at smgov.net/council/agendas.

Comments will not be redacted and appear online as they are submitted.

If you plan to speak at the meeting and have an electronic presentation to show, please submit it to [email protected] no later than 12 PM on the day of the meeting.

Thank you,
The City Clerk’s Office
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Stanley H Epstein
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Automatic reply: LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE ABOUT THE CIVIC AUDITORIUM Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 12:54:48 PM

EXTERNAL
Please post all emails from me to the Clerk, City Attorney, or Council members on Items 3 C and 3D tonight.Thanks. Stan Epstein
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:49 PM, councilmtgitems
<[email protected]> wrote:

Comments will not be redacted and appear online as they are submitted.

If you plan to speak at the meeting and have an electronic presentation to show, please submit it to [email protected] no later than 12 PM on the day of the meeting.

Thank you,
The City Clerk’s Office
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: oesr
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:47:11 AM

EXTERNAL
RE: City Council Agenda Items 3-C and 3-D
I grew up with family living in Santa Monica and spend lots of time here as a child. Over the years, I attended so many events at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium from the TAMI show in 1964 with an incredible cast of who was or became rock superstars, to the gem shows, dog show and so much in between. As I am sure you know, the Academy Awards were held there in the 60’s.

The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium has sat desolate for so many years and for whatever reasons has left Santa Monica with an icon in disrepair. I sincerely hope that this City Council will have the foresight to finally make a statement that we are a city who cares about our history and bring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium back to its glory. A City Council years saved the Santa Monica Pier to become a Pier that is known worldwide. Your foresight tonight could do the same for the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sadly, our notoriety currently does not bring people to our city. I believe it will be of interest to people worldwide who have attended events there over the years or visited our city.

Thank you,
Jane Dempsey
47 year resident of Santa Monica
Santa Monica, Ca 90405
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Victor Fresco
To: Jeff Gordon
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems; David White
Subject: Re: Council Items 3C/D on July 25, 2023 Agenda Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 7:26:41 PM

EXTERNAL
Great letter, Jeff!!
On Jul 22, 2023, at 2:51 PM, Jeffrey Gordon <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Mayor Davis and Councilmembers,
Whose spaces are Santa Monica’s “public spaces”? By definition they belong to the public and primarily residents. And this especially holds true when dealing with the future of our iconic and irreplaceable Civic Auditorium.

Jeff Gordon, SM Resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Karen Croner
To: Dan J.

EXTERNAL
Yes, SMRR and Forward have taken over the Democratic Club and also the Sierra Club.

Are folks on this chain members of either the Dem Club or local Sierra Club? The Sierra Club Stamp of approval makes a huge dif for people and it is completely corrupted by developer interests.

I am absolutely ready to help and join a new Dem Club for Santa Monica or join the present one and
make a difference.

On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:54 PM, Dan J. <[email protected]> wrote:

There is a new competitor to the SMDC:

Blue Wave Dem Club
bluewavedemclub.org
<cro
pped
-
bluewav
eicon180x
180.
png
>
DJ
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:34 PM, lmarreola
<[email protected]> wrote:

Agree about the necessity of using technology. SMRR had Roger Thorton as tech wizard for 40 years.

I believe trying to infiltrate Dem Club or SMRR is a waste of time and energy.

We need to grow our own organization with our own tech wizard.

We need to organize all the " like thinking" and FB site voters and all the neighborhood organizations under one umbrella working together. FB is not the answer to political organizing.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

AUDITORIUM
Zwick was born and raised here. His father is a well known film and tv producer.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner
organized a tech driven
bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time.. Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote - that is what SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote. Same with
SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

Gleam is not running - she is termed out I believe. Zwick and Caroline aren't running -they just got in ... but the others who are just as bad as Zwick and backed by SMF who are far
more the problem -will run. Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati
<[email protected]> wrote:

They don’t CARE about Election Day because they know they will win regardless. The last election proved it. No one had heard of Zwick. He moved here to run for office. He didn’t campaign.

Hardly had any “Pick Zwick” signs. Yet he easily won. How? SMRR and Dem Club + LA Federation of Labor ran a massive ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ballot harvesting and get out the vote ground name. We didn’t we aren’t organized. We need to fundraise on a national level (people laugh a us and they all know about us now) and overwhelm their own efforts with paid harvesters and a powerful ground game.

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with 1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share!
<image.jpg>
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard! Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam
apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium
items because public comment on the same items was
concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act
violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response
should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of
Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public
comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H
Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special
Meeting” to start five minutes after the
Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the
Special Meeting is one case against the
City, which should have been added to the
Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the
people who dreamed up this attempt to
fool the public and confuse things in order
to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal,
under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D
of the Regular Meeting.If there was a
legitimate reason, staff should inform
everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05
AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands
Act repeals or changes the
Brown Act.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
constituting her response,
failed to mention this issue or
my statement to her that the
session would be illegal. She
would not agree with my
opinion or, unethically,
support the Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310
393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023,
at 9:58 PM, Ann
Hoover
<annkbowman@
yahoo.com>
wrote:

The City put up the
FAQs Oscar asked
for yesterday (see
links below). I don't
think they are
completely
accurate.

Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the
Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamon
ica.gov/blog/faqs
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
-for-designationof-the-civicauditorium-assurplus-land This also can be
found on the
City’s homepage
santamonica.gov
under "Around
Our City"
https://santamon
ica.gov/
On Saturday, July
22, 2023 at
07:40:23 PM PDT,
Danielle Charney
<shineshuge@gma
il.com> wrote:

Excellent
letter from
Stan
Epstein...plea
se consider
including the
Brown Act
violations he
refers to:

The Agenda for
Tuesday’s Council
meeting now
includes Closed
Session Items 3C
and 3D., both of
which concern a
disposition by the
City of the Civic
Auditorium.

It should first
be mentioned
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
that every
person
present for
the discussion
of either or
both of those
items will be
committing a
certain
violation of
the Brown Act
because that
Act only
allows
consideration
of the “ Price
and Terms of
Payment for
Sale” of the
real estate
being
discussed. It
is certain that
the
discussion,
and any
decisions
made, will
include
dozens of
matters
concerning a
disposition
other than the
very limited
permitted
scope
specified
above.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
null and void.,
I trust that Ms.

Cola , as
requested by
Oscar, has
provided him
and his
colleagues
with a memo
relating to
some of the
points raised
at the prior
meeting.This
note will
surely say
that Ms. Cola
and Gleam
were
knowingly 100
% wrong in
stating
Tuesday that ,
under the
Brown Act,
real estate
matters can
be handled
only in Closed
Session.

The strong
argument of
SMCLC,
made today,
against a
Closed
Session,and
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
for public
discussion on
a matter of
huge
significance,
should be of
great
influence to
Council and
senior staff,
and
supplement
the legal
analysis
above that the
Brown Act
prohibits
Council from
discussing
behind closed
doors the
many broad
issues
involved in
this
disposition
issue.

Sincerely,
Stan Epstein.
310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22,
2023 at 7:34 PM
Jaleh

MIRHASHEMI
<jaleh[email protected]>
wrote:

Hello,
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Below emails are
belong to the staff
who were
involved in
considering Civic
Auditorium as a
“surplus Land
Act”, meaning
“non essential
land”, that has to
be sold or leased
for housing or
educational
institution passed
by councils on
October 2022
with no
community
inputs.

We don’t have
time!! The
deadline for 90
days from SM
District and
Community
Corporation
RFPs is
approaching soon
and again
councils are
going to make a
decision on
closed doors!
Please add below
emails to the
council emails
(copy/paste), so
the staff also can
hear our voices!
david.white@sant
amonica.gov
david.martin@sa
ntamonica.gov
susan.cline@sant
amonica.gov
doug.sloan@sant
amonica.gov
susan.cola@sant
amonica.gov
jennifer.taylor@s
antamonica.gov
nia.tang@santam
onica.gov
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Thank you for
your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22,
2023, at 1:41 PM,
Larry Arreola
<lmarreola@road
runner.com>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
We have established a more moderate Democratic Club for Venice and Santa Monica. We are certified and can endorse candidates in the next election. We need this to be a powerful body in our town. Please join!https://bluewavedemclub.org/
Phil
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:35 PM lmarreola <[email protected]> wrote:

Agree about the necessity of using technology. SMRR had Roger Thorton as tech wizard for 40 years.

I believe trying to infiltrate Dem Club or SMRR is a waste of time and energy.

We need to grow our own organization with our own tech wizard. We need to organize all the " like thinking" and FB site voters and all the neighborhood organizations under one umbrella working together. FB is not the answer to political organizing.

Who wants to join a committee to get a unified organization to compete with SM Forward and SMRR?
Come on !
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner organized a tech driven bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time..

Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote -that is what SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote. Same with SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

Gleam is not running - she is termed out I believe. Zwick and Caroline aren't running -they just got in ... but the others who are just as bad as Zwick and backed by SMF who are far more the problem -will run. Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati <[email protected]> wrote:

They don’t CARE about Election Day because they know they will win regardless. The last election proved it. No one had heard of Zwick. He moved here to run for office. He didn’t campaign. Hardly had any “Pick Zwick” signs. Yet he easily won. How? SMRR and Dem Club + LA Federation of Labor ran a massive ballot harvesting and get out the vote ground name. We didn’t we aren’t organized. We need to fundraise on a national level (people laugh a us and they all know about us now) and overwhelm their own efforts with paid harvesters and a powerful ground game.

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with 1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share!
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes
the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes
beyond Price and Terms of Payment would be
illegal. Further, actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open session, would be null and void.

Oscar requested, and the Council agreed , that
Attorney Cola would produce a memo on this
subject. Her FAQs , constituting her response, failed
to mention this issue or my statement to her that the
session would be illegal. She would not agree with
my opinion or, unethically, support the Closed
Session.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann
Hoover <[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for
yesterday (see links below). I don't think they
are completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the
Surplus Lands Act was absolutely
discretionary not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been
pushed by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to
set the agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-fordesignation-of-the-civic-auditorium-assurplus-land This also can be found on the City’s
homepage santamonica.gov under
"Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM
PDT, Danielle Charney
<[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider
including the Brown Act
violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting
now includes Closed Session Items 3C and
3D., both of which concern a disposition by
the City of the Civic Auditorium.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
It should first be mentioned that
every person present for the
discussion of either or both of
those items will be committing a
certain violation of the Brown
Act because that Act only allows
consideration of the “ Price and
Terms of Payment for Sale” of
the real estate being discussed.

It is certain that the discussion,
and any decisions made, will
include dozens of matters
concerning a disposition other
than the very limited permitted
scope specified above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session
is not cancelled, a report of the
meeting will be sent by me to
the Director of the Public
Integrity Division of the LA
County DA’s office, with
complaints against all Council
persons present, the City
Manager, City Attorney and
Susan Cola, City Clerk( for
placing the items on the
Agenda) and both City
Negotiators.In addition, I would
expect that any and all decisions
reached at that illegal meeting
would be considered by a court
to be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as
requested by Oscar, has
provided him and his colleagues
with a memo relating to some of
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
the points raised at the prior
meeting.This note will surely say
that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in
stating Tuesday that , under the
Brown Act, real estate matters
can be handled only in Closed
Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC,
made today, against a Closed
Session,and for public
discussion on a matter of huge
significance, should be of great
influence to Council and senior
staff, and supplement the legal
analysis above that the Brown
Act prohibits Council from
discussing behind closed doors
the many broad issues involved
in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393
7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who
were involved in considering Civic
Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non essential land”, that has to
be sold or leased for housing or
educational institution passed by councils
on October 2022 with no community inputs.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can
hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry
Arreola <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
--
Phil Brock / City Council Member
[email protected]
City of Santa Monica
(310) 458-8201 (310) 393-8004
1685 Main Street, Room 209, Santa Monica, CA 90401
smgov.net
Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Instagram Youtube
California Parks & Recreation Commissioner Of The Year/42nd President, CalParkBoards/Past Chair, Santa Monica Recreation & Parks Commission/Past President, Lt. Governor, Kiwanis Club Of Santa Monica & District 19/President, Santa Monica High School Alumni Association/ Santa Monica Elks Club Trustee, 2018 Citizen of the Year/Host, Brock On Your Block/Advisory Board, Salvation Army
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Just got a form from the City Clerk that my email of 5 minutes ago about the Auditorium comments this evening would be posted with the Agenda.

Tell me- how can the City accept emails at 12:50 PM on Jan 25 on the 2 Auditorium items if the public’s last chance to talk to Council was one week ago on the very same Items? Crazy, and that is why Council must suspend any rule that limits this transparency.

Stan Epstein
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:48 PM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi everyone. Gleam has written me to respond on the issue of public comment tonight on the two items.

She denied saying there would not be public comment, but said, in view of comments having been made at the meeting a week ago, she was turning the issue over to the City Attorney and Clerk. I replied in an email that she and her colleagues should, on a one time basis, suspend any rule that would prohibit comment tonight, and asked her to give me that commitment immediately.Sloan and Warren are absolutely not involved in such a decision.

I strongly suggest that everyone contact all seven Council members right away and urge that the rule should be suspended if it prohibits public comment tonight.Everyone should also be told of their responses.

Since a week ago, there have been all of the following, which fully justifies the need for more comments this evening: 1. The Asst City Attorney ( Susan Cola) ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
issued a book of FAQs that was specifically requested by Council so it could be much better informed, and so could the public. The comments contained in this document could not have been commented on a week ago since it did not exist.

2. The City Attorney made comments to the Lookout about the Brown Act situation which were materially false.

3. I developed and disclosed to Council, staff, the community and media the Brown Act violation claim and likelihood of DA and State Bar complaints.

If anyone has questions, please fire away.

Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam
apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items
because public comment on the same items was
concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response
should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of
Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public
comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H
Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special
Meeting” to start five minutes after the
Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special
Meeting is one case against the City, which
should have been added to the Closed
Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the
people who dreamed up this attempt to fool
the public and confuse things in order to
take the emphasis off the clearly illegal,
under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of
the Regular Meeting.If there was a
legitimate reason, staff should inform
everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM,
Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands
Act repeals or changes the
Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session
Tuesday that goes beyond Price
and Terms of Payment would
be illegal. Further, actions taken
at the meeting, even if approved
in open session, would be null
and void. Oscar requested, and
the Council agreed , that
Attorney Cola would produce a
memo on this subject. Her
FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this
issue or my statement to her that
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
the session would be illegal.

She would not agree with my
opinion or, unethically, support
the Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310
393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at
9:58 PM, Ann
Hoover
<[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the
FAQs Oscar asked
for yesterday (see
links below). I don't
think they are
completely accurate.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
found on the City’s
homepage
santamonica.gov
under "Around Our
City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22,
2023 at 07:40:23 PM
PDT, Danielle
Charney
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Excellent letter
from Stan
Epstein...please
consider
including the
Brown Act
violations he
refers to:

The Agenda for
Tuesday’s Council
meeting now includes
Closed Session Items
3C and 3D., both of
which concern a
disposition by the City
of the Civic
Auditorium.

It should first be
mentioned that
every person
present for the
discussion of
either or both of
those items will
be committing a
certain violation
of the Brown
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Act because
that Act only
allows
consideration of
the “ Price and
Terms of
Payment for
Sale” of the real
estate being
discussed. It is
certain that the
discussion, and
any decisions
made, will
include dozens
of matters
concerning a
disposition
other than the
very limited
permitted
scope specified
above.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Council
persons
present, the
City Manager,
City Attorney
and Susan
Cola, City
Clerk( for
placing the
items on the
Agenda) and
both City
Negotiators.In
addition, I
would expect
that any and all
decisions
reached at that
illegal meeting
would be
considered by a
court to be null
and void.,
I trust that Ms.

Cola , as
requested by
Oscar, has
provided him
and his
colleagues with
a memo
relating to
some of the
points raised at
the prior
meeting.This
note will surely
say that Ms.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Cola and
Gleam were
knowingly 100
% wrong in
stating Tuesday
that , under the
Brown Act, real
estate matters
can be handled
only in Closed
Session.

The strong
argument of
SMCLC, made
today, against a
Closed
Session,and for
public
discussion on a
matter of huge
significance,
should be of
great influence
to Council and
senior staff,
and
supplement the
legal analysis
above that the
Brown Act
prohibits
Council from
discussing
behind closed
doors the many
broad issues
involved in this
disposition
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
issue.

Sincerely, Stan
Epstein. 310
393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023
at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are
belong to the staff
who were involved
in considering Civic
Auditorium as a
“surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non
essential land”, that
has to be sold or
leased for housing
or educational
institution passed
by councils on
October 2022 with
no community
inputs.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your
support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023,
at 1:41 PM, Larry
Arreola
<[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Dan J.

EXTERNAL
There is a new competitor to the SMDC:

Blue Wave Dem Club
bluewavedemclub.org
DJ
On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:34 PM, lmarreola <[email protected]> wrote:

Agree about the necessity of using technology. SMRR had Roger Thorton as tech wizard for 40 years.

I believe trying to infiltrate Dem Club or SMRR is a waste of time and energy.

Who wants to join a committee to get a unified organization to compete with SM Forward and SMRR?
Come on !
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner organized a tech driven
bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time.. Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote -that is what ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote. Same with SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati
<[email protected]> wrote:

Yet he easily won. How? SMRR and Dem Club + LA Federation of Labor ran a massive ballot harvesting and get out the vote ground name. We didn’t we aren’t organized. We need to fundraise on a national level (people laugh a us and they all know about us now) and overwhelm their own efforts with paid harvesters and a powerful ground game.

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with 1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share! <image.jpg>
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to
start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is
one case against the City, which should have been
added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who
dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse
things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly
illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of
the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason,
staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H
Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals
or changes the Brown Act.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
requested, and the Council agreed , that
Attorney Cola would produce a memo on
this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this issue or
my statement to her that the session would
be illegal. She would not agree with my
opinion or, unethically, support the Closed
Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM,
Ann Hoover
<[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar
asked for yesterday (see links
below). I don't think they are
completely accurate.

The decision to subject the
Auditorium to the Surplus Lands
Act was absolutely discretionary
not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must
have been pushed by Gleam as
Mayor b/c she helps to set the
agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus
Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog
/faqs-for-designation-of-thecivic-auditorium-as-surplusland This also can be found on the
City’s homepage
santamonica.gov under
"Around Our City"
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at
07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle
Charney
<[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from
Stan Epstein...please
consider including the
Brown Act violations he
refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s
Council meeting now includes
Closed Session Items 3C and
3D., both of which concern a
disposition by the City of the Civic
Auditorium.

It should first be
mentioned that every
person present for the
discussion of either or
both of those items will
be committing a certain
violation of the Brown
Act because that Act
only allows
consideration of the “
Price and Terms of
Payment for Sale” of the
real estate being
discussed. It is certain
that the discussion, and
any decisions made, will
include dozens of
matters concerning a
disposition other than
the very limited
permitted scope
specified above.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Therefore, if the Closed
Session is not
cancelled, a report of
the meeting will be sent
by me to the Director of
the Public Integrity
Division of the LA
County DA’s office, with
complaints against all
Council persons
present, the City
Manager, City Attorney
and Susan Cola, City
Clerk( for placing the
items on the Agenda)
and both City
Negotiators.In addition,
I would expect that any
and all decisions
reached at that illegal
meeting would be
considered by a court to
be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as
requested by Oscar,
has provided him and
his colleagues with a
memo relating to some
of the points raised at
the prior meeting.This
note will surely say that
Ms. Cola and Gleam
were knowingly 100 %
wrong in stating
Tuesday that , under
the Brown Act, real
estate matters can be
handled only in Closed
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Session.

The strong argument of
SMCLC, made today,
against a Closed
Session,and for public
discussion on a matter
of huge significance,
should be of great
influence to Council and
senior staff, and
supplement the legal
analysis above that the
Brown Act prohibits
Council from discussing
behind closed doors the
many broad issues
involved in this
disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein.
310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM
Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the
staff who were involved in
considering Civic Auditorium as
a “surplus Land Act”, meaning
“non essential land”, that has to
be sold or leased for housing or
educational institution passed
by councils on October 2022
with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The
deadline for 90 days from SM
District and Community
Corporation RFPs is
approaching soon and again
councils are going to make a
decision on closed doors!
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Please add below emails to the
council emails (copy/paste), so
the staff also can hear our
voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
v
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM,
Larry Arreola
<[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Hi everyone. Gleam has written me to respond on the issue of public comment tonight on the two items.

Since a week ago, there have been all of the following, which fully justifies the need for more comments this evening: 1. The Asst City Attorney ( Susan Cola) issued a book of FAQs that was specifically requested by Council so it could be much better informed, and so could the public. The comments contained in this document could not have been commented on a week ago since it did not exist.

2. The City Attorney made comments to the Lookout about the Brown Act situation which were materially false.

3. I developed and disclosed to Council, staff, the community and media the Brown Act violation claim and likelihood of DA and State Bar complaints.

If anyone has questions, please fire away.

Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard! Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is
one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who
dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse
things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly
illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H
Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or
changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that
goes beyond Price and Terms of Payment
would be illegal. Further, actions taken at
the meeting, even if approved in open
session, would be null and void. Oscar
requested, and the Council agreed , that
Attorney Cola would produce a memo on
this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this issue or my
statement to her that the session would be
illegal. She would not agree with my
opinion or, unethically, support the Closed
Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM,
Ann Hoover
<[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar
asked for yesterday (see links
below). I don't think they are
completely accurate.

Shameful!!
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands
Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqsfor-designation-of-the-civicauditorium-as-surplus-land This also can be found on the
City’s homepage
santamonica.gov under
"Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at
07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle
Charney <[email protected]>
wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider
including the Brown Act
violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council
meeting now includes Closed
Session Items 3C and 3D., both of
which concern a disposition by the
City of the Civic Auditorium.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
that the discussion, and
any decisions made, will
include dozens of matters
concerning a disposition
other than the very limited
permitted scope specified
above.

Therefore, if the Closed
Session is not cancelled,
a report of the meeting
will be sent by me to the
Director of the Public
Integrity Division of the
LA County DA’s office,
with complaints against
all Council persons
present, the City
Manager, City Attorney
and Susan Cola, City
Clerk( for placing the
items on the Agenda) and
both City Negotiators.In
addition, I would expect
that any and all decisions
reached at that illegal
meeting would be
considered by a court to
be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as
requested by Oscar, has
provided him and his
colleagues with a memo
relating to some of the
points raised at the prior
meeting.This note will
surely say that Ms. Cola
and Gleam were
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
knowingly 100 % wrong
in stating Tuesday that ,
under the Brown Act, real
estate matters can be
handled only in Closed
Session.

The strong argument of
SMCLC, made today,
against a Closed
Session,and for public
discussion on a matter of
huge significance, should
be of great influence to
Council and senior staff,
and supplement the legal
analysis above that the
Brown Act prohibits
Council from discussing
behind closed doors the
many broad issues
involved in this
disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein.
310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM
Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the
staff who were involved in
considering Civic Auditorium as a
“surplus Land Act”, meaning “non
essential land”, that has to be
sold or leased for housing or
educational institution passed by
councils on October 2022 with no
community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
deadline for 90 days from SM
District and Community
Corporation RFPs is approaching
soon and again councils are
going to make a decision on
closed doors!
Please add below emails to the
council emails (copy/paste), so
the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM,
Larry Arreola
<[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Agree about the necessity of using technology. SMRR had Roger Thorton as tech wizard for 40 years.

I believe trying to infiltrate Dem Club or SMRR is a waste of time and energy.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner organized a tech driven bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time..

Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote -that is what SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote.

Same with SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

Gleam is not running - she is termed out I believe. Zwick and Caroline aren't running -they just got in ... but the others who are just as bad as Zwick and backed by SMF who are far more the problem -will run. Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati <[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with

1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich.

Here is the link. Please share!
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes
the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond
Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further,
actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open
session, would be null and void. Oscar requested, and
the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce
a memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this issue or my statement
to her that the session would be illegal. She would not agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the
Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for
yesterday (see links below). I don't think they
are completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the
Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary
not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been
pushed by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set
the agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-fordesignation-of-the-civic-auditorium-assurplus-land This also can be found on the City’s
homepage santamonica.gov under
"Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM
PDT, Danielle Charney
<[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider
including the Brown Act violations
he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting
now includes Closed Session Items 3C and
3D., both of which concern a disposition by the
City of the Civic Auditorium.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
certain that the discussion, and
any decisions made, will include
dozens of matters concerning a
disposition other than the very
limited permitted scope specified
above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session
is not cancelled, a report of the
meeting will be sent by me to the
Director of the Public Integrity
Division of the LA County DA’s
office, with complaints against all
Council persons present, the City
Manager, City Attorney and
Susan Cola, City Clerk( for
placing the items on the Agenda)
and both City Negotiators.In
addition, I would expect that any
and all decisions reached at that
illegal meeting would be
considered by a court to be null
and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as
requested by Oscar, has provided
him and his colleagues with a
memo relating to some of the
points raised at the prior
meeting.This note will surely say
that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in stating
Tuesday that , under the Brown
Act, real estate matters can be
handled only in Closed Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC,
made today, against a Closed
Session,and for public discussion
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
on a matter of huge significance,
should be of great influence to
Council and senior staff, and
supplement the legal analysis
above that the Brown Act prohibits
Council from discussing behind
closed doors the many broad
issues involved in this disposition
issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393
7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who
were involved in considering Civic Auditorium
as a “surplus Land Act”, meaning “non
essential land”, that has to be sold or leased
for housing or educational institution passed
by councils on October 2022 with no
community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90
days from SM District and Community
Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and
again councils are going to make a decision
on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council
emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can
hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Zwick was born and raised here. His father is a well known film and tv producer.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner organized a tech driven bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time..

Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote -that is what SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote.

Same with SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

Gleam is not running - she is termed out I believe. Zwick and Caroline aren't running -they just got in ... but the others who are just as bad as Zwick and backed by SMF who are far more the problem -will run. Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati <[email protected]> wrote:

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with

1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich.

Here is the link. Please share!
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes
the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond
Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further,
actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open
session, would be null and void. Oscar requested, and
the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce
a memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this issue or my statement
to her that the session would be illegal. She would not agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the
Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for
yesterday (see links below). I don't think they
are completely accurate.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The decision to subject the Auditorium to the
Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary
not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been
pushed by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set
the agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-fordesignation-of-the-civic-auditorium-assurplus-land This also can be found on the City’s
homepage santamonica.gov under
"Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM
PDT, Danielle Charney
<[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider
including the Brown Act violations
he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting
now includes Closed Session Items 3C and
3D., both of which concern a disposition by the
City of the Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that
every person present for the
discussion of either or both of
those items will be committing a
certain violation of the Brown Act
because that Act only allows
consideration of the “ Price and
Terms of Payment for Sale” of the
real estate being discussed. It is
certain that the discussion, and
any decisions made, will include
dozens of matters concerning a
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
disposition other than the very
limited permitted scope specified
above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session
is not cancelled, a report of the
meeting will be sent by me to the
Director of the Public Integrity
Division of the LA County DA’s
office, with complaints against all
Council persons present, the City
Manager, City Attorney and
Susan Cola, City Clerk( for
placing the items on the Agenda)
and both City Negotiators.In
addition, I would expect that any
and all decisions reached at that
illegal meeting would be
considered by a court to be null
and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as
requested by Oscar, has provided
him and his colleagues with a
memo relating to some of the
points raised at the prior
meeting.This note will surely say
that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in stating
Tuesday that , under the Brown
Act, real estate matters can be
handled only in Closed Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC,
made today, against a Closed
Session,and for public discussion
on a matter of huge significance,
should be of great influence to
Council and senior staff, and
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
supplement the legal analysis
above that the Brown Act prohibits
Council from discussing behind
closed doors the many broad
issues involved in this disposition
issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393
7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who
were involved in considering Civic Auditorium
as a “surplus Land Act”, meaning “non
essential land”, that has to be sold or leased
for housing or educational institution passed
by councils on October 2022 with no
community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90
days from SM District and Community
Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and
again councils are going to make a decision
on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council
emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can
hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
They don’t CARE about Election Day because they know they will win regardless. The last election proved it. No one had heard of Zwick. He moved here to run for office. He didn’t campaign. Hardly had any “Pick Zwick” signs. Yet he easily won. How? SMRR and Dem Club + LA Federation of Labor ran a massive ballot harvesting and get out the vote ground name. We didn’t we aren’t organized. We need to fundraise on a national level (people laugh a us and they all know about us now) and overwhelm their own efforts with paid harvesters and a powerful ground game.

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with

1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share!
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond
Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further,
actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open
session, would be null and void. Oscar requested, and the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce a
memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this issue or my statement to her that the session would be illegal. She would not
agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the
Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for
yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are
completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the
Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary
not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been pushed
by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set the
agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-fordesignation-of-the-civic-auditorium-assurplus-land This also can be found on the City’s
homepage santamonica.gov under "Around
Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT,
Danielle Charney <[email protected]>
wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider including
the Brown Act violations he refers
to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now
includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both
of which concern a disposition by the City of the
Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that
every person present for the
discussion of either or both of those
items will be committing a certain
violation of the Brown Act because
that Act only allows consideration of
the “ Price and Terms of Payment
for Sale” of the real estate being
discussed. It is certain that the
discussion, and any decisions
made, will include dozens of
matters concerning a disposition
other than the very limited permitted
scope specified above.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
would be considered by a court to
be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as requested
by Oscar, has provided him and his
colleagues with a memo relating to
some of the points raised at the
prior meeting.This note will surely
say that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in stating
Tuesday that , under the Brown Act,
real estate matters can be handled
only in Closed Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC,
made today, against a Closed
Session,and for public discussion
on a matter of huge significance,
should be of great influence to
Council and senior staff, and
supplement the legal analysis
above that the Brown Act prohibits
Council from discussing behind
closed doors the many broad
issues involved in this disposition
issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393
7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who were
involved in considering Civic Auditorium as a
“surplus Land Act”, meaning “non essential
land”, that has to be sold or leased for housing
or educational institution passed by councils on
October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
from SM District and Community Corporation
RFPs is approaching soon and again councils
are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails
(copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our
voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond
Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further,
actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open
session, would be null and void. Oscar requested, and the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce a
memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this issue or my statement to her that the session would be illegal. She would not
agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the
Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for
yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are
completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the
Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary
not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been pushed
by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set the
agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-fordesignation-of-the-civic-auditorium-assurplus-land This also can be found on the City’s
homepage santamonica.gov under "Around
Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT,
Danielle Charney <[email protected]>
wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider including
the Brown Act violations he refers
to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now
includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both
of which concern a disposition by the City of the
Civic Auditorium.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
discussion, and any decisions
made, will include dozens of
matters concerning a disposition
other than the very limited permitted
scope specified above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session is
not cancelled, a report of the
meeting will be sent by me to the
Director of the Public Integrity
Division of the LA County DA’s
office, with complaints against all
Council persons present, the City
Manager, City Attorney and Susan
Cola, City Clerk( for placing the
items on the Agenda) and both City
Negotiators.In addition, I would
expect that any and all decisions
reached at that illegal meeting
would be considered by a court to
be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as requested
by Oscar, has provided him and his
colleagues with a memo relating to
some of the points raised at the
prior meeting.This note will surely
say that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in stating
Tuesday that , under the Brown Act,
real estate matters can be handled
only in Closed Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC,
made today, against a Closed
Session,and for public discussion
on a matter of huge significance,
should be of great influence to
Council and senior staff, and
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
supplement the legal analysis
above that the Brown Act prohibits
Council from discussing behind
closed doors the many broad
issues involved in this disposition
issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393
7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who were
involved in considering Civic Auditorium as a
“surplus Land Act”, meaning “non essential
land”, that has to be sold or leased for housing
or educational institution passed by councils on
October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days
from SM District and Community Corporation
RFPs is approaching soon and again councils
are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails
(copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our
voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
I edited this list - removing a few dead ones and adding a few..hope it holds please use this list if it works - if Doster or LastGasp is still on here it didn't work if not - it's the new clean list
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 11:42 AM Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further, actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open session, would be null and void.

Oscar requested, and the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce a memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her response, failed to mention this issue or my statement to her that the session would be illegal. She would not agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been pushed by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set the agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-ofthe-civic-auditorium-as-surplus-land This also can be found on the City’s homepage
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
santamonica.gov under "Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please
consider including the Brown Act violations
he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes
Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that every
person present for the discussion of either
or both of those items will be committing a
certain violation of the Brown Act because
that Act only allows consideration of the “
Price and Terms of Payment for Sale” of the
real estate being discussed. It is certain that
the discussion, and any decisions made, will
include dozens of matters concerning a
disposition other than the very limited
permitted scope specified above.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Oscar, has provided him and his colleagues
with a memo relating to some of the points
raised at the prior meeting.This note will
surely say that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in stating Tuesday
that , under the Brown Act, real estate
matters can be handled only in Closed
Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC, made
today, against a Closed Session,and for
public discussion on a matter of huge
significance, should be of great influence to
Council and senior staff, and supplement
the legal analysis above that the Brown Act
prohibits Council from discussing behind
closed doors the many broad issues
involved in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who were involved in considering Civic Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non essential land”, that has to be sold or leased for housing or educational institution passed by councils on October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM
District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching
soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further, actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open session, would be null and void.

Oscar requested, and the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce a memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her response, failed to mention this issue or my statement to her that the session would be illegal. She would not agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been pushed by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set the agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-ofthe-civic-auditorium-as-surplus-land This also can be found on the City’s homepage
santamonica.gov under "Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please
consider including the Brown Act violations he
refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes
Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that every person
present for the discussion of either or both of
those items will be committing a certain
violation of the Brown Act because that Act
only allows consideration of the “ Price and
Terms of Payment for Sale” of the real estate
being discussed. It is certain that the
discussion, and any decisions made, will
include dozens of matters concerning a
disposition other than the very limited
permitted scope specified above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session is not
cancelled, a report of the meeting will be sent
by me to the Director of the Public Integrity
Division of the LA County DA’s office, with
complaints against all Council persons
present, the City Manager, City Attorney and
Susan Cola, City Clerk( for placing the items
on the Agenda) and both City Negotiators.In
addition, I would expect that any and all
decisions reached at that illegal meeting
would be considered by a court to be null and
void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as requested by Oscar,
has provided him and his colleagues with a
memo relating to some of the points raised at
the prior meeting.This note will surely say that
Ms. Cola and Gleam were knowingly 100 %
wrong in stating Tuesday that , under the
Brown Act, real estate matters can be
handled only in Closed Session.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The strong argument of SMCLC, made today,
against a Closed Session,and for public
discussion on a matter of huge significance,
should be of great influence to Council and
senior staff, and supplement the legal
analysis above that the Brown Act prohibits
Council from discussing behind closed doors
the many broad issues involved in this
disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who were involved in considering Civic Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non essential land”, that has to be sold or leased for housing or educational institution passed by councils on October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM
District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching
soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further, actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open session, would be null and void. Oscar requested, and the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce a memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her response, failed to mention this issue or my statement to her that the session would be illegal. She would not agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the Closed Session.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary not legally-mandated
and of course it all surely must have been pushed by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set the agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-of-the-civicauditorium-as-surplus-land This also can be found on the City’s homepage santamonica.gov under "Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please consider
including the Brown Act violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that every person present
for the discussion of either or both of those items will be committing a certain violation of the Brown Act because that Act only allows consideration of the “ Price and
Terms of Payment for Sale” of the real estate being
discussed. It is certain that the discussion, and any
decisions made, will include dozens of matters
concerning a disposition other than the very limited
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
permitted scope specified above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session is not cancelled, a
report of the meeting will be sent by me to the Director of the Public Integrity Division of the LA County DA’s
office, with complaints against all Council persons
present, the City Manager, City Attorney and Susan
Cola, City Clerk( for placing the items on the Agenda)
and both City Negotiators.In addition, I would expect
that any and all decisions reached at that illegal meeting would be considered by a court to be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as requested by Oscar, has
provided him and his colleagues with a memo relating
to some of the points raised at the prior meeting.This
note will surely say that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in stating Tuesday that , under
the Brown Act, real estate matters can be handled only
in Closed Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC, made today, against a
Closed Session,and for public discussion on a matter of huge significance, should be of great influence to
Council and senior staff, and supplement the legal
analysis above that the Brown Act prohibits Council
from discussing behind closed doors the many broad
issues involved in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes beyond Price and Terms of Payment would be illegal. Further, actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open session, would be null and void. Oscar requested, and the Council agreed , that Attorney Cola would produce a memo on this subject. Her FAQs , constituting her response, failed to mention this issue or my statement to her that the session would be illegal. She would not agree with my opinion or, unethically, support the Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann Hoover <[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are completely accurate.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
surplus-land
This also can be found on the City’s homepage santamonica.gov under "Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please consider including the Brown Act violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
The strong argument of SMCLC, made today, against a Closed Session,and for public discussion on a matter of huge
significance, should be of great influence to Council and senior staff, and supplement the legal analysis above that the Brown Act prohibits Council from discussing behind closed doors the many broad issues involved in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Oct 11, 2022 Staff report: https://publicdocs.smgov.net/WebLink/DocView.aspx? id=3523153&searchid=401bbf73-5685-430a-8ec3-
4da9c97b15ee&dbid=0&repo=SMGOV
Meeting minutes: None found
Council video: Negrete asking questions about landmarking and housing. Susan Cola explaining what has to happen with Housing Provider offering. Explains that HCD still considers the East Wing to be under the Surplus Land Act. https://youtu.be/WHRBtDKcftQ?t=17137
Hotlink to the video of the vote:
https://youtu.be/WHRBtDKcftQ?t=17374
Ann Maggio Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 9:58 PM Ann Hoover <[email protected]> wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are completely accurate.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-of-the-civic-auditorium-as-surplus-land This also can be found on the City’s homepage santamonica.gov under "Around Our City" https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please consider including the Brown Act violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

The strong argument of SMCLC, made today, against a Closed Session,and for public discussion on a matter of huge significance, should be of great influence to Council and senior staff, and supplement the legal analysis above that the Brown Act prohibits Council from discussing ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
behind closed doors the many broad issues involved in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Great Phil. I don't understand why Venice residents and SM residents need to be in same club.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

Agree about the necessity of using technology. SMRR had Roger Thorton as tech wizard for 40 years.

I believe trying to infiltrate Dem Club or SMRR is a waste of time and energy.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner organized a tech driven bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time..

Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote -that is what SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote. Same with SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

Gleam is not running - she is termed out I believe. Zwick and Caroline aren't running -they just got in ... but the others who are just as bad as Zwick and backed by SMF who are far more the problem -will run. Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
vote ground name. We didn’t we aren’t organized. We need to fundraise on a national level (people laugh a us and they all know about us now) and overwhelm their own efforts with paid harvesters and a powerful ground game.

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with 1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share!
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes
the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes
beyond Price and Terms of Payment would be
illegal. Further, actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open session, would be null and void.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann
Hoover <[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for
yesterday (see links below). I don't think they
are completely accurate.

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider
including the Brown Act
violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting
now includes Closed Session Items 3C and
3D., both of which concern a disposition by
the City of the Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that
every person present for the
discussion of either or both of
those items will be committing a
certain violation of the Brown
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Act because that Act only allows
consideration of the “ Price and
Terms of Payment for Sale” of
the real estate being discussed.

It is certain that the discussion,
and any decisions made, will
include dozens of matters
concerning a disposition other
than the very limited permitted
scope specified above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session
is not cancelled, a report of the
meeting will be sent by me to
the Director of the Public
Integrity Division of the LA
County DA’s office, with
complaints against all Council
persons present, the City
Manager, City Attorney and
Susan Cola, City Clerk( for
placing the items on the
Agenda) and both City
Negotiators.In addition, I would
expect that any and all decisions
reached at that illegal meeting
would be considered by a court
to be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as
requested by Oscar, has
provided him and his colleagues
with a memo relating to some of
the points raised at the prior
meeting.This note will surely say
that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in
stating Tuesday that , under the
Brown Act, real estate matters
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
can be handled only in Closed
Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393
7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who
were involved in considering Civic
Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non essential land”, that has to
be sold or leased for housing or
educational institution passed by councils
on October 2022 with no community inputs.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry
Arreola <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
--
Phil Brock / City Council Member
[email protected]
City of Santa Monica
(310) 458-8201 (310) 393-8004
1685 Main Street, Room 209, Santa Monica, CA 90401
smgov.net
Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Instagram Youtube
California Parks & Recreation Commissioner Of The Year/42nd President, CalParkBoards/Past Chair, Santa Monica Recreation & Parks Commission/Past President, Lt. Governor, Kiwanis Club Of Santa Monica & District 19/President, Santa Monica High School Alumni Association/ Santa Monica Elks Club Trustee, 2018 Citizen of the Year/Host, Brock On Your Block/Advisory Board, Salvation Army
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please consider including the Brown Act violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

Therefore, if the Closed Session is not cancelled, a report of the meeting will be sent by me to the Director of the Public Integrity Division of the LA County DA’s office, with complaints against all Council persons present, the City Manager, City Attorney and Susan Cola, City Clerk( for placing the items on the Agenda) and both City Negotiators.In addition, I would expect that any and all decisions reached at that illegal meeting would be considered by a court to be null and void., I trust that Ms. Cola , as requested by Oscar, has provided him and his colleagues with a memo relating to some of the points raised at the prior meeting.This note will surely say that Ms. Cola and Gleam were knowingly 100 % wrong in stating Tuesday that , under the Brown Act, real estate matters can be handled only in Closed Session.

The strong argument of SMCLC, made today, against a Closed Session,and for ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
public discussion on a matter of huge significance, should be of great influence to Council and senior staff, and supplement the legal analysis above that the Brown Act prohibits Council from discussing behind closed doors the many broad issues involved in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
All
Please correct the address - [email protected]
this is not correct
it is
Matt @SMDP.com. thank you -
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for yesterday (see links below). I don't think they are completely accurate.

The decision to subject the Auditorium to the Surplus Lands Act was absolutely discretionary not legallymandated and of course it all surely must have been pushed by Gleam as Mayor b/c she helps to set the agendas.

Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-of-the-civic-auditorium-as-surplus-land This also can be found on the City’s homepage santamonica.gov under "Around Our City" https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Excellent letter from Stan Epstein...please consider including the Brown Act violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting now includes Closed Session Items 3C and 3D., both of which concern a disposition by the City of the Civic Auditorium.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
concerning a disposition other than the very limited permitted scope specified above.

The strong argument of SMCLC, made today, against a Closed Session,and for public discussion on a matter of huge significance, should be of great influence to Council and senior staff, and supplement the legal analysis above that the Brown Act prohibits Council from discussing behind closed doors the many broad issues involved in this disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Dear Gleam. It would be appreciated if you and your colleagues have the backbone to immediately inform the public( partially through this email list) of whether or not you will permit people to speak this evening on the Auditorium items.

Denise considers the public record still open. How then could Public speaking have been stopped a week ago?
It is bad enough that Council, led by you, has kept everyone totally in the dark on every aspect of the highly important issue even in the clear face of its own exposure for, among other things, risking the severe penalties for violating the Brown Act (with two Council members who are attorneys and the top two members of the legal department fully and knowingly concurring in the illegality). It is also shocking that Council, at this late moment, does not inform people if they will be barred from speaking, thereby not giving them a chance to make plans.

Stan Epstein
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:48 PM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi everyone. Gleam has written me to respond on the issue of public comment tonight on the two items.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
and Warren are absolutely not involved in such a decision.

2. The City Attorney made comments to the Lookout about the Brown Act situation which were materially false.

3. I developed and disclosed to Council, staff, the community and media the Brown Act violation claim and likelihood of DA and State Bar complaints.

If anyone has questions, please fire away.

Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam
apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items
because public comment on the same items was
concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of
Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public
comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H
Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special
Meeting” to start five minutes after the
Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special
Meeting is one case against the City, which
should have been added to the Closed
Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the
people who dreamed up this attempt to fool
the public and confuse things in order to
take the emphasis off the clearly illegal,
under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of
the Regular Meeting.If there was a
legitimate reason, staff should inform
everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM,
Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands
Act repeals or changes the
Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session
Tuesday that goes beyond Price
and Terms of Payment would
be illegal. Further, actions taken
at the meeting, even if approved
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
in open session, would be null
and void. Oscar requested, and
the Council agreed , that
Attorney Cola would produce a
memo on this subject. Her
FAQs , constituting her
response, failed to mention this
issue or my statement to her that
the session would be illegal.

She would not agree with my
opinion or, unethically, support
the Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310
393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at
9:58 PM, Ann
Hoover
<[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the
FAQs Oscar asked
for yesterday (see
links below). I don't
think they are
completely accurate.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqsfor-designation-ofthe-civicauditorium-assurplus-land This also can be
found on the City’s
homepage
santamonica.gov
under "Around Our
City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22,
2023 at 07:40:23 PM
PDT, Danielle
Charney
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Excellent letter
from Stan
Epstein...please
consider
including the
Brown Act
violations he
refers to:

The Agenda for
Tuesday’s Council
meeting now includes
Closed Session Items
3C and 3D., both of
which concern a
disposition by the City
of the Civic
Auditorium.

It should first be
mentioned that
every person
present for the
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
discussion of
either or both of
those items will
be committing a
certain violation
of the Brown
Act because
that Act only
allows
consideration of
the “ Price and
Terms of
Payment for
Sale” of the real
estate being
discussed. It is
certain that the
discussion, and
any decisions
made, will
include dozens
of matters
concerning a
disposition
other than the
very limited
permitted
scope specified
above.

Therefore, if the
Closed Session
is not
cancelled, a
report of the
meeting will be
sent by me to
the Director of
the Public
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Integrity
Division of the
LA County DA’s
office, with
complaints
against all
Council
persons
present, the
City Manager,
City Attorney
and Susan
Cola, City
Clerk( for
placing the
items on the
Agenda) and
both City
Negotiators.In
addition, I
would expect
that any and all
decisions
reached at that
illegal meeting
would be
considered by a
court to be null
and void.,
I trust that Ms.

Cola , as
requested by
Oscar, has
provided him
and his
colleagues with
a memo
relating to
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
some of the
points raised at
the prior
meeting.This
note will surely
say that Ms.

Cola and
Gleam were
knowingly 100
% wrong in
stating Tuesday
that , under the
Brown Act, real
estate matters
can be handled
only in Closed
Session.

The strong
argument of
SMCLC, made
today, against a
Closed
Session,and for
public
discussion on a
matter of huge
significance,
should be of
great influence
to Council and
senior staff,
and
supplement the
legal analysis
above that the
Brown Act
prohibits
Council from
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
discussing
behind closed
doors the many
broad issues
involved in this
disposition
issue.

Sincerely, Stan
Epstein. 310
393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023
at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are
belong to the staff
who were involved
in considering Civic
Auditorium as a
“surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non
essential land”, that
has to be sold or
leased for housing
or educational
institution passed
by councils on
October 2022 with
no community
inputs.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
council emails
(copy/paste), so the
staff also can hear
our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your
support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023,
at 1:41 PM, Larry
Arreola
<[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Dan Jan,
This is the edited list I used to send my response to Houman about tech wizardry ..

I long deleted the dead emails and Council emails... not a tech wizard but I can do that much..I am not in control of editing the master list so whoever is has to do that..I have asked several times
Danielle
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:14 PM Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Zwick was born and raised here. His father is a well known film and tv producer.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner organized a tech driven bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time..

Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote -that is what SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote. Same with SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

Gleam is not running - she is termed out I believe. Zwick and Caroline aren't running -they just got in ... but the others who are just as bad as Zwick and backed by SMF who are far more the problem -will run. Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati <[email protected]> ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
wrote:

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with 1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share!
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to start five minutes after the Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting is one case against the City, which should have been added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act repeals or changes
the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session Tuesday that goes
beyond Price and Terms of Payment would be
illegal. Further, actions taken at the meeting, even if approved in open session, would be null and void.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58 PM, Ann
Hoover <[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the FAQs Oscar asked for
yesterday (see links below). I don't think they
are completely accurate.

Excellent letter from Stan
Epstein...please consider
including the Brown Act
violations he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s Council meeting
now includes Closed Session Items 3C and
3D., both of which concern a disposition by
the City of the Civic Auditorium.

It should first be mentioned that
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
every person present for the
discussion of either or both of
those items will be committing a
certain violation of the Brown
Act because that Act only allows
consideration of the “ Price and
Terms of Payment for Sale” of
the real estate being discussed.

It is certain that the discussion,
and any decisions made, will
include dozens of matters
concerning a disposition other
than the very limited permitted
scope specified above.

Therefore, if the Closed Session
is not cancelled, a report of the
meeting will be sent by me to
the Director of the Public
Integrity Division of the LA
County DA’s office, with
complaints against all Council
persons present, the City
Manager, City Attorney and
Susan Cola, City Clerk( for
placing the items on the
Agenda) and both City
Negotiators.In addition, I would
expect that any and all decisions
reached at that illegal meeting
would be considered by a court
to be null and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola , as
requested by Oscar, has
provided him and his colleagues
with a memo relating to some of
the points raised at the prior
meeting.This note will surely say
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
that Ms. Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 % wrong in
stating Tuesday that , under the
Brown Act, real estate matters
can be handled only in Closed
Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393
7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 7:34 PM Jaleh
MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who
were involved in considering Civic
Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non essential land”, that has to
be sold or leased for housing or
educational institution passed by councils
on October 2022 with no community inputs.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry
Arreola <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
SMRR and SMF are not the same. SMRR has always been closely aligned with the SMDC.. SMF infiltrated and took over the vote.

It is an uneasy alliance.. SMF split from. SMRR due to differences about 2015-16 .

The Sierra Club was taken over by $ many years ago - maybe in the early 2000's ...

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 1:08 PM Karen Croner <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes, SMRR and Forward have taken over the Democratic Club and also the Sierra Club.

Are folks on this chain members of either the Dem Club or local Sierra Club? The Sierra Club
Stamp of approval makes a huge dif for people and it is completely corrupted by developer interests.

I am absolutely ready to help and join a new Dem Club for Santa Monica or join the present one and
make a difference.

On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:54 PM, Dan J. <[email protected]> wrote:

There is a new competitor to the SMDC:

Blue Wave Dem Club
bluewavedemclub.org
<cro
pped
-
bluewav
eicon180x
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
180.
png
>
DJ
On Jul 25, 2023, at 12:34 PM, lmarreola
<[email protected]> wrote:

Agree about the necessity of using technology. SMRR had Roger Thorton as tech wizard for 40 years.

I believe trying to infiltrate Dem Club or SMRR is a waste of time and energy.

We need to grow our own organization with our own tech wizard.

We need to organize all the " like thinking" and FB site voters and all the neighborhood organizations under one umbrella working together. FB is not the answer to political organizing.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

AUDITORIUM
Zwick was born and raised here. His father is a well known film and tv producer.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner
organized a tech driven
bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF
candidates running next time.. Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

Gleam is not running - she is termed out I believe. Zwick and Caroline aren't running -they just got in ... but the others who are just as bad as Zwick and backed by SMF
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
who are far more the problem -will run. Zwick was not the choice of the SMDC or SMRR but dem's da rules and they
had to live with it. Let's keep it straight. In great part we are up against a tech savvy world - they are using it. We need to do the same.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati
<[email protected]> wrote:

They don’t CARE about Election Day because they know they will win regardless. The last election proved it. No one had heard of Zwick. He moved here to run for office. He didn’t campaign.

Hardly had any “Pick Zwick” signs. Yet he easily won. How? SMRR and Dem Club + LA Federation of Labor ran a massive ballot harvesting and get out the vote ground name. We didn’t we aren’t organized. We need to fundraise on a national level (people laugh a us and they all know about us now) and
overwhelm their own efforts with paid harvesters and a powerful ground game.

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with 1.5 million prime time
viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash
Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share!
<image.jpg>
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
It has been brought to my attention that Gleam
apparently will take the position tonight that no
public comment will be allowed on the Civic
Auditorium items because public comment on the
same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the
Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and
response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a
majority of Council can change the rules to allow
tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H
Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special
Meeting” to start five minutes after the
Regular Meeting tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the
Special Meeting is one case against the
City, which should have been added to
the Closed Session for the Regular
Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the
people who dreamed up this attempt to
fool the public and confuse things in
order to take the emphasis off the clearly
illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items
3C and 3D of the Regular Meeting.If
there was a legitimate reason, staff
should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05
AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]>
wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Nothing in the Surplus
Lands Act repeals or
changes the Brown Act.

Therefore, a Closed Session
Tuesday that goes beyond
Price and Terms of
Payment would be illegal.

Further, actions taken at the
meeting, even if approved
in open session, would be
null and void. Oscar
requested, and the Council
agreed , that Attorney Cola
would produce a memo on
this subject. Her FAQs ,
constituting her response,
failed to mention this issue
or my statement to her that
the session would be illegal.

She would not agree with
my opinion or, unethically,
support the Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310
393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22,
2023, at 9:58
PM, Ann
Hoover
<annkbowman
@yahoo.com>
wrote:

The City put up
the FAQs Oscar
asked for
yesterday (see
links below). I
don't think they
are completely
accurate.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

Shameful!!
FAQ regarding
the Surplus
Lands Act:
https://santam
onica.gov/blog/
faqs-fordesignation-ofthe-civicauditorium-assurplus-land This also can be
found on the
City’s
homepage
santamonica.go
v under
"Around Our
City"
https://santam
onica.gov/
On Saturday,
July 22, 2023 at
07:40:23 PM
PDT, Danielle
Charney
<shineshuge@g
mail.com> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Excellent
letter from
Stan
Epstein...ple
ase
consider
including the
Brown Act
violations he
refers to:

The Agenda for
Tuesday’s
Council meeting
now includes
Closed Session
Items 3C and
3D., both of
which concern a
disposition by the
City of the Civic
Auditorium.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
consideratio
n of the “
Price and
Terms of
Payment for
Sale” of the
real estate
being
discussed. It
is certain
that the
discussion,
and any
decisions
made, will
include
dozens of
matters
concerning
a disposition
other than
the very
limited
permitted
scope
specified
above.

Therefore, if
the Closed
Session is
not
cancelled, a
report of the
meeting will
be sent by
me to the
Director of
the Public
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

In addition, I
would
expect that
any and all
decisions
reached at
that illegal
meeting
would be
considered
by a court to
be null and
void.,
I trust that
Ms. Cola ,
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
as
requested
by Oscar,
has
provided
him and his
colleagues
with a
memo
relating to
some of the
points
raised at the
prior
meeting.Thi
s note will
surely say
that Ms.

Cola and
Gleam were
knowingly
100 %
wrong in
stating
Tuesday
that , under
the Brown
Act, real
estate
matters can
be handled
only in
Closed
Session.

The strong
argument of
SMCLC,
made today,
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
against a
Closed
Session,and
for public
discussion
on a matter
of huge
significance,
should be of
great
influence to
Council and
senior staff,
and
supplement
the legal
analysis
above that
the Brown
Act prohibits
Council from
discussing
behind
closed
doors the
many broad
issues
involved in
this
disposition
issue.

Sincerely,
Stan
Epstein. 310
393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22,
2023 at 7:34 PM
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Jaleh

MIRHASHEMI
<jaleh[email protected]>
wrote:

Hello,
Below emails
are belong to
the staff who
were involved
in considering
Civic
Auditorium as a
“surplus Land
Act”, meaning
“non essential
land”, that has
to be sold or
leased for
housing or
educational
institution
passed by
councils on
October 2022
with no
community
inputs.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
v
david.martin@s
antamonica.go
v
susan.cline@s
antamonica.go
v
doug.sloan@sa
ntamonica.gov
susan.cola@sa
ntamonica.gov
jennifer.taylor
@santamonica.
gov
nia.tang@sant
amonica.gov
Thank you for
your support!
Jaleh
Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22,
2023, at 1:41
PM, Larry
Arreola
<lmarreola@ro
adrunner.com>
wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Dear Phil. An excellent start to the new Club’s goals would be if you and your colleagues who are supportive would vote to suspend the rules tonight to allow public comment on the Auditorium itemsAlso, Council and its lawyers need finally to comply with the clear language of the Brown Act and therefore remove the two items from Closed Session.You know that Sloan’s comments to the Lookout were total nonsense!
Best regards, Stan.310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 1:01 PM, Phil Brock <[email protected]> wrote:

We have established a more moderate Democratic Club for Venice and Santa Monica. We are certified and can endorse candidates in the next election. We need this to be a powerful body in our town. Please
join!https://bluewavedemclub.org/
Phil
On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:35 PM lmarreola <[email protected]> wrote:

Agree about the necessity of using technology. SMRR had Roger Thorton as tech wizard for 40 years.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
I believe trying to infiltrate Dem Club or SMRR is a waste of time and energy.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

AUDITORIUM
Zwick was born and raised here. His father is a well known film and tv producer.

He won because Abundant Housing and Leonora Camner organized a tech driven
bullet voting campaign
and they will do it for Natalya and any other SMF candidates running next time.. Camner's husband is a tech wizard.

The SMDC goes by vote- want to change it.. join and vote -that is what SMF does .They are not in attendance usually for any other reason.. but they show up to vote. Same with SMRR..
they work by membership voting.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 12:04 PM Houman Hemmati
<[email protected]> wrote:

Phil Brock last night went on live in studio on Fox News at Night, a NATIONAL show with 1.5 million prime time viewership to draw attention to these issues and bash Himmelrich. Here is the link. Please share! <image.jpg>
California city councilmember speaks out after he
was attacked by homeless man | Fox News Video
foxnews.com
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

If Gleam and her colleagues refuse to allow public comment on 3C and 3D. it will be huge proof of a continuance of their effort to conduct the entire Auditorium use matter in total secrecy. Not helpful to them on Election Day or with the StateBar or LA County DA Public Integrity Division. Council can ,and certainly should, easily suspend its meeting rules so the public can be heard!
Stan
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 25, 2023, at 11:42 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

It has been brought to my attention that Gleam apparently will take the position tonight that no public comment will be allowed on the Civic Auditorium items because public comment on the same items was concluded last Tuesday ( before the Brown Act violation claim arose).

If anyone has an idea of what our action and response should be, please circulate it. Perhaps a majority of Council can change the rules to allow tonight’s public comment.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 5:33 PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

The City has just scheduled a “ Special Meeting” to
start five minutes after the Regular Meeting
tomorrow.

The sole item on the agenda for the Special Meeting
is one case against the City, which should have been
added to the Closed Session for the Regular Meeting.

It is hard to understand the minds of the people who
dreamed up this attempt to fool the public and
confuse things in order to take the emphasis off the
clearly illegal, under the Brown Act, of Items 3C and
3D of the Regular Meeting.If there was a legitimate
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
reason, staff should inform everyone immediately.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619.

Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 11:05 AM, Stanley
H Epstein <[email protected]>
wrote:

Nothing in the Surplus Lands Act
repeals or changes the Brown Act.

Her FAQs , constituting her response,
failed to mention this issue or my
statement to her that the session would
be illegal. She would not agree with my
opinion or, unethically, support the
Closed Session.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 22, 2023, at 9:58
PM, Ann Hoover
<[email protected]>
wrote:

The City put up the FAQs
Oscar asked for yesterday (see
links below). I don't think they
are completely accurate.

The decision to subject the
Auditorium to the Surplus
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Lands Act was absolutely
discretionary not legallymandated
and of course it all surely must
have been pushed by Gleam
as Mayor b/c she helps to set
the agendas. Shameful!!
FAQ regarding the Surplus
Lands Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqsfor-designation-of-the-civicauditorium-as-surplus-land This also can be found on
the City’s homepage
santamonica.gov under
"Around Our City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On Saturday, July 22, 2023 at
07:40:23 PM PDT, Danielle
Charney
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Excellent letter from
Stan Epstein...please
consider including the
Brown Act violations
he refers to:

The Agenda for Tuesday’s
Council meeting now includes
Closed Session Items 3C and
3D., both of which concern a
disposition by the City of the
Civic Auditorium.

It should first be
mentioned that every
person present for the
discussion of either or
both of those items
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
will be committing a
certain violation of the
Brown Act because
that Act only allows
consideration of the “
Price and Terms of
Payment for Sale” of
the real estate being
discussed. It is certain
that the discussion,
and any decisions
made, will include
dozens of matters
concerning a
disposition other than
the very limited
permitted scope
specified above.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
that illegal meeting
would be considered
by a court to be null
and void.,
I trust that Ms. Cola ,
as requested by
Oscar, has provided
him and his
colleagues with a
memo relating to
some of the points
raised at the prior
meeting.This note will
surely say that Ms.

Cola and Gleam were
knowingly 100 %
wrong in stating
Tuesday that , under
the Brown Act, real
estate matters can be
handled only in
Closed Session.

The strong argument
of SMCLC, made
today, against a
Closed Session,and
for public discussion
on a matter of huge
significance, should
be of great influence
to Council and senior
staff, and supplement
the legal analysis
above that the Brown
Act prohibits Council
from discussing
behind closed doors
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
the many broad issues
involved in this
disposition issue.

Sincerely, Stan
Epstein. 310 393 7619
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at
7:34 PM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hello,
Below emails are belong to
the staff who were involved in
considering Civic Auditorium
as a “surplus Land Act”,
meaning “non essential land”,
that has to be sold or leased
for housing or educational
institution passed by councils
on October 2022 with no
community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The
deadline for 90 days from SM
District and Community
Corporation RFPs is
approaching soon and again
councils are going to make a
decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to
the council emails
(copy/paste), so the staff also
can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41
PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]>
wrote:
>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
> <img123.jpg>
--
Phil Brock / City Council Member
[email protected]
City of Santa Monica
(310) 458-8201 (310) 393-8004
1685 Main Street, Room 209, Santa Monica, CA 90401
smgov.net
Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Instagram Youtube
California Parks & Recreation Commissioner Of The Year/42nd President, CalParkBoards/Past Chair, Santa Monica Recreation & Parks Commission/Past President, Lt. Governor, Kiwanis Club Of Santa Monica & District 19/President, Santa Monica High School Alumni Association/ Santa Monica Elks Club Trustee, 2018 Citizen of the Year/Host, Brock On Your Block/Advisory Board, Salvation Army ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Ann Maggio
To: Stanley H Epstein
Cc: Danielle Charney; SM Observer; Alyssa; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cola; Gleam Davis; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; David White; Jaleh MIRHASHEMI; Ann Bowman; Stephen Castro; [email protected]; PNA90404; Tricia Crane; Clerk Mailbox; [email protected]; Nia Tang; Elaine Golden-Gealer; Wes Wellman; [email protected] Subject: Re: LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE ABOUT THE CIVIC AUDITORIUM Urgent Matter! Date: Monday, July 24, 2023 5:51:36 PM

EXTERNAL
Gleam knows the truth of it. There's no telling her anything new.

Ann Maggio Thanawalla
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." - Albert Einstein On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 1:55 PM Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

In the Plaza project situation, the Surplus Land issue was paramount, and HCD, the state agency authorized to handle that deal, was incompetent , or worse, and went along with misstatements by Cola, David Martin, and the lawyer for the developer ( the same guy now masterminding the Gelson’s development).

That state agency has not yet had a role in the Civic Auditorium situation, but could become deeply involved if it has to decide if the City negotiated in good faith with educational or housing prospective purchasers.

I agree that the unfortunate probability is that Doug Sloan is going along with Gleam’s illegal desire that the deal tomorrow proceed in absolute secrecy.He and Cola can read the Brown Act as to real estate deals as well as I, but they lack the character to tell their client( also an experienced lawyer) the truth.

Stan Epstein
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 1:29 PM, Danielle Charney <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you Stan ..it would appear to me that Barrister Sloan has not upheld the resident's wishes on many occasions - his loyalty is clearly
to what he is told to do by the City.. and State now.. just like Moutrie - Cardona
Cola and the rest... no surprise here...

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 9:37 AM Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:

David. Thank you for performing a much needed public service. Stan Epstein Sent from my iPad
On Jul 24, 2023, at 9:05 AM, SM Observer
<[email protected]> wrote:

Here’s that
link: https://www.smobserved.com/story/2023/07/24/opinion/closedsession-meeting-on-sale-or-lease-of-the-civic-auditorium-clearlyviolates-the-brown-act/7702.html On Jul 24, 2023, at 6:56 AM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]> wrote:

Dear David. Thanks for the opportunity to submit a
letter showing that Sloan’s statements regarding the
Brown Act and Items 3C and 3D tomorrow were
false. It is too bad that you totally omitted from your posting yesterday all of my opinions to you and the
community, but chose to provide Sloan with the
unchallenged chance to materially mislead your
viewers.

Your posting was made a full day ago and the
rally and Council meeting are tomorrow. Therefore,
it is absolutely necessary and in the public interest
that my letter be posted by noon today. Please Email
me a copy of that immediately after it has been
posted.

Sincerely, Stan Epstein. 310 393 7619
Letter to the Editor: City Attorney Sloan has broken
his ethical obligations to all residents, the Council,
and the State Bar by falsely claiming in the Observer
that the Brown Act will not be violated Tuesday
when Council meets in Closed Session to discuss
and make decisions on all aspects of proposed sales
of the Civic Auditorium without any open meeting
on the issue. He is also causing all Council members
, the City Manager and other senior staff members to
be put in serious legal risk of prosecution by the LA
County DAs Office.

The Brown Act requires all Council proceedings,
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
including its decisions, to be held before the public.

There are specified exceptions such as litigation,
personnel matters and real estate deals. However,
only the price and terms of payment of real estate
sales or leases can be dealt with secretly.

Tomorrow’s secret session will deal with dozens of
major terms and conditions relating to Items 3 and/
or 4.Therefore, the Act will certainly be
violated.There is nothing in the Surplus Lands Act
that modifies the Brown Act!
On Tuesday, there will be no Staff Report on the two
items or relevant documents provided to the
public.In this case, the Report would probably be
about 20 pages if there were an open meeting. How
can anyone comment meaningfully when the City
tells no one what is being proposed at the secret
session? There will be no open discussion by
Council; no motions or amendments thereof; no
votes on anything but a bare bones proposal
approving the undisclosed deal reached behind
closed doors.The public has a legal right to all of that under the Brown Act and it is totally being taken
away because Council, David White, and Sloan
have blessed the illegal procedure.

We hear a lot lately that “ No one is above the law”.

That American standard will apply here to City
Attorney Sloan and all others who choose to hide
their actions by violating the Brown Act.

Stan Epstein, Member of the NY State Bar for many
decades
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23, 2023, at 8:12 PM, SM
Observer <[email protected]>
wrote:

Hi, Stan, it’s always nice to hear from
old friends.

In 100 words or less, how would you
respond to Sloane’s assertions?
On Jul 23, 2023, at 6:08
PM, Stanley H Epstein
<[email protected]>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
wrote:

Dear David. There is a big
rally planned for Tuesday to
protest the plan of Council
to dispose of the City
Auditorium pursuant to
secret discussions and
without public input.

The current erroneous draft
of your article was sent by
you to me with a request
that I verify its accuracy. I
promptly told me about its
errors, the most important
of which is the lies from the
City Attorney implying that
the Brown Act will be
complied with at the Closed
Session Tuesday. I have
asked for an appropriate
correction from you
because that issue is crucial
to the public knowing
whether its reasonable, and
legal, requests have been
honored by City Hall.

To prevent your misleading
of many people at the rally
and elsewhere, please
change your article so that
the Brown Act situation is
made clear by 9 am on
Monday. Failing that, I
shall inform the 100 or so
activists on the email chains
about the issue immediately
thereafter of the story’s
hugely important errors that
you let stand after receiving
from me totally reliable
facts about the falsehoods
and a strong request to
correct those false
statements.

Thank you. Stan Epstein.
310 393 7619
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 23,
2023, at 2:23
PM, Stanley H
Epstein
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Dear David.

There should
be many
comments on,
and changes to,
your Civic
Auditorium
sale story. They
are: 1. There
was no Closed
Session on this
subject on July

18. Many
Council
members,
especially
Oscar, had
important
concerns and
asked for a
factual and
legal memo
from Susan
Cola. The FAO
resulted
yesterday.

2. There are 2
Closed Session
items
scheduled for
July 25- one for
a sale to the
School District
and the other
for a sale for
affordable
housing
purposes.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023

3. Doug Sloan
is not telling
even a portion
of the truth to
you.The
Surplus Lands
Act is subject
to the Brown
Act, which is
certainly being
violated. Here,
Council will
discuss secretly
dozens of
issues about
either or both
of the Closed
Session items.

The Brown Act
expressly
allows only a
discussion
secretly of the
price and terms
of payment
Everything else
must be in open
session on real
estate
matters..Even
the FAQ did
not deal with
my Brown Act
complaint
because Cola
and Sloan, her
boss,
absolutely
know there is a
violation.

4. There is no
public
discussion or
Council
discussion after
Council has
made a
decision in
Closed Session.

Only a vote by
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Council. Again,
Sloan is trying
to materially
mislead you
and the public!

5. I think Tricia
was telling you
that HCD
decides
whether the
City acted in
good faith
when no sale is
agreed on for
education,
housing, or
park
purposes.That
is not to be our
situation. HCD
does not buy
the property in
any
circumstance.

Please feel
entirely free to
quote me, or
call me for any
clarification.

Thanks so
much. Stan
Epstein. 310
393 7619
Sent from my
iPad
On
Jul
23,
2023,
at
11:27
AM,
SM
Observer
<[email protected]>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
wrote:

Our
latest
story
on
the
Civic
sale,
let
me
know
if I
got
anything
wrong
<s_top.jpeg>
City Considers Sale of Santa Monica's Historic
Civic Auditorium to Developers
smobserved.com
On
Jul
23,
2023,
at
11:05
AM,
Stanley
H
Epstein
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Nothing
in
the
Surplus
Lands
Act
repeals
or
changes
the
Brown
Act.

Therefore,
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
a
Closed
Session
Tuesday
that
goes
beyond
Price
and
Terms
of
Payment
would
be
illegal.

Further,
actions
taken
at
the
meeting,
even
if
approved
in
open
session,
would
be
null
and
void.

Oscar
requested,
and
the
Council
agreed
,
that
Attorney
Cola
would
produce
a
memo
on
this
subject.

Her
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
FAQs
,
constituting
her
response,
failed
to
mention
this
issue
or
my
statement
to
her
that
the
session
would
be
illegal.

She
would
not
agree
with
my
opinion
or,
unethically,
support
the
Closed
Session.

Sincerely,
Stan
Epstein.
310
393
7619
Sent
from
my
iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
On
Jul
22,
2023,
at
9:58
PM,
Ann
Hoover
<[email protected]>
wrote:

The
City
put
up
the
FAQs
Oscar
asked
for
yesterday
(see
links
below).

I
don't
think
they
are
completely
accurate.

The
decision
to
subject
the
Auditorium
to
the
Surplus
Lands
Act
was
absolutely
discretionary
not
legallymandated
and
of
course
it
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
all
surely
must
have
been
pushed
by
Gleam
as
Mayor
b/c
she
helps
to
set
the
agendas.

Shameful!!
FAQ
regarding
the
Surplus
Lands
Act:
https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqsfordesignationofthecivicauditoriumassurplusland This
also
can
be
found
on
the
City’s
homepage
santamonica.gov
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
under
"Around
Our
City"
https://santamonica.gov/
On
Saturday,
July
22,
2023
at
07:40:23
PM
PDT,
Danielle
Charney
<[email protected]>
wrote:

Excellent
letter
from
Stan
Epstein...please
consider
including
the
Brown
Act
violations
he
refers
to:

The
Agenda
for
Tuesday’s
Council
meeting
now
includes
Closed
Session
Items
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
3C
and
3D.,
both
of
which
concern
a
disposition
by
the
City
of
the
Civic
Auditorium.

It
should
first
be
mentioned
that
every
person
present
for
the
discussion
of
either
or
both
of
those
items
will
be
committing
a
certain
violation
of
the
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Brown
Act
because
that
Act
only
allows
consideration
of
the
“
Price
and
Terms
of
Payment
for
Sale”
of
the
real
estate
being
discussed.

It
is
certain
that
the
discussion,
and
any
decisions
made,
will
include
dozens
of
matters
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
concerning
a
disposition
other
than
the
very
limited
permitted
scope
specified
above.

Therefore,
if
the
Closed
Session
is
not
cancelled,
a
report
of
the
meeting
will
be
sent
by
me
to
the
Director
of
the
Public
Integrity
Division
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
of
the
LA
County
DA’s
office,
with
complaints
against
all
Council
persons
present,
the
City
Manager,
City
Attorney
and
Susan
Cola,
City
Clerk(
for
placing
the
items
on
the
Agenda)
and
both
City
Negotiators.In
addition,
I
would
expect
that
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
any
and
all
decisions
reached
at
that
illegal
meeting
would
be
considered
by
a
court
to
be
null
and
void.,
I
trust
that
Ms.

Cola
,
as
requested
by
Oscar,
has
provided
him
and
his
colleagues
with
a
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
memo
relating
to
some
of
the
points
raised
at
the
prior
meeting.This
note
will
surely
say
that
Ms.

Cola
and
Gleam
were
knowingly
100
%
wrong
in
stating
Tuesday
that
,
under
the
Brown
Act,
real
estate
matters
can
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
be
handled
only
in
Closed
Session.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
the
legal
analysis
above
that
the
Brown
Act
prohibits
Council
from
discussing
behind
closed
doors
the
many
broad
issues
involved
in
this
disposition
issue.

Sincerely,
Stan
Epstein.
310
393
7619
On
Sat,
Jul
22,
2023
at
7:34 PM
Jaleh

MIRHASHEMI
<jalehITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]>
wrote:

Hello,
Below
emails
are
belong
to
the
staff
who
were
involved
in
considering
Civic
Auditorium
as
a
“surplus
Land
Act”,
meaning
“non
essential
land”,
that
has
to
be
sold
or
leased
for
housing
or
educational
institution
passed
by
councils
on
October
2022
with
no
community
inputs.

We
don’t
have
time!!
The
deadline
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
for
90 days
from
SM
District
and
Community
Corporation
RFPs
is
approaching
soon
and
again
councils
are
going
to
make
a
decision
on
closed
doors!
Please
add
below
emails
to
the
council
emails
(copy/paste),
so
the
staff
also
can
hear
our
voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank
you
for
your
support!
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Jaleh
Mirhashemi
>
On
Jul
22,
2023,
at
1:41
PM,
Larry
Arreola
<[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>
<img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who were involved in considering Civic Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”, meaning “non essential land”, that has to be sold or leased for housing or educational institution passed by councils on October 2022 with no community inputs.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
I would like to write a really smart letter regarding our city budget, does anyone have the facts about how many extra personnel we have working for the city, expenditures on the city hall annex, travel expenses. Yes, we have a 200 million dollar payout for sexual abuse which is horrific, but the city was being over developed before that happened. The civic center could certainly be a form of income for the city, selling naming rights. I’m uneducated about the SM school system, but I don’t understand why it would go to Samo High when enrollment is down and they just built a seemingly unnecessary new history building. Let’s promote arts and music and entertainment.

The “Bowl” sign says it all. What a terrible taunt, a reminder of essential community gathering place torn down, not even saved to be moved to the promenade for instance. Pretty soon, the phrase “there is no there there” is going to be literally true for Santa Monica. Thank you.

On Jul 23, 2023, at 12:07 AM, Mathew Millen <[email protected]> wrote:

The designation of the civic center as surplus property happened when North of Wilshire NIMBYs who don't want low income housing in their neighborhood voted to designate the historic Civic Center as surplus property. This means the almost 4 acres could probably be developed with over 700 units of high density low income housing.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
educational institution passed by councils on October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
When the residents rose against the city council members who wanted to tear down the pier, the residents were able to stop them - by pledging to vote them out. That is our our power and we must remind the cc we will absolutely do that. Also the staff can be fired, right? Most are high paid and don’t live here. They must know we will also fight for their dismissal. Is there anyone from the list that played the Civic Center that any of us know? Our mayor hates bad press. Maybe music fan Charles Andrews can use his connections here? Doesn’t Bob Dylan still live here?
On Jul 23, 2023, at 12:07 AM, Mathew Millen <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Kill me now.....

On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 3:18 AM John Alle <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks.

On Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 12:07 AM Mathew Millen <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Please add Stan Epstein to this email chain - he is all over it legally with a few areas..I have added him here
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 8:52 AM Karen Croner <[email protected]> wrote:

When the residents rose against the city council members who wanted to tear down the pier, the residents were able to stop them - by pledging to vote them out. That is our our power and we must remind the cc we will absolutely do that. Also the staff can be fired, right? Most are high paid and don’t live here. They must know we will also fight for their dismissal. Is there anyone from the list that played the Civic Center that any of us know? Our mayor hates bad press. Maybe music fan Charles Andrews can use his connections here? Doesn’t Bob Dylan still live here?
On Jul 23, 2023, at 12:07 AM, Mathew Millen <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <jaleh[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Hello,
Below emails are belong to the staff who were involved in considering Civic Auditorium as a “surplus Land Act”, meaning “non essential land”, that has to be sold or leased for housing or educational institution passed by councils on October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Thanks.

On Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 12:07 AM Mathew Millen <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
Subject: Surplus and Nonessential staff
I realize that our city has budget questions.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Arlene Fishbach
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Santa Monica Civic Auditorium and Council agenda items 3E and 3F Date: Friday, July 21, 2023 11:51:27 AM

EXTERNAL
Hello
Once again I reiterate that the fate of the auditorium should and must be an open discussion with the community.

Thank you,
Arlene Fishbach
125 Montana Avenue
On Jul 18, 2023, at 9:24 AM, Arlene Fishbach <[email protected]> wrote:

Good morning,
I have been a resident of Santa Monica since 1986.

The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium has been a beloved venue for decades. From concerts, award shows to craft fairs etc.

I am outraged that you would consider closed door discussions. Any discussion/negotiations/decisions about the Auditorium's future should be and must be in an open forum between the City Council and residents, nothing less.

I look forward to your response that tonights agenda has changed and an open meeting has been scheduled for the near future.

Thank you,
Arlene Fishbach
125 Montana Avenue
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Candice Barnett
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: SM Civic Auditorium
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 3:39:56 PM

EXTERNAL
Should Council members decide on the fate of public spaces – spaces that by their very definition belong to the public – behind closed doors, without hearing the opinions of that public?
No. They should not.

Council’s final closed-door hearing on privatizing the Civic has been postponed until this Tuesday, July 25th. But Council is still proceeding full speed ahead on liquidating this irreplaceable community property.

Do the right thing. Cease & Desist this
action!
Candice A. Barnett & Will Alexander
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
Hi everyone, kindly DELETE my email - [email protected] - from all contact lists and email forwards. Thanks.

On Saturday, July 22, 2023, Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

FYI - The council emails are in this thread. If you need to write to the group, pay attention to that!
I saw it after sending my email!
Jaleh
Begin forwarded message:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Lisa A de Vincent
To: Phil Brock
Cc: Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; councilmtgitems Subject: Reference Council agenda items 3C and 3D
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 5:59:34 PM

EXTERNAL
NO to the closed door agenda on the SM Auditorium!
Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
The City posted the FAQs where the Civic Auditorium process is described. https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-of-the-civic-auditorium-as-surplus-land (https://santamonica.gov/blog/faqs-for-designation-of-the-civic-auditorium-as-surplus-land) Sent by Elaine Golden-Gealer
On Jul 22, 2023, at 10:15 PM, Jim Pickrell <[email protected]> wrote:

I realize that our city has budget questions.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff. This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
October 2022 with no community inputs.

We don’t have time!! The deadline for 90 days from SM District and Community Corporation RFPs is approaching soon and again councils are going to make a decision on closed doors!
Please add below emails to the council emails (copy/paste), so the staff also can hear our voices!
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Bob Taylor
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Phil Brock; David White; David Martin
Cc: diana gordon; Nikki Kolhoff; Zina Josephs; [email protected]; Tricia Crane; Maryanne LaGuardia; Johncysmith; Lorie Brown; Bob Taylor; [email protected]; Mario Fonda-Bonardi; Dan Jansenson; Charles Andrews; Nancy Coleman; Esther Hickman; Dr. Anna Rogers; Ron Goldman; Larry Arreola; Robert H. Taylor; Samuel Tolkin
Subject: Santa Monica Civic Auditorium
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 12:07:41 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council, et al
I a m re-sending the same comments I made last week, but adding this forward in light of the storm of support that has been unleashed against the sale of the Civic Auditorium since the public was finally informed of the pending action of the Council.

You can not turn a deaf ear, and a blind eye, to the demands of the residents that you represent. Whatever silence may have existed prior to your listing the property as surplus land, and entering, or establishing the intent to enter, into negotiations is clearly a deafening roar of opposition as the public finally became informed. Please do your job and represent the wishes of the residents that you were elected to represent. And if this action is predicated on an attempt to balance an economic shortfall, then perhaps an independent third party analysis of the apparent years of fiscal mismanagement should be conducted to assure it will be curtailed and not repeated in the future.

Re: Civic Center Auditorium
I am expressing my concern for what appears to be an effort by certain members of the council to move for the sale of a city and historic treasure, the Civic Center Auditorium, and the leasing of the land for commercial development.

The presumed argument for this action is the necessity to generate income to our apparently cash starved city. To this resident that reasoning would seem to be merely a reflection of a continuing economic mismanagement that will further exacerbate the declining quality of life residents, and tourists, have been exposed to and and are experiencing for the past 20 years. We have the very egregious PAL lawlsuits costing upwards of $200 million, and inappropriate council member retribution against an individual that cost at least another $1million. There is the $1/year lease of our civic center land for the development of the ECEC which mostly appears to serve as a daycare center for the Rand Co employees children, and though said to be a function of the SMC is operated by a third party ‘non-profit’.

All to little benefit of residents.

Adding to the examples above, the several million dollars authorized to “study” the future of the Santa Monica Airport, ostensibly for the transformation to a “great” park. Like the current argument by certain council members that the city needs to sell/lease the Auditorium for financial reasons, it is quite apparent that the SMO land is merely ripe for similar sale/lease to developer interests and profit, once again at a loss of quality of life for residents. In the staff presentation to the council in January it was pointed out that there is no funding available for a change of use without developer involvement. The presentation mentioned SMO operations currently generates $20 million a year to the city, but did not mention that, as pointed out in a 2011 Daily Press news article, SMO generates some $273 million ($356 million 2023 dollars) city wide, which most obviously results in additional business taxes, sales taxes, etc.

Common sense suggests putting on hold any notion of further divesting our city of its community resources and the commons that serve us all, including the understanding that our beachfront town is a regional relief valve for the heat burdened residents of the Valley and east side. There will be no benefit seeking relief in an increasingly densely built out extension of high rise Los Angeles. Maybe a detached third party evaluation of the economic management of Santa Monica should be implemented, perhaps by the County in a manner similar to a study was that done in 2011.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
With concern,
Bob Taylor
Ocean Park Resident
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Brenda Anderson
To: Council Mailbox
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Civic Auditorium
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 5:34:58 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:

Regarding Council Items 3C and 3D at the next council meeting:

Any decisions regarding future use of the SM Civic Auditorium should be made after public discussion that includes input from the residents of the City.

Brenda Anderson
475 24th Street
Santa Monica 90402
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Santa Monica Rx
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]; Tricia Crane; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 3:54:10 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
RE: SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM Council agenda items 3C and 3D for COUNCIL MTG 2023 07 25
Should Councilmembers decide on the fate of public spaces – spaces that by their very definition belong to the public – behind closed doors, without public process and public participation in decisions on such a central and important public space and cultural venue?
No. They should not.

Santa Monica Residents Cross-City joins Northeast Neighbors and SMCLC in urging the SM City Council to utilize public process, democratic procedures in order to be accountable to the public whose taxes funded and have supported the SMCA.

Anything less would be authoritarian and autocratic.

Respectfully,
Derek Altmann, Research Team
Executive Board Secretary
Santa Monica Residents Cross-City (smRx)
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Patricia Rogers
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Civic
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 2:27:11 PM

EXTERNAL
Councilpersons:

Please use your influence to save the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. It is an important part of Santa Monica history and should be saved. What would happen to the land where it is were it to be razed? We don't need anymore luxury hotels or high rises for rich people to play in. Please consider your constituents over construction developers.

Kindest regards,
Patricia Rafferty
Santa Monica Homeowner
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Jo Baxter
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Civic
Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 3:19:41 PM

EXTERNAL
Regarding Council Agenda items 3c and 3D, please preserve the Santa Monica a civic Auditorium and the decision of its use to be determined by the tax paying citizens of Santa Monica. This much needed facility is an important fixture to the quality of life in Santa Monica. Residents need to have the right to keep this architectural fixture as a landmark and venue for cultural events to be enjoyed by the citizens of Santa Monica and for Santa Monica.

Thank You,
Jo Baxter
22 year resident of Santa Monica and property owner in NoMa.

ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: GARY
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Civic
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 12:52:22 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I'm writing to urge you to reconsider privatizing the iconic, landmarked Santa Monica Civic Auditorium aka Agenda items 3C and 3D.

I've lived here since 1975 and based on other buildings that have been saved both here and in Los Angeles, I know the building can continue to be of great value to the public.

Thank you,
Gary Gurner
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: hal lindes
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: SAVE OUR SANTA MONICA CIVIC - Council agenda items 3C and 3D Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 3:44:04 PM

EXTERNAL
What Councilmembers are doing is not acceptable.

The sale or long-term lease of public land should be decided by residents – These decisions should not be made in secret -Council agenda items 3C and 3D:

Hal Lindes
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: [email protected]
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SAVE The Civic !!
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:13:29 AM

EXTERNAL
Don’t tear down another SM piece of culture and history, kill it and then replace it with more cheaply made supposedly “affordable” housing to sit empty, or another beautiful park for meth head tweakers to live in and take over, or space for more tossed around scooters, e-bikes and motorcycles (all enriching out of state developers and investors!) I mean, how much more of our soul can you sell? 25+ year SM resident
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Mary Hubbell
To: Council Mailbox
Cc: David White; David Martin; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; councilmtgitems
Subject: Save the Civic Center - Items 3C and 3D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 10:25:11 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
I urge you to move to protect our beloved, landmarked, community based Civic Center.

This is public property and as a member of the Santa Monica public I urge you to reconsider your current plans to sell this iconic venue to private organizations.

A growing number of residents would very much like to see it restored to its former glory and used again as an arts, entertainment, and other community uses that would be an much needed asset for our City and its residents.

Please don’t allow the SMMUSD district to take this away from us for yet another sports related venue. Although it’s obvious sports are high on their priority list, they have other options that have and will continue to work fine for them. Besides, district enrollment continues to decline.

Also, please don’t rubber stamp the other option out there for more housing, we already have a massive number of hugely oversized housing developments in the pipeline. Including one at the former bowling alley across from the Civic Center. All of these developments should be required to have a much higher percentage of “affordable” units.

We don’t need more housing or other developments at the Civic Center site.

We need a community gathering place for fun and entertainment! This site provides a unique opportunity to fill a growing need for more local entertainment venues.

Thank you for considering my input.

Mary Hubbell
Ocean Park
Sent from Mary's iPhone
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Jonathan Louis Mann
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: John Alle; Elaine Golden-Gealer; Santa Monica Democratic Club; SM Renters Rights; Santa Monica Forward; CSMCE; Santa Monica Coalition for A. Livable City
Subject: Save the Santa Monica Civic!
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 3:00:43 PM

EXTERNAL
Our city council needs to start listening to what the people want, or we will vote every one of you out of office! No more back room
deals in violation of the Brown Act!
The SM Civic is a historical landmark and should reopen to the public for smaller venues.

You lot want to privatize our civic auditorium and turn it into a revenue generating monster, so you can give more perks to city employees
so they will contribute and endorse you all for reelection.

We're sick and tired of crime in this city because you reward the SMPD with a 3 day week so they can more than double their income
working overtime, instead of hiring more police to work the night shift when break-ins and car burglaries occur!
The situation at the SM Promenade is atrocious. Are you going to demolish that next and put in more high rises? What is it about you
people, once you get elected all your promises go out the window? I'm Jonathan Mann and I approve this message.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Santa Monica Coalition for a Livable City <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2023 at 12:30:09 PM PDT
Subject: It’s not over! Call or write Councilmembers to Save the Santa Monica Civic! ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
SMCLC-headerT.gif
July 22, 2023
RESIDENT ALERT!
IT’S NOT OVER!

CALL OR WRITE COUNCILMEMBERS TO

SAVE THE SANTA MONICA CIVIC
Fifty years ago, Santa Monica councilmembers voted to approve demolishing our beloved Santa Monica Pier and replacing it with a bridge leading to a manmade island resort. Residents were furious. They wanted to preserve this venerated treasure and rallied to defend it. Council backed down and the Pier was saved. But without that resident revolt, Santa Monica’s most iconic landmark would now only be a distant memory.

Currently, our City Council is engaged in closed-door negotiations to decide the fate of another Santa Monica jewel, our Civic Auditorium. Built in 1958, and now landmarked, The Civic is every bit as iconic as our Pier. While demolition may not be on the table, privatizing this public space most certainly is. In fact, it appears Councilmembers are about to sell or commit to a long-term lease of this public space with no public discussion.

Does that seem right to you? Should Councilmembers decide on the fate of public spaces – spaces that by their very definition belong to the public – behind closed doors, without hearing the opinions of that public?
No. They should not.

Council’s final closed-door hearing on privatizing the Civic has been ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
postponed until this Tuesday, July 25th. But Council is still proceeding full speed ahead on liquidating this irreplaceable community property.

If you agree that the sale or long-term lease of public land should be decided by residents – or at least that these decisions should not be made in secret -- please write or call our Councilmembers and tell them what they are doing is not acceptable. And if you’ve already written, feel free to write again! Reference Council agenda items 3C and 3D:
[email protected]; [email protected]; christine.parra@ santamonica.gov; [email protected]; jesse.zwick@santamonica. gov; [email protected]; [email protected]; co [email protected]
Fifty years ago, the Pier was saved by residents who stopped their City Council from making a tragic mistake. History has vindicated those residents. And the Council members who voted to demolish the Pier? None of them ever were reelected again.

Victor, Diana, Sherrill and Jeff
Please forward this email to your friends and neighbors to sign up for updates and join in our efforts.

Santa Monica Coalition for a Livable City | 1112 Montana Ave. #174, Santa Monica, CA 90403 Unsubscribe [email protected]
Update Profile |Constant Contact Data Notice
Sent [email protected] by
Try email marketing for free today!
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
Santa Monica Rx <[email protected]>ANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM Council agenda items 3C and 3D for COUNCIL MTG 2023 07 25
Should Councilmembers decide on the fate of public spaces – spaces that by their very definition belong to the public – behind closed doors, without public process and public participation in decisions on such a central and important public space and cultural venue?
No. They should not.

Respectfully,
Mary Rushfield, member
Santa Monica Residents Cross-City

SANTA MONICA CIVIC AUDITORIUM
From: Mary Rushfield
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems Subject: SM CIVIC AUD Council agenda items 3C and 3D for COUNCIL MTG 2023 07 25 Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 4:33:55 PM

EXTERNAL
Reply Forward
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Candice Hartung
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SM Civic
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 4:41:47 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
Please do not vote to privatize the SM Civic. This decision should be made by the residents of Santa Monica.

I was born in Santa Monica, I am a homeowner here, and have spent most of my life in our wonderful city. The future use of the Civic should not be made behind closed doors. Please open this subject to public conversation.

Thank you,
Candice Hartung
Sent from my iPad
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: [email protected]
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Stop the sale or long term lease of the Civic Center without public discussion of options Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 10:25:45 AM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
This email is to make you aware of my vigorous objection to the manner in which the future of the Civic Center is being decided. Although I have not formed a firm opinion as to what should be done with that site, mainly because all of the options, including restoration, have not been discussed in public by the Council or staff, I do vigorously object to the way in which staff and Council are handling this topic.

The Civic Center is a public resource that belongs to the current residents and voters of Santa Monica. It is a resource that should be allocated only after public discussion of its future, with the public giving its input and the Council members voting in public on how to proceed, so that they can be held accountable for their decisions. This secretive process is undemocratic and only further erodes the public’s trust in their institutions and elected officials. Proceeding in this manner is a bad decision and this process should be halted and a more public and transparent one should be undertaken instead.

Sincerely,
Ofer Grossman
1115 Hill Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

EXTERNAL
I realize that our city has budget questions.

I am concerned that nobody is taking action on the issue of surplus and nonessential staff.

This is where the city could make some cuts.

Are you guys proposing to sell Civic Auditorium, and the ones in charge of designing traffic obstructions. Those guys could definitely go and nobody would miss them.

Jim Pickrell
On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 4:34 AM Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]> wrote:

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
[email protected]
[email protected]
Thank you for your support!
Jaleh Mirhashemi
> On Jul 22, 2023, at 1:41 PM, Larry Arreola <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <img123.jpg>
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Bernice Glenn
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: the sale or long-term lease of public land should be decided by residents Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 1:16:08 PM

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members
The sale or long-term lease of public land should be decided by residents!!!
Council members who profess to hold the interests of Santa Monica residents at heart have forgotten the claims they made in order to be elected to their present positions. The sale or long term lease is not to be heald in secret -- not only for the Civic Center but for any ongoing proposal of discussion of interest that affects the residents who voted for you.

And that includes council members who propose large scale building projects to provide affordable housing -- not for Santa Monica residents wo need and are looking for an affordable place to live, but for workers living elsewhere to save them from their long commutes.

Please have the courtesy ti reply and explain your positions on this issue to me.

Thank you.

Bernice Glenn, low income senior and a 50year resident in Ocean Park... who has suffered through the many large rent increases through her years in residency!!!!!!!
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Mike Bone
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: The Santa Monica Civic
Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 12:52:28 PM

EXTERNAL
This place is iconic.

You should be VERY careful with whatever you decide to do with the Civic.

I miss going to shows there. It needs to be made ADA compliant and earthquake proofed.

Why not let a concert promoter come in for a long term lease with them making the upgrades? Mike Bone
[email protected]
310 795 3231 mobile
“The great book, always open and which we should make an effort to read, is that of Nature.” - Antoni Gaudi
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: lmarreola
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dr.

Anna Rogers
Subject: Tonights Agenda Items 3-C, 3-D
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 7:11:19 AM

EXTERNAL
To move ahead with selling the Civic Auditorium without public notice or public input is totally irresponsible. You owe your constituents a chance to agree or object to the selling of a iconic landmark.

Larry and Carol Arreola
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
From: Brent Cohen
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cline; David Martin; Susan Cola; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang Subject: Urgent Action Needed: Save Santa Monica"s Civic Auditorium! Date: Sunday, July 23, 2023 10:52:54 AM

EXTERNAL
To the esteemed members of the City Council and dedicated Staff, In 1973, a significant decision loomed over Santa Monica as council members considered the demolition of the beloved Santa Monica Pier. Thanks to the collective efforts of determined residents, the Pier was rescued from its fate. Today, that same spirit of preservation and love for our local history has sparked a new fight—one that urges us to prevent the sale of the Civic Auditorium landmark and the potential destruction that might pave the way for a gymnasium or housing.

I urge you to join this cause and champion the restoration of the SM Civic Auditorium, transforming it once again into a space for hosting historic live events. Instead of selling or leasing this iconic establishment, let us embrace its rich heritage and potential for bringing our community together. For far too long, this extraordinary and historic venue has remained unused, and we are in dire need of more reasons to unite our residents and welcome visitors.

Let us seize this opportunity to revitalize the SM Civic Auditorium and create a space that will not only honor our past but also contribute to a vibrant and culturally rich future for Santa Monica. Together, we can preserve our heritage and strengthen the bonds of our community through cherished live events that will be treasured for generations to come.

Sincerely,
Brent Cohen
2254 Cloverfield Blvd.
photo Brent Cohen
310-613-0204 | [email protected]
GMT +8
Santa Monica, CA
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023
ITEM 3.C.

JULY 25, 2023

Santa Monica City CouncilJuly 25, 2023

Santa Monica City Council
July 25, 2023