Agenda packet — Santa Monica City Council, October 10, 2023 (part 1 of 4)

City of Santa Monica
City Council Meeting
AGENDA

GLEAM DAVIS
MAYOR

PHIL BROCK LANA NEGRETE

COUNCILMEMBER MAYOR PRO TEM

CHRISTINE PARRA CAROLINE TOROSIS

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

JESSE ZWICK OSCAR DE LA TORRE

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

DAVID WHITE

CITY MANAGER

DOUGLAS SLOAN

CITY ATTORNEY

DENISE ANDERSON-WARREN

CITY CLERK

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

City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 2

RULES OF ORDER FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (Resolution No.11494(CCS))

WAYS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT
If you are interested in providing public comment at a City Council meeting, there are several ways to participate:
(1) Written public comment. In lieu of oral public comment, the public is strongly encouraged to submit written public comment on agenda items via email to [email protected]. Written public comment submitted before 12:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be available for online viewing. Please note the agenda item number in the subject line of your written comments. (2) Oral public comment. Persons wishing to address the City Council regarding items on the agenda must be present and submit their name and address (optional) to the City Clerk before the public comment section is opened for that item or before the public hearing is opened where one is required by law. Register to speak at the Speaker Kiosk prior to the meeting. Remarks from the public are limited to a total of 6 minutes per City Council meeting, with a maximum of 2 minutes and a minimum of one minute per item. Except for the author of the request, public comment on 15-items are limited to 1 minute. Except on Public Input, speakers appearing at the meeting in person, may donate 2 minutes to another person present in-person at the meeting, who may speak for a total of 4 minutes on that item.

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

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

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

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

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

3. Closed Session.

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

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

6. Public Comment on remaining Agenda Items

7. Study Session.

8. Continued Items.

9. Administrative Proceedings.

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

11. Staff Administrative Item.

12. Public Hearings.

13. Reports of Boards and Commissions.

14. Resolutions.

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

16. Councilmember Discussion Items.

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

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

City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 3

AGENDAS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

REGULAR MEETING

CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1685 MAIN STREET, ROOM 250,
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2023
MEETING BEGINS AT 5:30 PM
HOW TO PROVIDE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT:

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

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

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

1. PUBLIC INPUT
(Public comment is permitted only on items not on the agenda that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City. State law prohibits the City Council from taking any action on items not listed on the agenda, including issues raised under this agenda item.)

1.A. Written Comments

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

ITEMS, CONSENT CALENDAR ONLY)

3. SPECIAL AGENDA ITEMS

3.A. Proclamation: Fire Prevention Week

3.B. City Manager's Report

4. CLOSED SESSIONS
City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 4

4.A. Conference with Real Estate Negotiator pursuant to Government Code §54956.8: Properties: 1) 2772-2800 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California, office space (~70,500 sq. ft.), Hangars 18-21 and 27-30 (~8,900 sq. ft.); 2) 3000 31st Street, Santa Monica, California, office space (~10,500 sq. ft.) and hangar space (~30,000 sq. ft); City Negotiator: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Snap Inc.; under negotiation: commercial lease terms - New item Received 10/5/2023

4.B. Conference with Real Estate Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Property: 2828 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California Offices and Pilot Lounge Premises (~5,300 sq. ft.), Corporate Hangar and Maintenance Shop (~6,450 sq. ft.), Aircraft Main Ramp (~145,000 sq. ft.), Aircraft Overflow Ramp (~32,000 sq. ft.); and 3100 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment; City Negotiator: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Atlantic SMO Holdings; under negotiation: terms for modified and extended lease. (continued from September 26) - New item Received 10/5/2023

4.C. Conference with Labor Negotiator - Government Code Section 54957.6.

Consideration of the City Clerk Appointment and Process - New item Received 10/5/2023

4.D. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica; LASC Case No. BC616804; Second District Court of Appeal Case No.

B295935; California Supreme Court Case No. S263972

4.E. Conference with Legal Counsel – Considering Whether to Initiate Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Whittier, et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCP03579 (requested by Councilmember Brock)

4.F. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Eric Canonico v. City of Santa Monica; LASC Case No. 21STCV22615 - New item Received 10/5/2023

4.G. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Hector Orozco v. John Doe, Does 1-2; LASC Case No. 23SMCV03120 - New item Received 10/5/2023

4.H. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): John U.N.B. Doe, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCV12746 - New item Received 10/5/2023
City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 5

4.I. Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Santa Monica v. ICSOP, et al.; OCSC Case No. 30-2022- 01261243 - New item Received 10/5/2023

4.J. Conference with Labor Negotiator: Government Code Section 54957.6 - Agency Designated Representatives: City Manager David White, Acting Human Resources Director Michael Arnoldus, and Human Resources Manager Robert Scalise; Bargaining Units: MTA-AFSCME Local 4819 - Item Pulled at the Request of Staff. 10/09/2023
The following is the order of business for items to be heard no earlier than 7:00 p.m.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items will be considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. In accordance with Charter section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and resolutions shall be by reading of title only unless a Councilmember present dissents.)

5.A. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 6.49 on Taxicabs to Transition from Taxicab Franchises to Taxicab Permits
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

5.B. Second Reading and Adoption of an Interim Zoning Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2754 (CCS) Promoting Economic Recovery in the City’s Downtown Area, including the Third Street Promenade Area and Santa Monica Place, and Providing Other Minor and Clerical Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Related to Economic Recovery
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

5.C. Approval of First Modification of Agreement with Best Contracting Services, Inc. for Citywide Roofing Services
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities), of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to agreement 10854 in the amount not to exceed $854,620 with Best Contracting Services, Inc., for citywide roofing contractor services. This would result in a seven-year amended agreement through September 26, 2026, with a new total amount not to exceed $1,229,620, with future funding contingent on Council budget approval.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 6

5.D. Adoption of Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Resolutions Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Adopt the attached Resolution increasing the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee by 5.8 percent for new market-rate apartments and condominiums (Attachment A).

3. Adopt the attached Resolution increasing the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost by 5.8 percent (Attachment B).

5.E. Adoption of Resolution Approving Final Map for Condominium at 2002 21st Street
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding that the proposed project was previously analyzed in the certified 2002 21st Street Project Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2007031019), and no further review is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and

2. Adopt the attached resolution approving Final Tract Map No. 66625.

5.F. Award Construction and Construction Management Contracts for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Annual Street Paving and Sidewalk Repair Project Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Award Bid #SP2680 to Sully-Miller Contracting Company for construction services for the Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Annual Street Paving and Sidewalk Repair Project for the Public Works Department.

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with SullyMiller Contracting Company in an amount not to exceed $2,853,346 (including a 10% contingency).

4. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue any necessary change orders to complete additional work within contract authority.

5. Award Request for Proposals (RFP) #SP2680 to PSOMAS to provide construction management, observation, and material testing services for the FY 2023-24 Annual Street Paving and Sidewalk Repair Project and the Street Lighting Modernization Program - Package 3 Project for the Public Works Department.

6. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with PSOMAS in an amount not to exceed $600,000.

5.G. Approval of Agreement with Trustmark for Long Term Care Insurance Coverage - New item Received 10/5/2023
City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 7 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Trustmark for Long-Term Care (LTC) insurance coverage for a period of 5 years with one additional one-year option for the Human Resources Department. This is a no cost contract to the City with an estimated value of $240,000. All services are paid by the plan participants, who are employees that voluntarily elect to obtain LTC coverage.

6. PUBLIC INPUT ON REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS

7. STUDY SESSION

7.A. Discussion on the Lottery-Selected Panel Process for the Airport Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:

1. Review and comment on the democratic lottery process as the primary public engagement method for the Future of the Santa Monica Airport project;

2. Provide direction to staff about: the framing question the Lottery Selected Panel would answer and whether the Lottery Selected Panel should be comprised of Santa Monica residents only or also include business owners and/or people from the adjacent West Los Angeles area; and

3. Direct staff to prepare a sole source contract, as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (b), for Healthy Democracy to provide the services related to the democratic lottery process and bring it back for Council review in November.

8. CONTINUED ITEMS
No items

9. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
No items

10. ORDINANCES
(Public comment is permitted on ordinances for introduction and first reading. No public discussion is permitted on ordinances for second reading and adoption. In accordance with Charter section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and resolutions shall be by reading of title only unless a Councilmember present dissents.)

10.A. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Replacing Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 7.04.800 (Access and Street Improvements) in its Entirety
City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 8 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of exemptions pursuant to Section 15301, 15303, 15304, and 15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Section 21080.25 of CEQA.

2. Introduce for first reading the attached ordinance replacing the codified text of Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 7.04.800 in its entirety to clarify the City’s public right of way requirements for new development.

10.B. Introduction and First Reading of Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 2.24.110 and 2.24.220(g)(Master Services Agreements) Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effects pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines

2. Introduce for first reading a proposed ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Sections 2.24.110 and 2.24.220(g) related to Master Services Agreements.

10.C. Introduction and First Reading of an Interim Zoning Ordinance Amending the Text of the Zoning Ordinance to: (1) Replace the Term “Medical Marijuana Dispensary” with “Medicinal Cannabis Retailer”; (2) Remove Certain Requirements for Medicinal Cannabis Retailers for Consistency with State Law; and (3) Permit Medicinal Cannabis Retailers To Deliver, Cultivate, and Sell Adult-Use Cannabis or Adult-Use Cannabis Products to Persons 21 Years of Age and Over
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

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

2. Introduce for first reading an Interim Zoning Ordinance amending the text of the Zoning Ordinance to replace the term “Medical Marijuana Dispensary” with “Medicinal Cannabis Retailer”, to remove certain requirements for Medicinal Cannabis Retailers for consistency with State law, and to permit Medicinal Cannabis Retailers to deliver, cultivate, and sell adult-use cannabis or adult-use cannabis products to persons 21 Years of Age and Over.

3. Introduce for first reading an Ordinance amending Section 6.203.010 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to allow medicinal cannabis retailers with medicinal cannabis permits issued before October 10, 2023, to deliver, cultivate, and sell adult-use cannabis and adult-use cannabis products to persons 21 years of age and over, subject to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.31.185.

10.D. Introduction and First Reading of Water and Wastewater Capacity Study Ordinances - New item Received 10/5/2023
Recommended Action
City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 9 Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3) and Section 15308 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Introduce for first reading the attached ordinance to amend Santa Monica Municipal Code 7.12.180 to require water capacity studies for new developments.

3. Introduce for first reading the attached ordinance to amend Santa Monica Municipal Code 7.04 to require wastewater capacity studies for new developments.

11. STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
No items

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS
No items

13. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
No items

14. RESOLUTIONS
No items

15. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS OTHER THAN REPORTS OF COMMISSION AND

OFFICERS
No items

16. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS

16.A. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Disabilities Commission for a term ending on 6/30/2025.

16.B. Recommendation to accept Cinzia Paganuzzi's resignation from the Disabilities Commission and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 10

16.C. Request of Mayor Davis and Councilmembers Torosis and Zwick that the City Council support the Justice for Renters Act. The California Secretary of State has verified that the Justice for Renters Act has qualified for the November 2024 state ballot. The Justice for Renters Action is an initiative which will expand local control over rent laws by replacing The Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. Costa Hawkins prohibits rent control on single-family homes, condominiums and rental units that were built after 1995. The Justice for Renters Act removes this ban on rent control in California, giving local communities the right to stabilize rents and make apartments more affordable for low-income and middle-income renters. Repealing Costa Hawkins will help local government address one of the root causes of homelessness-- skyrocketing rents and unaffordable housing. Mayor Davis and Councilmembers Torosis and Zwick also request that the City Manager issue a press release indicating the City Council’s support for the proposed ballot initiative and send a letter of support from the City to the Governor, Senator Ben Allen, Assemblymember Rick Zbur, and to the proponents of the Justice For Renters Act.

16.D. Request of Mayor Davis that the City waive application, administrative, and rental fees associated with the partial use of the parking lot on the Santa Monica Pier as well as Santa Monica Beach Parking Lot 1 North to support the City’s annual commemoration of Veterans Day honoring and celebrating all those who have served our country in the Armed Forces, being planned in coordination with the United States Army.

16.E. Request of Councilmembers Parra, de la Torre, and Mayor Pro Tem Negrete that the Council authorize the use of their travel funds to accept an invitation from the Embassy of El Salvador to visit the country from November 6-10, 2023. The agenda includes meeting the ambassador and various government officials to discuss public safety, education, and tourism as well as evaluating beach communities for future sister city partnerships.

16.F. Request of Councilmember Torosis, Mayor Davis and Councilmember Zwick that the City Council adopt a resolution in support of the tenants of Barrington Plaza as they fight mass eviction, and direct staff to send copies of the adopted resolution to the Barrington Plaza tenants' association, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, the Los Angeles City Councilmember that represents the tenants of Barrington Plaza, and to Douglas Emmett Inc. headquartered in Santa Monica, and other parties as deemed appropriate.

16.G. Request of Councilmember Zwick, Councilmember Torosis and Mayor Davis that the City of Santa Monica support AB 1033 (Ting) and, upon the governor’s signature, draft a local ordinance to allow the separate conveyance of the primary dwelling unit and ADU or ADUs as condominiums.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 11

16.H. Request of Councilmember Brock that the City Attorney and City Manager consider developing and evaluate the impacts of an ordinance prohibiting the manufacture, sale, and/or installation of engineered countertops in Santa Monica. The fabrication of engineered countertops releases silica dust, and inhalation of silica dust can cause silicosis, a serious and deadly disease. On June 6, 2023, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors adopted a motion instructing the Director of Public Health to report on options to ban the sale, fabrication, and installation of silica fabricated stone in Los Angeles County.

In addition, the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health has indicated that they will develop workplace standards for workers who handle engineered stone. Prior to developing a local ordinance, the City Attorney and City Manager are being asked to consider the findings of the Los Angeles County Director of Public health and standards developed by Cal/OSHA to determine its feasibility. - New item Received 10/5/2023

16.I. Request of Councilmember Zwick that the Council authorize use of his travel funds to cover the registration fees and travel expenses associated with attending the YIMBYtown Annual Conference to be held February 26-28, 2024 in Austin, TX. - New item Received 10/5/2023

16.J. Appointments to two unscheduled vacancies on the Housing Commission for terms ending on 6/30/2024 and 6/30/2026. - New item Received 10/5/2023

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

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

City Hall and the Council Chamber are wheelchair accessible. If you require any special disability related accommodations to either attend or provide public testimony at a Council meeting (i.e. sign language interpreting, access to an amplified sound system, remote option, etc.), please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211 or TDD: (310) 917- 6626 or via email at [email protected] at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Best efforts shall be made to accommodate requests received after the 72-hour deadline. In the case of special meetings, requests should be submitted as early as possible, but no later than noon the day of the special Council meeting.

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

City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/12/2023 9:48 AM Page 12 Santa Monica Blue Bus Lines #2, #3, #5, #9 and the EXPO Line serve City Hall. Parking is available on Main Street, on Olympic Drive, and in the Civic Center Parking Structure (validation free).

City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 1.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Written Comments
Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

1.A
Packet Pg. 13
1 Xavier Mota
From: Peterson Loftin <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 5, 2023 1:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]; Zach Pollard
Subject: Oversized Vehicle Parking in Santa Monica

EXTERNAL
Hi City Council,
I am a citizen of Santa Monica currently residing at 404 Georgina Avenue. I am writing to request that oversized vehicle parking be added to the next city council meeting on October 10th.

There is a growing problem of oversized vehicles (e.g., RVs, sprinter vans with campers, etc.) being parked overnight on residential streets in Santa Monica. There are currently restrictions in the municipal code that prohibit the overnight parking of oversized vehicles, however, permits are currently being granted in a manner that is undermining this effort. Specifically:
 The address of the Santa Monica resident filing for the permit is not required to match the registration of the vehicle. I have personally seen several RVs with out‐of‐state tags that possess these oversized vehicle permits.  The two‐block parking rule that is enforced on standard visitor permits is not part of the municipal code for oversized permits. Parking enforcement has been instructed not to cite vehicles for this, so RVs are parking nowhere near the address listed on their hang‐tag permit. Specifically, there is an RV with two people living in it parked in our neighborhood, despite the fact that the address listed on their permit is over a mile away.  These permits are granted for up to 30 days at a time and can be renewed indefinitely. In addition, these permits are currently being issued for free. This is resulting in RVs being permanently stored on our streets at no cost. They belong in RV parks or in garages.

I have been in touch with parking enforcement about this multiple times recently, and they have instructed me that there is nothing they can do until the municipal code is changed. Zach Pollard from the Parking Division at the Department of Transportation has confirmed this as well.

I would like to speak with the council on this issue at the next city council meeting on October 10th. Can you please confirm that this will be added to the agenda?
Sincerely,
Peterson Loftin
To help protect your privacy,
Micro so ft Office prevented
auto matic downlo ad o f this
picture from the Internet.
ᐧ
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Written Comments (6081 : Written Comments)
1 Xavier Mota
From: Eric Wilson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 3:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: park

EXTERNAL
Please take heed of our message. You must strike the words "and development." We do not want development, we want a park. Thank you.

Eric Wilson
[email protected]
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Written Comments (6081 : Written Comments)
1 Xavier Mota
From: Francisco Juarez <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2023 7:21 PM
To: David Rodriguez Sr.; Leona Flores
Cc: Shirrell McCarey; Greg Nichols; Sennett Devermont; Ryan Thompson; councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Yolanda Aguerrebere; Irma Perez; Ms. Suttle; Keisha Dixon Subject: Veteran Beachfront Property, Santa Monica

EXTERNAL
AGIF‐US National Commander Rodriguez,
Please consider this as your California, El Camino Real Chapter, National Home Committee, Update Report.

This email focuses on the questionable
actions and evasive behavior of the Santa Monica City Council members and City officials, regarding the Veteran beachfront property. That beachfront was, originally,
part of the larger National Home vision and, today, it may possibly be part of land‐racket that is stealing the (inland) National Home.

F A C T
On March 3, 1888, two separate deeds were executed that legally transferred land from signatories Arcadia Bandini and Senator Jones to the U.S. government. One deed is for 300 acres, inland from Santa Monica Beach and the second deed is for beachfront property on Santa Monica Beach.

F A C T
Both "indentures" have deed‐restricted land‐use mandates that are legally established in perpetuity. Both Deeds state that each property is to be "permanently maintained" for the explicit use by disabled Veterans.

F A C T
Advocates from WWII Veterans, Korean War Veterans, and every generation of Veterans to follow have strived to make every Veteran across the country
aware of their "Home" in Los Angeles, with its Santa Monica beachfront property, should they, God forbid, become disabled.

F A C T
My grandson and I addressed the Santa Monica City Council before it went into closed session to negotiate with the Jonathan Club and informed that body of the deed‐restricted land‐use mandates.

F A C T
Spectrum News covered the City Council meeting when $10,000 was budgeted for a title search.

F A C T
The City did not engage the Veteran advocates who brought the matter to the attention of the public. The advocates had to press for a meeting to see the results of the title search with the City Manager and an attorney.

F A C T
AGIF‐US Members, frustrated with the City's non‐action, attended a subsequent City Council meeting and, during public input, reminded the Council that the matter is still open and that unhoused Veterans are losing their lives and sanity.

F A C T
The documentation that the taxpayer funded title search produced does not match the title search information that the advocates hold and our El Camino Real Chapter, National Home Committee Chairperson, a proven subject matter expert, demonstrated to the City Manager and the City's attorney the differences. To our knowledge, the City Manager has done nothing to resolve this.

S U M M A R Y
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Written Comments (6081 : Written Comments)
2 The City officials and the Council of Santa Monica have failed to work in good faith with AGIF‐US and Coalition Veteran advocates. We have to keep pressing for action. We have to keep coming back to demonstrate that the beachfront property contains deed‐restrictions that are not only sorely needed in the "Capital of Veteran Homelessness," the law that returned Bruce's Beach in Manhattan Beach is being violated at Santa Monica Beach.

P L A N
Another delegation of advocates, including members of AGIF‐US, plans to return to the Santa Monica City Council (copied here) to press for the proper solution. Former National Secretary Greg Nichols, having "occupied" the land in civil protest, will be with us.

We join other VSO representatives including "Mr. Checkpoint," Sennett Devermont, who produced this link, https://www.instagram.com/reel/CyE2KEdvfwF/
Respectfully submitted,
Francisco Juarez
Commander
El Camino Real Chapter
American GI Forum of the U.S.

Whittier, CA
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Written Comments (6081 : Written Comments)
1 Xavier Mota
From: Maria Moore <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:15 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Concerned Santa Monica resident

EXTERNAL
I was born and raised in Southern California and Santa Monica was always my summer fun place to visit while growing up in Burbank. As a young adult, it’s where I brought out‐of‐town guests and visited with friends to dine and enjoy the beauty. We bought a townhouse in Santa Monica 7 years ago and have grown to regret it. My husband and I have watched the city become more and more crime‐infested and dangerous. We have screaming people on our sidewalk where we live on 24th near Wilshire and others who just sleep and beg in front of Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods and in our beauƟful park across the street. OŌen they’re in our alleys and in our front yard. My grandchildren are no longer allowed to visit our house since being chased and cursed at by a mentally deranged person the last Ɵme I walked them to the park. We need to visit them instead in Long Beach. I haven’t been to the 3rd Street promenade in months. Nor the Farmers Market on Arizona which I used to love.

This is NOT fair to 95% of the Santa Monica ciƟzens who pay high mortgages, and high taxes and just want to feel safe. Something needs to be done to change Santa Monica from an outdoor Mentally insane experiment and back to a beloved city and community. Not more low‐income housing, but instead hospitals with mental care, and security. I urge you to join the lawsuit with other ciƟes regarding zero bail and to help get these people who need help off our street and into long‐term care faciliƟes! I registered as a Democrat in the 1970’s and for the first Ɵme in my life, my husband and I have switched to Independent and will most likely be forced to vote for level‐headed responsible Republicans in the next elecƟon. Many of my friends are going the same way. The pendulum will swing big Ɵme if things don’t start to change.

Maria Moore
Phone: 310‐428‐1668
Email: [email protected]
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 1.

October 10, 2023

1.A.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Written Comments (6081 : Written Comments)
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 3.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, City Clerk, Special Agenda Items Subject: Proclamation: Fire Prevention Week
Prepared By: Gilbert Portillo, Administrative Staff Assistant Approved Forwarded to Council

3.A
Packet Pg. 19
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 3.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David White, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: City Manager's Report
Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Acting Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council

3.B
Packet Pg. 20
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 4.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Conference with Real Estate Negotiator pursuant to Government Code §54956.8: Properties: 1) 2772-2800 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California, office space (~70,500 sq. ft.), Hangars 18-21 and 27-30 (~8,900 sq. ft.); 2) 3000 31st Street, Santa Monica, California, office space (~10,500 sq. ft.) and hangar space (~30,000 sq. ft); City Negotiator: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Snap Inc.; under negotiation:
commercial lease terms
Prepared By: Andrew Cabello, Legal Assistant
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

4.A
Packet Pg. 21
1 Xavier Mota
From: Paulette Rochelle-Levy <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 9:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Airport2Park; NoJets
Subject: the people have spoken.

EXTERNAL
LC was voted. Close the airport . This land IS NOT FOR DEVELOPERS TO GAIN WEALTH!! Regards,
Paulette
Paulette Rochelle-Levy, MFT
2215 Oak st. #201
Santa Monica, CA 90405
http://creativepathwithpaulette.com
310) 453-4053
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: David Abramis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 2:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 10/10/23 City Council Meeting

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members:

We support the posiƟon of the "Santa Monica Airport2Park FoundaƟon", namely that you need to remove the words "and development" from the airport land use plans.

We already voted on this and we expect to see the airport converted enƟrely into park land.

Thank you,
David Abramis and Iris Souza
2642 33rd St.

Santa Monica, CA 90405
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Brodsky, Michael <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 9:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Item 4: Close Session recommendations

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
Item 4.A. Do NOT renew leases on underground storage tanks at SMO.

Item 4.D. Do NOT settle this case.

Sincerely,
Michael Brodsky
Santa Monica
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Margaret Francesca Rosenthal <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 7:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport develpoment

EXTERNAL
I am wriƟng to oppose the development of the airport into housing. I approve the idea to convert the airport into a park.

Thank you,
Margaret Rosenthal
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: GC C2 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 8:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport Space & METRO filth
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE turn the Santa Monica Airport into a LARGE PUBLIC PARK that EVERYONE can enjoy.

The idea of building houses and homeless shelters is disgusting, and will ruin the city that is ALREADY BUILDING HOMELESS APARTMENTS in a parking lot, right next to the StM PIER, and this will DRIVE AWAY TOURISTS If you are trying to DESTROY SANTA MONICA< you are SUCCEEDING.

Also, what about the FILTH AND CRIME ON THE METRO LINE? How about building a final ENCLOSED BUILDING at End of Line, that NO ONE CAN LEAVE WITHOUT SHOWING A VALID TICKET
And that locks in people until they PAY for their transit.

I have never seen such filth, and was recently assaulted riding the Metro to the IMAX Theatre, And there is NO ONE ON THE TRAIN to protect passengers… A stupid sign says to CALL someone on the phone for emergencies ????? That is hardly useful when you are being assaulted, and robbers can see you calling? WHERE ARE THE SECURITY CAMERAS ON THESE TRAINS?
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: DAVID STILLER <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 10:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Lofty

EXTERNAL
I have been an airport, user, tenant, and pilot at Santa Monica Airport for over 40 years.

Airports are unique and require experience and knowledge to manage properly.

Please choose, come knowledgeable, and experienced people for these posiƟons Best wishes ,
Dave SƟller
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: John Murdock <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:41 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport

EXTERNAL
The proposal to spend $3,000,000 for a group of residents to study and debate the future of the airport property when the voters have already set the course is irresponsible and designed purposely to open the door to housing and other developments the voters have already rejected. We are told point blank that the city has insufficient funds for code enforcement in our neighborhood, yet staff is assuming that $3M is an acceptable expense for a useless, nonbinding exercise in confusion? Please be the adults in the city government and reject this out of hand.

John B. Murdock
1209 Pine Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
tel. (310) 450‐1859
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Mark SmithTV <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 1:02 PM
To: Gleam Davis; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport is not a football
Attachments: PastedGraphic-2.tiff

EXTERNAL
I am a contractor working for the City and with the City for over a decade.

City staff can’t not punch their way out of a paper bag.

We have lost our best staff members.

You can not create the future with uneducated ‐ have you seen the news in Israel?

1. There is no money to destroy an airport and build a park. No water.

2. The airport is the greatest asset for the future.

3. Development is not an option ‐ traffic is already too much.

Only option: Turn the airport into a fully electric airport by 2035.

Develop slowly and wisely.

Mark Smith
310 213 0790
http://duenorthproduction.com
Respect science, respect nature, respect each other.

ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: PNA90404 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 3:25 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; David White Subject: Agenda Item 4A

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Gleam Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Lana Negrete, City Councilors, David White and Staff.

Please say no to the lottery system, all Cities that have any of these departments or all are known to be Racist and the City of Santa Monica has all of these departments (listed Below) Adding the lottery system is just one more way the City of Santa Monica acknowledges they are a Racist City and will just continue as normal.

Please stop the Hateful Racist behavior.

Sincerely yours Cris McLeod Pico Neighborhood Resident.

Building safety dept
Planning dept
Code enforcement dept
Planning commission
Office of sustainability
Housing commission
Lottery system
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.A.

October 10, 2023

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 30
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6073 : 2772 Donald Douglas) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 4.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Conference with Real Estate Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Property: 2828 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California Offices and Pilot Lounge Premises (~5,300 sq. ft.), Corporate Hangar and Maintenance Shop (~6,450 sq. ft.), Aircraft Main Ramp (~145,000 sq. ft.), Aircraft Overflow Ramp (~32,000 sq. ft.); and 3100 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment; City Negotiator: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Atlantic SMO Holdings; under negotiation: terms for modified and extended lease. (continued from September 26)
Prepared By: Andrew Cabello, Legal Assistant
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

4.B
Packet Pg. 31
1 Xavier Mota
From: Betsy Katz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 12:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 4B

EXTERNAL
Dear Member of the Santa Monica City Council,
Please do not renew AtlanƟc AviaƟon’s lease at SMO. And for god’s sake DO NOT lease the aged fuel tanks that sit over our aquifer. The City is under no obligaƟon to lease these tanks that will hold leaded gas and threaten our precious water supply should they leak. They have leaked in the past. We are already suffering from toxic parƟcles in the air from the planes sƟll using leaded gas.

The City should be limiƟng, not increasing, operaƟons at SMO as 2028 approaches. The ciƟzens of Santa Monica passed measure LC that would close the airport and develop a Park.

The Council needs to listen to the voters, not the special interests.

Thank you.

Betsy Katz
3016 Ruskin Street
Santa Monica, CA
90405
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 32
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Joy Abbott <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 1:04 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B

EXTERNAL
Hello,
I am strongly opposed to the continuation of fuel storage and sales at Santa Monica Airport and ask Council do to right thing to protect the health and welfare of your constituents by supporting the end of the Atlantic leases for underground fuel storage, and not extending them.

Given my opposition, I am also concerned these Council is discussions regarding the Atlantic SMO lease are being held in CLOSED SESSION. If Council is considering extending or modifying the fuel sale lease with Atlantic and not end them, please allow the public the ability to hear this in open session.

I’m sure it would be illuminating for those of us who are concerned about the future of the Airport space and the health of our neighborhood.

Council ‐ please show your support for: 1) the health of Santa Monica Citizens 2) the close of the airport facilities, 3) open discussions and transparency, and most importantly 4) your support of Measure LC as passed without modifications.

Sincerely,
Joy Abbott
1745 Sunset Avenue
SM 90405
Sent from Mail for Windows
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Brenda Goodman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 1:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 4B

EXTERNAL
Hello
I understand that you are now considering not honoring what has already been set – to create a park at the airport.

This has been resolved.

And why are you meeting in secret.

This is not acceptable.

Brenda Goodman
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Jamie Dunham <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 1:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: John Gereau
Subject: Item 4B

EXTERNAL
Repeating prior message.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On M on, Sep 25, 2023 at 8:46 AM , Jam ie Dunham
<jdunham 13@ yahoo.com > wrote:

Please do NOT renew the Atlantic lease and do NOT lease fuel tanks.

We have voted on this measure before to turn the Santa Monica Airport into a PARK.

We live on the north east corner of the airport and have been patiently waiting its closure. To hear of closed door considerations to renew a lease from 8 years ago is disturbing ‐ as is any talk of creating housing instead of a park.

Thank you,
Jamie Dunham & John Gereau
2314 Pier Ave
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: JORDAN ELLIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 2:22 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B: Stop the lease

EXTERNAL
Do not grant Atlantic Aviation a lease to the Santa Monica Airport! It’s environmentally unsafe and against the will of the residents of Santa Monica.

Jordan Ellis
Santa Monica resident
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Karen Comegys-Wortz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 3:46 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council:

There seems to be an issue about what to do with the Santa Monica Airport.

CLOSE THE SANTA MONICA AIRPORT AND MAKE A PARK!!
The voters voted for a park.

Weren't you elected to follow that result?
You and the Planning Commission are overdeveloping our city.

STOP IT!
MAKE THE AIRPORT A PARK!
Thank You,
Karen Comegys Wortz
1725 Cedar Street
90405
[email protected]
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Asa Greenberg <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 4:15 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B

EXTERNAL
Hello!
As a Santa Monica resident, homeowner, and business owner, I write regarding the fuel tank lease for AtlanƟc AviaƟon and the fate of SMO in general. It is Ɵme to close the airport and terminate all related acƟviƟes ‐ including the lease. We live in a residenƟal area and the airport has long overstayed its welcome. This is no recreaƟonal airport per its original mandate. And the toxins in the air and noise are palpable.

Dust from fuel exhaust accumulates in large quanƟƟes on our windows and doors. Why are we storing and using these fuels and other chemicals here? Please do not allow this company to renew its lease.

Please hear us, it's Ɵme for the airport to end all commercial acƟvity and close its doors. Accordingly, the fuel tanks must go. All of my neighbors feel the same.

I hope the authoriƟes in Santa Monica will recognize that none of us want the airport here. Let's come up with a plan that is economically viable ‐‐ e.g., a plan to replace any jobs that may be in flux when the airport goes. But let's make sure the closure happens on schedule and all tanks and equipment are removed safely and ASAP.

Sincerely,
Asa Greenberg
2315 Pier Ave.

Santa Monica, CA 90405
‐‐
‐
Asa Greenberg
Kilogram Entertainment
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Ellen Hannan <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 4:18 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox
Subject: Close session on all airport leases need to be open sessions

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Member:

You and City Staff are aware of the health hazards and air quality effects of the airport uses on our community members. All leases need to be evaluated in a public session before any private sessions for contracts. Leases must clearly state the responsibility of the city and the business for any health hazards that may occur and who is responsible for any damages to the City and residents or visitors to the airport area.

Ellen Hannan PHN
1219 9th St #6
Santa Monica CA 90401
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Michael Katz <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 6:10 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B

EXTERNAL
WTF? Please do not renew the $%#^& AtlanƟc lease on potenƟally calamitous leaking fuel tanks at SM0. This creaky old leaking fuel farm is contaminaƟng Santa Monica's aquifer . Santa Monica voters have spoken on Airport maƩers many Ɵmes, overwhelming in favor of CLOSING THE AIRPORT and stopping airport operaƟons ASAP. The Council needs to listen to the voters, not the special interests.

Michael Katz
3016 Ruskin Street
SM 90405
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: D F <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 6:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Concerns Item 4B

EXTERNAL
How dare the city ignore the voices of the people who live in the Ocean Park sunset park destrucƟve Santa Monica. We are the residents supposed affected by the conƟnue use and dangers of Santa Monica airport. We now have the opportunity to change the outcome of our city and add more open space that is desperately needed due to populaƟon density. Do not have this land be built for airport use or fuel storage.

How dare the city ignore the voices of the people who live in the Ocean Park sunset park district of Santa Monica. We are the residents both affected by the conƟnued use and dangers of Santa Monica airport. We now have the opportunity to change the outcome of our city and add more open space that is desperately needed due to populaƟon density. Do not have this land be built for airport use or fuel storage.

Dee Forrest
Santa Monica resident of 35 years
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Paulette Rochelle-Levy <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 9:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Airport2Park; NoJets
Subject: the people have spoken.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 11:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David White; Stelios Makrides
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: FOSP: City Council 10/10/23 item 4-B -- Atlantic Aviation lease -- OPPOSE!

EXTERNAL
Reminder -- There were 88 pages of Written Comments in the September 26 agenda opposing the Atlantic lease, including the one from the FOSP Board below.

Meanwhile, a bit more information about the history of contamination of the City of Santa Monica's water wells from underground fuel storage tanks:

Cal/EPA MtBE Project - 1998 - https://semspub.epa.gov/work/09/100002821.pdf-- 7 Santa Monica wells have been contaminated with MtBE.

The State of California requires that all underground storage tanks installed before 1984 be removed, replaced, or upgraded.

"Santa Monica Deal with Mobil Expected on [Arcadia] Well Cleanup" 3/17/1998 -- Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-mar-17-me-29819-story.html

"MtBE Still Fouls Half of California City's Water" (Santa Monica) 7/4/2004 -- Baltimore Sun
Baltimore Sun
https://www.baltimoresun.com › news › bs-xpm-2004-...

"So by mid-1996, Santa Monica shut down its Charnock well field, and two wells elsewhere that also showed evidence of MTBE contamination...."

"City and Oil Companies to Cash Out Charnock Water Plant" 12/14/2006 -- Santa Monica Mirror
https://smmirror.com/2006/12/city-and-oil-companies-to-cash-out-charnock-water-plant/ "The City of Santa Monica has reached agreement with a consortium of oil companies that is designed to streamline construction of a new water treatment system necessitated by the contamination of the City’s drinking water by gasoline additives. Shell, Chevron, and ExxonMobil, who were already obligated to pay for a water treatment facility under the terms of a 2003 settlement agreement, have agreed to pay the City the liquidated sum of $131 million rather than continue to foot the bill for design and construction costs.

The City says this amount will allow it to construct a water treatment plant for water produced from the City’s Charnock Well Field, to pay for replacement water until the plant begins its operations and to maintain and monitor regional test wells and to perform other related tasks. Since 1996, Santa Monica drinking water has been imported from the Metropolitan Water District...." ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 2 "MtBE Settlement Agreement Reached with Attorneys"
3/13/2008 -- Santa Monica Mirror
https://smmirror.com/2008/03/mtbe-settlement-agreement-reached-with-attorneys/ "The City of Santa Monica on Tuesday, March 11, approved an agreement to settle its fee dispute with the contingency attorneys who assisted the City in its MtBE water contamination lawsuit.

The settlement agreement with Baron & Budd, P.C., Miller, Sher & Sawyer, Miller & Sawyer, Miller, Axline & Sawyer, Sher Leff LLP, Cooper & Scully, P.C., Frederick M. Baron, Scott Summy, Victor M. Sher, Duane C. Miller, and A. Curtis Sawyer, Jr. resolves all outstanding and potential claims and disputes. The City agrees to pay the lawyers $55 million.....

The settlement represents 22% of the $250 million total recovery the City received from Shell, ChevronTexaco, ExxonMobil, and other companies which the City sued in 2000 for contaminating the city’s water with the gasoline additive Methyl Tertiary-Butyl Ether (MtBE). Because of contamination, the City lost the use of much of its drinking water and since 1996 has been importing water from the Metropolitan Water District...."
CEQA in 2008: Charnock Well Field Restoration Project -- https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2008031109/2 -- The project involves implementation of a water treatment system and other improvements that would help to remove groundwater contamination from the Charnock groundwater sub-basin and restore this resource as a water supply for the City of Santa Monica (City). As part of the project upgrades, improvements will be required at two existing City-operated water service facilities. The City is planning to return the Charnock groundwater wells to full production using a well head treatment system to be constructed at the Charnock well field. The treatment system will use filtration with granular activated carbon (GAC) to treat water from the three contaminated wells at the well field. The treated water will be pumped to the Santa Monica Water Treatment Plant for the final treatment and distribution. Water treatment improvements are also proposed for the Santa Monica Water Treatment Plant including water disinfection and water softening. Improvements for the SMWTP may include two salt water wells, as part of a water softening treatment system, that would replace existing salt water wells located on Santa Monica beach."

To: Mayor Davis and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 9/26/23 agenda item 3-D: Lease agreement with Atlantic Aviation Agenda: https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1379

The FOSP Board opposes this lease agreement.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 3 The lease of city property to Atlantic Aviation would include 40-year-old underground fuel tanks, sitting above our aquifer, which are used to store leaded and toxic aviation fuels.

(California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment)

Atlantic Aviation has been operating without a lease since 2015.

For years, residents and the Airport Commission have lobbied the city and the City Council to not continue leasing these old underground tanks, which have leaked in the past.

Have you forgotten the leaks from underground tanks at gas stations which contaminated the city's Charnock wells some years ago?

https://www.epa.gov/archive/epapages/newsroom_archive/newsreleases/5a790d8bf1a74361852570d80 05e16fc.html

The city is not required to lease these tanks by the consent decree or by any agreement with the FAA.

We have never received a clear answer from staff as to why the city would put our aquifer at risk in this way, when providing tanks to Atlantic is not required.

Furthermore, the Airport Commission was not given a "heads up" regarding this lease renewal [before it appeared on the September 26 Council agenda], even though the Airport staff had promised to keep them informed.

Again, the FOSP Board opposes this lease agreement with Atlantic Aviation.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2023 11:52 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David White; Stelios Makrides
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: FOSP: City Council 10/10/23 item 4-B -- Atlantic Aviation lease -- OPPOSE!

EXTERNAL
(There was a glitch in the previous email.)

Reminder -- There were 88 pages of Written Comments in the September 26 agenda opposing the Atlantic lease, including the one from the FOSP Board below.

Meanwhile, a bit more information about the history of contamination of the City of Santa Monica's water wells from underground fuel storage tanks:

Cal/EPA MtBE Project - 1998 - https://semspub.epa.gov/work/09/100002821.pdf-- 7 Santa Monica wells have been contaminated with MtBE. The State of California requires that all underground storage tanks installed before 1984 be removed, replaced, or upgraded. "Santa Monica Deal with Mobil Expected on [Arcadia] Well Cleanup" 3/17/1998 -- Los Angeles Times
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-mar-17-me-29819-story.html "MtBE Still Fouls Half of California City's Water" (Santa Monica) 7/4/2004 -- Baltimore Sun
https://www.baltimoresun.com
"So by mid-1996, Santa Monica shut down its Charnock well field and two wells elsewhere that also showed evidence of MTBE contamination...."
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 2 "City and Oil Companies to Cash Out Charnock Water Plant" 12/14/2006 -- Santa Monica Mirror
https://smmirror.com/2006/12/city-and-oil-companies-to-cash-out-charnock-water-plant/ "The City of Santa Monica has reached agreement with a consortium of oil companies that is designed to streamline construction of a new water treatment system necessitated by the contamination of the City’s drinking water by gasoline additives. Shell, Chevron, and ExxonMobil, who were already obligated to pay for a water treatment facility under the terms of a 2003 settlement agreement, have agreed to pay the City the liquidated sum of $131 million rather than continue to foot the bill for design and construction costs.

"MtBE Settlement Agreement Reached with Attorneys"
3/13/2008 -- Santa Monica Mirror
https://smmirror.com/2008/03/mtbe-settlement-agreement-reached-with-attorneys/ "The City of Santa Monica on Tuesday, March 11, approved an agreement to settle its fee dispute with the contingency attorneys who assisted the City in its MtBE water contamination lawsuit.

Miller, and A. Curtis Sawyer, Jr. resolves all outstanding and potential claims and disputes. The City agrees to pay the lawyers $55 million.....

CEQA in 2008: Charnock Well Field Restoration Project -- https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2008031109/2 -- The project involves implementation of a water treatment system and other improvements that would help to remove groundwater contamination from the Charnock groundwater sub-basin and restore this resource as a water supply for the City of Santa Monica (City). As part of the project upgrades, improvements will be required at two existing City-operated water service facilities. The City is planning to return the Charnock groundwater wells to full production using a well head treatment system to be constructed at the Charnock well field.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 3 The treatment system will use filtration with granular activated carbon (GAC) to treat water from the three contaminated wells at the well field. The treated water will be pumped to the Santa Monica Water Treatment Plant for the final treatment and distribution. Water treatment improvements are also proposed for the Santa Monica Water Treatment Plant including water disinfection and water softening. Improvements for the SMWTP may include two salt water wells, as part of a water softening treatment system, that would replace existing salt water wells located on Santa Monica beach."

12 years before the city started cleaning up the contaminated water wells.

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Sent: 9/26/2023 10:54:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Subject: FOSP: City Council 9/26/23 item 3-D -- Atlantic Aviation lease -- OPPOSE! September 24, 2023
To: Mayor Davis and City Council members
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 9/26/23 agenda item 3-D: Lease agreement with Atlantic Aviation Agenda: https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Meeting.aspx?ID=1379 The FOSP Board opposes this lease agreement.

The lease of city property to Atlantic Aviation would include 40-year-old underground fuel tanks, sitting above our aquifer, which are used to store leaded and toxic aviation fuels. (California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment)
Atlantic Aviation has been operating without a lease since 2015.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 4 For years, residents and the Airport Commission have lobbied the city and the City Council to not continue leasing these old underground tanks, which have leaked in the past.

Have you forgotten the leaks from underground tanks at gas stations which contaminated the city's Charnock wells some years ago?
https://www.epa.gov/archive/epapages/newsroom_archive/newsreleases/5a790d8bf1a74361852570d8005e16fc. html
The city is not required to lease these tanks by the consent decree or by any agreement with the FAA.

We have never received a clear answer from staff as to why the city would put our aquifer at risk in this way, when providing tanks to Atlantic is not required.

Again, the FOSP Board opposes this lease agreement with Atlantic Aviation.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Kirsten Campisi <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2023 11:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 4B

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Do Not renew the AtlanƟc AviaƟon lease and Do Not lease the fuel tanks. Do not potenƟally put resident’s drinking water and health at risk. You work for and represent the residents of Santa Monica, and we Do Not want this.

Kirsten Campisi
1352 Hill St.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2023 12:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David White; Stelios Makrides
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: City Council 10/10/23 item 4-B: Atlantic SMO Holdings lease - OPPOSE!

EXTERNAL
October 8, 2023
Dear City Council members,
Regarding October 10, 2023 agenda item 4-B: 2828 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California Offices and Pilot Lounge Premises (~5,300 sq. ft.), Corporate Hangar and Maintenance Shop (~6,450 sq. ft.), Aircraft Main Ramp (~145,000 sq. ft.), Aircraft Overflow Ramp (~32,000 sq. ft.); and 3100 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment; City Negotiator: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Atlantic SMO Holdings; under negotiation: terms for modified and extended lease. (continued from September 26)
I oppose the extended lease of underground storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport to Atlantic SMO Holdings.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 2 “New Study Reveals Fault Zone off Santa Monica Coast Could Cause Up to 7.8 Magnitude Earthquake”-- (map)
9/29/2022 – Santa Monica Daily Press
https://smdp.com/2022/09/29/new-study-reveals-fault-zone-off-santa-monica-coast-could-cause-up-to-7-8- magnitude-earthquake/

“A fault zone off the Santa Monica coast could result in a larger, higher magnitude earthquake than previously thought according to a new study. Instead of a 7.4 magnitude earthquake, which is already considered severe, scientists now say the fault system is capable of triggering up to a 7.8 quake. While the difference may not seem major, it is an increase of close to four times the amount of energy being released, according to calculations by the United States Geological Survey.

Adding, “The Santa Monica Bay segment and RCFZ (Redondo Canyon Fault Zone) should be considered as active seismic sources capable of moderate-to-large magnitude earthquake events that would directly impact the metropolitan Los Angeles area.”
The study also suggests that the Palos Verdes fault has a faster slip rate than other active fault zones in LA county, meaning that more energy is being generated and stored to eventually be released in the form of an earthquake. Such an earthquake would cause mass damage and destruction and could also result in tsunamis in the Santa Monica area….”
************************************************************************** Opinion: “Preparing for the Best Case Scenario: The City of Santa Monica Involvement in the Storage and Sale of Leaded Avgas” – Dr.Charles Blum 11/15/2021 – Santa Monica Daily Press
https://smdp.com/2021/11/15/preparing-for-the-best-case-scenario-the-city-of-santa-monicas-involvement-inthe-storage-and-sale-of-leaded-avgas/ Excerpt: “One aspect of earthquakes and fuel storage is the possible leaks and adverse effects to our aquifers, which are our main sources of water. Contaminated aquifers can affect water availability and subsequent health issues for decades or even centuries. A study by the EPA investigating lead emissions from piston-engine aircraft using leaded aviation gasoline noted that ethylene dibromide may “enter underground aquifers via leaking underground storage tanks or fuel spills. Studies demonstrate that ethylene dibromide may persist for long periods of time in certain groundwater environments.” “As discussed in a prior article in the Santa Monica Daily Press entitled, “Santa Monica Airport (SMO), Leaded Avgas, and Childhood Blood Lead Levels: Profound Pediatric Health Consequences,” what is clear is that:

1. Avgas is the largest source of lead in air in the United States.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 3 2. SMO sells leaded avgas and allows aircraft using leaded avgas into its airport.

3. Blood lead levels in our children near the airport have profound and drastic short and long-term health consequences.” What is not commonly known is that the City of Santa Monica is facilitating and promoting the sale of leaded AvGas at SMO. The common facade the city has hid behind is something called the Consent Decree, which represents an agreement between the City of Santa Monica and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) made in 2017. Part of this agreement states that. “Nothing in this agreement shall allow the City to restrict the sale of leaded aviation fuel for as long as the FAA authorizes use of such fuels within the United States.” However, Alan Levenson (Founder of No Jets and Environmental Activist) and other Activists who have researched our agreements note that while the city cannot restrict the sale of leaded fuel nothing in the agreement states that the City of Santa Monica must sell leaded AvGas or provide tanks for lease to sell this toxic fuel. Though the City of Santa Monica should do everything possible to stop the sale of leaded AvGas at SMO the consent decree still permits other private agencies such as Atlantic Aviation to sell leaded AvGas at SMO. Therefore the fuel storage tanks owned by the City of Santa Monica can be restricted to only the sale of unleaded AvGas and 80% of the SMO fleet can use this unleaded fuel.

Seldom is it an issue to prepare for the “Best Case Scenario,” so it is crucial to consider how to best consider the risks associated with the storage of fuel underground at SMO. We really don’t get any advance warning when an earthquake might take place and Environmental Protection Agencies note that “following a substantial earthquake it is important to examine all underground storage tank (UST) systems for damage. A damaged or improperly operating UST system can pose a significant risk to human health, safety, and the environment.” In fact the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cautions that “natural disasters – such as tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and fires – are often unpredictable, cause significant damage, and can be costly to mitigate. Underground storage tank (UST) systems can be vulnerable to damage during natural disasters and can even release regulated substances into the environment.” California is particularly susceptible to earthquakes and fuel storage accidents as witnessed in San Francisco in 2019 and Los Angeles in 2015. Given the problems at underground gas storage facilities, a 2014 United States study by the National Agricultural and Rural Development Policy Centre determined that “… underground natural gas storage activities bear risks that are substantial enough to affect nearby residents, and that these impacts are more severe in proximity, concentration, and for properties without access to public water.” One aspect of earthquakes and fuel storage is the possible leaks and adverse effects to our aquifers, which are our main sources of water. Contaminated aquifers can affect water availability and subsequent health issues for decades or even centuries. A study by the EPA investigating lead emissions from piston-engine aircraft using leaded aviation gasoline noted that ethylene dibromide may “enter underground aquifers via leaking underground storage tanks or fuel spills.

Studies demonstrate that ethylene dibromide may persist for long periods of time in certain groundwater environments.

Due to the seriousness of this possible environmental emergency the EPA Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) and Office of Research and Development’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL) in association with the Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ATSWMO) have formed a team to evaluate the potential for public health and welfare effects attributable to ethylene dibromide from past or present fuel leaks and spills.

These agencies found that “water samples for this study were provided by State agencies to EPA between October 2005 and July 2007. Of the 802 groundwater samples provided from 102 sites, ethylene dibromide was detected in 54 samples, 43 of which had ethylene dibromide concentrations above the Maximum Concentration Level.” It is important to note that could have been much worse since these sites did not include the analysis of groundwater at airports.

But the City of Santa Monica might ask are we immune from issues of fuel storage leaks? A review of the recent past, suggests otherwise. For instance, a spill in the Charnock Sub-Basin led the EPA to investigate the cleanup of methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), a gasoline additive, from a groundwater basin formerly used for drinking water by the City of Santa Monica, California.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 4 Another illustration is the extensive clean-up of drinking water contamination needed at Santa Monica’s Olympic Well field, where an aquifer is located that underlies Olympic Boulevard and surrounding areas in the eastern part of the City, and represents the City’s second largest groundwater supply.

A story in the Daily Press said “Contamination in Santa Monica has come from several sources. Locations of suspected and known soil and water contamination are tracked and cataloged by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), a department of the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Leaking underground storage tanks of petroleum and other chemicals have allowed pollutants to seep into the soil and water in some parts of the Santa Monica Basin. Some sites are actively leaking or are in the process of being tested.”
The primary groundwater producing areas for the Silverado aquifer are the City of Santa Monica’s Olympic and Charnock Wellfields. At the west, the Santa Monica Airport also has a well, that feeds into the aquifer and the yields are approximately 300 gallons per minute. So, safety is an important concern with leaded or even unleaded AvGas fuel underground storage and sale in and around SMO since there is a well at SMO that feeds into the Silverado aquifer.

Since lead in AvGas is one of the largest air and soil contaminant source in our environment the City of Santa Monica should immediately stop their sale of this toxic fuel. However it should also consider stopping their involvement with the storage of fuel underground at SMO. When we consider the health of our citizens and environment the risk of storing fuel that could lead to health risks affecting our aquifers warrants our serious attention.

As SMO and the City of Santa Monica are preparing to close the airport by 2029, according to the consent decree, it only makes sense that the city should stop the sale of leaded AvGas and eliminate the City’s storage of underground AvGas Fuel. The consent decree allows other private agencies, other than the city, within SMO to store and sell AvGas fuel. This solution insulates the city from liability due to conceivable class action suits against the city for the sale of leaded AvGas and its social health consequences and eliminates the risk associated with underground fuel storage leaks.”
Thank you for your consideration.

Zina Josephs
Sunset Park resident
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: ALICE ELLIS <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2023 4:48 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council members,
I can not believe the City of Santa Monica is even considering renewing the leases for Atlantic Aviation and the fuel tanks.

We are not required to lease these tanks under any agreement with the FAA or the consent decree. Do not put our aquifer at risk by providing tanks to Atlantic when it is not required.

We, the people, voted down measure D, and passed measure LC to close the airport and develop a park with the land residents purchased with a vote in 1926 to be used for a park. You need to start the process of transforming the Santa Monica Airport into a Great Park ‐ NOT renew these leases!
Thank you,
Alice Ellis
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: JOHN VENTURA <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2023 8:38 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
In your consideration to renew leasing city property to Atlantic Aviation, including 40yr. old underground fuel tanks that store leaded and toxic fuels that sit over our aquifer, I would like to voice my opposition to a lease renewal. Please do not renew the Atlantic lease and do not lease the fuel tanks.

It has been reported that Atlantic Aviation is operating without a lease since 2015. Residents and the Airport Commission have lobbied the city and the city council for years to not lease the tanks that have leaked in the past. We are not required to lease these tanks under any agreement with the FAA or the consent decree and have never received a clear answer regarding why the city would put our aquifer at risk if providing tanks to Atlantic is not required.

We, the people, voted down measure D, and passed measure LC to close the airport and develop a park with the land residents purchased with a vote in 1926 to be used for a park; residents did not purchase the land for an airport or a housing development. Maybe some in politics would like to ignore the vote of the people and re‐open the discussion regarding the airport as if the votes in 1926 and 2014 never happened. Consider the fact that since LC has passed the city has not applied for any state or federal grant money for the park or done much of anything to plan it in the last nine years. Please do not ignore the votes of the people.

Thank you,
John Ventura
City Resident
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Jeanne Laurie <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2023 10:31 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; David White; Stelios Makrides
Subject: City Council 10/10/23 item 4-B: Atlantic SMO Holdings lease - OPPOSE!

EXTERNAL
I couldn’t possibly say it any better that Zina Josephs has.

Please OPPOSE.

Jeanne Laurie
Sunset Park
Sent from Mail for Windows
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, October 8, 2023 12:59 PM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Fwd: City Council 10/10/23 item 4‐B: Atlantic SMO Holdings lease ‐ OPPOSE!

Just FYI (sent on my own behalf):

From: [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Cc: [email protected]
Sent: 10/8/2023 12:51:21 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Subject: City Council 10/10/23 item 4-B: Atlantic SMO Holdings lease - OPPOSE! October 8, 2023
Dear City Council members,
Regarding October 10, 2023 agenda item 4-B: 2828 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California Offices and Pilot Lounge Premises (~5,300 sq. ft.), Corporate Hangar and Maintenance Shop (~6,450 sq. ft.), Aircraft Main Ramp (~145,000 sq. ft.), Aircraft Overflow Ramp (~32,000 sq. ft.); and 3100 Donald Douglas Loop North, Santa Monica, California “Fuel Farm” (~3,800 sq. ft.) consisting of ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 57
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 2 three 12,000 gallon and one 500 gallon underground storage tanks and associated systems and equipment; City Negotiator: Stelios Makrides, Chief Operations Officer/Airport Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Atlantic SMO Holdings; under negotiation: terms for modified and extended lease. (continued from September 26) I oppose the extended lease of underground storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport to Atlantic SMO Holdings.

According to the July 2023 Fuel Flowage Report at the 7/24/23 Airport Commission meeting, from July 2021 to June 2023, Atlantic delivered 842,553 gallons of Jet A fuel and 250,780 gallons of 100LL Avgas.
https://www.smgov.net/Departments/Airport/Commission/default.aspx?folder=20230724#reports Meanwhile, there appears to be a newly-identified earthquake fault line running under Santa Monica, which makes using underground fuel storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport even more problematic. “New Study Reveals Fault Zone off Santa Monica Coast Could Cause Up to 7.8 Magnitude Earthquake”‐‐ (map)
9/29/2022 – Santa Monica Daily Press
https://smdp.com/2022/09/29/new-study-reveals-fault-zone-off-santa-monica-coast-could-cause-up-to7-8-magnitude-earthquake/

Dubbed the Palos Verde fault zone (PVFZ), the network runs close to 70 miles from the Santa Monica Bay, south down the coast, under the Palos Verdes peninsula and out into the ocean off of Dana Point. Scientists say this new knowledge reveals the potential for an earthquake more destructive than both the 2019 Ridgecrest quake and the 1994 Northridge earthquake, which caused significant damage in Santa Monica…. “The sizes of these segments indicate that PVFZ is capable of larger events than previously reported,” the study says. Adding, “The Santa Monica Bay segment and RCFZ (Redondo Canyon Fault Zone) should be considered as active seismic sources capable of moderate-to-large magnitude earthquake events that would directly impact the metropolitan Los Angeles area.”
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 58
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 3 The study also suggests that the Palos Verdes fault has a faster slip rate than other active fault zones in LA county, meaning that more energy is being generated and stored to eventually be released in the form of an earthquake. Such an earthquake would cause mass damage and destruction and could also result in tsunamis in the Santa Monica area….”
************************************************************************** Opinion: “Preparing for the Best Case Scenario: The City of Santa Monica Involvement in the Storage and Sale of Leaded Avgas” – Dr.Charles Blum 11/15/2021 – Santa Monica Daily Press
https://smdp.com/2021/11/15/preparing-for-the-best-case-scenario-the-city-of-santa-monicasinvolvement-in-the-storage-and-sale-of-leaded-avgas/ Excerpt: “One aspect of earthquakes and fuel storage is the possible leaks and adverse effects to our aquifers, which are our main sources of water. Contaminated aquifers can affect water availability and subsequent health issues for decades or even centuries. A study by the EPA investigating lead emissions from piston-engine aircraft using leaded aviation gasoline noted that ethylene dibromide may “enter underground aquifers via leaking underground storage tanks or fuel spills.

Studies demonstrate that ethylene dibromide may persist for long periods of time in certain groundwater environments.”
“As discussed in a prior article in the Santa Monica Daily Press entitled, “Santa Monica Airport (SMO), Leaded Avgas, and Childhood Blood Lead Levels: Profound Pediatric Health Consequences,” what is clear is that:

1. Avgas is the largest source of lead in air in the United States.

2. SMO sells leaded avgas and allows aircraft using leaded avgas into its airport.

3. Blood lead levels in our children near the airport have profound and drastic short and long-term health consequences.”
What is not commonly known is that the City of Santa Monica is facilitating and promoting the sale of leaded AvGas at SMO. The common facade the city has hid behind is something called the Consent Decree, which represents an agreement between the City of Santa Monica and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) made in 2017. Part of this agreement states that. “Nothing in this agreement shall allow the City to restrict the sale of leaded aviation fuel for as long as the FAA authorizes use of such fuels within the United States.” However, Alan Levenson (Founder of No Jets and Environmental Activist) and other Activists who have researched our agreements note that while the city cannot restrict the sale of leaded fuel nothing in the agreement states that the City of Santa Monica must sell leaded AvGas or provide tanks for lease to sell this toxic fuel. Though the City of Santa Monica should do everything possible to stop the sale of leaded AvGas at SMO the consent decree still permits other private agencies such as Atlantic Aviation to sell leaded AvGas at SMO. Therefore the fuel storage tanks owned by the City of Santa Monica can be restricted to only the sale of unleaded AvGas and 80% of the SMO fleet can use this unleaded fuel.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 59
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 4 In fact the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cautions that “natural disasters – such as tornadoes, hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and fires – are often unpredictable, cause significant damage, and can be costly to mitigate. Underground storage tank (UST) systems can be vulnerable to damage during natural disasters and can even release regulated substances into the environment.” California is particularly susceptible to earthquakes and fuel storage accidents as witnessed in San Francisco in 2019 and Los Angeles in 2015. Given the problems at underground gas storage facilities, a 2014 United States study by the National Agricultural and Rural Development Policy Centre determined that “… underground natural gas storage activities bear risks that are substantial enough to affect nearby residents, and that these impacts are more severe in proximity, concentration, and for properties without access to public water.” One aspect of earthquakes and fuel storage is the possible leaks and adverse effects to our aquifers, which are our main sources of water. Contaminated aquifers can affect water availability and subsequent health issues for decades or even centuries. A study by the EPA investigating lead emissions from piston-engine aircraft using leaded aviation gasoline noted that ethylene dibromide may “enter underground aquifers via leaking underground storage tanks or fuel spills. Studies demonstrate that ethylene dibromide may persist for long periods of time in certain groundwater environments.

Another illustration is the extensive clean-up of drinking water contamination needed at Santa Monica’s Olympic Well field, where an aquifer is located that underlies Olympic Boulevard and surrounding areas in the eastern part of the City, and represents the City’s second largest groundwater supply.

A story in the Daily Press said “Contamination in Santa Monica has come from several sources. Locations of suspected and known soil and water contamination are tracked and cataloged by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), a department of the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), and by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Leaking underground storage tanks of petroleum and other chemicals have allowed pollutants to seep into the soil and water in some parts of the Santa Monica Basin. Some sites are actively leaking or are in the process of being tested.” The primary groundwater producing areas for the Silverado aquifer are the City of Santa Monica’s Olympic and Charnock Wellfields. At the west, the Santa Monica Airport also has a well, that feeds into the aquifer and the yields are approximately 300 gallons per minute. So, safety is an important concern with leaded or even unleaded AvGas fuel underground storage and sale in and around SMO since there is a well at SMO that feeds into the Silverado aquifer.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 5 environment the risk of storing fuel that could lead to health risks affecting our aquifers warrants our serious attention.

Zina Josephs
Sunset Park resident
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Famili, Anita <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 11:22 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 4B

EXTERNAL
Hello,
I am writing you as a Santa Monica resident and homeowner for the last 14 years. I am VERY concerned about the City entering into the Atlantic lease and the lease of the old fuel farm. Please do NOT SUPPORT those leases.

Thank you,
Anita Famili
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: David Abramis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 2:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 10/10/23 City Council Meeting

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members:

We support the posiƟon of the "Santa Monica Airport2Park FoundaƟon", namely that you need to remove the words "and development" from the airport land use plans.

We already voted on this and we expect to see the airport converted enƟrely into park land.

Thank you,
David Abramis and Iris Souza
2642 33rd St.

Santa Monica, CA 90405
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 63
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Ben <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 1:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Jesse Zwick
Subject: SMO: SMCC Agenda Item 4B October 10, 2023 -- No Atlantic Aviation Lease

EXTERNAL
RE: SMO: SMCC Agenda Item 4B October 10, 2023 -- Atlantic Aviation Lease Dear Mayor and City Council:

Please don't sign a lease with Atlantic Aviation, and definitely don't lease the tanks.

SMO will close in only 62 months per the 2017 Consent Decree and the 2017 City Council SMO Closure Resolution No. 11026 which states, “The City Council directs the City Manager, City Attorney and their staffs to take all actions necessary and proper to ensure that SMO will cease to operate as an airport and shall be closed to all aeronautical use forever effective as of midnight on December 31, 2028.”
The SMO fuel farm and underground storage tanks are far past their life expectancy and should be decommissioned now. Additionally, the City is NOT required to lease tanks. And there is little-to-no financial benefit to the City for leasing the tanks.

Thank you,
Ben Wang
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Ben <[email protected]>
To: Ben W <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 1, 2023 at 08:29:34 AM PDT
Subject: Fw: SMO: SMCC Agenda Item 3D September 26, 2023 = April 12, 2022 -- City Council Meeting Agenda Item

1.G -- Petition to Santa Monica City Council
SMO will close in 80 months, per both the 2017 Consent Decree and the 2017 City Council SMO Closure Resolution No. 11026 which states, “The City Council directs the City Manager, City Attorney and their staffs to take all actions necessary and proper to ensure that SMO will cease to operate as an airport and shall be closed to all aeronautical use forever effective as of midnight on December 31, 2028.” The SMO fuel farm and underground storage tanks are far past their life expectancy and should be decommissioned now.

Additionally the City is NOT required to lease tanks. And there is little-to-no financial benefit to the City for leasing the tanks.

Begin forwarded message:

On Sunday, September 24, 2023, 10:30 AM, Ben <[email protected]> wrote:

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 64
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 2 Dear Santa Monica City Council, please see the email below related to SMCC Agenda Item 3 on September 26, 2023.

On Tuesday, April 12, 2022, 10:05 AM, Ben <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Santa Monica City Council:

The attached Petition from over 220+ community members is respectfully submitted for your consideration for the April 12, 2022 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 1.G.
“We, the undersigned, urge the City Council to decommission the 37- year-old City-owned underground storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport and to stop leasing them to store leaded and other toxic fuels.”
SMO will close in 80 months, per both the 2017 Consent Decree and the 2017 City Council SMO Closure Resolution No. 11026 which states, “The City Council directs the City Manager, City Attorney and their staffs to take all actions necessary and proper to ensure that SMO will cease to operate as an airport and shall be closed to all aeronautical use forever effective as of midnight on December 31, 2028.” The SMO fuel farm and underground storage tanks are a huge present danger and risk. They are far past their life expectancy and should be decommissioned now.

You may receive the petition from others as well. For your convenience, I have also pasted it below in the text of this email
Thank you,
Ben Wang
===============
Petition to Santa Monica City Council
April 12, 2022
City Council Meeting
Agenda Item 1.G
“We, the undersigned, urge the City Council to decommission the 37-yearold City-owned underground storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport and to stop leasing them to store leaded and other toxic fuels.” Below are the names, timestamp, and additional comments submitted by over 220+ petition signers:

Alan Levenson -- 4/9/2022 11:20
Billy Nistico -- 4/9/2022 13:44
Theo Swerissen -- 4/9/2022 13:45
John Campisi -- 4/9/2022 13:46
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 65
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 3 Asa Greenberg -- 4/9/2022 13:46
Katherine Newmark -- 4/9/2022 13:48
Ellen Mark -- 4/9/2022 13:48
Gregg Cahdwick -- 4/9/2022 13:49
Simona Garon -- 4/9/2022 13:50
Gavin Scott -- 4/9/2022 13:50
James Murakami -- 4/9/2022 13:52
Jonny Pray -- 4/9/2022 13:53
Yvonne Guy -- 4/9/2022 13:54
Will Guston -- 4/9/2022 13:56
Sejon Ding -- 4/9/2022 13:57
Sulinh Lafontaine -- 4/9/2022 13:57
Guy Cass -- 4/9/2022 13:58
Kent Alves -- 4/9/2022 13:58
Ross Berryman -- 4/9/2022 14:00
Patricia Braun -- 4/9/2022 14:00
Gary Glickman -- 4/9/2022 14:03
Jan Simonovic -- 4/9/2022 14:03
Jill Rosen -- 4/9/2022 14:03
Katherine Inglis -- 4/9/2022 14:05
Benjamin Shore -- 4/9/2022 14:08
John Greenwood -- 4/9/2022 14:08
tom krumpak -- 4/9/2022 14:10
William N. Fordes -- 4/9/2022 14:10
Darcy Lubbers -- 4/9/2022 14:12
David Abramis -- 4/9/2022 14:15
Chuck Mason -- 4/9/2022 14:18
Zina Josephs -- 4/9/2022 14:20
Robb Brown -- 4/9/2022 14:20
Jan-Peter Flack -- 4/9/2022 14:24
Nicola Scott -- 4/9/2022 14:29
Edward Luci -- 4/9/2022 14:33
David Konell -- 4/9/2022 14:33
Jeff Treves -- 4/9/2022 14:37
Jennifer Field -- 4/9/2022 14:38
Doug Wolf -- 4/9/2022 14:38
Alvin Crown -- 4/9/2022 14:39
Maureen Bradford -- 4/9/2022 14:45
Marion Klein -- 4/9/2022 14:48
Jesse Kramer -- 4/9/2022 14:59
Lori Nafshun -- 4/9/2022 15:02
Nan Waldman -- 4/9/2022 15:08
Joseph Lutz -- 4/9/2022 15:15
Zuzana Landres -- 4/9/2022 15:29
Dorothy Chapman -- 4/9/2022 15:30
Ose Dalldorf -- 4/9/2022 15:34
Stephan Hewitt -- 4/9/2022 15:38
Chris Lee -- 4/9/2022 15:42
Jamie Dunham -- 4/9/2022 15:46
Lauren wallenstein -- 4/9/2022 15:48
LOU SSUTU -- 4/9/2022 15:57
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 4 David Ginsburg -- 4/9/2022 16:00
Erika Soja -- 4/9/2022 16:18
Marsha Nakashima -- 4/9/2022 16:21
David Sirh -- 4/9/2022 16:26
Andrea Lieberman -- 4/9/2022 16:45
Laurie Rocha -- 4/9/2022 16:57
Andrea Maitra -- 4/9/2022 17:04
Deborah Rothman -- 4/9/2022 17:06
Brian Kelly -- 4/9/2022 17:09
Betsy Katz -- 4/9/2022 17:25
Deborah Travis -- 4/9/2022 17:34
Ann Lewis -- 4/9/2022 17:39
Socorro Gallegos -- 4/9/2022 18:02
Mia Levenson -- 4/9/2022 18:03
Charles Bloomquist -- 4/9/2022 18:07
Jo Winston -- 4/9/2022 18:27
Joseph Schmitz -- 4/9/2022 18:34
Elin Katz -- 4/9/2022 18:36
Joan Schmitz -- 4/9/2022 18:42
Caroline Denyer -- 4/9/2022 18:55
Michael Brodsky -- 4/9/2022 18:55
Peter Spelman -- 4/9/2022 19:26
John Humble -- 4/9/2022 19:28
John Machtinger -- 4/9/2022 19:46
Michael Osment -- 4/9/2022 19:54
Mindy Taylor-Ross -- 4/9/2022 20:14
Carol Dickinson -- 4/9/2022 20:25
Patrick Seeholzer -- 4/9/2022 21:01
Lisa Sandbank -- 4/9/2022 21:07
Patty -- 4/9/2022 21:15
Davidegoddard -- 4/9/2022 21:29
Roy Rico -- 4/9/2022 22:48
Linda Wilson -- 4/9/2022 23:05
Julia Quinn -- 4/9/2022 23:12
Dennis Wilder -- 4/10/2022 0:46
Michael Katz -- 4/10/2022 1:04
Bill Sundblad -- 4/10/2022 1:39
Matt Hendrickson -- 4/10/2022 1:47
Charles Blum -- 4/10/2022 2:54
Dirk Beving -- 4/10/2022 4:08
Eric Weingarten -- 4/10/2022 4:38
Helane Weingarten -- 4/10/2022 4:39
Cheryl Jones -- 4/10/2022 4:55
Dee Forrest -- 4/10/2022 4:57
David McCoy -- 4/10/2022 7:28
Rebecca Villegas -- 4/10/2022 8:49
Gizelle Strohkendl -- 4/10/2022 9:19
Paola Levenson -- 4/10/2022 9:22
Gary Keller -- 4/10/2022 10:28
Joyce Foster -- 4/10/2022 10:36
Brett Schafer -- 4/10/2022 11:05
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 5 Alice Ellis -- 4/10/2022 11:05
Ammar lughod -- 4/10/2022 11:14
Flynn Isment -- 4/10/2022 11:44
Ava Osment -- 4/10/2022 11:45
Sandra Casillas -- 4/10/2022 12:02
Lara Osment -- 4/10/2022 12:12
Annie Sabroux -- 4/10/2022 12:23
Will Pirkey -- 4/10/2022 12:24
Susan Grossman -- 4/10/2022 12:26
Richard M Levine -- 4/10/2022 12:45
John Ventura -- 4/10/2022 13:00
Patrick De Feo -- 4/10/2022 13:15
Elizabeth Oakes -- 4/10/2022 13:15
Olivia Kelly -- 4/10/2022 13:28
Leslie Bogart -- 4/10/2022 13:34
Shannon Eakman -- 4/10/2022 13:34
Kirsten Campisi -- 4/10/2022 13:37
Schafer -- 4/10/2022 13:38
David Abramis -- 4/10/2022 13:43
Cathy tieri -- 4/10/2022 14:03
Stephen Manes -- 4/10/2022 14:19
Stacey Abrams-Sherick -- 4/10/2022 14:31
Tina Sumner -- 4/10/2022 14:39
ADRIAN HAREWOOD -- 4/10/2022 14:42
Laura Zerr -- 4/10/2022 14:55
Jordan Ellis -- 4/10/2022 15:28
susan reid -- 4/10/2022 15:29
H Milder -- 4/10/2022 16:57
William Schoene -- 4/10/2022 16:58
Natalie pittman -- 4/10/2022 16:59
William Schoene -- 4/10/2022 17:01
Joey Reynolds -- 4/10/2022 17:18
Nina Ellis -- 4/10/2022 17:22
Robert Street -- 4/10/2022 17:34
Christina Tayag -- 4/10/2022 18:02
Cris Armstrong -- 4/10/2022 18:18
David Greene -- 4/10/2022 18:33
Tasha Giuda -- 4/10/2022 18:44
Sydney Lovelace -- 4/10/2022 18:44
Astrid Calderas -- 4/10/2022 18:52
Astrid Calderas -- 4/10/2022 18:53
IrmaVargas -- 4/10/2022 18:58
Andrea ferrer -- 4/10/2022 19:36
Leo and Rachel Marcus -- 4/10/2022 19:47
Santiago Ferrer -- 4/10/2022 19:48
Lorri Benson -- 4/10/2022 19:49
Joseph Hardin -- 4/10/2022 19:51
Barbara Kaplan -- 4/10/2022 19:54
Karen Stern -- 4/10/2022 20:06
Stephen Mark -- 4/10/2022 20:14
Mario Peixoto -- 4/10/2022 20:38
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 6 Vivien Flitton -- 4/10/2022 20:44
Kim Grossman -- 4/10/2022 20:59
victor davich -- 4/10/2022 21:40
Deanna Ssutu -- 4/10/2022 22:49
Dale Strumpell -- 4/10/2022 23:00
Patricia Rulo -- 4/10/2022 23:24
Diana Tran -- 4/10/2022 23:30
Anne Yee -- 4/10/2022 23:31
Russell Yee -- 4/10/2022 23:32
Nancy Owens -- 4/10/2022 23:37
Jilla Sardashti -- 4/10/2022 23:49
Megan FitzGerald -- 4/11/2022 0:09
Paula Mazur -- 4/11/2022 0:56
Pam Bottaro -- 4/11/2022 1:19
HAL GOLDEN -- 4/11/2022 1:29
Joan Blum -- 4/11/2022 2:10
Steven Benson -- 4/11/2022 2:10
Gregory Blum -- 4/11/2022 2:10
Christine Hardin -- 4/11/2022 8:38
Lisa Detamore -- 4/11/2022 10:33
stephen wilkins -- 4/11/2022 11:50
Kathy Cass -- 4/11/2022 11:58
Allison Greene -- 4/11/2022 12:21
John Greene -- 4/11/2022 12:28
saku ee -- 4/11/2022 13:03
hal lindes -- 4/11/2022 13:28
Joy Abbott -- 4/11/2022 14:44
Philip Cass -- 4/11/2022 15:08
Nicola Goode -- 4/11/2022 19:06
Sean Meehan -- 4/11/2022 19:08
Dylan McFarland -- 4/11/2022 19:09
Ruby Meehan -- 4/11/2022 19:38
Sara Daleiden -- 4/11/2022 20:01
ruth shari -- 4/11/2022 20:06
Tina Grossman -- 4/11/2022 20:59
Max Hunt -- 4/11/2022 21:12
Tracy Orloff -- 4/11/2022 22:31
Stephen Naftali -- 4/11/2022 23:24
Catherine Lerer -- 4/11/2022 23:46
Antonio Lysy -- 4/12/2022 1:12
Ted Braun -- 4/12/2022 1:25
Syd Lovelace -- 4/12/2022 2:27
Ken Abbott -- 4/12/2022 2:52
Randolph Holland -- 4/12/2022 3:29
Colin Maduzia -- 4/12/2022 9:35
Michele Perrone -- 4/12/2022 9:44
Pamela Gavras -- 4/12/2022 11:19
Margaret Griffin -- 4/12/2022 11:21
Kim Andres -- 4/12/2022 11:24
Susan grant -- 4/12/2022 11:27
tamra raven -- 4/12/2022 11:29
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 69
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 7 Jeffrey Rosenfeld -- 4/12/2022 11:30
Janet Tunick -- 4/12/2022 11:34
Laura Thixton -- 4/12/2022 11:36
Dorothy Cramer -- 4/12/2022 11:36
Cinzia Paganuzzi -- 4/12/2022 11:41
Alison Megliola -- 4/12/2022 11:41
John Murdock -- 4/12/2022 11:52
Patty Antin -- 4/12/2022 11:55
Heather Gould -- 4/12/2022 11:59
Mary Hubbell -- 4/12/2022 12:02
Ben Wang -- 4/12/2022 12:05
Leah -- 4/12/2022 12:06
Kathy Seal -- 4/12/2022 12:15
Robert Street – 4/12/2022 12:24:28
Paulette Rochelle-Levy – 4/12/2022 12:25:32
Geraldine Kennedy – 4/12/2022 12:27:21
Tregg Rustad – 4/12/2022 12:40:56
Additional comments:
 Don’t lease tanks. Thanks.
 Please I live near this place. These tanks and lead are not compatible with living things.
 These jets are not flying out over the shoreline before banking north upon take off, which I believe is a violation of departures.  Airport should be closed and all services suspended ASAP  Take the leaded gas out of our city!
 Please end the storage of leaded fuel in Santa Monica.  Please stop providing leaded fuel at Santa Monica airport. Thanks  "Protect the long term health of our environment get rid of these fuel storage tanks, now!
 Choke the airport not the lives around it!
 Newer studies show the dangers. Please act now.
 These tank are a danger to the health and safety of all!!  Toxic! Dangerous! Life threatening! Protect us. Just say no.  PLEASE do the right thing. For once....
 It's time.
 Practice what you PREACH!! Stop the sale of TOXINS!
 In our effort to shut down the airport permanently, we should keep establishing facts wherever possible. Shutting down AVGAS storage and distribution is a key action that needs to be taken. Dear City Council: please act accordingly and do not renew the tank leases. Ideally the tanks get dismantled and removed. That sends a clear message to the Aviation Industry and will be hard to reverse.  Stop storing toxic fuels in these old storage tanks!
 It’s time to get rid of these under ground storage tanks.  If there is any fuel offered it should be UNLEADED!!!! Other small airports such as Torrance have done this for years. PLEASE ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 70
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 8 contribute to the climate change solution as well as cleaning the air in our back yards. I will be SO grateful.
 Lead causes learning disabilities in children and impacts health.

We must eradicate lead from our environment!
 Please cease and desist the sale of leaded fuel.
 Every little piece of the puzzle is essential.Every missed link weakens us. Please remain strong in your actions !
 Decommission the toxic tanks and stop leasing them now!  Please get rid of the fuel storage and stop the jets from endangering our neighborhoods.
 While SM cannot restrict the sale of leaded fuel, the Consent Decree does not require SM to sell leaded AvGas or provide tanks for lease to sell this toxic fuel. I do believe that individual Council Members could be personally liable for gross dereliction of duty if the sale of toxic fuel is authorized. And, why WOULD a sane person go out of their way to facilitate the spewing of toxic, diseasecausing fumes over our own neighbors??  For the good of Santa Monica please discontinue use of all city owned tanks that store toxic fuel. Do the right thing.
 Please do the right thing to make our community as safe as possible for its residents. Thank you.
 Please be kind to mother earth!
 "Stopping the City from enabling Atlantic Aviation's ongoing lead poisoning of our children should be an easy decision given your professed commitment to environmental justice.
 Acts, not words, reveal values.
 As our elected representatives, are you stalwart protectors of our children! Please act on our behalf."
 Please discourage leaded fuel wherever you can!
 Please, please do not allow the city to be complicit in poisoning our children with lead.
 "Please stop the poisoning of my two children, we live in Sunset Park, we smell leaded gas fumes all the time!!
 You pride yourself on being an environmental city. Santa Monica has a history of developing environmental and sustainability strategies, with the most recent focus on community-wide carbon neutrality by 2050 or sooner. PLEASE, get rid of the fuel storage tanks! Please protect the many, over the few.
 Let’s begin to close down the airport so that we’re ready in 2028.  There can be NO GOOD REASON to lease underground storage tanks at SMO to store leaded fuel for use over our town. PLEASE STOP and think of the PEOPLE.
 There will be long term repercussions to your decisions which will leave your legacy of service to Santa Monica Citizens who entrust the health of the children in your hands. There is more than enough research by the EPA, CDC, and even the FAA about the dangers of lead pollution. It is time to stop playing politics and stand up for what you know in your heart is right.
 Get this toxic stuff out of our neighborhood!
 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this common sense measure.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 71
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 9  Please stop poisoning the residents of Santa Monica.  Fuel tanks at gas stations have often been repaired due to leakage. There are ways to avoid future litigation. Perhaps you should take them.
 Please don’t allow them to store toxic fuels on the airport!!!!  Do not stand by while our children are being poisoned. Do not extend the Atlantic Aviation lease of city-owned fuel tanks. GET THE LEAD OUT!
 I would like to voice my support to stop leasing of the underground storage tanks at the Santa Monica Airport for all types of fuels and toxic chemicals.
 We know how harmful these fuels are to the public and the environment, and yet we do little to stop them. Do not enable this any longer! Please end the lease and decommission the tanks to prevent further harm to us all. Thank you.
 Stop the fuel farm lease!
 Stop poisoning our neighborhood and children! It’s absurd.  My house is constantly covered in sut from fuel.. toxic and loud  Don't be fools! Water is gold
 We are not required to provide tanks or sell fuel and we should not if we are serious about closing the airport. Right now we need to focus on the fuel farm lease. Time to do as you say, now!  Water is so precious that it must be protected above all and no matter the cost.
 I want this decommission of the 37-year-old City-owned underground storage tanks to happen immediately.
 There is no case for the continued use of leaded fuels, aviation or otherwise.
 No more jets!!!! Enough.
 Hasten the discontinuation of leaded aviation fuel by refusing to store it in city-owned facilities.
 Please help convert airport to a park. No new construction.  Please do not delay any longer than necessary.
 Since we are not supposed to have jets at the SM Airport - we don't need to have the fuel there either. Begs the question, are you serious about providing safety to the neighborhood by removing the jets and fuel? that's what we have all been promised for years  I strongly oppose the renewal of the fuel tank lease at the airport property
 The health risks are simply not worth any potential commercial benefits that may derive from maintaining the lease. Thank you for doing the right thing!
 Please please please vote to get rid of these dangerous toxins in our neighborhood. We know too much to let these leaded and other toxic fuels continue to harm us all. Thank you!
 No more Aviation fuel at SMO
 This is urgent to address and take action to protect
our environment and the future of our aquifer, our most valuable asset. Please take action to decommission the 37 year old City owned storage tanks at Santa Monica Airport and stop leasing them to store leaded and other toxic fuels.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 72
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 10  Walk the talk and protect our environment. And no deals with "property developers."
 An accident--and class action--waiting to happen.
 Decommission Now!!
 Removing the underground storage tanks would contribute to better health, especially for those of us who live in the airport neighborhood.
 Stop allowing toxic fuels in our city!
 Fuel tanks don't belong here if we're serious about closing the airport.
 For a city that prides itself on clean living, Santa Monica can be mighty hypocritical when it comes to selling out.
 Let’s get this transition started.
 Please help clean up our city!
 Santa Monica should do everything in it's power to protect the health of its citizens!
 You absolutely have a health obligation to stop the storage & sale of AV leaded fuel….
 Having been a victim of leaded fuel particles over our house for 38 years, we strongly encourage going forward the City stop leasing underground storage used for leaded fuels.
 Let's do the common sense, right thing. Thank you.
 Thank you for continuing to seek ways to heal the land at the Santa Monica Airport so it is available for a new life.  How many years will it take to clean up the toxic leaks on airport land?
 Let's get the lead out of Santa Monica. Thank you.
 Please get the lead out! I live at the end of the runway (Navy and Walgreens). I worry about long term known health risks. I’m shocked to learn that lead fuel exists.
 Do not extending this
 Let's clean up these tanks to avoid a much more expensive cleanup when the chemicals leach into our land due to age-related failure.
 The vast health problems that stem from leaded fuel were first discovered in the 70's (fifty years ago). Lead was introduced into fuel to make engines go faster. Allowing airplanes at SMO access to leaded fuel from City owned storage tanks, means you the City Council (our representatives) would be prioritizing airplane efficiency over the lives of the City's citizens.

Decommissioning these tanks is 50 years past due.
 I believe my father’s Parkinson’s Disease could have been caused by his living under the runway of the airport.
 Release the underground storage
 Don't be hypocritical. Stop supplying storage for lead avgas.  SMO will close in 80 months, per both the 2017 Consent Decree and the 2017 City Council SMO Closure Resolution No. 11026 which states, “The City Council directs the City Manager, City Attorney and their staffs to take all actions necessary and proper to ensure that SMO will cease to operate as an airport and shall be closed to all aeronautical use forever effective as of midnight on ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 11 December 31, 2028.” The SMO fuel farm and underground storage tanks are far past their life expectancy and should be
decommissioned now.
 Please act quickly on this hazard to our community's health!  We have known for over ten years the damage that leaded gas from the Small planes is causing our children> THIS MUST STOP NOW!!
 I wholeheartedly agree that these storage tanks be
decommissioned. And let’s have public notice that Santa Monica is a leader in reducing access to leaded gas. Public health and the climate thank you!
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Eric Weingarten <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 4:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 4-B

EXTERNAL
Your uƩer lack of compliance in following a legal agreement to turn the Airport into parklands by 2028 shows a disregard for people’s health, safety & welfare. You already circumvented the 2016 will of the people by signing a closed door agreement to keep the Airport open Ɵll 2028 in a signed deal with the FAA. Now, as I knew you would, you are once again ignoring your commitments & promises & acƟng in bad faith! Enough is enough! Eric Weingarten
Sent from my iPhone
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Margaret Francesca Rosenthal <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 7:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport develpoment

EXTERNAL
I am wriƟng to oppose the development of the airport into housing. I approve the idea to convert the airport into a park.

Thank you,
Margaret Rosenthal
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: GC C2 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 8:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport Space & METRO filth
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE turn the Santa Monica Airport into a LARGE PUBLIC PARK that EVERYONE can enjoy.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Alan Levenson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 10:06 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 4B - Atlantic Lease

EXTERNAL
Dear Council and others,
DO NOT SIGN the lease to AtlanƟc with the city owned fuel farm. Here is why:

1. The AtlanƟc lease INCLUDING THE FUEL FARM is not required by any agreement. We have repeatedly asked what agreement or regulaƟon requires the lease of the fuel farm and have never been given a straight answer with a cite from any agreement or FAA regulaƟon. If such requirement existed we all would have seen it by now. There is a floor full of lawyers at city hall. Someone should be able to answer clearly with facts and back up informaƟon.

2. AtlanƟc has been on a holdover lease for almost a decade. If the FAA, or anyone, is going to sue us for not signing this lease with the fuel farm, then why have they not yet done so already?

3. The staff keeps perpetuaƟng the myth that we can not stop the sale of fuel at SMO and that not leasing the fuel farm would stop fuel sales. Not leasing a forty year old fuel farm does not equate to not allowing the sale of fuel. Fuel can be sold by AtlanƟc without the lease of these tanks from trucks and their own approved and safe tanks of their choosing.

YOUR ARE DISCUSSING THINGS IN CLOSED SESSION THAT TRANSPARENCY OF GOVERNANCE REQUIRES TO BE DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC.

An important quesƟon that needs to be answered is what is staff trying to hide by keeping the AtlanƟc lease discussions behind closed doors for the second Ɵme in two weeks, and in years gone by? Make a decision out in the open based on the facts.

PLEASE NOTE: FOR THE SEPTEMBER 26 CLOSED SESSION ON THIS LEASE OVER 80 PAGES OF PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED, AND EVERY SINGLE ONE WAS AGAINST SIGNING THIS LEASE. THESE COMMENTS WERE NOT POSTED ONLINE AS WRITTEN COMMENTS UNTIL TWO HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING BECAUSE OF AN ‘ISSUE,” Residents are being ignored.

The Airport Commission and their resoluƟons and recommendaƟons regarding lease have been ignored.

PLEASE LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED YOU AND READ THEIR COMMENTS. DO NOT IGNORE THE AIRPORT COMMISSION YOU APPOINTED TO ADVISE YOU.

DO NOT LEASE THE FUEL FARM.

Thank you.

Alan
Alan Levenson
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 2 www.alanlevenson.com
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: DAVID STILLER <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 10:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Lofty

EXTERNAL
I have been an airport, user, tenant, and pilot at Santa Monica Airport for over 40 years.

Airports are unique and require experience and knowledge to manage properly.

Please choose, come knowledgeable, and experienced people for these posiƟons Best wishes ,
Dave SƟller
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: John Murdock <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:41 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport

John B. Murdock
1209 Pine Street
Santa Monica, CA 90405
tel. (310) 450‐1859
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Mark SmithTV <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 1:02 PM
To: Gleam Davis; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Airport is not a football
Attachments: PastedGraphic-2.tiff

EXTERNAL
I am a contractor working for the City and with the City for over a decade.

City staff can’t not punch their way out of a paper bag.

We have lost our best staff members.

You can not create the future with uneducated ‐ have you seen the news in Israel?

1. There is no money to destroy an airport and build a park. No water.

2. The airport is the greatest asset for the future.

3. Development is not an option ‐ traffic is already too much.

Only option: Turn the airport into a fully electric airport by 2035.

Develop slowly and wisely.

Mark Smith
310 213 0790
http://duenorthproduction.com
Respect science, respect nature, respect each other.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Stanley H Epstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 10:36 AM
To: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; David White; dominic gomez; Clerk Mailbox
Cc: Alan Levenson
Subject: Fwd: Item 4B - Atlantic Lease

EXTERNAL
The Clerk may not send you Alan’s wonderful letter, but it is must reading for all of you! Stop your illegal closed sessions and put the lease consideration on the Agenda for the next meeting.

Stan Epstein
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:

From: Alan Levenson <[email protected]>
Date: October 10, 2023 at 10:06:16 AM PDT
To: [email protected]
Subject: Item 4B ‐ Atlantic Lease
Dear Council and others,
DO NOT SIGN the lease to Atlantic with the city owned fuel farm. Here is why:

1. The Atlantic lease INCLUDING THE FUEL FARM is not required by any agreement. We have repeatedly asked what agreement or regulation requires the lease of the fuel farm and have never been given a straight answer with a cite from any agreement or FAA regulation. If such requirement existed we all would have seen it by now. There is a floor full of lawyers at city hall. Someone should be able to answer clearly with facts and back up information.

2. Atlantic has been on a holdover lease for almost a decade. If the FAA, or anyone, is going to sue us for not signing this lease with the fuel farm, then why have they not yet done so already?

3. The staff keeps perpetuating the myth that we can not stop the sale of fuel at SMO and that not leasing the fuel farm would stop fuel sales. Not leasing a forty year old fuel farm does not equate to not allowing the sale of fuel. Fuel can be sold by Atlantic without the lease of these tanks from trucks and their own approved and safe tanks of their choosing.

YOUR ARE DISCUSSING THINGS IN CLOSED SESSION THAT TRANSPARENCY OF GOVERNANCE REQUIRES TO BE DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC.

An important question that needs to be answered is what is staff trying to hide by keeping the Atlantic lease discussions behind closed doors for the second time in two weeks, and in years gone by? Make a decision out in the open based on the facts.

ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) 2 PLEASE NOTE: FOR THE SEPTEMBER 26 CLOSED SESSION ON THIS LEASE OVER 80 PAGES OF PUBLIC COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED, AND EVERY SINGLE ONE WAS AGAINST SIGNING THIS LEASE. THESE

COMMENTS WERE NOT POSTED ONLINE AS WRITTEN COMMENTS UNTIL TWO HOURS BEFORE THE MEETING BECAUSE OF AN ‘ISSUE,”
Residents are being ignored.

The Airport Commission and their resolutions and recommendations regarding lease have been ignored.

PLEASE LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO ELECTED YOU AND READ THEIR COMMENTS. DO NOT IGNORE THE AIRPORT COMMISSION YOU APPOINTED TO ADVISE YOU.

DO NOT LEASE THE FUEL FARM.

Thank you.

Alan
Alan Levenson
www.alanlevenson.com
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.B.

October 10, 2023

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6072 : 2828 Donald Douglas) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 4.D
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica; LASC Case No. BC616804; Second District Court of Appeal Case No. B295935; California Supreme Court Case No. S263972 Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

4.D
Packet Pg. 85
1 Xavier Mota
From: Brodsky, Michael <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 9:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Item 4: Close Session recommendations

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
Item 4.A. Do NOT renew leases on underground storage tanks at SMO.

Item 4.D. Do NOT settle this case.

Sincerely,
Michael Brodsky
Santa Monica
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Cathy Larson and Roger Allen <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 10:58 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; councilmtgitems
Subject: Oct 10 Item 4-D

EXTERNAL
I support at large voƟng.

All voices heard by all Councilmembers.

Cathy Larson
Santa Monica Resident
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Michael Feinstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 8:04 AM
To: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White; Douglas Sloan
Subject: City Council item 4-D, October 10, 2024

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis, City Councilmembers and City Staff
Regarding your closed session item 4-D, I encourage you to continue to defend the City’s position in the CVRA case in front of the Court of Appeals, because the recent California Supreme Court decision puts the City in a strong position. https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_Communication.aspx?Frame=&Meeti ngID=1380&MediaPosition=&ID=2150&CssClass=
As you know, the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) was enacted to ensure that historically disadvantaged voters have a meaningful opportunity to win representation. But key terms were left undefined. In its recent ruling in Pico Neighborhood Neighborhood vs. City of Santa Monica, the California Supreme Court has defined those terms and in the process, has substantially changed the CVRA landscape.

Previously, the plaintiffs have maintained that to prove “vote dilution” and compel a change in a voting system, one only needs to show the existence of “racially polarized voting”. It is upon this basis that they have argued that the single time former Santa Monica Latino Councilmember Tony Vasquez was defeated proves their case, but the three times he was elected should be discounted. This same kind of supposition about vote dilution (and racially polarized voting) has driven the change to single-seat, winnertake-all districts across California, where concerned with legal costs and liability, several hundred local governments have simply changed voting systems without going to court or seeking a vote of its citizens.

Now that Santa Monica has had the will and resources to defend its record all the way to the State Supreme Court, this supposition by the plaintiffs has been challenged and heard in court. The result is that the Court ruled that vote dilution is not an absolute, but must be judged against another legally allowable system proposed by the plaintiffs. Furthermore, ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 2 this must occur via an 'intensely local appraisal’ of all the relevant electoral and electionrelated facts, to see if the system proposed by the plaintiffs would give voters from the protected class demonstrably more influence. If not — especially in situations where the targeted minority community is too geographically spread out to benefit from single-seat, winner-take-all districts — and might even lose influence — the dilution would be ruled insufficient to compel court-imposed change.

Given the Court’s ruling, it is easy to see that the CVRA was not meant for a city like Santa Monica.

In Santa Monica, most Latino-preferred candidates (that run viable campaigns) already win under its at-large system.

At the same time, a change to the plaintiff’s proposed seven singleseat districts could lead to a net loss of self-identified Latinos on the City Council, of which there are currently three out of seven elected at-large -- including two living in one of the same proposed districts, that would have to compete against each other if single-seat, winner-take-all districts were imposed upon the City.

But going to the heart of the plaintiff’s request for such single-seat districts is the fact that because Latinos are spread out over Santa Monica, the highest Latino concentrated district would be only 30%.

At the same time, the other two-thirds of Santa Monica Latinos would be left outside of this district, spread over the other six. These ‘less-than-equal’ Latinos would see their own influence significantly diluted in each of the new districts (districts which would be substantially more white than the city at-large), and these 2/3 of Santa Monica Latinos would lose their vote (and influence) on six of the seven city council seats they have today, which occur in a more diverse city-wide electorate.

Meanwhile, even for the concentrated 30%, there is no clear demonstration of increased ‘influence’ for them that doesn’t require a great deal of unprovable speculation. The plaintiffs - in trying to make their case for increased influence by this 30% - suggest that this 30% will be united in its vote, based upon a few past cases when there was a strong Latino vote supporting a single Latino candidate running in multiple-candidate (three or four-seat) City Council races. But such theoretical ‘unity’ will disappear from among this Latino 30% where there are multiple Latino and/or Latino-preferred candidates all competing against each other for a single district seat, which is highly likely to occur in the Pico-neighborhood-based district proposed by the plaintiffs if the city were compelled to adopt single-seat, winner-take-all districts.

At some point, logic has to be stretched beyond credulity to suggest there would be enough clear and demonstrable additional ‘influence’ under the seven-district model ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 3 proposed by the plaintiffs to compel a change in Santa Monica’s electoral system under the Supreme Court’s new definition of dilution.

Thank you for your time in reading this message.

Sincerely
Mike Feinstein
Ocean Park neighborhood
Santa Monica
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Adele Andrade Stadler (via Google Docs) <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 9:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Christine Parra; Jesse Zwick; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Santa Monica public comments (CVRA).docx

EXTERNAL
Adele Andrade Stadler attached a docum ent

Adele Andrade Stadler (adeleandradestadler@ gm ail.com ) has attached the follow ing docum ent:

Santa M onica public com m ents (CVRA).docx
Snapshot of the item below:

Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers,
As a former Alhambra Mayor and current Alhambra Councilwoman, I am writing to you as a supporter of the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) and an advocate of by‐district elections.

By‐district elections have served Alhambra well. The transition from Alhambra’s former at‐ large from‐district system was seamless. Both councilmembers and residents embraced it.

Consequently, Alhambra’s communities of color are better ensured sustainable and fair representation. I can also attest that the transition has not altered councilmembers’ collective concern for all residents of Alhambra. The only difference now is that we can spend more time with the residents of our districts, which helps us better understand and address the needs of our constituents.

My fear is that Santa Monica’s continued CVRA litigation will ultimately weaken the CVRA, resulting in the loss of fair representation for marginalized communities across California. The CVRA is a landmark law that ought not be diminished but lifted up in the face of a significantly weakened federal Voting Rights Act and consistent attacks on democracy.

I encourage Santa Monica to embrace by‐district elections, and in so doing, safeguard the California Voting Rights Act for under‐represented communities of color across California.

Sincerely,
Adele Andrade Stadler
Alhambra Councilwoman, Fifth District
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 2 Google LLC, 1600 Am phitheatre Parkw ay, M ountain View , CA 94043, USA You have received this em ail because adeleandradestadler@ gm ail.com shared a docum ent with you from Google Docs.

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

Google

ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Brian O'Neil <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:32 AM
To: Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; councilmtgitems
Cc: David White; Attorney Mailbox
Subject: City Council Agenda 10/10/23 (Closed Session Conference Regarding CVRA Case: Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica)

EXTERNAL
To: Santa Monica City Council, City Attorney, City Manager From: Brian O’Neil
Re: City Council Agenda Item 3‐C (Closed Session Conference Regarding CVRA Case: Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica)
Date: October 10, 2023
Dear Council Members, City Attorney, City Manager

I’d like to reiterate my urging that the City Council drop the City’s appeal in the CVRA case, which will be discussed in closed session at tonight’s City Council meeting.

Besides the reasons I noted last month in my letter to you, which I’ve pasted below for reference, I want to highlight now how the move to district-based elections would greatly improve our local representative democracy. Indeed, some food for fought, Harvey Milk would have never been elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1977 had the SF Board not recently adopted district-based elections. There is no doubt that dropping the appeal and adopting some form of district-based elections would open the door for new candidates and fresh voices here in Santa Monica. Currently, as you are all aware, the At-Large System requires big money to run for office in the entire city, big money usually supplied by the machine PACs of SMRR and SM Forward or other special interests. Adopting District-based Elections would allow for true electoral competition and truly grass-roots candidates to stand a chance.

ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 2 Take the lesson of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in 1977 and the subsequent election of a grass-roots candidate like Harvey Milk, and help create a truly representation democracy in Santa Monica.

Many thanks for your service to our city,

Brian O’Neil
Pico Resident

From: Brian O’Neil
Re: City Council Agenda Item 3‐C (Closed Session Conference Regarding CVRA Case: Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica)
Date: September 12, 2023
Dear Council Members, City Attorney, City Manager
As an historian and a long‐term Pico neighborhood resident, I urge you to drop the City’s appeal in the case of Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica, popularly known as the California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) case, which you will be discussing in closed session at today’s City Council meeting.

Why should the City drop its the appeal?
TO DO THE RIGHT THING!
THREE SIMPLE REASONS:
1) VOTING RIGHTS FOR ALL SANTA MONICANS!
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 3 2) REPRESENTATION & EQUITY FOR THE PICO NEIGHBORHOOD 3) FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY& EQUITY FOR ALL SANTA MONICANS 1) VOTING RIGHTS & the CVRA
Are we in Selma, Alabama in 1965 or Santa Monica in 2023? The CVRA was put in place to enhance the voting rights protections of the US Voting Rights Act of 1965. All by one of you (Councilmember Davis being the exception) were not on the Council when the decisions were made in 2018 to appeal the CRVA case. It has boggled my mind since 2018 why the purportedly “progressive” Santa Monica City Council has for years now aggressively fought against the CRVA case. Most of CA’s truly progressive and leaders understand that Santa Monica’s continuing of the appeal of the CRVA case is an affront to voting rights for all Californians. Senator Alex Padilla has remarked that our City’s appeal could undue over 20 years of progress for voting rights in our state.

See:

Read or listen to our State Senator's opinion here.

California Supreme Court case threatens voting rights ‐ CalMatters You all (including Councilmember Davis) have the opportunity to now stop the suppression of voting rights in our city and shift to the historic side of advancing the expansion of voting rights by dropping the appeal.

While there are many legitimate and complicated issues to discuss regarding the transition away from the current At‐Large Electoral system, which the Los Angeles Superior Court found violates the CVRA, to a more equitable District‐based (or hybrid District‐based + At‐Large Mayoral) electoral system, the basic facts in this case point to how Latinos in the Pico neighborhood (and I would argue all Pico residents) have for years had their votes diluted by the current At‐Large voting system. This dilution has, in turn, led to the systematic marginalization of the Pico neighborhood.
2) REPRESENTATION & EQUITY FOR THE PICO NEIGHBORHOOD
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 4 Quick history lesson. The Pico Neighborhood has been politically and socially marginalized since the early 20th century. Thanks to racist redlining real estate practices, for decades Pico was only neighborhood in Santa Monica open to non‐whites. It has historically been the dumping ground to serve all the city’s major mass transit and infrastructure projects: Interstate‐10 Freeway; the City Yards and Recycling Center, the Metro Maintenance Facility. More recently in 2018, a private preschool was given a CUP to operate a 20‐student preschool (a business) out of a single‐family home at 2953 Delaware Ave, a CUP fiercely opposed by nearly the entire neighborhood, a CUP that flew in the face of the LUCE and local zoning intended to preserve our residential neighborhoods, a CUP that would have NEVER been approved in any other Santa Monica neighborhood, but was approved by the City Council because of the business‐owner’s political ties to city leaders. There is no doubt that had the Pico neighborhood had just political representation, such inequities would not have been the pattern in the Pico neighborhood.

Today the Pico neighborhood faces ongoing policy impacts related to the commericialization and densification of our residential neighborhoods, the redevelopment of Bergamont Station, the proposed Resilience Center at VAP. Thankfully, there are currently two councilmembers that live in and look out for the Pico neighborhood (De la Torre & Parra). This political shift, however, only occurred via a herculean grass‐roots effort in the 2020 elections. With the current At‐Large system, there is every chance that in 2024, big money interests could work to unseat Councilmembers De La Torre and Parra and our neighborhood would once again have No Direct Representation in our City Council. Please drop the CVRA appeal and start the transition to some sort of district elections system so that the Pico neighborhood, and all Santa Monica neighborhoods, can have truly representative democracy.
3) FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY& EQUITY FOR ALL SANTA MONICANS To date the City has spent millions of dollars fighting the CVRA (I’ve heard estimates of $10‐15 million). Tragically for a city that prides itself on being a fighter for the environment, much of that money has gone to Gibson, Dunn, a law firm known to regularly defend the big oil companies. Stop throwing good money after bad by dropping the appeal. If the appeal in not dropped the CVRA will undoubtedly drag on for years more, and probably end up back in the CA Supreme Court. To continue the appeal would mean millions and millions more to Gibson, Dunn; money that would be much better spent improving our city’s safety and services.

In the end, DO THE RIGHT THING and drop the appeal!
Have your legacy be as fighter for voting rights and representative democracy! ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 5 Thank you all for your continued service to our beloved city, Santa Monica, Highest Regards,
Brian O’Neil
Pico Resident

ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Tom Charron <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:54 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Jim Lindsay
Subject: Written comment RE: Agenda Item 4.D. on the closed session agenda of 10/10/23

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis, Councilmembers and staff,
The California Ranked Choice Voting Coalition (Cal RCV) believes in real democracy. Plurality at‐large voting (PAL) is well known to be a discriminatory and undemocratic system.

Santa Monica continuing to fight the Pico lawsuit is undemocratic. Doing so would seek to continue using PAL, which is a fundamentally discriminatory system. If Santa Monica should prevail, it would threaten the voting rights of 40 million Californians. Furthermore, it is unlikely Santa Monica will prevail as there is no established CVRA case law in which a public agency defendant has successfully prevailed on the merits. It would be a futile exercise that will only waste many more millions of taxpayer dollars.

Cal RCV would prefer a proportional method of voting, such as Proportional Ranked Choice Voting, which would provide the most equitable, representative, and durable solution to represent all the people of Santa Monica, but regardless of the remedy chosen, we must oppose all efforts to undermine the CVRA.

We urge you to drop the city’s appeal of Pico v. Santa Monica and find an acceptable compromise that will improve representation as soon as possible. To continue to fight to keep PAL in place is undemocratic and un‐American.

Sincerely,
Tom Charron and Jim Lindsay, Co‐founders, on behalf of the Executive Committee of the California Ranked Choice Voting Coalition
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Tony Huizar <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; David White
Subject: Public input for today's Closed Agenda Item 4.D. Santa Monica City Council Meeting 09/12/2023

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members, City Manager and City Staff,
Just a reminder as you meet on the agenda item regarding he CVRA...

On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 11:12 AM Tony Huizar <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Council Members, City Manager and City Staff,
I urge you to unite the City of Santa Monica and drop the legal fight against the Voting Rights case. Millions of dollars that should have gone to improving the safety and infrastructure of Santa Moncia have been spent on attorney fees to reverse a legal case that has already been decided in a six-week trial, by the LA Superior Court.

Today you have been given a once in a lifetime opportunity to correct this grave injustice and make history by acting on behalf of the residents of Santa Moncia and the people of our United States by supporting over 20 years of progress that the CVRA has made in our state electoral system and its shared impact across the nation. We are residents of one of the most progressive cities in the country, are we not? Please take corrective measures and act on behalf of your constituents, the residents of Santa Moncia, who will not forget your role in improving safety and well being by investing our budget where it most matters, in our community.

Read or listen to our State Senator's opinion here.

Thank you for your time and service,
Tony Huizar
Life-long Santa Monica Resident and father to three past and present SMMUSD students ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Cris Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 3:22 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Christine Parra
Subject: Item 4D: NO settlement!

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis and City Council Members:

As a Latina born in Santa Monica, I support the City's defense of the CA Voting Rights Act by defending against Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica. Do NOT settle! The City is defending justice and diversity with a clear‐eyed appropriate understanding of the CVRA. The City is aiming to safeguard voices of Latinos and other ethnic and racial communities by not allowing a splinter group of Latinos to prejudice and confuse genuine concerns about how we could make our democratic voting practices stronger for all.

Our City’s leadership on civil rights depends on allowing the case to continue.

With respect,
Christine “Cris” Gutierrez
Santa Monica Resident
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) 1 Xavier Mota
From: PNA90404 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 3:37 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Phil Brock; David White; Gleam Davis
Subject: Agenda Item 4-D

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Gleam Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Lana Negrete, City Councilors, City Manager David White.

Please settle the CVRA lawsuit, show some class in the face of defeat.

The residents of the Pico Neighborhood dont care if the City drags this lawsuit out another 7 years by your litigious behavior and actions to draw it out.

You have knowingly and forever harmed the Santa Monica Residents of color.

Stop this indignant charade that you care about Civil Rights your actions say otherwise.

Please save some money and settle this case.

Yours Sincerely Cris McLeod Resident of the Pico Neighborhood.

ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.D.

October 10, 2023

4.D.a
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6082 : 4.D. Closed Session - Pico) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 4.E
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Conference with Legal Counsel – Considering Whether to Initiate Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Whittier, et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCP03579 (requested by Councilmember Brock)
Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

4.E
Packet Pg. 102
1 Xavier Mota
From: Marianne O'Donnell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 3:31 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fwd: Santa Monica City Council Meeting of 10/9/23 – Please say No to the new Zero Bail system

EXTERNAL
From: "Marianne O'Donnell" <[email protected]>
To: "gleam davis" <[email protected]>, "oscar delatorre" <[email protected]>, "lana negrete" <[email protected]>, "phil brock" <[email protected]>, "jesse zwick" <[email protected]>, "christine parra" <[email protected]>, "caroline torosis" <[email protected]>, "David White" <[email protected]>, "doug sloan" <[email protected]>, "community affairs" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 3:29:44 PM
Subject: Santa Monica City Council Meeting of 10/9/23 – Please say No to the new Zero Bail system I understand that the City Council will consider joining a multiple city lawsuit over the County’s newly implemented Zero Bail system at tomorrow’s meeting.

I urge the Council and City government to challenge this Zero Bail initiative, which will only encourage further crime in our city, already plagued with more crime than we can sustain.

Reminder: so-called “petty crimes like property crimes, minor theft and vehicle violations” are not victimless.

Do you have any idea what the community has to put up with on a daily basis?  Constant property/vehicle violations that have already cost us hundreds of hard-earned dollars  Constant harassment in the street or at the store
 We’re not longer able to take safe walks in our neighborhood at dawn at dusk (before/after work)  We can no longer safely enjoy our parks because of a free needle program that draws aggressive addicts  Etc., etc.

This new system is not “equitable justice,” as its proponents allege: what about justice for the victims, and why should perpetrators be able to get away with crime free?
The dubious argument that the Zero Bail system doesn't lead to increased crime doesn't stand the everyday reality of our streets. It’s an ill-conceived ideological initiative that will only make our community worse off than it already is.

Our beloved city is falling into lawless disarray, and this cannot endure:
 Enough with being collateral damage to lax government policies  Enough with taxation without representation.

You are elected by voters, and our city government is funded by taxpayers: it is your duty to represent them, so please do your job! Not doing so is akin to negligence and misrepresentation.

Please: join the lawsuit to repel that ill-considered Zero Bail system.

Thank you.

Marianne O'Donnell
Santa Monica, CA 90405
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 2 ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Marianne O'Donnell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 3:35 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Fwd: Santa Monica City Council Meeting of 10/10/23 – Please say No to the new Zero Bail system

EXTERNAL
From: "Marianne O'Donnell" <[email protected]>
To: "gleam davis" <[email protected]>, "oscar delatorre" <[email protected]>, "lana negrete" <[email protected]>, "phil brock" <[email protected]>, "jesse zwick" <[email protected]>, "christine parra" <[email protected]>, "caroline torosis" <[email protected]>, "David White" <[email protected]>, "doug sloan" <[email protected]>, "community affairs" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 9, 2023 3:29:44 PM
Subject: Santa Monica City Council Meeting of 10/10/23 – Please say No to the new Zero Bail system I understand that the City Council will consider joining a multiple city lawsuit over the County’s newly implemented Zero Bail system at tomorrow’s meeting.

I urge the Council and City government to challenge this Zero Bail initiative, which will only encourage further crime in our city, already plagued with more crime than we can sustain.

Reminder: so-called “petty crimes like property crimes, minor theft and vehicle violations” are not victimless.

Our beloved city is falling into lawless disarray, and this cannot endure:
 Enough with being collateral damage to lax government policies  Enough with taxation without representation.

You are elected by voters, and our city government is funded by taxpayers: it is your duty to represent them, so please do your job! Not doing so is akin to negligence and misrepresentation.

Please: join the lawsuit to repel that ill-considered Zero Bail system.

Thank you.

Marianne O'Donnell
Santa Monica, CA 90405
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 2 ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Anjuli Kronheim Katz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 10:48 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis
Subject: Re: Closed Session E Item

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete and Honorable Councilmembers:
"Innocent until proven guilty” is a bedrock principle of the American justice system, and yet with a cash bail system, hundreds of thousands of people are locked up in local jails without being convicted of any crime. They are behind bars because they can’t afford bail. Not only is this an injustice, it is also the source of further injustices in the rates of conviction and incarceration: people jailed before trial are more likely to be convicted than people who can afford bail and are released pre‐trial. Like many other aspects of the criminal justice system, money bail also disproportionately harms people of color; for example, bail amounts for black men average 35% higher than for white men. Further, it wastes billions of tax dollars across the country to hold people who have not been convicted of a crime; billions of tax dollars that could go towards education, healthcare and mental health services. I could go on about reasons I disagree with the injustices of the cash bail system.

The issue in front of you today is outrageous. The cash bail system was already found to be unconstitutional in the State of California in 2021. This question has already been answered. To use the city's resources to join a lawsuit with another city to have that question answered again for us by the same court would be an incredible waste of money and resources and a move against progressive reforms in our justice system that I do not support.

PLEASE do not join this lawsuit with the city of Whittier.

Thank you,
Anjuli Kronheim Katz
Former Housing Commissioner 2015‐2019
‐‐
Anjuli Kronheim Katz
Cell: 484‐213‐4811
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 107 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Jon Katz <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Item 4E - OPPOSE

EXTERNAL
Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tempore Negrete, and Councilmembers:

Please do not use City resources to join the lawsuit to reinstate cash bail. Cash bail is a deeply flawed system that perpetuates inequality and injustice within our criminal justice system. Cash bail unfairly penalizes individuals from lower‐income backgrounds. It effectively criminalizes poverty, as those who cannot afford to pay bail are forced to remain in jail while awaiting trial, often for minor offenses. This exacerbates economic disparities within our community.

Cash bail often results in the unnecessary and prolonged detention of individuals who have not been convicted of any crime. This goes against the fundamental principle of "innocent until proven guilty" and can have devastating consequences for individuals, their families, and their livelihoods.

Studies have consistently shown that people of color are disproportionately affected by cash bail. African American and Hispanic individuals are more likely to be assigned higher bail amounts and are less likely to be able to afford it, leading to higher rates of pretrial detention.

Cash bail does not necessarily enhance public safety. It can lead to the release of dangerous individuals who can afford to pay bail while detaining non‐violent individuals who pose no significant risk to the community. This undermines the goal of our criminal justice system to protect the public.

Let's follow the wishes of California voters who, in 2022, voted to end the system of cash bail, in order to prioritize justice for all residents of our community.

Thank you,
Jon Katz
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Anastasia Foster <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Cash Bail Item 4e

EXTERNAL
Santa Monica should not join the Whittier lawsuit.

The new bail system has already been in place for months prior to October 1st. People arrested go through a process before it's determined if they can be temporarily released based on their criminal history and many other factors. A court determined that cash bail is unconstitutional for good reason. Cash bail has nothing to do with justice, other than to unduly harm those who cannot afford bail while they await trial. Please do not vote to join this lawsuit. ‐‐
Anastasia Foster
Chair, Santa Monica Rent Control Board
Organizer, Schiff for Senate Campaign
Board of Directors, Meals on Wheels West
CADEM Credentials Committee Co‐Chair & Delegate ‐ AD51
CEPS Steering Committee
Franklin PTA Executive Committee
Facebook
Instagram
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Michelle Parris <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:26 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 4.E (Considering Whether to Initiate Litigation – City of Whittier, et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al
Attachments: Vera Written Public Comment for Oct 10 2021 Santa Monica CC Mtg - Agenda Item 4E.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
My name is Michelle Parris. I live in Los Angeles and am the director of Vera California, a local iniƟaƟve of the Vera InsƟtute of JusƟce, which advances policies and pracƟces that will make California a model for ending mass incarceraƟon, promoƟng community safety, and advancing racial jusƟce.

Please see the aƩachment for my public comment on today’s council meeƟng agenda item 4E. If you have any trouble accessing the document, please let me know and I can resend it. Just in case, I have also pasted the content below my signature block.

Warmly,
Michelle
Michelle Parris
Director, Vera California
Vera Institute of Justice
634 South Spring Street, #300A
Los Angeles, CA 90014
c 917-783-6850
[email protected]
(pronouns: she/her)
Subscribe here to receive periodic updates about our work in California and opportuniƟes to become involved.

October 10, 2023
Santa Monica City Council:

Via email: [email protected]
Re: Agenda Item 4.E (Considering Whether to Initiate Litigation – City of Whittier, et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al.)
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
My name is Michelle Parris. I live in Los Angeles and am the director of Vera California, a local initiative of the Vera Institute of Justice (Vera) advancing policies and practices that will make California a model for ending mass incarceration, promoting community safety, and advancing racial justice. Vera has worked on pretrial policy across the country—from Michigan to Kentucky to New Jersey—for more than 60 years.

ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 2 We encourage the Council not to join litigation that seeks to thwart implementation of the Superior Court’s new bail policy, the Pre-Arraignment Release Protocols (PARP). The policy is a step forward towards a more fair, just, and safe pretrial system.

The PARP policy rightfully shifts away from money bail and recommends administrative release for people charged with misdemeanors and low-level felonies.

The court’s policy does not represent a radical change in the pretrial system and instead builds off years of similar bail policies and assessment of those policies. For the past three years, the county has had a bail schedule (often called the “emergency bail schedule” or EBS) on and off where many people charged with lowlevel offenses were released through administrative means, like citations, instead of having traditional cash bail imposed. Like the emergency bail schedule, the PARP policy recommends administrative release for low-level offenses. The policies of having pre-arraignment magistrate reviews and a money bail system for people detained until arraignment continue.

Extensive research demonstrates that reforms like the PARP policy are good for public safety.

Vera analyzed the Los Angeles Police Department’s own data from the EBS period and found that violent crime and property crime in Los Angeles were lower or remained effectively unchanged under the EBS from the twoyear period before the policy. As in Los Angeles, studies from around the country repeatedly find that reforms like the PARP policy are not linked to an increase in violent or nonviolent crime. The courts in Harris County, Texas—home to Houston—issued a standing order in 2019 for most people charged with misdemeanors to be released without money bond. An independent federal monitor tasked with analyzing the data found that far more people are now being released pretrial and that these higher release rates did not translate to higher rearrest rates—rearrest rates have stayed largely constant from before and after the policy change.

The Kentucky Supreme Court issued statewide orders similar to what is in the PARP, including release for nonviolent and nonsexual lower level felonies, and found that the data showed releasing more people does not compromise public safety. In 2017, the court mandated administrative pretrial release for most misdemeanors; 92 percent of those released were not rearrested. In 2020, after the policy expanded to include the aforementioned felonies, rearrest remained low and 89 percent of people were not rearrested.

In New York, despite the fearmongering around bail reform, a rigorous academic study found that it reduced overall re-arrest and felony re-arrest among people released under the new law, compared to a pre-reform comparison group. Further, research shows no correlation between bail reform policies and an increase in violent crime. These research findings counter false claims that the PARP policy is likely to increase crime.

The Council should not act on the critics’ fearmongering and misleading claims.

Critics of the PARP policy frequently cite the Yolo County District Attorney’s reports claiming their emergency bail schedule led to a huge increase in crime. The Yolo County DA reports should not be credited because they are significantly flawed. They are based on a small sample size—one study was of 100 people (compared to the tens of thousands studied in Houston’s or Kentucky’s policies which are similar in scope to PARP’s)—and without establishing the proper research protocols that would show a discrete policy change causing a specific outcome (e.g., increased arrests). The robust research on similar policies with larger sample sizes—including from Los Angeles itself—should inform the Council.

Ultimately, more pretrial detention will not benefit public safety, nor justice.

Research demonstrates that just 24 hours in jail increases the likelihood that someone will be arrested again because of the destabilizing effect of detention and the resulting loss of jobs, housing, and community ties.

In addition to building safety, PARP serves justice. Only those who cannot pay experience the harms of pretrial detention, from the horrors of jail to housing instability or homelessness. The PARP policy ensures that a person’s wealth does not determine whether they are free or in jail.

ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 3 By following the research on public safety and policies like PARP, we have an opportunity to spare many people the harmful destabilization of pretrial incarceration and spare Angelenos the results of such destabilization.

Rather than join suit, Santa Monica City Council should encourage the court to monitor and share data analysis on implementation at regular intervals.

Sincerely,
Michelle Parris
Initiative Director
Vera California
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) October 10, 2023
Santa Monica City Council:

We encourage the Council not to join litigation that seeks to thwart implementation of the Superior Court’s new bail policy, the Pre-Arraignment Release Protocols (PARP).

The policy is a step forward towards a more fair, just, and safe pretrial system.

The PARP policy rightfully shifts away from money bail and recommends administrative release for people charged with misdemeanors and low-level felonies.

The court’s policy does not represent a radical change in the pretrial system and instead builds off years of similar bail policies and assessment of those policies. For the past three years, the county has had a bail schedule (often called the “emergency bail schedule” or EBS) on and off where many people charged with low-level offenses were released through administrative means, like citations, instead of having traditional cash bail imposed. Like the emergency bail schedule, the PARP policy recommends administrative release for low-level offenses. The policies of having pre-arraignment magistrate reviews and a money bail system for people detained until arraignment continue.

Extensive research demonstrates that reforms like the PARP policy are good for public safety.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) people charged with misdemeanors to be released without money bond. An independent federal monitor tasked with analyzing the data found that far more people are now being released pretrial and that these higher release rates did not translate to higher rearrest rates—rearrest rates have stayed largely constant from before and after the policy change.

The Council should not act on the critics’ fearmongering and misleading claims.

Ultimately, more pretrial detention will not benefit public safety, nor justice.

ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) By following the research on public safety and policies like PARP, we have an opportunity to spare many people the harmful destabilization of pretrial incarceration and spare Angelenos the results of such destabilization. Rather than join suit, Santa Monica City Council should encourage the court to monitor and share data analysis on implementation at regular intervals.

Sincerely,
Michelle Parris
Initiative Director
Vera California
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Ellis Raskin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:42 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; Christine Parra; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick
Cc: Clerk Mailbox; David White; Douglas Sloan; Denise Anderson-Warren Subject: Comments for Oct. 10, 2023 City Council Meeting Attachments: 2023-10-10 Ltr re Agenda Item 16-F.pdf; 2023-10-10 Ltr re Agenda Item 16-C.pdf; 2023-10-10 Ltr re Agenda Item 4-E.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Hon. Councilmembers:

Please find attached comment letters regarding agenda items 4‐E, 16‐C, and 16‐F.

Best,
Ellis Raskin
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) October 10, 2023
Santa Monica City Council
c/o City Clerk
1685 Main St., Room 250
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Conference with Legal Counsel – Considering Whether to Initiate Litigation – Gov. Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): City of Whittier, et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCP03579 (requested by Councilmember Brock) Dear Hon. Councilmembers,
I understand that you are considering taking action regarding the above-captioned case. I urge you to not vote in favor of joining this lawsuit.

I have attached a report from the American Bar Association that discusses the importance of bail reform. At the very least, I hope you will read just this short excerpt:

Cash bail creates a two-tiered system of justice hiding in plain sight. It splits the criminal legal system into two separate and unequal processes: one for those who have money and one for those who do not. After courts set bail amounts, people who can afford that cost return home to their families, jobs, and lives where they can prepare their defense and ultimately recoup their payment after returning to court. People who cannot afford bail are left behind bars for the duration of their case—often lasting months and even years.

During that time, people’s lives can fall apart; they can lose their jobs and homes, be separated from their children, and endure the daily trauma that jail brings. These pressures mount against them and ultimately impact case outcomes. Research shows that people detained pretrial are more likely to plead guilty after succumbing to these pressures, leading to higher conviction rates and harsher punishments than their released counterparts.

Best,
Ellis Raskin
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier)

!"#
$
#"
!
# !%

% &!%
! '#'!' !'$#

'

'
''
'"(
)*+,-./0/1/2 3456789:3;<
=>?@AB>CDAE?FGHIJ>KIAL MNO,PQ-RSTNTUVTWXTWQ YZ[\]^ _`abc =>?de?DAEIfEDAeAfILL?BILJgJh?eeiJhJ??jhFkILIfE?h>?IleAfAJhDIhAFfFGmiJhAE?Ifl AflAnAliILJoDAB>hhFGD??lFepqhJl?JABfEIe?J>FDhLgIGh?Dh>?r?nFLihAFfIDgsIDt>?fh>? de?DAEIfu?FuL?l?eIfl?lJhDFfBBiIDIfh??Jh>IhDAB>hJD?E?fhLgtFfGDFeh>?KDAhAJ> eFfIDE>gtFiLlD?eIAfuDFh?Eh?lGDFef?tBFn?Dfe?fhFn?DD?IE>pvu?EAIL?eu>IJAJtIJ uLIE?lFfuDFh?EhAFfJGFDh>FJ?IEEiJ?lFGEDAe?Jw?fJ>DAfAfBtAh>Afh>?KALLFGrAB>hJEL?ID kFiflIDA?JIDFiflEDAeAfILAfn?JhABIhAFfJwhDAILJwIflJ?fh?fE?Jp=>iJwGDFeAhJ?IDLA?Jh>AJhFDgwh>? xfAh?lvhIh?JuDFnAl?lGFDIDFkiJhEDAeAfILL?BILJgJh?ewtAh>BiIDIfh??lJIG?BiIDlJIflI uD?JieuhAFfFGAffFE?fE?GFDILLp Kihh>?GDIe?DJL?Ghk?>AflIGIhILl?JABfyItzEIJ>kIALp{DABAfIhAfBAf|iDFu?eIfgE?fhiDA?J k?GFD?h>?lItfFGh>?r?uikLAEwh>?uDIEhAE?FGeFf?gkIALF}?D?lIfILh?DfIhAn?hFn?fB?GiL kLFFlG?ilJpqfJh?IlFGuAEjAfBiuIDeJIBIAfJhh>FJ?k?LA?n?lhF>In?lFf?>IDewdfBLF~vIFf LItD?iAD?lImilB?hFl?h?DeAf?h>?BiALhFGIfIEEiJ?luIDhgpqfFDl?DGFDh>Ihu?DJFfhFItIAhI EFiDh>?IDAfBFfh>?eIhh?DGDFe>Fe?wh>?D?tIJh>?FuhAFfhFuiheFf?gFfh>?LAf?pqfh>AJ >AJhFDAEILEFfh?hwEIJ>kIALJ?Dn?lIlAJhAfEhuiDuFJ?zAfE?fhAnAAfBD?hiDfhFEFiDhIflInFAlAfB ifJIfEhAFf?lkLFFlJ>?lGDFeh>?e?D?IEEiJIhAFfFGIEDAe?p qfl?eIflAfBBFn?Dfe?fhLAeAhIhAFfJAfEDAeAfILeIhh?DJw?IDLgde?DAEIfJGFiB>hGFDI uD?JieuhAFfFGAffFE?fE?h>IhnILi?lGD??lFeIflmiJhAE??iILLgBFAfBJFGIDIJhF?fJ>DAf?I kIfIBIAfJh?E?JJAn?kIALAfh>?HFfJhAhihAFfp=>?gILLFt?lEIJ>kIALhFLAn?FfwD?LgAfBFfh>? LAfB?DAfBIJJieuhAFfh>IhuihhAfBeFf?gFfh>?LAf?tALLeIj?u?FuL?EFe?kIEjhFEFiDhp Kihh>?EFfhAfi?liJ?FGEIJ>kIAL>IJEFDDiuh?lh>?JgJh?eGDFetAh>AfJh??DAfBAhGIDGDFeI e?D?AfE?fhAn?hFD?hiDfGFDIhDAILpK?ht??f
Iflwh>?uD?hDAILmIALuFuiLIhAFfAfED?IJ?l kgu?DE?fhwuDAeIDALgli?hFmilB?JD?LgAfBeFD?IfleFD?FfEIJ>kIALIflJ?hhAfBAhIh IeFifhJu?FuL?EFiLlfFhI}FDlp{fIfgBAn?flIgwf?IDLg>ILGIeALLAFfu?FuL?LIfBiAJ>AfmIAL E?LLJIEDFJJh>?EFifhDgtIAhAfBGFDh>?ADEIJ?JhFeFn?GFDtIDlpC?FuL?l?hIAf?luD?hDAILfFt ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier)

!"#
$
#"
!
# !%

% &!%
! '#'!' !'$#

'

'
''
'"(
)*+,-.)/0,12*314/5126078/9:),06;*<8=*6>./.->*16/3?@26>,12,/0,16;*>>A.0,8-),7 633/;,31-37,012,>*4B90,,7/)0,)*638/-1/90,*;2-3>,8812,*;;-8,72*8,3/-C2)/3,A1/ .*A9/061?D-11268683<112,/3>A;/81/912,;*82E*6>8A81,)F4,*>>.*A)/0,12*34,+3/4G )/0*>>AB8/;6*>>AB*37,;/3/)6;*>>A? HIJKLIMNOJPQJRNSMTUQVWTWXMVITYPIVMINMTQZRINMSMQJRTYQPXMTQSKQQTSMPQVPMXMTINNQUINJ[JSQX\ ]^_`a_ab]cde_fbg^hg^f]`ibac]j]klm]abj]df^nddo_p`dqrs t,.*0*1,*37u3,v-*>wx,;18 y*82E*6>;0,*1,8*14/516,0,78A81,)/9=-816;,26763C63.>*6386C21?z18.>61812,;06)63*>>,C*> 8A81,)631/14/8,.*0*1,*37-3,v-*>.0/;,88,8{/3,9/012/8,42/2*|,)/3,A*37/3,9/0 12/8,42/7/3/1?:91,0;/-0188,1E*6>*)/-318B.,/.>,42/;*3*x/0712*1;/810,1-032/),1/ 12,609*)6>6,8B=/E8B*37>6|,842,0,12,A;*3.0,.*0,12,607,9,38,*37->16)*1,>A0,;/-.12,60 .*A),31*91,00,1-0363C1/;/-01?},/.>,42/;*33/1*x/07E*6>*0,>,91E,2637E*089/012, 7-0*16/3/912,60;*8,G/91,3>*8163C)/3128*37,|,3A,*08?~-063C12*116),B.,/.>,<8>6|,8;*3 9*>>*.*01F12,A;*3>/8,12,60=/E8*372/),8BE,8,.*0*1,790/)12,60;26>70,3B*37,37-0,12, 7*6>A10*-)*12*1=*6>E063C8?2,8,.0,88-0,8)/-31*C*638112,)*37->16)*1,>A6).*;1;*8, /-1;/),8?,8,*0;282/4812*1.,/.>,7,1*63,7.0,106*>*0,)/0,>6+,>A1/.>,*7C-6>1A*91,0 8-;;-)E63C1/12,8,.0,88-0,8B>,*763C1/26C2,0;/3|6;16/30*1,8*372*082,0.-3682),31812*3 12,600,>,*8,7;/-31,0.*018? ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier)

!"#
$
#"
!
# !%

% &!%
! '#'!' !'$#

'

'
''
'"(
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`7713?9:+7+-+1,.*121,/:+973+,-96:+6D+,+58/,,+<71?9:+7+-9-13-*1,82193/?NYZ[B\]^AR,-=34 +6[77+6/+,;?/21Q95871;,=DD1,-,-*9-<4R82+7KMKM;]aAJ812:16-/?3/:=516-13NYZ[B\]^:9,1,+6 -*1,-9-1.1212179-13-/81/871:4:7+6D-*2/=D*-*1N//@N/=6-4C9+7A )*11:/6/5+::/6,1P=16:1,/?:9,*<9+731>9,-9-16/-/6749::=,13+63+>+3=97,<=-97,/-*1+2 7/>13/61,AY6:1:9,*<9+7+,,1-;81/871.*/:96,:2981-/D1-*12-*195/=6-59@1-*13+b:=7- 31:+,+/6/?.*1-*12-/8=-:2+-+:9721,/=2:1,/6-*17+61;,/51-+51,82+/2+-+c+6D-*1+2?2113/5 />12/-*1261:1,,9247+>+6D1Q816,1,A)*+,`696:+97:/,-+,/?-163+,-2+<=-13<14/63-*1+63+>+3=97; 9,89216-,;,+<7+6D,;?2+163,;892-612,;963792D1261-./2@,:*+8+61>124-*+6D-*14:96T3+,2=8-+6D -*11:/6/5+:,-9<+7+-4/?1>124/61+6>/7>13A d/-1>124/61:9629+,1-*1?=63,61:1,,924-/,1:=21-*1+221719,1A)*+,+,=6,=282+,+6D :/6,+312+6D-*1513+96<9+795/=6-,1-<4:/=2-,+6KM]a?/281/871?9:+6D9?17/649::=,9-+/6 .9,I]M;MMM;.*+71-*1513+96966=97+6:/51?/29812,/6+6821-2+9731-16-+/6-*9-4192.9, I]a;]M^A)*1IK<+77+/6<9+7</63+63=,-2482139-/2+74-92D1-,-*+,8/8=79-+/6;,11@+6D-/1Q-29:- 5/614>+96/6021?=639<71?11,?2/5-*/,1.+-*-*1?1.1,-21,/=2:1,AR,921,=7-;7/.0+6:/51 ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier)

!"#
$
#"
!
# !%

% &!%
! '#'!' !'$#

'

'
''
'"()
*+,,-./0/12314,5.1.0676+215**1220+*4/0/*561*+.+,/*412+-4*128191.:;1.*;54<12541 =4+331=+4.+19/=1.*1+>:4+.<=+/.</2>+-.=? @;1.31+361:/0;*52;A5/6*+.=/0/+.2*5..1/0;145B+4=0+3570;505,+-.0.+40;1A5/6 A+.=2,5.C2>11D41,5/./.</.E5/6+4*59/.<0+3615=15620;50+B140/,121491=+434+A50/+.>4+, ;+,15410;1+.67+30/+.2?F.=710D191.34104/56=101.0/+.;52522+*/501=*+202?@;/61 /.*54*14501=D31+361,141675**-21=+>*4/,121G314/1.*15./,,1=/501/.*+,16+225.=6+.<H 014,*+.21I-1.*12+.>-0-411,36+7,1.0?FJ;/65=163;/520-=7>+-.=0;5031+361/.*54*14501= 34104/56154.KLDLMN6122/.0;1>+-471542>+66+:/.<0;1412+6-0/+.+>0;1/4*5210;5.0;+21:;+ :1414161521=:;/610;1/4*521:5231.=/.<? O,35*01=31+361=+.C0A1540;121*+20256+.1?P5G357142231.=KLNA/66/+.15*;71540+ /.*54*1450161<5667/..+*1.031+361?@;1.>5*0+4/.</.0;1/,35*0+>34104/56=101.0/+.+. >5,/6/12D*+,,-./0/12D5.=2+*/107D0;104-11*+.+,/**+20+>0;/2*4/2/2;52A11.120/,501=0+ 5334+5*;KLNMA/66/+.5..-5667? Q+6-0/+.2 @/0;*52;A5/6*+20/.<F,14/*5.22+,-*;:;/61-.=14,/./.<0;161<5627201,C2=12/<.20+ 34+01*0/.=/9/=-56>411=+,D:1,-20R.=5.56014.50/91?S+40-.50167D0;141/219/=1.*10;50*52; A5/6/2.+0.1*122547?P;1T5/6J4+E1*0;522-33+401=+914UVDMMM31+361/.,5W/.<XU314*1.0+> 0;1/4*+-405331545.*12?P;/2.50/+.56.+.34+R034+9/=12>411A5/6522/205.*15.=*+,,-./07H A521=34104/562-33+400+6+:H/.*+,15.=/.=/<1.031+361191477154D657/.<:52010+0;1/=150;50 *52;A5/6/2.1*122547>+40;1*4/,/.5661<5627201,0++314501?T1*5-21/02*6/1.02;591.+R.5.*/56 +A6/<50/+.0+P;1T5/6J4+E1*0+40;1*+-402D0;/2;/<;314*1.05<12;+:20;500;19520,5E+4/07+> 31+361410-4.0+*+-40:/0;+-00;1A-4=1.+>*52;A5/6?P;1T5/6J4+E1*0+B142204+.<19/=1.*10;50 31+3612/,367.11=41,/.=142+>-3*+,/.<;154/.<2D;163:/0;045.23+4050/+.5.=+0;14 *+,,+.6+</20/*56*;5661.<12D5.=2-33+40.59/<50/.<9+6-.0547*+,,-./07HA521=2+*/562149/*12 8.+.1+>:;/*;*+202/.=/9/=-562DF,14/*5.956-12D+405G35714252,-*;52*52;A5/6? Q+6-0/+.2541*6154YF,14/*5.2*5.A+0;2041.<0;1.0;1E-20/*127201,5.=59+/=0;1*+2067 *+.21I-1.*12+>*-441.065:A7ZL[41I-/4/.<0;50E-=<12,5W1=1*/2/+.25A+-034104/564161521 5.==101.0/+.A521=+.19/=1.*15.==-134+*122450;140;5.,+.1752534+G7>+4:;+<+12 ;+,1\ZU[1.2-4/.<0;5034104/56=101.0/+./20;14541D6/,/01=1G*130/+.D520;1]?Q?Q-341,1^+-40 ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier)

!"#
$
#"
!
# !%

% &!%
! '#'!' !'$#

'

'
''
'"()
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`.->0A+4F+42A;4,02->,/-;/<-:=0<9B =490</>;8-4C-+<9*BDN9*+,A;>>=/9-2;=>A>0.04+<<-:+<,B,9-.F+4209,A;4,-H=-4A-,0./+A9=, +<<Da-.=,9>-9=>49;*0,9;>0A/>;9-A90;4,;G0420802=+<,G+A04:.->-+AA=,+90;4,@B-4204:9*0, />+A90A-+42,=//;>904:/-;/<-G>;.C09*049*-0>A;..=4090-,D`G9->+<<FG>--2;.,*;=<2@-G>--D bcdedfg heiejkelmdnocpnqheojrsndehb dqtehg hqskdnurspeheokfvhkewecojjox ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier)

!"#
$
#"
!
# !%

% &!%
! '#'!' !'$#

'

'
''
'"((
)*+,-./01/,)223.-/4-30 5 6789:;9:6<=<>7?@>A8:8BC6;96CB8DE@67B@F6ED=GH7<:H89@6ID?<9JBHCI:@J?<C<KH9;JI8?;6;7898?H7>H@@D;@>H9>7BH?H9<G>FD@:H7;6:I;>IHCI>EBH7;>8L> 7<@I>=<HG MNOPQR STUVWXYZ[Z\]Z^_Z^V `abcQRdQecfghQNbiaejkPalmcedRQnafO opqrstuvwvxyvz{vzrpxvxtzpr|}rspqwqr~zxtsvtvps|rtq vzrz}|rpr|vzp{vprzv }|rptx|ttvpsvxxpxvzqtvzqr~zpwvxt}|t|pvsx~}}r|rr~xvzxrsrpzqrtvz pzptz}tr}sttt|wwtv|x}v|rtvps|rtqxrspqwtv xtvrqvtxrtzqvxvpsvz x|tztz}|t|pvsxwxtxvq|rxxtqr~z|w October
ITEM
10, 2023

4.E.

ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Natalya Zernitskaya <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 11:47 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Lana Negrete; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Caroline Torosis; David White; Jesse Zwick; [email protected]
Subject: 10/10/23 City Council Agenda Item 3D

EXTERNAL
Re: Santa Monica City Council Agenda 10/10/2023 Item 3D Dear Mayor Davis, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, City Councilmembers, Mr. Sloan, and Mr. White, I once again urge the Council to stay the course and allow the case to be re-heard by the Court of Appeals for a number of reasons including the need for the Court to apply the facts of the case to the provisions of the law as well as the fact that staying the course is the most fiscally responsible choice given our current circumstances.

Additionally, I urge Councilmember de la Torre to recuse himself from this item due to the actual or perceived conflict of interest that he has in regards to this lawsuit and his relationships with the Plaintiffs.

For your convenience, I have included the content of my letter to the City Council on this issue from September 12, 2023 below:

Councilmember de la Torre has a Conflict of Interest and Must Recuse Himself from Item 3.D As I previously stated when I provided verbal comments at the May 9th meeting, I once again urge Councilmember de la Torre to recuse himself from participating in the legal conference discussions on this topic. With respect to the June 2022 settlement of the conflict of interest case between the City and Councilmember de la Torre, the settlement states that “the decision to recuse on account of any potential conflict of interest shall be left to each councilmember,” but it is in the interest of protecting the City’s reputation and maintaining the highest ethical standards for Councilmember de la Torre to recuse himself from this item because of the following facts:

1. Prior to being elected to the Council, Councilmember de la Torre served as co-chair of one of the coplaintiffs, the Pico Neighborhood Association (PNA), and he served as the representative of the PNA in the CVRA case,

2. The other co-plaintiff is the Councilmember’s spouse.

3. After being elected to the Council in 2020, in June 2021, the Councilmember filed an amicus brief as an individual in support of the plaintiffs.

Recusal from the case would not prohibit Councilmember de la Torre from voicing his opinion on his preferred method of electing local representatives publicly, but would protect the City and the councilmember from any appearance of impropriety or conflict. Outside of any potential financial conflicts of interest, there is also a common law conflict of interest prohibition which extends to non-economic interests.

In prior legal cases on the topic of conflicts of interest, the California Attorney General has noted that a public officer is bound to exercise their powers with disinterested skill, zeal and diligence for the benefit of the public.

Actual injury is not the principle the law proceeds on. Fidelity to the public interest is the purpose of conflict of interest laws.

The Supreme Court’s Ruling and the City’s Next Steps on the CVRA Lawsuit ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 2 With regards to the choices that the Council faces in deciding the next steps for the case, it is in the best interest of the City and its residents to allow the case to be re-heard at the Court of Appeals.

The Supreme Court’s opinion was highly nuanced in how a plaintiff would be required to prove vote dilution under the CVRA and further asserted that a plaintiff must prove both racially polarized voting and vote dilution in order to prove a violation of the CVRA.

The Supreme Court did not rule “on the ultimate question of whether the City’s at-large voting system is consistent with the CVRA” or declare the plaintiffs the victors, but rather took the opportunity to clarify some of the ambiguities of the law. The City did not lose (or win) the case and neither did the Plaintiffs.

It is up to the Santa Monica City Council to ensure that the “totality of the facts and circumstances” of the City’s current at-large voting system are carefully examined by the Court of Appeals as the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the same panel of appellate judges who issued their now-depublished opinion in favor of the City in July 2020.

In defining how vote dilution must be proven, the Supreme Court also noted that protected class voters should not be made “worse off” by a potential remedy:
“To replace at-large with district elections under a dilution theory, a successful plaintiff must show not merely that the protected class would have a real electoral opportunity in one or more hypothetical districts, but also that the incremental gain in the class’s ability to elect its candidate of choice in such districts would not be offset by a loss of the class’s potential to elect its candidates of choice elsewhere in the locality. (...) As both sides in this proceeding agree, unless the plaintiff can demonstrate a net gain in the protected class’s potential to elect candidates under an alternative system, it has not shown the at-large method of election “impairs” the ability of the protected class to elect its preferred candidates. ”
If Santa Monica were forced to switch to by-district elections, Latino voters would certainly be made worse off.

Further, If we wish to change the method(s) by which we elect our representatives, that decision should be made through an open, public process and ratified by the voters, and not through an opaque settlement decided in closed session behind closed doors. As we are a charter city, our form of government is for the citizens alone to decide by voting at the ballot box.

The Fiscally Responsible Choice
At this stage of the legal process for this case, the most fiscally responsible decision would be to stay the course and allow the case to be re-heard at the Court of Appeals. If the Council were to seek a potential settlement at this time, there could be a potential financial liability of millions if not tens of millions of dollars at a time when our City’s fiscal health is still recovering. Any additional legal costs from continuing the case would be marginal compared to the costs that have already been incurred and if the Court of Appeals’ initial ruling is any indication, the City may have a reasonable chance of potentially recovering at least some of the costs that we have incurred.

It is important to note that Section 14030 of the CVRA is a one-way attorney fee provision, which means that the prevailing plaintiff party is entitled to fees and costs, so long as the plaintiff is not the state or a political subdivision. There is no fee provision for prevailing defendants. Prevailing defendants do not recover costs unless the action was frivolous or the like. However, in the Court of Appeals’ opinion, the panel of three judges unanimously awarded costs to the City.

In conclusion, I urge the City Council to heed the intention of the California Supreme Court and give the Court of Appeals the opportunity to re-evaluate the Santa Monica CVRA case.

Sincerely,
Natalya Zernitskaya
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 3 Natalya Zernitskaya (she/her)
[email protected]
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 1 Xavier Mota
From: Peter DiChellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2023 1:15 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Cc: POA; Community Affairs; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Council Item 2 -- re: 4E: Zero Bail Litigation

EXTERNAL
To: Santa Monica City Council
Copies: Neighborhood OrganizaƟons, SMDP, SMPD, SMPOA,
The City Council needs to do whatever is necessary to deter ever‐rising crime in Santa Monica, too much of it the result of rabid crime‐enablers in LA County government. Every new crime isn’t simply another staƟsƟc; it’s another vicƟm.

The County’s new zero bail, catch‐and‐release mandate is naive and dangerous, and its raƟonale, as presented to the public, is chock full of falsehoods.

First, we already have painful experience with LA County cite‐and‐release dangers. A small sampling: a) The individual arrested for a knife murder a few blocks south of the Pier had been arrested and released on a citaƟon just two weeks before; b) The man who stabbed a City worker in the chest in Palisades Park had been released from jail on a citaƟon five days prior to the stabbing; c) Another man, arrested for robbery and stabbings near the beach, had been cited and released for baƩery (i.e., punching or hiƫng someone) two weeks earlier; d) An individual arrested for arson of an inhabited building had been cited and released for a different crime a month earlier. Why expect different results now? Second, the claim that “zero‐dollar bail is not available for serious or violent crimes” is blatantly false based on the published bail schedule itself, which demands police release a variety of child sex offenders, those who shoot a firearm on a public highway, possessors of illegal explosive devices, and those arrested for assaults/baƩeries on school grounds On what planet are those not “serious or violent crimes?” Also released forthwith are convicted felons and others who inƟmidate or threaten witnesses, those arrested for commiƫng certain hate crimes, those who interfere with emergency first responders or impersonate a police officer, loiterers who refuse to leave private property, burglars, and repeat offenders for theŌ and public transit crimes.

Those mandated releases for repeat offenders also expose the County’s false spin that “the new rules do not allow repeat offenders back on the streets as individuals rearrested are not eligible for release a second Ɵme.” In fact, the published bail schedule is loaded with mandated releases for second and/or “subsequent” offenses.

Moreover, the penalty for refusing to appear in court aŌer being cited and released for any of these crimes is simply another citaƟon and immediate release.

Police, Sheriffs, and experienced prosecutors roundly denounce this crime‐friendly County scheme for good reason. And while proponents of the zero bail policy point to a single study showing its effecƟveness, they ignore other data, notably a Northern California study, demonstraƟng its dangers.

ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) 2 Santa Monica may have legiƟmate financial reasons for avoiding yet more liƟgaƟon involvement, but the Council must at least denounce this preposterous County policy via an open‐session resoluƟon vote. Show the world which Council members stand with Santa Monica and which ones stand with criminals.

Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica 90403
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023
ITEM 4.E.

October 10, 2023

4.E.a
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6083 : 4.E. Closed Session - Whittier) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office, Administration Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 6.49 on Taxicabs to Transition from Taxicab Franchises to Taxicab Permits
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

Executive Summary
At its meeting on September 26, 2023, the City Council introduced for first reading an Ordinance amending the text of Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 6.49 on Taxicabs to transition from taxicab franchises to taxicab permits. The ordinance is now presented to the City Council for adoption.

Prepared By: Bradley Michaud, Principal Legal Analyst
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d

5.A
Packet Pg. 129
1 City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CHAPTER 6.49 TO TRANSITION TAXICAB

REGULATIONS FROM A FRANCHISE-BASED SYSTEM TO A PERMIT-BASED SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica’s (“City”) taxicab franchise was established by Council in June 2009 due to the influx of the number of taxicabs within the City and complaints pertaining to poor customer service from drivers; confusing and high fees; lack of discounted services for seniors and residents with disabilities; and “bandit” taxis; and WHEREAS, the City’s one existing franchise with a taxicab company expires on December 31, 2023; and
WHEREAS, with the changing nature of the taxicab industry due in part to the rise in the use of Transportation Network Companies (“TNCs”) for ride-hailing services, staff recommends that the City shift from a franchise program for regulating taxicabs to a system that is permit-based.

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

SECTION 1. Chapter 6.49 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:

6.49.010 Definitions.

For the purposes of this Chapter certain words and phrases are defined and certain provisions shall be construed as herein set forth, unless it is apparent from the context that a different meaning is intended.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 2 (a) Taxicab. “Taxicab” means every automobile and motor-propelled vehicle which is not otherwise licensed by the California Public Utilities Commission, is designed to carry not more than eight persons, excluding the driver, is not otherwise required by State Law to have all trips prearranged, and is used for the transportation of passengers for hire within and without the boundaries of the City, at rates for distance traveled, or for waiting, standby or traffic delay time, or for any combination of such rates, and not operating over a defined route.
(b) Taxicab Company Permittee or Permittee. “Taxicab company permittee” or “permittee” means any person, firm, corporation, or other entity, however organized, including the management and officers thereunder, that is substantially located in and has been granted a permit by the City to provide taxicab transportation services. (c) Taxicab Driver. “Taxicab driver” means a driver who works for a taxicab company permittee or is a self-employed, independent taxicab company permittee, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(d) Taximeter. “Taximeter” means any device or technology that automatically calculates a predetermined rate or rates for taxicab services and indicates the charge for the hire of a taxicab, including Internet, web, or other network-based applications.

Taximeters may use global position system metering and also facilitate flat rates or promotional rates.

6.49.020 Authority of designated employees of the Police Department to have access to summary criminal history information.

Police Department employees assigned to or having responsibility for permitting and licensing pursuant to this Chapter shall have the authority to obtain State and local

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 3 summary criminal history information pursuant to Sections 11105(b)(11) and 13300(b)(11) of the California Penal Code.

6.49.030 Taxicab company permit— application for permit. (a) Prior to commencing the operation of taxicab services within the City, a taxicab company shall apply for and obtain a permit in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. In order for a taxicab company to be eligible for a permit, the taxicab company must provide documentation of the following consistent with applicable State law, this Chapter, and the City’s requirements: (1) the taxicab company is substantially located in the City; (2) established fares, fees, or rates to be charged to the customer; (3) participation in the pull-notice program; (4) financial responsibility; (5) a safety and disabled access education and training program; (6) the motor vehicles to be used for taxicab transportation services are in safe operating condition and have passed inspection by the City; (7) the address of an office or terminal where all documents pertaining to taxicab transportation services may be inspected by the City; and (8) provision of a taxicab driver fingerprint-based criminal history check and a mandatory drug and alcohol testing program.
(b) Taxicabs may be driven pursuant to a contract, agreement, or understanding between the taxicab company permittee and the driver. Such contract, agreement, or understanding shall not relieve the taxi company permittee from full and complete compliance with the applicable provisions of the Code, rules and regulations adopted pursuant to this Chapter.

6.49.040 Taxicab company permit —Suspension or revocation.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 4 (a) Suspension. The City may, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard, suspend a taxicab company’s operations for one or more days if, in the judgment of the City, a lapse in required insurance or any other violation of this Chapter; or a violation of any administrative rules and regulations established by the City, orders or directives established by the City, or applicable State law, creates an immediate safety hazard.

Cause for suspension also exists where the holder of a majority interest in the taxicab company or the taxicab company permittee illegally conducts any type of vehicle for hire or public transportation operation licensed by the City or any other governmental agency, or the permittee fails to pay any monetary penalties in accordance with this Chapter or any resolutions or schedules adopted thereto.
(b) Revocation. The City may, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard, revoke a permit in the event that the permittee, including its employees, officers, agents and drivers: violates this Chapter; violates subsection (d) of this Section; violates or commits multiple violations of any provision of this Chapter or any other law, rule, regulation, order or filings of any regulatory body having jurisdiction over the permittee; or practices, or attempts to practice, any fraud or deceit upon any governmental agency or regulatory body.
(c) The permittee may appeal any decision from the City to suspend or revoke to a Hearing Examiner for consideration pursuant to this Section. The matter will be set for a hearing and the City shall give the permittee at least thirty days’ written notice of the time and place of the hearing. At the hearing, the Hearing Examiner shall consider all relevant evidence and testimony and if supported by a preponderance of the evidence, the Hearing Examiner may, in his or her discretion, order the permittee to take remedial

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 5 actions or impose any other remedy as authorized by law, including, but not limited to, suspension for a designated period of time; or revocation of the permit. The decision or order of the Hearing Examiner shall be final and binding and subject only to judicial review.
(d) Effect of Suspension or Revocation. Upon suspension or revocation of a permit, all the company permittee’s taxicab operations in the City shall cease until such time as the suspension or revocation is lifted. Upon revocation of any taxicab permit, no permit to operate the same business activity shall be granted to the permit for a period of three years thereafter.

6.49.050 Taxicab company permit —Driver’s permit.
(a) Application. In order to obtain a taxicab driver’s permit, each person shall file with the City, upon forms supplied by the City, a completed verified application including the following information and documentation:
(1) Name, address, and age of applicant;
(2) Convictions, if any, in any court of law;
(3) Name, address, and certification of the taxicab company permittee by whom the applicant is to be employed as a taxicab driver in the City; (4) Proof of a valid California driver’s license;
(5) A signed agreement to submit to a background investigation and fingerprinting via LiveScan capture by the Police Department;
(6) Original test results from a certified laboratory or testing agency, submitted simultaneously with the applicant’s verified application, proving that the applicant has

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 6 tested negative for drugs and alcohol as provided by Section 53075.5(b)(3) of the California Government Code; and
(7) Such further information as the City may require, as established by the rules and regulations.
(b) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Applicant Investigation. The Police Department shall investigate each applicant for a taxicab driver’s permit and shall approve the application or state its reason for disapproval. The City may disapprove any applicant who has a record of criminal conduct or other behavior involving any of the following:
(1) Moral turpitude;
(2) Violence toward persons or property;
(3) Physical or mental disease which could make the applicant a danger to the safety of others;
(4) Illegal sexual conduct involving another nonconsenting person; (5) Negligent or reckless driving;
(6) Operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or drugs; (7) Three or more moving violations under the California Vehicle Code within the 12-month period preceding the date of the application;
(8) Existing suspension or revocation of a taxicab driver’s permit in any other jurisdiction as of the date of the application;
(9) Conviction of operating a taxicab without a valid taxicab driver’s permit or taxicab vehicle permit within the three-year period preceding the date of the application; or

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 7 (10) Acts showing the applicant to be otherwise incompetent or not fit to drive a taxicab.
(c) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Issuance. Based on the application, investigation and compliance with all requirements of Section 53075.5(b)(3) of the California Government Code, the City shall approve or deny the taxicab driver’s permit. No taxicab driver’s permit shall be issued if the applicant is under the age of eighteen years, if any false statement appears in the application, or if the application is otherwise incomplete. Upon approval of an application and receipt by the City of the taxicab driver’s permit fee, the City shall issue a taxicab driver’s permit to the applicant. The taxicab driver’s permit shall bear the name and photograph of the applicant, date of expiration of the taxicab driver’s permit, and name of the taxicab company permittee for which the driver is authorized to drive a taxicab.
(d) Taxicab Driver’s Permit Renewal. A taxicab driver’s permit which has not been revoked, suspended, or terminated may be renewed annually by paying the annual taxicab driver’s permit fee and by filing with the City a verification that the driver is in compliance with the provisions of this Section and test results from a certified laboratory or testing agency proving that the driver has tested negative for drugs and alcohol as provided by Section 53075.5(b)(3) of the California Government Code and U.S.

Department of Transportation program guidelines set forth in 49 CFR Parts 40, 653, and 654, and any other applicable regulations.
(e) Effect of Termination of Employment. The taxicab driver’s permit shall become void upon termination of employment, at which time the taxicab company permittee shall

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 8 immediately give the City written notice of the termination and the terminated driver shall immediately return their taxicab driver’s permit to the City. (f) Prohibition on Transfers. A taxicab driver’s permit is personal in nature and shall not be transferred to another person. Any purported transfer shall be null and void. (g) Grounds for Suspension and Revocation. Any taxicab driver’s permit and any taxicab vehicle permit may be suspended or revoked, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard, for any of the following reasons:
(1) Arrest or citation for the commission of any crime while driving a taxicab or any crime involving moral turpitude;
(2) Violation of any applicable rule or regulation, or Federal, State or local law relating to the operation of taxicabs by a driver, or by an employer in the case of a taxicab vehicle permit;
(3) Use of the taxicab driver’s permit for a purpose different from that for which it was issued;
(4) Suspension or revocation of the driver or taxicab company permittee’s taxicab driver’s permit or taxicab vehicle permit in another jurisdiction; and (5) The existence of any facts, including conviction of a crime that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions or duties of a taxicab driver, which would have been good cause to deny such taxicab driver’s permit application, regardless of when such facts arose.

6.49.060 Taxicab permit —Fees.
(a) Annual Taxicab Company Permit Fee. Each taxicab company permittee shall pay to the City an annual fee, established by resolution of the City Council, to cover the

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 9 City’s costs of administering taxicab transportation services in the City. Such payment shall be in addition to any other prescribed fees, including but not limited to, business license fees. The taxicab company permit fee shall be due, without set off or deduction, upon issuance of the taxicab company permit and payable on each anniversary date thereafter, unless otherwise as specified in the franchise ordinance. Failure to pay the full taxicab company fee when due shall be cause for revocation of the taxicab company permit.
(b) Annual Taxicab Vehicle Permit Fee. Each taxicab company permittee shall be required annually to obtain a taxicab vehicle permit and to pay to the City an annual taxicab vehicle permit fee, established by resolution of the City Council, for each taxicab operating under its taxicab company permit.
(c) Annual Taxicab Driver’s Permit Fee. Each taxicab driver shall be required annually to renew his or her taxicab driver’s permit and the taxicab permittee or driver shall pay to the City an annual taxicab driver’s permit fee, established by resolution of the City Council.
(d) No fee refunds shall be issued to any taxicab company permittee upon revocation of a, or to any driver upon revocation of a taxicab driver’s permit.

6.49.070 Taxicab company permittee —Signage.

Taxicab company permittees and taxicab drivers shall ensure that taxicabs display the following signage:
(a) Two cards not less than two inches by four inches nor more than two and onehalf inches by five inches, in both the front seat and the rear seat in full view of

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 10 passengers, which state the following in letters and numbers which are clearly legible and in the following format:
(1) On the first card: the name, address and telephone number of the taxicab franchisee which operates the taxicab and all rates to be charged; and (2) On the second card: “COMPLAINTS? Call the City of Santa Monica’s Hotline,” followed by the City’s hotline telephone number.
(b) Every taxicab shall have printed upon it, in lettering and numbering not less than two and one-fourth inches in height and five-sixteenths of an inch wide, the cab number and the name and telephone number of the taxicab company permittee which operates the taxicab. The telephone number and the cab number shall also be printed in a plainly visible manner upon the rear of such vehicle. (c) Every taxicab may have an electrically lighted identification or vacant sign, or a combination of both, attached to the top of such taxicab, which shall be not more than two and one-half inches high by nine inches in length.
(d) No taxicab shall display any sign other than those authorized in this Chapter.

6.49.080 Taxicab company permit —Identification decal required. (a) Each taxicab operated pursuant to a permit shall be identified as a City of Santa Monica authorized taxicab by a taxicab identification decal issued by the City. No person shall identify any vehicle by means of such taxicab identification decal, or any facsimile thereof, unless authorized to do so by the City in writing. (b) Every taxicab driver and permittee shall ensure that a taxicab identification decal is displayed in each taxicab at all times. Such decal shall be issued and affixed by the City to a specific area on the assigned taxicab as designated by the City.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 11 (c) No taxicab driver or taxicab company permittee shall operate a taxicab without a current taxicab identification decal for that specific vehicle. (d) No taxicab identification decal issued shall be in any manner transferred or assigned. Any decal that is transferred, assigned, or otherwise conveyed or stolen shall be automatically revoked.
(e) No applicant may be issued a taxicab identification decal until that applicant has paid all applicable fees and all of his, her or its outstanding parking citations, including all civil penalties and related fees.

6.49.090 Taximeters and rates.
(a) No taxicab shall be operated within the City unless it is equipped with a taximeter that is approved by the California Division of Measurement Standards and complies with Section 12500.5 of the California Business and Professions Code and with all regulations established pursuant to Section 12107 of the California Business and Professions Code.
(b) Taximeters are subject to inspection at any time by any police officer of the City or any other authorized inspector, including the California Department of Agriculture Commissioner/Weights and Measures. Any vehicle equipped with an inaccurate taximeter is subject to impound until said taximeter shall have been correctly adjusted, inspected, and certified by the Los Angeles County Agricultural Commissioner/Weights and Measures.
(c) Taximeters shall be placed so that the reading dial displaying the amount to be charged is readily discernible by passengers.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 12 (d) All rates to be charged for transportation by taxicabs pursuant to a permit, including both flat and mileage rates, may not exceed the maximum rates established by resolution of City Council. No permittee shall charge, collect, demand, receive, or arrange for any compensation for taxicab service in an amount that exceeds said maximum rates. (e) Each taxicab company and taxicab driver shall disclose all rates to the customer before providing taxicab services.
(f) Except where a flat rate is applicable, it is unlawful for a taxicab driver to do any of the following:
(1) Set the taximeter in operation when such vehicle is not actually hired; (2) Fail to set the taximeter to a nonrecording position at the termination of each and every service or call the attention of the passenger to the amount registered; (3) Fail to activate the taximeter while carrying passengers or under hire; or (4) Activate or operate the taximeter so as to denote a rate of fare exceeding that authorized pursuant to this Chapter or by the permitting governmental agency. (g) No driver of any taxicab upon receiving payment of a fare thereon shall refuse to give a receipt upon the request of any passenger making said payment. (h) It shall be unlawful to charge a discounted or flat rate other than that which has been advertised or agreed to in advance with the passenger. (Added by Ord. No. 2590CCS, adopted 11/13/18)

6.49.100 Intentionally Left Blank

6.49.110 Taxicab identification and vehicle operating requirements.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 141 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 13 (a) No taxicab company shall operate any taxicab without a distinctive and uniform color scheme or identification which designates the taxicab company under which said vehicle is operated.
(b) No taxicab company shall use any color scheme, insignia, name, monogram, logo, or identification that conflicts with or imitates any color scheme, insignia, name, monogram, logo, or identification used by another taxicab company in such a manner as to be misleading or to tend to confuse or defraud the public. (c) Every taxicab company and taxicab driver shall comply with the following operating requirements at all times:
(1) Maintain and keep an accurate and legible record of all passengers carried, including the pickup and drop off points, the date and time carried, the starting and ending mileage of the taxicab for each trip, and the charges authorized and made for each trip; (2) Display inside the taxicab and in full view of passengers, a valid taxicab driver’s permit bearing the name and photograph of the taxicab driver and identifying the name of the taxicab company under which such taxicab is operated; (3) Maintain in each taxicab a working two-way communication system with a dispatcher;
(4) Obtain an annual vehicle inspection of each taxicab at a facility certified by the National Institute for Automotive Service or a facility registered with the Bureau of Automotive Repair; and
(5) Permit any police officer of the City or other authorized enforcement officer enforcing this Chapter to inspect any taxicab upon request.

6.49.120 Full use of taxicab.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 142 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 14 When a taxicab is engaged the occupant or occupants shall have the exclusive right to the full and free use of the passenger compartment and no owner or driver of said taxicab shall solicit or carry additional passengers therein without soliciting and receiving the consent of the occupant or occupants. Nothing in this provision is intended to restrict any taxicab company from offering carpooling or ride sharing services.

6.49.130 Access to passengers on business establishment premises; exclusive arrangements limited.
(a) No owner, operator, employee or agent of any hotel or any other business establishment shall exclude any permitted taxicab driver from standing or picking up passengers at any location where taxicabs or other vehicles for hire are regularly allowed to stand and pick up passengers on the premises of the hotel or other business establishment.
(b) Each taxicab company permittee is prohibited from entering into any taxicab service arrangements or agreements for compensation with any hotel, motel, or other business establishments, or any public or private agency or organization in the City for the purpose of obtaining exclusive access to the business’ patrons seeking on demand taxicab services. Each taxicab company permittee shall ensure that none of its members or taxicab drivers enters into any such taxicab service arrangements or agreements for compensation with any hotel, motel or other business establishments, or any public or private agency or organization in the City. Nothing in this Section prohibits exclusive arrangements with any business establishment for the purpose of providing pre-arranged transportation services for events with multiple participants, employee shuttle services,

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 143 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 15 carpooling services, or other arrangement approved in advance by the City to the extent consistent with the requirements of this Chapter.

6.49.140 Unauthorized taxicab services prohibited; exception. (a) No person shall knowingly dispatch a vehicle or respond to a request for a “taxi,” “cab” or “taxicab” for pick-up within the City, or pick up passengers within the City for taxicab services, unless the vehicle has a valid taxicab vehicle permit, the driver of such vehicle has a valid taxicab driver’s permit, and the taxicab is operated pursuant to this Chapter.
(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) above, a taxicab company or taxicab driver that is lawfully permitted by a governmental agency to operate in Los Angeles County may provide prearranged trips anywhere within the City.
(c) No person who drives or operates a taxicab in the City shall publish, advertise or broadcast in any manner, written or oral, a telephone number, website address, or other identifier, either by itself or connected to a rotary, redirect, or call forwarding system for taxicab service, which is the same telephone number, website address, or other identifier, as that for other taxicabs or vehicles for hire. (d) No person who drives or operates a taxicab in the City shall use a name that imitates a name used by another person who drives or operates a taxicab in such a manner as to be misleading or tend to confuse or defraud the public. (e) No person shall advertise or otherwise hold itself out as providing taxicab services within the City, unless such person is operating pursuant to a taxicab company permit granted by the City or is lawfully permitted by a governmental agency to provide prearranged trips in the City.

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 144 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 16 6.49.150 Rules and regulations.

The Director of Transportation or designee is authorized to adopt administrative rules and regulations consistent with this Code and applicable State law necessary to implement this Chapter. Such rules and regulations may include, but are not limited to, provisions: governing taxicab service and safety; prescribing limitations, conditions and qualifications of applicants for vehicle permits and driver permits; stipulating the responsibilities of taxicab company permittees and their drivers; and pertaining to public health, safety, and welfare. Violations of the administrative rules and regulations adopted pursuant to this section shall constitute violations of this Chapter, and shall subject the violator to the penalties set forth in this Chapter.

6.49.160 Penalty for violation.
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, any person violating any provision of this Chapter shall be guilty of either: (1) an infraction, which shall be punishable by a fine of one hundred dollars for the first violation, two hundred dollars for a second violation within one year, and five hundred dollars for a third and subsequent violations within one year; or (2) a misdemeanor, which shall be punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars per violation, or by imprisonment in the County Jail for a period not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Where the violation is of a continuing nature, each day that the violation continues constitutes a separate and distinct violation.
(b) Any police officer and other persons authorized by the City to enforce this Chapter are authorized under Sections 53075.6 and 53075.61 of the California Government Code, Section 5411.5 of the California Public Utilities Code, Section 21100.4

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 145 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 17 of the California Vehicle Code and any other applicable State law, to impound and retain any vehicle operating within the City as a taxicab without having any valid permits issued by the City to operate a taxicab service, in violation of this Chapter. (c) Every person who operates a taxicab and who knowingly and willfully issues, publishes or affixes, or causes or permits to be issued, published or affixed, any oral or written advertisement, broadcast or holding out to the public or any portion thereof, in any manner whatsoever, that the person operates a taxicab company or an individual taxicab without having any valid permits is guilty of a misdemeanor. (d) Any person who, after due notice and an opportunity to be heard in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 6.16, is found to have been operating a taxicab service within the City without any valid permits may in the City’s discretion be required to pay a fine of not less than five thousand dollars for each violation, plus any assessments and interest as authorized by law, as set forth by resolution of the City Council. (e) The remedies specified in this Section are cumulative and their specification shall not preclude the use of any other remedy provided by law.

6.49.170 Penalties for violations of rules and regulations.

Any person who violates a rule or regulation adopted pursuant to this Chapter may be subject to an administrative citation pursuant to Chapter 1.09 of this Code. A taxicab company shall be responsible for the violation of a rule or regulation by a taxicab driver operating under that company, and shall be deemed a responsible party within the meaning of Section 1.09.020 of this Code.

SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 146 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) 18 inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.

SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

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

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney

5.A.a
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: ORD-6.49 Taxicab Permit 2d (6039 : Taxicab Permits - Second Reading) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.B
1 of 2
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office, Administration Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of an Interim Zoning Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2754 (CCS) Promoting Economic Recovery in the City’s Downtown Area, including the Third Street Promenade Area and Santa Monica Place, and Providing Other Minor and Clerical Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Related to Economic Recovery Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

Executive Summary
At its meeting on September 26, 2023, the City Council introduced for first reading an Interim Zoning Ordinance extending Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2754 (CCS) promoting economic recovery in the City’s downtown area, including the Third Street Promenade Area and Santa Monica Place, and providing other minor and clerical amendments to the Zoning Ordinance related to economic recovery. The ordinance is now presented to the City Council for adoption.

Prepared By: Bradley Michaud, Principal Legal Analyst
Approved Forwarded to Council

5.B
Packet Pg. 148
2 of 2
Attachments:

A. ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d

5.B
Packet Pg. 149
1 City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

AN INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA EXTENDING AND AMENDING REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED BY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2754 (CCS) TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC RECOVERY IN THE CITY’S DOWNTOWN AREA, INCLUDING THE THIRD STREET

PROMENADE AREA AND SANTA MONICA PLACE, AND PROVIDE OTHER MINOR

AND CLERICAL AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATED TO

ECONOMIC RECOVERY
WHEREAS, on July 6, 2010, the City Council adopted the Land Use and Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan (“LUCE”), which designates the proposed general distribution, location, and extent of land uses within the City; and WHEREAS, on July 25, 2017, the City Council of the City of Santa Monica (“City Council”) adopted the Downtown Community Plan (“DCP”) which sets forth the City’s vision of Downtown as a high quality, mixed-use district offering opportunities as a major public space framed by a mix of retail, restaurants, and services that form unique experiences enjoyable to both residents and visitors; and WHEREAS, the DCP supports activities that enrich the Promenade, including street performances and events that enliven the street and provide memorable experiences for visitors, while also seeking to expand cultural opportunities, including live music venues and upgraded state-of-the art cinemas; and WHEREAS, the DCP acknowledges that the Promenade is an essential component of the Downtown’s economic sustainability and emphasizes the importance of reevaluating and refreshing the Promenade so that it remains attractive and exciting to residents and visitors alike; and

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 2 WHEREAS, DCP Goal LU3 contemplates that the Downtown will continue to be the economic center for the City, providing a diverse and flexible mix of uses that can meet future resident, business, and visitor demand; and WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the City Manager, as the Director of Emergency Services (“Director of Emergency Services”), proclaimed the existence of a local emergency pursuant to Chapter 2.16 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to ensure the availability of mutual aid and effectuate the City’s response to the novel coronavirus (“COVID-19”), and this local emergency was restated on March 14, 2020, through a revised declaration of local emergency to ensure compliance with all digital signature requirements (the “Executive Order”); and
WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services issued a Third Supplement to the Executive Order, requiring the closure of a wide range of businesses including bars, nightclubs, on-premises restaurant service, movie theatres, live performance venues, gyms, fitness centers, spas, hair salons, massage parlors, and nail salons; and
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order N-33-20 directing all residents of the State of California to heed directives issued by the State Health Officer on the same date instructing all Californians to stay home except as needed to maintain continuity of operations of the federal critical infrastructure sectors; and
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2020, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health issued an enhanced Health Officer Order, the Safer at Home Order for Control of

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 3 COVID-19, amending and superseding its earlier March 16, 2020 Order, closing all nonessential businesses, and limiting gatherings to 9 people or less; and WHERAS, after March 19, 2020, the Los Angeles Department of Public Health, on multiple occasions, amended and modified its Health Officer Order, recognizing the issues posed by community transmission of COVID-19 in Los Angeles County, and, in response, maintaining public health measures that have, at differing times, included strict limitations on public gatherings, required closures of certain businesses, and strict limitations and protocols for the operations of businesses permitted to remain open; and WHEREAS, as of March 31, 2023, the local, state, and federal COVID-19 emergency declarations have concluded; and
WHEREAS, although the emergency orders have been lifted, the economic impacts of the COVID-19 closures of, and limitations on, businesses have been and continue to be devastating to the local Santa Monica economy; and the Downtown area is continuing to experience economic uncertainty; and
WHEREAS, as the commercial and economic landscape evolves, Downtown’s economic recovery and competitive advantage will depend on its ability to deliver on a diverse range of unique dining, retail, and entertainment uses; and WHEREAS, as restaurant and entertainment environments across the region and county continue to evolve, there is a need to adjust allowed uses and dining and entertainment options to enable economic recovery and provide increased flexibility to minimize vacancies on the Third Street Promenade and the Downtown areas; and

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 4 WHEREAS, the City has an important governmental interest in maintaining a thriving business community and protecting the health, safety, and economic welfare of its citizens and businesses; and
WHEREAS, vacancy rates, in addition to economic impacts that threaten the health, safety, and economic welfare of its citizens and businesses, may lead to public safety impacts, including, but not limited to, increased calls for emergency services, and WHEREAS, on October 25, 2022, City Council adopted an Ordinance amending the text of the City’s Zoning Ordinance related to economic recovery in commercial districts Citywide and in the area including and immediately adjacent to the Third Street Promenade; and
WHEREAS, these zoning changes codified Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinances approved in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and focused on relaxing barriers that had been shown to create unnecessarily difficult processes for simple changes of use, inhibiting the establishing of common neighborhood-servicing uses; and WHEREAS, on January 24, 2023, City Council held a discussion session requesting that the City develop strategies to revitalize the Third Street Promenade that included, but were not limited to, establishing an arts and entertainment district in the 1200 block of the Third Street Promenade, expanding outdoor dining opportunities, promoting available space and development opportunities, Zoning Ordinance amendments to expand allowable uses, and opportunities to partner with Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. on street performances; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance includes zoning changes supporting a variety of potential commercial uses within Downtown; and

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 5 WHEREAS, the proposed changes focus on enabling additional outdoor uses and providing streamlined review for alcohol permits based on recent discussions with prospective businesses considering available tenant space within the Promenade areas; and
WHEREAS, pre-COVID-19, the City began discussions on the concept and feasibility of a utilizing the top levels of City-owned parking structures in the Downtown area for new uses, including a rooftop cinema, but such discussions ceased due to the pandemic commencing in March 2020; and
WHEREAS, as a part of the City’s economic recovery measures post-COVID-19, Downtown Santa Monica, Inc., City staff, and a potential rooftop cinema operator have reengaged discussions on the concept;
WHEREAS, these public parking structures are the most appropriate locations to allow for certain uses, including the proposed rooftop cinema, due to their locations, structural capacity, and size; and
WHEREAS, allowing eligible businesses the flexibility to engage in new uses will facilitate business recovery and generate increased sales tax revenue for the City; and WHEREAS, on July 25, 2023, due to the continued economic uncertainty arising out of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the high vacancy rate along the Promenade in the Downtown area, the City Council adopted Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2754, which: (1) provides greater flexibility for restaurants that provide entertainment within the Third Street Promenade Area District; (2) expands Alcohol Exemption (AE) permits to additional uses to further streamline the review of alcohol permits while also correcting and refining existing AE permit condition; (3) enables the Director of Planning to consider commercial

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 6 uses that are not clearly defined in the Zoning Code; (4) extends terms for Temporary Use Permits; and (5) allows outdoor rooftop commercial uses on public parking structures owned by the City; and
WHEREAS, Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2754 became effective September 22, 2023 and is set to expire on November 22, 2023;
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to extend Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2754 for the full 60 months in accordance with SMMC 9.46.090(C), with a new expiration date of November 22, 2028;
WHEREAS, as the City continues to support local businesses during this next phase of economic recovery following the pandemic, the proposed extension would allow adequate time for staff to further evaluate the 1200 block of the Promenade as a potential arts/entertainment district and evaluate the results of the land use changes included in the Interim Zoning Ordinance;
WHEREAS, the proposed extension would not preclude Council from revisiting the Interim Zoning Ordinance prior to its expiration to potentially amend the provisions or duration thereof where necessary;
WHEREAS, the City Council would also like to make other non-substantive clerical amendments and clarifying language to the Interim Zoning Ordinance, including the following: (1) ensuring the subject area is correctly identified as the “Third Street Promenade Area” by deleting any terms or reference to this area as a “District;” (2) providing greater clarity by noting that “[s]ervice of alcoholic beverages shall be incidental to the primary use” for Cultural Facilities and Instructional Services and for Commercial Entertainment and Recreation to ensure that alcohol service is not the primary use of

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 7 those establishments; and (3) providing greater clarity to the alcohol exemption operational standards for General Retail Sales, Small-Scale and Medium-Scale by: (a) clarifying that retail establishments such as wine shops may offer a tasting component during permitted hours, and (b) removing the requirement that sale of alcoholic beverages be incidental to use, in order to eliminate an inadvertent conflict with such establishment; WHEREAS, the extension of and amendments to the interim zoning regulations set forth in Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2754 support local business retention and promote new business opportunities within the Downtown, addressing the needs of the business community and residents and supporting small businesses by simplifying land use standards and streamlining review procedures; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and declares that a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and general welfare exists due to the devastating impact the COVID-19-mandated closures and limitations have had on the local economy, including, but not limited to, the high vacancy rate in the Third Street Promenade Area, and that the approval of additional use permits, variances, building permits or any other applicable entitlement for use which is required in order to comply with the current regulations would result in a threat to public health, safety, and welfare;

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

SECTION 1. Interim Zoning Regulations. (A) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.080 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Determining Floor Area shall apply:

9.04.080 Determining Floor Area

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 8 A. Excluded from Floor Area. Floor area does not include:

1. Stairways and stairwells;

2. Elevators, elevator equipment rooms, and elevator shafts;

3. Ramps to a subterranean or semi-subterranean parking structure or ramps between floors of a parking structure provided the ramp does not accommodate parking;

4. Loading spaces and docks used exclusively for loading and unloading as required by Section 9.28.080;

5. Unenclosed decks, balconies, porches, and platforms not used for commercial or restaurant activity;

6. In the Third Street Promenade Area, unenclosed rooftop areas used for commercial or restaurant activity (“unenclosed rooftop areas”), subject to the following specific standards:
a. Unenclosed rooftop areas shall be surrounded by a barrier not to exceed 42 inches in height with an allowable transparent barrier not to exceed 42 inches in height. The barrier shall be permanently affixed to the rooftop; b. Unenclosed rooftop areas, including barrier, shall be set back a minimum five feet from the edges of the building;
c. Portable restrooms, storage sheds, or other similar temporary structures shall not be permitted on the rooftop;
d. Rooftop features such as sunshades, trellises, or canopies shall not exceed 10 feet in height with a maximum aggregate coverage of 50% of the unenclosed rooftop area;
e. Unenclosed rooftop areas shall not be accessible to the public

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 9 outside of their normal business operating hours.

7. Covered and uncovered courtyards, arcades, atria, paseos, walkways, and corridors located at or near the street level and are accessible to the general public provided they are not used as sales, display, storage, service, or production areas;

8. Parking areas located below finished grade or finished floor of habitable space where the vertical distance between finished grade and finished floor is 5 feet or less;

9. Semi-subterranean parking areas that meet the following criteria:
a. The parking area is located below finished grade along a minimum of one street frontage,
b. The portions of the parking area located above finished grade are a result of the site’s slope and cannot feasibly be fully subterranean due to geological or physical site constraints, and
c. The facades of any of the visible portions of the parking area located above finished grade are appropriately treated and landscaped;

10. Mechanical equipment rooms, electrical rooms, telecommunication equipment rooms, and similar space located below grade

11. Enclosures constructed pursuant to Section 9.31.060, Automobile Repair, Major and Minor, for outdoor hoists in existence on the adoption of Ordinance Number 1452 (CCS);

12. Attics;

13. Accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units established in accordance with Section 9.31.025;

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 10 14. Commercial outdoor space permitted pursuant to SMMC 9.31.199, Outdoor Commercial Uses on Private Property, and SMMC 9.31.200, Outdoor Dining and Seating on Sidewalks, shall be excluded from floor area.

15. In the Third Street Promenade Area, any unenclosed rooftop parking areas on City-Owned Parking Structures as set forth in Section 9.10.050(a). (B) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.04.090 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Determining Floor Area Ratio shall apply:

9.04.090 Determining Floor Area Ratio
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is the ratio of the floor area, excluding the areas described below, of all principal and accessory buildings on a site to the site area. To calculate FAR, floor area is divided by site area, and typically expressed as a decimal. For example, if the floor area of all buildings on a site totals 20,000 square feet, and the site area is 10,000 square feet, the FAR is expressed as 2.0. For parcels containing one or more zoning designations, only that portion zoned for commercial or industrial use shall be used as parcel area when calculating floor area ratio.

A. Floor Area Ratio Exclusions

1. Floor area devoted to basements;

2. Unenclosed decks, balconies, porches, outdoor dining areas permitted pursuant to Section 9.31.200, Outdoor Dining and Seating on Sidewalks, provided the dining areas have not more than a 42-inch high barrier surrounding the dining area and is visible from the public right-of-way, and other open spaces, and outdoor space permitted pursuant to Section 9.31.199, Outdoor Commercial Uses on Private Property.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 11 3. In the Third Street Promenade Area, any unenclosed rooftop parking areas on City-Owned Parking Structures that are converted to outdoor rooftop commercial use in accordance with SMMC 9.10.050(a).
(C) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.10.040 to the contrary, the following land use regulations shall apply in the Downtown Districts:

SMMC § 9.10.040 Land Use Regulation
Table 9.10.040 prescribes the land use regulations for Downtown Districts. The regulations for each district are established by letter designations below. These designations apply strictly to the permissibility of land uses; applications for buildings or structures may require discretionary review.
“P” designates permitted uses. Uses not listed in Table 9.10.040 may be permitted upon a determination by the Director, or designee, that the use is similar to, and not more intrusive or disruptive than, uses permitted in the District. Factors to be considered in making this determination shall include, but are not limited to, maximum parking requirements, operational characteristics, and prior determinations on similar uses. “L(#)” designates limited uses, which are permitted by right, provided they comply with specific limitations listed at the end of the table.
“MUP” designates use classifications that are permitted after review and approval of a Minor Use Permit. Uses not listed in Table 9.10.040 may be permitted after review and approval of a Minor Use Permit upon a determination by the Director, or designee, that the use is similar to, and not more intrusive or disruptive than, a use that requires an MUP in the District. Factors to be considered in making this determination shall include, but are not limited to, maximum parking requirements, operational characteristics, and prior

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 12 determinations on similar uses.
“CUP” designates use classifications that are permitted after review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Uses not listed in Table 9.10.040 may be permitted after review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit upon a determination by the Director, or designee, that the use is similar to, and not more intrusive or disruptive than, a use that requires a CUP in the District. Factors to be considered in making this determination shall include, but are not limited to, maximum parking requirements, operational characteristics, and prior determinations on similar uses. “—” designates uses that are not permitted.

Land uses are defined in Chapter 9.51 (“Use Classifications”) of Article 9 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code (“Zoning Ordinance”). Use classifications and sub-classifications not listed in the table are prohibited. Accessory uses are permissible when they are determined by the Zoning Administrator to be necessary and customarily associated with and appropriate, incidental, and subordinate to, the principal uses and which are consistent and not more disruptive than Permitted uses. The table also notes additional use regulations that apply to various uses. Section numbers in the right-hand column refer to other Sections of this Ordinance.
.

Use Classification LT NV
BC (Third
Street
Promenade
Area)
BC
(Excluding
Third
Street
Promenade
Area) TA OT WT
Additional
Regulations
Residential Uses
Residential Housing Types See sub-classifications below.

Accessory Dwelling Unit P P P P P P P
Section 9.31.025
Accessory
Dwelling Units
and Junior
Accessory
Dwelling Units

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 13 .

Use Classification LT NV
BC (Third
Street
Promenade
Area)
BC
(Excluding
Third
Street
Promenade
Area) TA OT WT
Additional
Regulations
Junior Accessory Dwelling
Unit P P P P P P P
Section 9.31.025
Accessory
Dwelling Units
and Junior
Accessory
Dwelling Units
Multiple-Unit Dwelling P P L(1) L(1) P P P
Section 9.31.195,
Multiple-Unit
Dwelling Projects
Senior Citizen Multiple-Unit
Residential P P L(1) L(1) P P L(1)
Section 9.31.195,
Multiple-Unit
Dwelling Projects
Single-Room Occupancy
Housing L(1) L(3) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Section 9.31.330,
Single Room
Occupancy
Structures
Group Residential MUP MUP,
L(3) MUP, L(1) MUP, L(1) MUP MUP MUP
Congregate Housing P MUP,
L(3) L(1) CUP, L(1) MUP MUP MUP
Section 9.31.110,
Congregate and
Transitional
Housing
Senior Group Residential P MUP,
L(3) MUP, L(1) MUP, L(1) MUP, L(1)
MUP,
L(1)
MUP,
L(1)
Section 9.31.310,
Senior Group
Residential
Elderly and Long-Term
Care P L(3) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Emergency Shelters L(6)/CUP L(6)/
CUP CUP/L(1) L(1), L(6)/CUP
L(6)/
CUP
L(6)/
CUP
L(6)/
CUP
Section 9.31.130,
Emergency
Shelters
Family Day Care See sub-classifications below.

Large L(1) L(3) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Section 9.31.140,
Family Day Care,
Large
Small L(1) L(3) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Residential Facilities See sub-classifications below.

Residential Care, General P L(3) L(1) L(1) P L(1) L(1) Section 9.31.270, Residential Care
Facilities
Residential Care, Limited P L(3) L(1) L(1) P L(1) L(1)
Residential Care, Senior P L(3) L(1) L(1) P L(1) L(1)
Hospice, General P L(3) L(1) L(1) P L(1) L(1)
Hospice, Limited P L(3) L(1) L(1) P L(1) L(1)
Supportive Housing P L(3) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Transitional Housing P L(3) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Section 9.31.11,
Congregate and
Transitional
Housing
Public and Semi-Public Uses
Adult Day Care L(1) L(3) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Child Care and Early
Education Facilities P P P P P P P
Section 9.31.120,
Child Care and
Early Education
Facilities
Colleges and Trade Schools,
Public or Private CUP L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1) L(1)
Community Assembly L(7)/CUP CUP L(15),
L(25) P CUP L(1) L(7)/ CUP

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 14 .

Use Classification LT NV
BC (Third
Street
Promenade
Area)
BC
(Excluding
Third
Street
Promenade
Area) TA OT WT
Additional
Regulations
Community Gardens P P L(25) P P P P
Cultural Facilities P P P P P P P
Hospitals and Clinics P P L(1) L(1) P - P
Park and Recreation Facilities,
Public P P P P P P P
Public Safety Facilities P P P P P P P
Schools, Public or Private CUP L(3) L(1) P P - CUP
Social Service Centers P P - P P P P
Section 9.31.350,
Social Service
Centers
Commercial Uses
Animal Care, Sales, and
Services See sub-classifications below.

Grooming and Pet Stores L(5)/CUP L(5)/CU
P P L(5)/CUP L(5)/ CUP
L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
No more than 10
dogs or cats can
be kept overnight
Pet Day Care Services MUP MUP - MUP MUP MUP MUP
Veterinary Services MUP MUP - MUP MUP - MUP
Automobile/Vehicle Sales and
Service See sub-classifications below.

Alternative Fuels and
Recharging Facilities
CUP/
L(19)
CUP/
L(19) - -
CUP/
L(19) - -
Automobile Rental L(10) L(10) L(10) L(10) L(10) L(10) L(10) Automobile Storage Use - - - - - - -
New Automobile/Vehicle
Sales and Leasing
L(8),
L(5)/CUP
L(8),
L(5)/CUP
L(8),
L(5)/CUP
L(8),
L(5)/CUP
L(8),
L(5)/
CUP
- -
Additions 7,500 sq ft or
less to Automobile/
Vehicle Sales and
Leasing buildings
existing as of 7/06/2010
L(20)/
MUP
- - - - - -
Section 9.31.070
Automobile/Vehi
cle Sales,
Leasing, and
Storage
Additions larger than
7,500 sq ft to
Automobile/Vehicle Sales
and Leasing buildings
existing as of 7/06/2010
L(20)/
CUP
- - - - - -
Automobile/Vehicle Repair,
Major
L(19) - - - - - -
Automobile/Vehicle Service
and Repair, Minor
L(19) - - - - - -
Automobile/Vehicle
Washing
L(19) - - - - - -
Service Station L(19) L(19) - - L(19) - -
Towing and Impound - - - - - - -
Banks and Financial
Institutions
See sub-classifications below.

Banks and Credit Unions L(4)/CUP L(3),
L(5)/CUP
- - L(4)/
CUP
L(4)/
CUP
L(4)/
CUP
Check Cashing Businesses - - - - - - -
Business Services L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP L(15) L(5)/CUP L(5)/ CUP
L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
Commercial Entertainment and
Recreation See sub-classifications below.

Cinemas & Theaters, up to
99 seats
- CUP L(24) P P - -

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 15 .

Use Classification LT NV
BC (Third
Street
Promenade
Area)
BC
(Excluding
Third
Street
Promenade
Area) TA OT WT
Additional
Regulations
Cinemas & Theaters, more
than 99 seats
- - L(24) CUP CUP - -
Convention and Conference
Centers

CUP CUP P CUP CUP CUP CUP
Large-Scale Facility L(21)/
CUP
L(21)/
CUP
L(21)/CUP
, L(25)
L(21)/ CUP L(21)/
CUP
L(21)/
CUP
-
Small-Scale Facility L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP,
L(25)
L(5)/CUP L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
Section 9.31.340
Small Scale
Facility
Fortunetelling P P P P P P P
Eating and Drinking
Establishments See sub-classifications below.

Bars/Nightclubs/Lounges CUP CUP L(26) CUP CUP CUP(10
)
-
Restaurants, Full-Service,
Limited Service & Take-Out
(2,500 sq ft and smaller,
including Outdoor Dining
and Seating)
P P L(22) P P P P Section 9.31.040,
Alcoholic
Beverage Sales
Restaurants, Full-Service,
Limited Service & Take-Out
(2,501 – 5,000 sq ft,
including Outdoor Dining
and Seating)
P P L(22) P P P P Section 9.31.280,
Restaurants,
Limited Service,
and Take-Out
Only
Restaurants, Full-Service,
Limited Service & Take-Out
(greater than 5,000 sq ft,
including Outdoor Dining
and Seating)
CUP P L(22) P P P CUP Section 9.31.200,
Outdoor Dining
and Seating
Food Hall (up to 175 seats) CUP CUP P CUP CUP CUP CUP
Equipment Rental - - - - L(5)/
CUP
- -
Food and Beverage Sales See sub-classifications below.

Convenience Market CUP L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP L(5)/ CUP
L(5)/
CUP
- Section 9.31.040,
Alcoholic
Beverage Sales
Farmer’s Market CUP P P P P P P
General Market L(12)/
CUP
L(12)/
CUP
L(12)/
CUP
L(12)/ CUP L(12)/
CUP
L(12)/
CUP
L(12)
/ CUP
Section 9.31.040,
Alcoholic
Beverage Sales Liquor Stores CUP CUP L(26) CUP CUP CUP - Funeral Parlors and Mortuaries CUP - - - - - -
Instructional Services L(5)/CUP L(3),
L(5)/CUP
L(1),
L(5)/CUP
L(5)/CUP L(5)/
CUP
L(1),
L(5)/
CUP
L(1),
L(5)/
CUP
Live-Work L(13) L(3)(13) L(1)(13) L(13) L(13) L(1)(13
)
L(13) Section 9.31.170,
Live-Work Units
Lodging See sub-classifications below.

Bed and Breakfast MUP MUP P MUP MUP MUP MUP Section 9.31.090, Bed and
Breakfasts
Hotels and Motels CUP CUP P CUP CUP CUP CUP,
L(19)
Maintenance and Repair
Services
L(5)/CUP - - - - - -

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 16 .

Use Classification LT NV
BC (Third
Street
Promenade
Area)
BC
(Excluding
Third
Street
Promenade
Area) TA OT WT
Additional
Regulations
Nurseries and Garden Centers L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP - L(5)/CUP L(5)/ CUP
- L(5)/
CUP
Section 9.31.220,
Outdoor Retail
Display and Sales
Offices See sub-classifications below.

Business and Professional L(14)/
CUP
L(3),
L(5)/CUP
L(1) L(1) L(3),
L(5)/
CUP
L(1) L(1)
Creative L(14)/
CUP
L(3),
L(5)/CUP
L(1) L(1) L(3),
L(5)/
CUP
L(1) L(1)
Medical and Dental L(14)/
CUP
L(3),
L(5)/CUP
P L(1) L(3),
L(5)/
CUP
L(1) L(1)
Walk-In Clientele L(14)/
CUP
L(3),
L(5)/CUP
L(1) L(5)/CUP L(3),
L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
Outdoor Newsstands MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Section 9.31.210, Outdoor
Newsstands
Parking, Public or Private CUP CUP - CUP CUP,
L(11)
- CUP
Personal Services See sub-classifications below.

General Personal Services L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP P L(5)/CUP L(5)/ CUP
- L(5)/
CUP
Section 9.31.230,
Personal Service
Physical Training L(17),
L(5)/CUP
L(17),
L(5)/CUP
L(17),
L(21)/CU
P
L(17),
L(5)/CUP
L(17),
L(5)/
CUP
L(17),
L(5)/
CUP
L(17),
L(5)/
CUP
Tattoo or Body Modification
Parlor
MUP MUP P MUP MUP MUP - Section 9.31.230,
Personal Service
Retail Sales See sub-classifications below.

Building Materials Sales
and Services
P - - - - - - Section 9.31.220,
Outdoor Retail
General Retail Sales, Small- Display and Sales
Scale
L(5)/CUP L(5)/CUP P L(5)/CUP L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
L(5)/
CUP
General Retail Sales,
Medium-Scale

CUP CUP P CUP CUP - CUP
General Retail Sales, LargeScale- - - - - - -
Medical Marijuana
Dispensaries
CUP - - - - - - Section 9.31.185,
Medical
Marijuana
Dispensaries
Pawn Shops - - - - - - -
Swap Meets - - - - - - -
Industrial Uses
Artist’s Studio P P L(2) L(1) P P P
Commercial Kitchens - - - CUP - -
Industry, Limited - - L(2),
L(23)
- - - -
Media Production See sub-classifications below.

Support Facilities L(14)/
CUP
L(3),
L(5)/CUP
L(1) L(1) L(3),
L(5)/
CUP
L(1) L(1)
Transportation, Communication, and Utilities Uses
Bus/Rail Passenger Stations P P P P P - P

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 17 .

Use Classification LT NV
BC (Third
Street
Promenade
Area)
BC
(Excluding
Third
Street
Promenade
Area) TA OT WT
Additional
Regulations
City Bike Share Facility P P P P P P P
Communication Facilities See sub-classifications below.

Antennas and Transmission
Towers
- - - - - - -
Equipment within Buildings - - - - - - -
Light Fleet-Based Services - - - - MUP - -
Utilities, Major L(18) - - - - - -
Utilities, Minor P P P P P P P
Specific Limitations:
(1) Limited to upper floors, and on the ground floor where the entire tenant space shall be located at least 25 feet from the front property line, except for residential units shall be limited to upper floors only. (2) A minimum depth of 25 feet from the front parcel line adjacent to a street for the entire ground-floor street frontage shall be designed to accommodate interactive uses. For purposes of this limitation, interactive uses shall be commercial uses with an interactive element, including, but not limited to, retail sales, exhibitions, displays, demonstrations, or instruction. (3) Between 4th and 7th Court, permitted in mid-block parcels on the ground floor and upper floors. On all other parcels, permitted anywhere on the ground floor if the space has street frontage and was occupied by office on, or is vacant but was occupied by office in the 12 months preceding, the date this Ordinance is effective; otherwise, permitted on upper floors and on the ground floor where the entire tenant space including the primary entry is located at least 50 feet from the front property line. (4) Permitted except no ground floor tenant space shall exceed 20 linear feet of ground floor street frontage without a Conditional Use Permit.
(5) Permitted if within buildings existing as of the date the ordinance codified in this Chapter is effective. Permitted in new buildings, except:
(a) No individual ground floor tenant space shall occupy more than 7,500 square feet of floor area and/or exceed 50 linear feet of ground floor street frontage without a Conditional Use Permit. (b) Ground floor tenant spaces in the Santa Monica Place are not subject to size limitations. (6) Limited to shelters containing less than 55 beds; Conditional Use Permit required for emergency shelters with 55 or more beds. (7) Any community assembly facility abutting a residential district shall require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. (8) Limited to automobile/vehicle dealer showrooms only which must display one alternative fuel automobile/vehicle if such an automobile/vehicle is available in the dealer’s fleet, and limited to six showrooms in the Third Street Promenade Area. (9) (Reserved)
(10) Permitted as an ancillary use to support a primary use. (11) Limited to public parking facilities only.
(12) General markets greater than 15,000 square feet require approval of a Conditional Use Permit, except general markets in the MixedUse Boulevard district greater than 25,000 square feet require approval of a Conditional Use Permit. (13) If the commercial use requires a MUP or CUP, an application shall be required in accordance with SMMC, Chapter 9.41. Even if the commercial use would otherwise be permitted, no such use shall be approved where, given the design or proposed design of the livework unit, there would be the potential for adverse health impacts from the proposed use on the people residing in the unit. An example of a potential health impact is the potential for food contamination from users that generate airborne particulates in a unit with an unenclosed kitchen.
(14) All new construction requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit or permitted if within buildings existing as of the date the ordinance codified in this Chapter is effective, except:
(a) New additions of 50% or more additional square footage to an existing building at any one time, or incrementally, after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this Chapter, requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit. (b) No ground floor, street-fronting, non-office or non-media production support facility use, non-medical or non-dental office use tenant space shall be changed into an individual office use or a media production support facility use, or individual medical or dental office use occupying more than 7,500 square feet of floor area and/or exceeding 50 linear feet of street frontage without the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
(15) Limited to the ground floor with frontage along 2nd Court and 3rd Court alleys or to upper floors. (16) Limited to public parking facilities only.
(17) Youth-serving personal services, physical training requires review and approval of passenger loading and drop-off plan by the Director.
(18) Limited to electric distribution substations.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 18 .

Use Classification LT NV
BC (Third
Street
Promenade
Area)
BC
(Excluding
Third
Street
Promenade
Area) TA OT WT
Additional
Regulations
(19) Limited to legally established existing uses as of the date this Specific Plan is effective. (20) Auto dealerships existing as of July 6, 2010 are considered permitted uses. Expansions to existing dealerships conforming to the urban auto dealership format standards in Section 9.31.070, Automobile/Vehicle Sales, Leasing and Storage are permitted. Expansions to existing dealerships of 7,500 square feet or less that do not conform to the urban auto dealership format standards shall require an MUP. Expansions to existing dealerships larger than 7,500 square feet that do not conform to the urban auto dealership formal standards shall require a CUP.
(21) Except in Santa Monica Place, no individual Fitness Center tenant space shall exceed 100 linear feet of ground floor street frontage without the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
(22) Restaurant, Limited-Service and Take-Out establishments with frontage on the Third Street Promenade and the following characteristics shall be prohibited:
(a) More than 150 locations nationwide at the time that the application for the establishment is deemed complete by the City; and (b) Characteristics, including but not limited to, orders placed at a walk-up window, counter, or machine; payment prior to food consumption; and food served with disposable, one-time, or limited-use wrapping, containers, or utensils. (23) Excludes commercial laundries and dry cleaning plants, monument works, medicinal cannabis, and medicinal cannabis products. (24) Permitted use. Additionally, outdoor rooftop cinemas/theaters are permitted, limited only to the rooftops on City-owned parking structures.
(25) Permitted as an outdoor use limited only to the rooftops on City-owned parking structures. (26) Permitted, subject to obtaining an Alcohol Exemption pursuant to SMMC 9.31.040(D)(2). If no Alcohol Exemption is obtained, a Conditional Use Permit is required.
(D) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code to the contrary, the following regulations set forth in Section 9.10.050 related to Outdoor Rooftop Uses on City-Owned Parking Structures shall apply:

9.10.050 Outdoor Rooftop Commercial Uses on City-Owned Parking Structures Any proposed conversion of parking area to accommodate an outdoor rooftop commercial use on the top-level of an existing City-Owned parking structure within the Third Street Promenade Area shall be subject to the following:

A. Excluded as Floor Area and from Floor Area Ratio. Any unenclosed rooftop parking areas on City-Owned Parking Structures that are converted to and utilized as outdoor rooftop commercial space as permitted in the district, including any new enclosed structures supportive of such permitted uses erected within the converted parking area including but not limited to, temporary or permanent restroom facilities, concession

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 19 stands, and storage structures, shall be excluded from floor area and floor area ratio requirements.

B. Allowable Height Projections. Maximum height projections as measured from the finished parking surface level, including any deck-leveling surfaces as required, shall be allowed as set forth in Section 9.21.060(A).

C. Applicability Certain Land Use and Zoning Related Provisions.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in Chapters 9.65, Child Care Linkage Program,

9.66, Transportation Impact Fee Program, 9.67, Parks and Recreation Development Impact Fee Program, and 9.68, Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fee Program, for purposes of determining applicability, conversion of rooftop parking area on Cityowned parking structures to outdoor rooftop commercial use shall not be considered a “Project” and shall not be subject to associated impact fees. (E) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.21.060 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Height Projections shall apply:

9.21.060 Height Projections
No structure shall project above the height limits established in this Article except as specified in this Section.

A. Building-Mounted and Attached Structures. Table 9.21.060 establishes the maximum permitted projection(s) above the height limit of a building and into the daylight plane for structures that are typically mounted or attached to a building. These projections are by right, with no discretionary permit required. Table 9.21.060 also establishes limitations in the horizontal coverage of permitted projections. Some allowances apply in all Zoning Districts while others are limited to specified Zoning Districts. In the Single-Unit

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 20 Residential (R1) District, allowed height projections into the minimum side stepback areas above 23 feet shall be permitted. None of these projections shall permit occupiable space above the height limit. The total aggregate coverage of projections shall not exceed 30% of a roof’s area. This limitation shall not apply to solar energy systems (see Section

9.21.150).

TABLE 9.21.060: ALLOWED PROJECTIONS ABOVE HEIGHT LIMITS AND DAYLIGHT PLANE Structure
Maximum Aggregate
Coverage of Building’s Roof
Area (%); Other Locational
Restrictions
Maximum
Vertical
Projection (ft.)
Above the Height
Limit*
Projections Allowed in All Zoning Districts:

Skylights No limit 1 ft.

Skylights on flat roofs 30%; May not be located
within 5 ft. of any edge of
the roof
5 ft.

Chimneys, vent stacks 5% 5 ft.

Windscoops 5% 5 ft.

Solar energy systems located on a rooftop See Section 9.21.150 See Section

9.21.150
Antennas
One standard television receive-only nonparabolic
antenna and one vertical whip
Antenna
10%; May not be located
between the building and
any
street-facing parcel line
25 ft.

Other antennas See Chapter 9.32, Telecommunications Facilities TABLE 9.21.060: ALLOWED PROJECTIONS ABOVE HEIGHT LIMITS AND DAYLIGHT PLANE Structure
Maximum Aggregate
Coverage of Building’s Roof
Area (%); Other Locational
Restrictions
Maximum
Vertical
Projection (ft.)
Above the Height
Limit*
Parapets, fire escapes, catwalks, and open guard rails
required by law As required by law As required by
law
Projections Allowed in All Districts Except R1 and OP-1 Districts:

Non-occupiable features such as steeples, spires, towers, domes, and cupolas 10% 10 ft.

Rooftop features for outdoor living areas, such as
sunshade, open railings, trellises, and landscaping 25% 10 ft.

Elevator shafts 15% 18 ft.* above
the roofline
Stairwells 25% 14 ft.* above

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 21 the roofline
Mechanical rooms and enclosures 25% 12 ft.* above
the roofline
Ventilating fans, water tanks, cooling towers, or other equipment required to operate and maintain a building,
along with screening of such equipment
required by Section 9.21.140, Screening
Total area enclosed by all
screening may not exceed
30% of roof area
12 ft.

Projections Allowed for Outdoor Rooftop Commercial Uses on City-Owned Parking Structures Located in the Third Street Promenade Area:

Outdoor cinema and theater screens. None 25 ft. above the finished parking
surface level,
including deckleveling surfaces as
required.

Concession stands, restroom facilities, storage
structures, shade structures, or similar structures
associated with rooftop cinemas/theaters,
None 15 ft. above the
finished parking
surface level,
including deckleveling surfaces as
required.

Structures associated with rooftop community
assembly, community gardens, and small/large-scale
commercial entertainment and recreation facilities
None 15 ft. above the
finished parking
surface level,
including deckleveling surfaces as
required.
(F) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.28.040 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Calculating Off-Street Parking and Loading Spaces shall apply:

9.28.040 Calculating Off-Street Parking and Loading Spaces A. Rules for Calculating Required Spaces. The following rules shall be followed for calculating the amount of off-street parking and loading spaces.

1. Rounding. Fractional space requirements totaling 0.5 or above shall be rounded up to the next whole space after calculating the total number of required spaces.

Rounding up shall not apply to loading spaces; however, a minimum of one space shall be provided.

2. Residential Uses. For purposes of calculating off-street parking

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 22 requirements for dwelling units, all private living spaces including, but not limited to, dens, studios, family rooms, studies and lofts shall be considered as “bedrooms” except that a maximum of one such room per unit shall not count as a bedroom if it is less than 100 square feet in area. Kitchens, bathrooms, and one living room per unit shall not be considered bedrooms. Semiprivate rooms shall not count as bedrooms if they have no doors and a minimum 7-foot opening to adjacent living space. A loft or mezzanine shall not count as a bedroom if the maximum width of the loft or mezzanine is less than 7 feet.

3. Non-residential Uses. Unless otherwise specified, the floor areas used to calculate the number of off-street parking and loading spaces required for non-residential uses shall include:
a. All floor area located above or below grade devoted to office, retail, service, or other activities and uses, storage areas, restrooms, lounges, lobbies, kitchens, and interior hallways and corridors, unless exempted by this Chapter; and
b. All outdoor areas that will accommodate a permanent activity that will generate a demand for parking facilities in addition to that which is provided for principal activities and uses within the building or structure.

4. Multiple Uses. When two or more principal uses are located on the same parcel, the estimated parking demand shall be the sum of the estimated demand of the various individual uses computed separately, in accordance with this Section, unless shared parking is approved pursuant to Section 9.28.180.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 23 5. Exclusions. Floor area devoted to the following shall not be included when determining required parking and loading spaces:
a. Automobile parking;
b. Loading areas;
c. Driveways, drive aisles, ramps;
d. Bicycle parking;
e. Showers or locker areas not associated with a physical training, personal service or instructional service; and
f. Outdoor dining areas and other outdoor space permitted pursuant to Section 9.31.199, Outdoor Commercial Uses on Private Property, and Section

9.31.200, Outdoor Dining and Seating on Sidewalks.
(G) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.31.040 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Alcoholic Beverage Sales shall apply:

9.31.040 Alcoholic Beverage Sales
A. Purpose.

1. To limit the potential for community problems such as public drunkenness, drunk driving, traffic accidents, violent crime, noise, and nuisance from an overabundance or overconcentration of the availability of alcohol and its consumption. To regulate traditional alcohol outlets, including bars, restaurants, liquor stores, and supermarkets, as well as new types of alcohol outlets, to ensure that public health, safety, and welfare are not threatened.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 24 2. To establish control measures that will permit the City to review and approve new alcohol outlets on a case-by-case basis and to condition that approval based on the specific type of alcohol outlet, neighborhood location, and potential problems involved.

B. Conditional Use Permit Required. No person shall dispense for sale or other consideration, alcoholic beverages, including beer, wine, malt beverages, and distilled spirits, for on-site or off-site consumption without first obtaining a Conditional Use Permit unless the proposed use has received an Alcohol Exemption Zoning Conformance Permit in accordance with subsection D or is otherwise determined to be exempt after a Zoning Conformance Review in accordance with subsection E.

C. Findings for Approval of Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission, or the City Council on appeal, may approve the dispensing, for sale or other consideration, alcoholic beverages, including beer, wine, malt beverages, and distilled spirits for on-site or off-site consumption only if, in addition to the required findings for Conditional Use Permits contained in Section 9.41.060, Required Findings (for a Conditional Use Permit), all of the following findings can be made in an affirmative manner:

1. The proposed alcohol sales will not adversely affect the welfare of neighborhood residents in a significant manner;

2. The proposed alcohol sales will not contribute to an undue concentration of alcohol outlets in the area;

3. The proposed alcohol sales will not detrimentally affect nearby neighborhoods, considering the distance of the alcohol outlet to residential buildings, churches, schools, hospitals, playgrounds, parks, and other existing alcohol outlets; and

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 173 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 25 4. The sale of alcohol will not increase traffic congestion or generate a demand for parking that will adversely affect surrounding businesses and residents.

D. Alcohol Exemption Zoning Conformance Permit.

1. Citywide Excluding Third Street Promenade Area, Santa Monica Place, and Santa Monica Pier. Except as provided in paragraphs 2 and 3, below, limited and full-service restaurants that offer alcoholic beverages incidental to meal service that are located citywide, excluding in the Third Street Promenade Area and the area bounded by 2nd Street to the west, Broadway to the north, 4th Street to the east, and Colorado to the south, shall be exempt from the provisions of the Conditional Use Permit requirement of subsection B of this Section if such a permit is approved in writing by the Director and if the applicant agrees in writing to comply with all of the following criteria and conditions:
a. If a counter service area is provided, food service shall be available at all hours the counter is open for patrons, and the counter area shall not function as a separate bar area;
b. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted;
c. Customers shall be permitted to order meals at all times and at all locations where alcohol is being served. The establishment shall serve food to patrons during all hours the establishment is open for customers; d. The premises shall maintain a kitchen or food-serving area in which a variety of food is prepared on the premises;

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 26 e. Sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption beyond the premises shall be permitted if authorized by the premises’ California Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) license;
f. No video or other amusement games shall be permitted on the premises;
g. Entertainment may only be permitted in the manner set forth in Section 9.31.290, Restaurants with Entertainment;
h. The primary use of any outdoor dining area shall be for seated meal service. Patrons who are standing in the outdoor seating area shall not be served; i. The operation shall at all times be conducted in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator shall control noisy patrons leaving the restaurant; j. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. with complete closure and all employees vacated from the building by 1:00 a.m. All alcoholic beverages must be removed from the outdoor dining area no later than 11:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday. No after-hours operation is permitted;
k. Liquor bottle service shall be prohibited. Wine and beer bottle service shall not be available to patrons unless full meal service is provided concurrent with the bottle service. For purposes of this paragraph, “bottle service” means the service of any full bottle of liquor, wine, or beer of more than 375 ml, along with glass ware, mixers, garnishes, etc., in which patrons are able to then make their

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 27 own drinks or pour their own wine or beer. All food items shall be available from the premises’ full service menu;
l. No organized queuing of patrons at the entry or checking of identification to control entry into and within the establishment shall be permitted.

There shall not be any age limitation imposed restricting access to any portion of the restaurant;
m. The premises shall not organize or participate in organized “pubcrawl” events where participants or customers pre-purchase tickets or tokens to be exchanged for alcoholic beverages at the restaurant; n. Establishments with amplified music shall be required to comply with Chapter 4.12, Noise, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code; o. Prior to occupancy, a security plan shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues;
p. Prior to occupancy, the operator shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABCsponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the employee shall attend the alcohol awareness training within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 28 no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director. The operator shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments; q. Within 30 days from the date of approval of this exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the State ABC;
r. Prior to occupancy, the operator shall submit a plan describing the establishment’s designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the establishment’s patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as offering on the menu a free non-alcoholic drink for every party of 2 or more ordering alcoholic beverages;
s. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to please not litter or block driveways in the neighborhood;
t. Employees of the establishment shall walk a 100-foot radius from the facility at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons; and u. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 29 these conditions of approval. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director;
v. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section.

2. Third Street Promenade Area and Santa Monica Place. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, above, in the Third Street Promenade Area and the area bounded by 2nd Street to the west, Broadway to the north, 4th Street to the east, and Colorado to the south, the following uses that offer alcoholic beverages incidental to the primary use, including bars/nightclubs/lounges that primarily serve alcoholic beverages, shall be exempt from the provisions of the Conditional Use Permit requirement of subsection B of this Section if such a permit is approved in writing by the Director and if the applicant agrees in writing to comply with all of the following criteria and conditions established for each use:
a. Restaurants (Full-Service and Limited Service and Take Out) and Food Halls
i. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. daily.
ii. From 8:00 a.m. until at least 10:00 p.m., food service shall be available at all times when alcohol is being served.
iii. Sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption beyond the premises shall be permitted if authorized by the premises’ California Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) license.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 30 iv. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.
v. Entertainment may only be permitted in the manner set forth in Section 9.31.290(D), Restaurants with Entertainment;
vi. Except as may be permitted by a Temporary Use Permit issued in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.44, Temporary Use Permits, alcohol shall not be served in any disposable containers such as disposable plastic or paper cups.
vii. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
viii. Premises with amplified music shall be required to comply with Chapter 4.12, Noise, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, except that Section

4.21.140 Nightclubs, Bars and Establishments with Amplified Music shall not apply.
ix. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
x. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 31 management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the plan shall require all such new employees to attend an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director. The operator of the premises shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator of the premises shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments.
xi. Within 30 days from the date of approval of the exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.
xii. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan describing the premises’ designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the premises’ patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as by offering on the menu a free non-alcoholic drink for every party of 2 or more ordering alcoholic beverages.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 32 xiii. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to not litter or block driveways in the neighborhood.
xiv. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons.
xv. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.
xvi. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section. b. Bars/Nightclubs/Lounges
i. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. daily.
ii. Sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption beyond the premises shall be permitted if authorized by the premises’ California Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) license.
iii. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 33 iv. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
v. Premises with amplified music shall be required to comply with Chapter 4.12, Noise, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, except that Section

4.21.140 Nightclubs, Bars and Establishments with Amplified Music shall not apply.
vi. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
vii. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the plan shall require all such new employees to attend an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 34 by the Director. The operator of the premises shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator of the premises shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments.
viii. Within 30 days from the date of approval of this exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.
ix. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan describing the premises’ designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the premises’ patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as by offering on the menu a free nonalcoholic drink for every party of 2 or more ordering alcoholic beverages. x. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to not litter or block driveways in the neighborhood.
xi. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons. xii. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 35 xiii. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section. c. Convenience Markets and Liquor Stores
i. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage sales shall be 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily.
ii. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.
iii. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
iv. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
v. Within 30 days from the date of approval of this exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.
vi. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons. vii. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 36 development shall be consistent with such plans. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.
viii. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section. d. Cultural Facilities and Instructional Services
i. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. daily.
ii. Service of alcoholic beverages shall be incidental to the primary use. iii. Sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption beyond the premises shall be permitted if authorized by the premises’ California Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) license.
iv. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.
v. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
vi. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
vii. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 37 programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the plan shall require all such new employees to attend an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director. The operator of the premises shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator of the premises shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments.
viii. Within 30 days from the date of approval of the exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.
ix. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons. x. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 38 development shall be consistent with such plans. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.
xi. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section. e. Outdoor Rooftop Commercial Uses: Cinemas, Community
Assembly, Small/Large-Scale Commercial Entertainment and Recreation Facilities i. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. daily.
ii. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
iii. Premises with amplified sound or music shall be required to comply with Chapter 4.12, Noise, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, except that Section 4.21.140 Nightclubs, Bars and Establishments with Amplified Music shall not apply.
iv. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
v. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 39 training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the plan shall require all such new employees to attend an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director. The operator of the premises shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator of the premises shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments.
vi. Within 30 days from the date of approval of the exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.
vii. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan describing the premises’ designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the premises’ patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as by offering on the menu a free nonalcoholic drink for every party of 2 or more ordering alcoholic beverages.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 40 viii. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to not litter or block driveways in the neighborhood.
ix. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons. x. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.
xi. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section. f. Commercial Entertainment and Recreation: Small-Scale Facilities and Large-Scale Facilities
i. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. daily.
ii. Service of alcoholic beverages shall be incidental to the primary use. iii. Sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption beyond the premises shall be permitted if authorized by the premises’ California Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) license.
iv. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 41 v. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
vi. Premises with amplified music shall be required to comply with Chapter 4.12, Noise, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, except that Section

4.21.140 Nightclubs, Bars and Establishments with Amplified Music shall not apply.
vii. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
viii. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the plan shall require all such new employees to attend an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 42 by the Director. The operator of the premises shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator of the premises shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments.
ix. Within 30 days from the date of approval of the exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.
x. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan describing the premises’ designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the premises’ patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as by offering on the menu a free nonalcoholic drink for every party of 2 or more ordering alcoholic beverages. xi. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to not litter or block driveways in the neighborhood.
xii. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons. xiii. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 43 xiv. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section. g. Retail Sales: General Retail Sales, Small-Scale and Medium-Scale i. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage sales for off-site consumption and or on-site tasting shall be 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. daily. ii. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.
iii. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
iv. Premises with amplified music shall be required to comply with Chapter 4.12, Noise, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. v. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
vi. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation.

The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 44 complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the plan shall require all such new employees to attend an ABCsponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director. The operator of the premises shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator of the premises shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments. vii. Within 30 days from the date of approval of the exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.
viii. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan describing the premises’ designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the premises’ patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as by offering on the menu a free nonalcoholic drink for every party of 2 or more ordering alcoholic beverages. ix. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to not litter or block driveways in the neighborhood.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 45 x. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons. x. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.
xii. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section.

3. Santa Monica Pier. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, above, limited and full service restaurants, bars/nightclubs/lounges, food halls, and small and medium scale general retail sales on the Santa Monica Pier shall be exempt from the provisions of the Conditional Use Permit requirement of subsection B of this Section if such a permit is approved in writing by the Director and if the applicant agrees in writing to comply with all of the following criteria and conditions:
a. The permitted hours of alcoholic beverage service shall be 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. daily.
b. From 8:00 a.m. until at least 10:00 p.m., food service shall be available at all times when alcohol is being served.
c. Sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption beyond the premises shall be permitted if authorized by the premises’ California Alcoholic Beverage Control (“ABC”) license.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 46 d. Window or other signage visible from the public right-of-way that advertises beer or alcohol shall not be permitted.
e. Except as may be permitted by a Temporary Use Permit issued in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.44, Temporary Use Permits, alcohol shall not be served in any disposable containers such as disposable plastic or paper cups.
f. The premises shall at all times conduct operations in a manner not detrimental to surrounding properties by reason of lights, noise, activities or other actions. The operator of the premises shall control noisy patrons leaving the premises.
g. Liquor bottle service shall be prohibited. Wine and beer bottle service shall not be available to patrons unless food service is provided concurrent with the bottle service. For purposes of this paragraph, “bottle service” means the service of any full bottle of liquor, wine, or beer of more than 375 ml, along with glass ware, mixers, garnishes, or other items used for the mixing of drinks, which patrons are able to then use to make their own drinks or pour their own wine or beer.
h. The premises shall not organize or participate in organized “pubcrawl” events where participants or customers pre-purchase tickets or tokens to be exchanged for alcoholic beverages at the premises.
i. Premises with amplified music shall be required to comply with Chapter 4.12, Noise, of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 47 j. Prior to occupancy, a security plan for the premises shall be submitted to the Chief of Police for review and approval. The plan shall address both physical and operational security issues.
k. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan for approval by the Director regarding employee alcohol awareness training programs and policies. The plan shall outline a mandatory alcohol-awareness training program for all employees having contact with the public and shall state management’s policies addressing alcohol consumption and inebriation. The program shall require all employees having contact with the public to complete an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of the effective date of the exemption determination. In the case of new employees, the plan shall require all such new employees to attend an ABC-sponsored alcohol awareness training program within 90 days of hiring. In the event the ABC no longer sponsors an alcohol awareness training program, all employees having contact with the public shall complete an alternative program approved by the Director. The operator of the premises shall provide the City with an annual report regarding compliance with this requirement. The operator of the premises shall be subject to any future Citywide alcohol awareness training program affecting similar establishments.
l. Within 30 days from the date of approval of this exemption, the applicant shall provide a copy of the signed exemption to the local office of the ABC.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 48 m. Prior to occupancy, the operator of the premises shall submit a plan describing the premises’ designated driver program, which shall be offered by the operator to the premises’ patrons. The plan shall specify how the operator will inform patrons of the program, such as by offering on the menu a free nonalcoholic drink for every party of 2 or more ordering alcoholic beverages. n. Notices shall be prominently displayed urging patrons to leave the premises and neighborhood in a quiet, peaceful, and orderly fashion and to not litter or block driveways in the neighborhood.
o. Employees of the premises shall walk a 100-foot radius from the premises at some point prior to 30 minutes after closing and shall pick up and dispose of any discarded beverage containers and other trash left by patrons. p. The exemption shall apply to approved and dated plans, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City Planning Division. Project development shall be consistent with such plans, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director.
q. In the event of a conflict between the regulations of this Section and regulations issued by the ABC, the ABC regulations shall control and be deemed to have modified contrary provisions of this Section.

4. With respect to the Director’s decision for Alcohol Exemption Zoning Conformance Permits for restaurants with over 50 seats and subject to subsection D(1) above, within 2 business days from the date when the determination has been made concerning the application and posted on the City’s website, the Director shall transmit

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 49 a notice of determination that summarizes the determination and provides a website link to the Statement of Official Action to the applicant at the address shown on the application and to all property owners and residential and commercial tenants within a radius of 750 feet from the exterior boundaries of the property involved in the application.

E. Zoning Conformance Review.

1. When an existing alcohol outlet without a Conditional Use Permit changes ownership or undergoes an interior remodel, it shall be subject to Zoning Conformance review in accordance with the following:
a. Except as provided in paragraph b, below, an existing alcohol outlet that was lawfully established and is nonconforming solely due to the lack of an approved Conditional Use Permit is exempt from the requirements of this Section if the licensed premises have remained in continuous operation without substantial change in mode or character of operation. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit shall be required for a change in the licensed classification. The operation of an existing nonconforming alcohol outlet shall be considered lapsed and a Conditional Use Permit shall be required where operations have been discontinued for a period of over one year.
i. The one-year period to determine that a nonconforming alcohol outlet has been abandoned shall commence when the use ceases and any one of the following occurs:
(1) The business license lapses;
(2) The site is vacated;
(3) The lease is terminated;

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 50 (4) Utilities are terminated; or
(5) A conforming use that meets the applicable
requirements of this Article is lawfully established in the space previously occupied by the nonconforming alcohol outlet. ii. Once the one-year period has commenced under subsection (E)(1)(a)(i) that period shall only be terminated if the nonconforming alcohol outlet is fully licensed, permitted, and operational for 60 continuous days. Operational shall mean that the nonconforming alcohol outlet is open for business to the public and provides services typically associated with the nonconforming alcohol outlet during the hours and days that are customary for that nonconforming alcohol outlet.
iii. Cessation of use due to remodeling shall not be considered abandonment so long as building permits are active in accordance with Chapter 8.08 of the Municipal Code. However, if the building permit expires before the use resumes, the one-year period under subsection (E)(1)(a)(i) shall relate back and commence with the cessation of use. iv. Any existing premises where operations have been discontinued for these time periods shall be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit prior to resuming business whether or not a Conditional Use Permit was obtained in the past for the premises.
v. A substantial change in mode or character of operation shall include, but is not limited to, a change in operational hours that extends

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 51 past 11:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and midnight on Friday and Saturday, a 5% increase in the floor area of the premises, a 10% increase in the shelf area used for the display of alcoholic beverages, queuing outside the establishment, age requirements for entry, checking identification at the door, implementing a cover charge, offering bottle service, or a 5% increase in the number of seats in any restaurant that serves alcoholic beverages, but in no case shall the increase exceed any established seating limitation in the underlying zoning district.
(1) “Bottle service” shall mean the service of any full bottle of liquor, wine, or beer, of more than 375 ml, along with glass ware, mixers, garnishes, etc., in which patrons are able to then make their own drinks or pour their own wine or beer.
(2) “Cover charge” shall mean requiring payment of
customers before they may enter the establishment.
b. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph a, above, when an existing alcohol outlet (i) located within the Third Street Promenade Area and (ii) without a Conditional Use Permit changes ownership or undergoes an interior remodel, it shall be subject to Zoning Conformance review to confirm consistency with current operations, except that an existing alcohol outlet that was lawfully established and is nonconforming solely due to the lack of an approved Conditional Use Permit shall not be subject to a zoning conformance review if the licensed premises have remained in continuous operation without substantial

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 52 change in mode or character of operation. As used in this paragraph, a substantial change in mode or character of operation shall include, but is not limited to: a 5% increase in the floor area of the premises; a 10% increase in the shelf area used for the display of alcoholic beverages; implementing a cover charge, that is, requiring payment from customers before they may enter the premises; or a 5% increase in the number of seats in any restaurant that serves alcoholic beverages, but in no case shall the increase exceed any established seating limitation in the underlying zoning district.

2. When an existing alcohol outlet with a Conditional Use Permit changes ownership or undergoes an interior remodel, it shall be subject to Zoning Conformance review to ensure compliance with the existing CUP.
(H) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.31.290 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Restaurants with Entertainment shall apply:

9.31.290 Restaurants with Entertainment
A. Except as provided in subsection B, below, restaurants may provide entertainment including but not limited to music, DJs, song, dance, stand-up comedy, and poetry readings for the patrons’ enjoyment if they meet the following standards.

1. There is sit down meal service provided at all times while the entertainment is taking place.

2. There is no permanent or temporary dance floor or dance area for patrons.

3. There is no cover charge or minimum drink purchase requirement.

4. The entertainment is provided only in the dining areas.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 53 5. No more than three television screens including video projectors or similar audio/visual devices shall be utilized on the premises. None of these televisions or projection surfaces shall exceed 60 inches measured diagonally. No billiard/pool tables, video games, bowling, darts, and other similar entertainment activities may be provided.

6. Liquor bottle service shall be prohibited. Wine and beer bottle service shall not be available to patrons unless full meal service is provided concurrent with the bottle service. All food items shall be available from the full service menu. Bottle service shall mean the service of any full bottle of liquor, wine, or beer of more than 375 ml, along with glass ware, mixers, garnishes, etc., in which patrons are able to then make their own drinks or pour their own wine or beer.

7. No organized queuing of patrons at the entry or checking of identification to control entry into and within the establishment shall be permitted. There shall not be any age limitation imposed restricting access to any portion of the restaurant.

8. The establishment shall not organize or participate in organized “pub-crawl” events where participants or customers pre-purchase tickets or tokens to be exchanged for alcoholic beverages at the restaurant.

9. Establishments with amplified music shall comply with Section 4.12.140.

B. Third Street Promenade Area and Santa Monica Place. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection A, restaurants located in the Third Street Promenade Area and the area bounded by 2nd Street to the west, Broadway to the north, 4th Street to the east, and Colorado to the south, may provide entertainment including but not limited to music, DJs, song, dance, stand-up comedy, and poetry readings for the patrons’ enjoyment if they meet the following standards.

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 54 1. There is sit down meal service provided at all times while the entertainment is taking place.

2. The entertainment is provided indoors only within the dining areas.

3. Dancing shall be ancillary to the primary restaurant use and temporary dance areas may be provided within portion(s) of the dining area provided that seating for sit down meal service is available for patrons at all times while dancing is taking place.

4. There is no cover charge or minimum drink purchase requirement.

5. Establishment shall comply with SMMC Chapter 4.12 Noise, except that Section 4.21.140 Nightclubs, Bars and Establishments with Amplified Music shall not apply.

C. A restaurant with entertainment beyond the scope of the limitations set forth in subsections A or B above, as applicable, shall also be considered a Bar/Nightclub/Lounge as defined in Chapter 9.51, and such entertainment use shall be prohibited unless a separate Conditional Use Permit for that use has been obtained. (I) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.31.370 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Temporary Uses and Seasonal Sales shall apply:

SMMC 9.31.370 Temporary Uses and Seasonal Sales
A. This Section establishes standards and requirements for certain uses that are intended to be of limited duration of time and that will not permanently alter the character or physical facilities of the site where they occur. Temporary uses shall require approval of a Temporary Use Permit pursuant to Chapter 9.44 with the following exceptions:

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 55 1. Seasonal sales of holiday-related items such as Christmas trees, pumpkins and similar items that have a duration of not more than 45 consecutive calendar days and are conducted in conjunction with an established retail commercial business holding a valid City business license or conducted by a school or place of worship;

2. Temporary carnivals, fairs, and festivals with a duration of not more than 3 days when conducted by a school or place of worship on land owned by the school or place of worship;

3. Art displays under the sponsorship of any recognized art organization or accredited school on any parking lot in any commercial or industrial district provided that the art display is on a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday when the place or places of business, which have control of the parking lot are not open for business on the day the art display is to occur;

4. Trailers that provide residences for security personnel associated with any approved construction site;

5. Construction offices where approved construction projects are being diligently completed;

6. Yard sales limited to 2 per calendar year, for each dwelling unit, for a maximum of 2 days each;

7. Events which occur in theaters, meeting halls, or other permanent public assembly facilities;

8. Private social gatherings in private residences.

B. Temporary Uses Requiring a Temporary Use Permit. Temporary uses may be permitted with the approval of a Temporary Use Permit, pursuant to Chapter 9.44,

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 56 Temporary Use Permits, subject to compliance with the standards. Additional or more stringent requirements may be established through the Temporary Use Permit process in order to prevent the use from becoming a nuisance with regard to the surrounding neighborhood or the City as a whole.

1. Stand-Alone Seasonal Sales. Seasonal sales of holiday related items such as Christmas trees, pumpkins, and similar items conducted for a period not to exceed 45 consecutive calendar days.

2. Temporary Outdoor Sales. Temporary outdoor sales conducted by an established retail commercial business holding a valid City business license, including, but not limited to, grand opening events, sidewalk sales, and other special sales events subject to the following standards:
a. Temporary outdoor sales shall be conducted by an established retail commercial business holding a valid City business license for the same site. b. Outdoor display and sales areas must be located on a paved or concrete area on the same parcel as the structure(s) containing the business with which the temporary sale is associated.
c. Location of the displayed merchandise must not disrupt the normal circulation of the site, nor encroach upon driveways, pedestrian walkways, or required landscaped areas, or obstruct sight distances or otherwise create hazards for vehicle or pedestrian traffic.
d. Number of Events. No more than 4 events shall be allowed on any 1 site within any 12-month period, except sidewalk sales located on the public rightof-way shall be limited to 2 events for periods not exceeding 3 consecutive days

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 57 each within any 12-month period. Business Improvement Districts and Areas shall be exempt from the limitations on number of events.

3. Special Events. Other short-term special events, outdoor sales, art sales, and displays that do not exceed 3 consecutive days, may be permitted in accordance with the following standards:
a. Location. Events are limited to nonresidential districts. b. Number of Events. No more than 4 events shall be allowed on any 1 site within any 12-month period.
c. Recreational Special Events. Short-term recreational special events shall be part of an existing Commercial Recreation or Personal Service use located on the same site.
d. Carnivals, Fairs, and Festival Events. Carnivals, fairs, and festival events are also subject to the following standards:
i. Location. Events are limited to areas within commercial or employment districts, or on land owned by a school or place of worship. ii. Time Limit. When located adjacent to a Residential District, the hours of operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.

4. Other Temporary Uses. The following temporary uses may also be permitted subject to the approval of a Temporary Use Permit when conducted for a period not to exceed 180 consecutive calendar days:
a. Circuses and carnivals subject to compliance with Article 6 of the Municipal Code;

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 58 b. Fairs, festivals, and concerts, when not held within premises designed to accommodate such events, such as auditoriums, stadiums, or other public assembly facilities;
c. Off-site contractors’ construction yards;
d. Similar temporary uses or other temporary uses supportive of economic recovery, which the Director has determined will be compatible with the purposes of the district and surrounding land uses.
e. The Zoning Administrator may approve a single extension of a Temporary Use Permit under this subsection for an additional 180 days, subject to any additional operational conditions as deemed necessary, and subject to a finding that the operation of the approved temporary use at the location and within the time period specified operated in a manner that did not jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety, or general welfare.

Any proposed extension exceeding 180 days not meeting the requirements of this subsection be shall be subject to Minor Use Permit approval pursuant to Subsection C below.

C. Temporary Uses Requiring a Minor Use Permit. Other special events, temporary uses, outdoor sales, and displays not specifically limited under this Section that exceed 180 consecutive calendar days shall require the approval of a Minor Use Permit pursuant to Chapter 9.41, Minor Use Permits and Conditional Use Permits. (J) Notwithstanding any provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.44.060 to the contrary, the following regulations related to Temporary Uses Requiring a Minor Use Permit shall apply:

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) 59 SMMC 9.44.060 Temporary Uses Requiring a Minor Use Permit Other special events, temporary uses, outdoor sales, and displays not specifically limited under Section 9.31.370 that exceed 180 consecutive calendar days shall require the approval of a Minor Use Permit pursuant to Chapter 9.41, Minor Use Permits and Conditional Use Permits
SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or any appendix thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Interim Zoning Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Interim Zoning Ordinance.

SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Interim Zoning Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Interim Zoning Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Interim Zoning Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Interim Zoning Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

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

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney

5.B.a
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: ORD-Promenade IZO Extension 2d (6040 : IZO - Second Reading) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.C
1 of 4
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Facilities Maintenance Subject: Approval of First Modification of Agreement with Best Contracting Services, Inc. for Citywide Roofing Services
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities), of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

Summary
The City of Santa Monica’s Public Works Department contracts out roofing repair and replacement services to maintain the structural integrity, safety, and appearance of City facility roofs. On June 11, 2019, Council authorized the City Manager to split the award of bid 4377 to Best Contracting Services, Inc., Letner Roofing, Inc., and Maverick Roofing, Inc. Staff recommended a split award to ensure the City had access to the best pricing, prompt response times, and applicable project expertise. However, Letner Roofing and Maverick Roofing have been unresponsive to the City’s roofing repair requests. Therefore, staff will terminate the agreements with Letner Roofing (agreement 10855) and Maverick Roofing (agreement 10856) and, upon approval of this item by Council, would negotiate a first modification of agreement 10854 with Best Contracting

5.C
Packet Pg. 209
2 of 4
Services, Inc. This first modification would result in a seven-year amended agreement through September 26, 2026, with a new total amount not to exceed $1,229,620.

Discussion
The Public Works Department contracts out approximately 30 roofing projects annually.

These projects include roof repairs and replacements, leak mitigations, and installations of coatings, gutters, roof drains, and skylights. It is necessary to contract out these projects as City staff do not possess the required equipment, specialized skills, training, and licensing.

On June 11, 2019 (Attachment A), Council authorized the City Manager to split the award for bid 4377 and execute agreements as follows: 1) agreement #10854 with Best Contracting Services (Attachment B) as the primary contractor for roofing projects that contain a waterproofing component for a total amount not to exceed $375,000 over a five-year period; 2) agreement #10855 with Letner Roofing (Attachment C) as the primary contractor for large-scale roofing repairs and replacements for a total amount not to exceed $580,650 over a five-year period; and 3) agreement #10856 with Maverick Roofing (Attachment D) as the primary contractor for minor and urgent repairs for a total amount not to exceed $275,000 over a five-year period. The total authority for all agreements would not exceed $1,230,650.

Since the agreements were executed, Letner Roofing and Maverick Roofing have been unresponsive to staff’s roofing repair requests while Best Contracting Services, Inc. has been highly responsive. Agreement #10855 was executed on October 30, 2019 with Letner Roofing and they have responded to one out of 20 project requests. On November 11, 2022, staff received e-mail correspondence from Letner Roofing requesting that the agreement be terminated. Agreement #10856 was executed on August 29, 2019 with Maverick Roofing and they have not responded to any of the 17 project requests sent to them. Staff has attempted to contact Maverick Roofing but have been unsuccessful. Agreement #10854 was executed on September 26, 2019, with Best Contracting Services and they have satisfactorily provided roofing contractor services for over 100 projects.

5.C
Packet Pg. 210
3 of 4
Due to the unresponsiveness of the above-mentioned contractors, staff has expended the total amount not to exceed with Best Contracting Services. Staff recommends increasing contract 10854 by $854,620 and extending the contract by an additional two years. This will ensure that staff has continued access to a dependable roofing contractor to protect the City’s infrastructure. This recommendation would result in a first modification of agreement 10854 in the amount of $854,620 with Best Contracting Services, Inc. for a new total amount not to exceed $1,229,620 over a seven-year period.

Environmental Review
The awards for roofing contractor services are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15301. Section 15301 of the CEQA State Guidelines provides Class 1 (exiting facilities) exemption for projects that consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, leasing, licensing, permitting, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of the existing or former use. The awards for the roofing contractor services would not result in any modifications to existing facilities. The existing facilities would be maintained and repaired with roofing contractor services and the award of services would not expand or materially change existing facilities or operations. Furthermore, none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15300.2, apply to this exemption. Therefore, the project is categorically exempt as set forth in Section 15301 of the CEQA State Guidelines.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
06/11/19 (Attachment A) Award Agreement for Citywide Roofing Contractor Services

5.C
Packet Pg. 211
4 of 4
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from various funds to increase the amount of agreement 10854 with Best Contracting Services, Inc. for citywide roofing contractor services. Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Agreement Modification Request
Agreement # Current Authorized
Amount
Request
Amount Dept Account # Total Revised Contract Amount
10854 $375,000 $854,620 Various Accounts $1,229,620
Prepared By: Kyla Johnson, Senior Administrative Analyst Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Staff Report_June 11, 2019
B. Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854
C. Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855
D. Maverick Roofing_Agreement 10856
E. Best Contracting OAKS

5.C
Packet Pg. 212
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: June 11, 2019
Agenda Item: 3.D
1 of 4
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director, Public Works, Facilities Maintenance Subject: Award Agreement for Citywide Roofing Contractor Services Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:

1. Award Bid #4377 to Best Contracting Services, Inc., Danny Letner Inc., dba Letner Roofing and Maverick Roofing, Inc., all California-based companies, for roofing contractor services for the Public Works Department;

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Best Contracting Services, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $150,000 for two years, with one additional three-year renewal option in the amount of $225,000, on the same terms and conditions, for a total amount not to exceed $375,000 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Letner Roofing, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $200,000 for two years, with one additional three-year renewal option in the amount of $380,650, including a 15% increase for year three and a 10% increase for years four and five, for a total amount not to exceed $580,650 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval;

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Maverick Roofing, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $110,000 for two years, with one additional three-year renewal option in the amount of $165,000, on the same terms and conditions, for a total amount not to exceed $275,000 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

Summary
To maintain the structural integrity, safety and appearance of City facility roofs, the Facilities Maintenance Division contracts out roofing repair and replacement services.

Staff recommends a split award for Bid #4377 as follows: Best Contracting Services, Inc., would be the primary contractor for roofing projects that contain a waterproofing component for a total amount not to exceed $375,000 over a five-year period; Letner Roofing would be the primary contractor for large-scale roofing repairs and replacements for a total amount not to exceed $580,650 over a five-year period; and

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Staff Report_June 11, 2019 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) 2 of 4
Maverick Roofing Inc., would be the primary contractor for minor and urgent repairs, for a total amount not to exceed $275,000 over a five-year period.

Discussion
The Facilities Maintenance Division contracts out approximately 30 roofing projects annually. These projects include repairs, replacements, leak mitigation, and installing coatings, gutters, roof drains and skylights. It is necessary to contract out these jobs as in-house staff do not possess the necessary equipment, specialized skills, training and licensing.

To ensure the City has access to the best pricing, prompt response times and applicable project expertise, staff recommends splitting the award between Best Contracting Services, Inc., Letner Roofing and Maverick Roofing, Inc. Best Contracting Services, Inc. would primarily provide roofing services such as leak mitigation and waterproofing as Best Contracting has satisfactorily provided such services for the City over the past three years. Based on Letner Roofing’s extensive experience with multimillion dollar projects, Letner Roofing would provide services for the City’s large-scale projects that are often long-term, intricate and require a large workforce. Maverick Roofing, Inc. has the lowest minimum call-out charge and fastest response time, thus Maverick Roofing would perform urgent and minor repairs that require a prompt response time and are small-scale in nature.

Vendor/Consultant Selection
Bid Data
Bid
Posting
Date
Bid Posted
On
Bid Advertised In (City
Charter & Municipal Code)
# of Vendors
Downloaded
# of
Submittals
Received
Date
Publicly
Opened
1/31/2019 City's Online
Bidding Site Santa Monica Daily Press 28 5 2/22/2019
Submittals Received Selection Criteria
Best
Contracting
Services, Inc.
$85.00/hour Municipal
Code
SMMC 2.24.072
$160.00/hour (OT)
Commercial
Roofing
Systems, Inc.
$109.00/hour Evaluation
Criteria
Price, previous experience, ability to
deliver, quality of product, and
compliance with City specifications. $153.00/hour (OT)

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Staff Report_June 11, 2019 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) 3 of 4
Concrete
Construction
$130.00/hour Best and
Lowest
Bidders
Best Contracting Services, Inc., Letner
Roofing and Maverick Roofing, Inc. $177.00/hour (OT)
Letner
Roofing
$104.84/hour
$137.45/hour (OT)
Maverick
Roofing, Inc.
$55.69/hour
$72.88/hour (OT)
Best Bidder Justification
Best Contracting Services, Inc. has satisfactorily provided roofing contractor services for the City for the past three years. In addition, Best Contracting Services, Inc. has continued to provide competitive pricing and dependable service. Letner Roofing was the most experienced bidder by over 20 years, and their bid submittal yielded impressive references. Letner Roofing has successfully completed multi-million-dollar projects for the University of Southern California, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Irvine School District and the University of California, Los Angeles. These organizations confirmed that Letner Roofing provided satisfactory work and remained budget-conscious. Maverick Roofing, Inc. has provided roofing contractor services for the City, as a subcontractor, for the past year. Maverick Roofing has provided fast response times and the most competitive pricing. Based on these criteria, Best Contracting Services, Inc., Letner Roofing and Maverick Roofing, Inc., are recommended as the best bidders. *Lowest bids were based on the general pricing total (regular time and overtime) Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to award agreements with Best Contracting Services, Inc., Letner Roofing and Maverick Roofing, Inc. for roofing contractor services.

Agreement Requests
Contractor
Request
Amounts
FY 2019-20 Budget
Public Works Department
Account #
Total
Contract
Amounts
Best Contracting Services, Inc. $75,000 01500020.529480 $375,000 Letner Roofing $100,000 01500020.529480 $580,650
Maverick Roofing, Inc. $55,000 01500020.529480 $275,000 Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Staff Report_June 11, 2019 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) 4 of 4
Prepared By: Kyla Johnson, Senior Administrative Analyst Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Best Contracting Services Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form B. Letner Roofing Co. Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form
C. Maverick Roofing Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Staff Report_June 11, 2019 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 1 -
Contract No. 10854 (CCS)

CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Contractual Services Agreement (“Contract”), entered into as of _________________(“Execution Date”), by and between the CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal corporation (“City”), and Best Contracting Services Inc. (“Best Contracting Services”), is made with reference to the following:

RECITALS:

A. The City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of the City.

B. Best Contracting Services is qualified to do business, and is doing business, in the State of California. Best Contracting Services represents it has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise necessary to provide the services set forth in this Contract.

C. The City and Best Contracting Services desire to enter into an agreement for the Best Contracting Services to provide contractual services to the City as set forth herein, upon the terms and conditions set forth below.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows:

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Term. This Agreement begins on the Execution Date and terminates two calendar years after the Execution Date, unless sooner terminated in accordance with Section

14. 1.1 Option to Extend. The City, in its sole and complete discretion, shall have the option to renew this agreement for (1) additional (3) year period (“Extension Term”), in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit B.

2. Best Contracting Services Services. Best Contracting Services will perform all of the services (“Services”) described in Exhibit A, Scope of Services. Best Contracting Services will complete the Services in accordance with Exhibit B, Budget.

3. City Services. The City agrees to:

16.1 Make available to Best Contracting Services any currently existing documents, data or information required for the performance of the Services.

16.2 Designate a representative authorized to act on behalf of City.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19 9/26/2019

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 2 -

16.3 Promptly examine and render findings on all documents submitted for staff review by Best Contracting Services.

4. Compensation. The City will compensate Best Contracting Services for the Services performed in an amount not to exceed $150,000 as set forth in Exhibit B.

4.1 Total Amount Not To Exceed. In the event the City exercises the (1) additional (3) year renewal option, the total amount for the Term and Extension Term shall not exceed $375,000, as set forth in Exhibit B.

5. Invoices. Best Contracting Services will invoice the City for the Services in accordance with Exhibit B and the City will pay any undisputed amount within 30 days of receipt.

6. Notices. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Agreement, must be in writing and will be deemed served when delivered personally, by email, or on the third business day after deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, registered or certified, addressed as follows:

6.1 All notices, demands, requests or approvals to the City:

Facilities Maintenance Division
City of Santa Monica
2500 Michigan Avenue
Santa Monica, California 90404
Attention: Shidan Adlparvar
Re: Contract No. 10854
with a copy to:

Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office
1685 Main Street, Third Floor
Santa Monica, California 90401
Attention: City Attorney
Re: Contract No. 10854

6.2 All notices, demands, requests or approvals to Best Contracting Services:

Best Contracting Services
19027 S. Hamilton Avenue
Gardena, CA 90248-4408
Attention: Candys Simpkins
[email protected]; 310-328-6969 Ext. 243
Re: Contract No. 10854

7. Independent Parties. Both parties to this Agreement will be acting in an independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint venturers of one another.

Neither the City nor its officers or employees will have any control over the conduct DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 3 -
of Best Contracting Services or any of Best Contracting Services’ agents, employees, or subcontractors, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement.

8. Integrated Contract. This Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties. Any preliminary negotiations and agreements of any kind or nature are merged into this Agreement. No oral agreement or implied covenant may be held to vary the provisions of this Agreement.

This Agreement may be modified only by written agreement signed by City and Best Contracting Services, and approved as to form by the City Attorney.

9. Insurance. Prior to commencing work, Best Contracting Services must procure, maintain and pay for insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Services by Best Contracting Services or Best Contracting Services’ agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors for the duration of this Agreement. Best Contracting Services must obtain insurance that, at a minimum, meets the requirements for insurance set forth in Exhibit C, Insurance Requirements and Verifications.

10. Defense and Indemnification.

10.1 Best Contracting Services agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, boards and commissions, and employees (collectively, “City”) from and against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, or costs, including but not limited to attorney’s fees, or payments for injury to any person or property (collectively, “Losses”) caused or claimed to be caused by the act, errors, and/or omissions of Best Contracting Services, or Best Contracting Services’ employees, agents, officers, and subcontractors. Best Contracting Services’ responsibilities under this Section 10.1 include liability arising from, connected with, caused by, or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the City, which may be in combination with the acts or omissions of Best Contracting Services, its employees, agents or officers, or subcontractors; provided, however, that Best Contracting Services’ duty to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless shall not include any Losses arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City.

Notwithstanding Best Contracting Services’ obligation to defend City hereunder, City has the right to conduct its own defense and seek reimbursement for reasonable costs of defense from Best Contracting Services, if City chooses to do so.

10.2 Enforcement Costs. Best Contracting Services agrees to pay any and all costs the City incurs enforcing the indemnity, defense and hold harmless provisions set forth in Section 10.1.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 4 -

11. Prohibition Against Transfers.

11.1 Best Contracting Services may not assign, hypothecate, or transfer this Agreement or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any attempt to do so without the City’s consent will be null and void, and any assignee, hypothecatee or transferee acquires no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.

11.2 The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Best Contracting Services or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Best Contracting Services, if a partnership or joint venture or syndicate exists, which results in changing the control of Best Contracting Services, will be construed as an assignment of this Agreement. Control means 50% or more of the voting power of the corporation.

12. Permits and Licenses. Best Contracting Services, at its sole expense, must obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement all required business and professional permits, licenses and certificates.

13. Waiver. A waiver of any breach of this Agreement may not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement.

14. Default and Termination.

14.1 If Best Contracting Services fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement, and if the default is not cured within a period of five days after the City’s written notice of default specifying the nature of the default, City may immediately terminate this Agreement by written notice to Best Contracting Services.

14.2 The City has the option, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement by giving ten days’ written notice to Best Contracting Services.

Upon termination of this Agreement, City will pay Best Contracting Services any compensation earned and unpaid up to the effective date of termination.

15. Compliance with Law. Best Contracting Services must comply with all laws of the State of California and the United States, and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by City including, but not limited to, Articles 2 and 3, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the Labor Code, State of California related to prevailing wage, apprentices, penalties and certified payroll.

16. Registration with the Department of Industrial Relations; Compliance Monitoring.

16.1No contractor or subcontractor may be listed on a bid proposal for a public works project (submitted on or after March 1, 2015) unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 [with DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 5 -
limited exceptions from this requirement for bid purposes only under Labor Code section 1771.1(a)].

16.2No contractor or subcontractor may be awarded a contract for public work on a public works project (awarded on or after April 1, 2015) unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5.

16.3This project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations.

17. Discrimination. Best Contracting Services may not discriminate in the provision of services hereunder because of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, sexual orientation, marital status, AIDS or disability.

18. Nuisance. Best Contracting Services may not maintain, commit, or permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement.

19. Records.

19.1 Best Contracting Services must maintain complete and accurate records with respect to costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by the City for any services provided where compensation is on the basis of hourly rates, subcontractor costs, or other direct costs. Best Contracting Services must keep the records, together with supporting documents, separate from other documents and records and maintain them for a period of three years after receipt of final payment.

19.2 Best Contracting Services must maintain records in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of the Services and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Best Contracting Services must clearly identify all records and make them readily accessible to the City. At the City’s request, Best Contracting Services must provide records in an electronic format and, if necessary, access to any proprietary software to view such electronic records.

19.3 Best Contracting Services must allow the City to have free access to Best Contracting Services’ books and records and to inspect all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. The City has the right to examine or audit Best Contracting Services’ records, and Best Contracting Services agrees to cooperate with any examination or audit of its records. If a City audit discloses an error of 5% or more in information reported by Best Contracting Services, Best Contracting Services agrees to pay the cost of the City’s audit computed on the basis of four times the direct payroll of the audit staff completing the audit and audit report.

20. Work Product; Reports.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 6 -

20.1 Any work product prepared or caused to be prepared by Best Contracting Services or any subcontractor for this Agreement will be the exclusive property of City. No work product given to or prepared by Best Contracting Services or any subcontractor pursuant to this Agreement may be made available to any individual or organization by Best Contracting Services without prior written approval by City.

20.2 At the City’s request, Best Contracting Services must furnish reports concerning the status of the Services.

21. Standard of Care. Best Contracting Services agrees to provide all Services, including services performed by any subcontractor, in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of Best Contracting Services’ profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions.

22. Subcontractors.

22.1 If Best Contracting Services proposes to have any subcontractor perform any part of the Services, Best Contracting Services must submit a request for approval in writing, describing the scope of work to be subcontracted, the name of the proposed subcontractor, and the total price or hourly rates used in preparing an estimated cost for the subcontractor’s services. The City, in its sole discretion, may grant or deny the request.

22.2 Best Contracting Services will be responsible for the quality of any subcontractor’s work. Every subcontract or agreement of any kind entered into between Best Contracting Services and any subcontractor (or between any subcontractor and others) must contain the following provision:

This agreement is consistent with all terms and conditions of the Agreement No. 10854 (CCS) entered into between the City of Santa Monica and Best Contracting Services
on^^____________________.

23. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California, without regard to any choice of law provisions, will govern this Agreement.

24. Venue and Jurisdiction. The City and Best Contracting Services agree that the Services will take place in Los Angeles County. Any litigation arising out of this Agreement may only be brought in either the United States District Court, Central District of California, or the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, West District, as appropriate. The parties agree that venue exists in either court, and each party expressly waives any right to transfer to another venue. The parties further agree that either court will have personal jurisdiction over the parties to this Agreement.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19 9/26/2019

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 7 -

25. Survival of Provisions and Obligations. Any provision of this Agreement, which by its nature must be exercised after termination of this Agreement, will survive termination and remain effective for a reasonable time. Any obligation that accrued prior to termination of this Agreement will survive termination of this Agreement.

26. Exhibits. The following exhibits are incorporated by reference into this Contract as though fully set forth herein.

Exhibit A Scope of Services
Exhibit B Budget
Exhibit C Insurance Requirements
In witness whereof, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.

ATTEST:
______________________________

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

LANE DILG
City Attorney

CITY OF SANTA MONICA,
a municipal corporation
By: ______________________________

RICK COLE
City Manager
Best Contracting Services Corporation
#VENDOR
By: ________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19 Lane Dilg
8/23/2019
City Attorney
Kayhan Fatemi
9/16/2019
Best Contracting Services, Inc.

Executive V.P.
9/26/2019
City Manager
Rick Cole
9/26/2019
City Clerk
Denise Anderson-Warren

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Exhibit A
Scope of Services

1. GENERAL. Best Contracting Services, Inc. shall provide roofing repair and replacement services at various City facilities. Work may include roof replacements or repairs on a wide variety of roof types, emergency call outs for leak mitigation, and associated work involving coatings, flashings, gutters, HVAC unit replacements (roof work only), parapet well, roof drains/ scuppers, and skylights. Jobs shall be quoted individually and requested as required (no guaranteed usage).

2. APPROVAL OF WORK. Best Contracting Services, Inc. shall provide a written proposal with pricing for approval for all jobs requested by Facilities Maintenance staff. All work under this contract must be authorized by the Carpenter Crew Leader, Facilities Supervisor or Facilities Services Administrator. City staff shall approve all jobs in writing prior to the start of work (generally in the form of an e-mail approval) with the exception of emergency work requested by staff to address a clear and present hazard to the public, City staff, the environment and/or City property. A written proposal or invoice shall be submitted to the City with accurate cost information as soon as is practicable after emergency work approval based on a verbally provided cost estimate.

3. CONTRACTORS LICENSE / REGISTRATION WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS. Best Contracting Services, Inc. shall maintain a valid C-39 California Roofing Contractors License during the term of this agreement. Best Contracting Services, Inc. must have appropriate certifications to work on certain roof material (e.g. Sika Sarnafil). If required, Best Contracting Services, Inc. shall maintain a valid registration as a Public Works contractor on the Department of Industrial Relations website: http://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/PublicWorks.html

4. PERFORMANCE OF WORK. Work dates / times shall be coordinated in advance with City Carpentry staff who shall facilitate access to City locations. The City may opt to provide materials and/or labor to assist with various work.

5. PREVAILING WAGE / CERTIFIED PAYROLL RECORDS. The City shall notify Best Contracting Services, Inc. of projects to be performed under this contract where prevailing wage must be paid and certified payroll records must be submitted. Certified payroll records shall be submitted electronically via the State Department of Industrial Relations’ electronic Certified Payroll Reporting (eCPR) system, and if requested, to Facilities Maintenance staff.

6. WASTE MATERIALS DISPOSAL. Best Contracting Services, Inc. shall remove any trash and waste materials generated by work performed under this contract unless otherwise specified by Facilities Maintenance staff.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Exhibit B
Budget
I. Labor Rates. Jobs shall be quoted individually with specifications provided by Facilities Maintenance Division staff using the labor rates noted below (per Bid 4377).

Contract Term Regular Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Overtime Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Years 1 & 2 $ 85 $ 160
II. Additional Pricing.

2.1.1. The after-hours / weekend labor rate (otherwise known as Overtime) shall be applicable for work completed Friday – Monday after 4 p.m.

2.1.2. The minimum call-out charge shall be $2,000.

III. Total Compensation.

3.1.1. The City will compensate Best Contracting Services, Inc. for the services performed in an amount to exceed $150,000 for the Contract Term.

3.1.2. Extension Term: (1) additional (3) year renewal option; the total amount for the Term and Extension Term shall not exceed ($375,000).

IV. Invoices. Best Contracting Services, Inc. shall invoice the City per job under Net 30 terms.

Extension Term Regular Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Overtime Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Years 3,4 &5 $ 85 $ 160
DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Exhibit C
Insurance Requirements
Contractual Services Agreement Insurance Requirements
Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.

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

1. Commercial General Liability (CGL): Insurance Services Office Form CG 00 01 covering CGL on an “occurrence” basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury and personal and advertising injury, with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (Insurance Services Office Form CG 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

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

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

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

Other Insurance Provisions

1. The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
a. Additional Insured Status: The City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. CGL coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’s insurance (at least as broad as DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 10 11 85, or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38 and CG 20 37). b. Primary Coverage: For any claims related to this Agreement, the Contractor’s insurance shall be primary coverage as least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. c. Notice of Cancellation: Each insurance policy required herein shall state that coverage shall not be cancelled except after notice has been given to the City of Santa Monica.
d. Waiver of Subrogation: Contractor hereby grants to the City of Santa Monica a waiver of any right of subrogation which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against the City of Santa Monica by virtue of payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City of Santa Monica has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City of Santa Monica for all work performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors.

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

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers authorized to conduct business in California with a current A.M. Best rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City of Santa Monica.

Verification of Coverage
Contractor shall furnish the City of Santa Monica with original certificates and amendatory endorsements (or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage provided by this clause). All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Santa Monica before work commences. However, failure to obtain required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’s obligation to provide them.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) The City of Santa Monica reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including the endorsements required herein, at any time.

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

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

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

DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F1429B3-9603-4898-B0EA-5ABCB0233C19

5.C.b
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Best Contracting Services_Agreement 10854 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 1 -
Contract No. 10855 (CCS)

CONTRACTUAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Contractual Services Agreement (“Contract”), entered into as of _________________ (“Execution Date”), by and between the CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a municipal corporation (“City”), and Danny Letner Inc. (“Letner Roofing Co.”), is made with reference to the following:

RECITALS:

B. Letner Roofing Co. is qualified to do business, and is doing business, in the State of California. Letner Roofing Co. represents it has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise necessary to provide the services set forth in this Contract.

C. The City and Letner Roofing Co. desire to enter into an agreement for the Letner Roofing Co. to provide contractual services to the City as set forth herein, upon the terms and conditions set forth below.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows:

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Term. This Agreement begins on the Execution Date and terminates two calendar years after the Execution Date, unless sooner terminated in accordance with Section

14. 1.1 Option to Extend. The City, in its sole and complete discretion, shall have the option to renew this agreement for one (1) additional 3-year period (“Extension Term”), in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit B.

2. Letner Roofing Co. Services. Letner Roofing Co. will perform all of the services (“Services”) described in Exhibit A, Scope of Services. Letner Roofing Co. will complete the Services in accordance with Exhibit B, Budget.

3. City Services. The City agrees to:

16.1 Make available to Letner Roofing Co. any currently existing documents, data or information required for the performance of the Services.

16.2 Designate a representative authorized to act on behalf of City.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2 10/30/2019

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 2 -

16.3 Promptly examine and render findings on all documents submitted for staff review by Letner Roofing Co.

4. Compensation. The City will compensate Letner Roofing Co. for the Services performed in an amount not to exceed $200,000 as set forth in Exhibit B.

4.1 Total Amount Not To Exceed. In the event the City exercises the one (1) additional 3-year renewal option, the total amount for the Term and Extension Term shall not exceed $580,650, as set forth in Exhibit B.

5. Invoices. Letner Roofing Co. will invoice the City for the Services in accordance with Exhibit B and the City will pay any undisputed amount within 30 days of receipt.

6.1 All notices, demands, requests or approvals to the City:

Facilities Maintenance Division
City of Santa Monica
2500 Michigan Avenue
Santa Monica, California 90404
Attention: Shidan Adlparvar
Re: Contract No. 10855
with a copy to:

Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office
1685 Main Street, Third Floor
Santa Monica, California 90401
Attention: City Attorney
Re: Contract No. 10855

6.2 All notices, demands, requests or approvals to Letner Roofing Co.:

Letner Roofing Co.
1490 N. Glassell Street
Orange, CA 92867
Attention: Dennis Olson
[email protected]; 310-328-6969 Ext. 243
Re: Contract No. 10855

7. Independent Parties. Both parties to this Agreement will be acting in an independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint venturers of one another.

Neither the City nor its officers or employees will have any control over the conduct DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 3 -
of Letner Roofing Co. or any of Letner Roofing Co.’s agents, employees, or subcontractors, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement.

This Agreement may be modified only by written agreement signed by City and Letner Roofing Co. and approved as to form by the City Attorney.

9. Insurance. Prior to commencing work, Letner Roofing Co. must procure, maintain and pay for insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Services by Letner Roofing Co. or Letner Roofing Co.’s agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors for the duration of this Agreement. Letner Roofing Co. must obtain insurance that, at a minimum, meets the requirements for insurance set forth in Exhibit C, Insurance Requirements and Verifications.

10. Defense and Indemnification.

10.1 Letner Roofing Co. agrees to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the City, its agents, officers, boards and commissions, and employees (collectively, “City”) from and against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, or costs, including but not limited to attorney’s fees, or payments for injury to any person or property (collectively, “Losses”) caused or claimed to be caused by the act, errors, and/or omissions of Letner Roofing Co. , or Letner Roofing Co. ’ employees, agents, officers, and subcontractors. Letner Roofing Co. ’ responsibilities under this Section 10.1 include liability arising from, connected with, caused by, or claimed to be caused by the active or passive negligent acts or omissions of the City, which may be in combination with the acts or omissions of Letner Roofing Co. , its employees, agents or officers, or subcontractors; provided, however, that Letner Roofing Co. ’ duty to defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless shall not include any Losses arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Notwithstanding Letner Roofing Co.’s obligation to defend City hereunder, City has the right to conduct its own defense and seek reimbursement for reasonable costs of defense from Letner Roofing Co. if City chooses to do so.

10.2 Enforcement Costs. Letner Roofing Co. agrees to pay any and all costs the City incurs enforcing the indemnity, defense and hold harmless provisions set forth in Section 10.1.

11. Prohibition Against Transfers.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 4 -

11.1 Letner Roofing Co. may not assign, hypothecate, or transfer this Agreement or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any attempt to do so without the City’s consent will be null and void, and any assignee, hypothecatee or transferee acquires no right or interest by reason of such attempted assignment, hypothecation or transfer.

11.2 The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Letner Roofing Co. or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Letner Roofing Co. , if a partnership or joint venture or syndicate exists, which results in changing the control of Letner Roofing Co. , will be construed as an assignment of this Agreement. Control means 50% or more of the voting power of the corporation.

12. Permits and Licenses. Letner Roofing Co. at its sole expense, must obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement all required business and professional permits, licenses and certificates.

13. Waiver. A waiver of any breach of this Agreement may not be deemed a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition of this Agreement.

14. Default and Termination.

14.1 If Letner Roofing Co. fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement, and if the default is not cured within a period of five days after the City’s written notice of default specifying the nature of the default, City may immediately terminate this Agreement by written notice to Letner Roofing Co.

14.2 The City has the option, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement by giving ten days’ written notice to Letner Roofing Co. Upon termination of this Agreement, City will pay Letner Roofing Co. any compensation earned and unpaid up to the effective date of termination.

15. Compliance with Law. Letner Roofing Co. must comply with all laws of the State of California and the United States, and all ordinances, rules and regulations enacted or issued by City including, but not limited to, Articles 2 and 3, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1 of the Labor Code, State of California related to prevailing wage, apprentices, penalties and certified payroll.

16. Registration with the Department of Industrial Relations; Compliance Monitoring.

16.1No contractor or subcontractor may be listed on a bid proposal for a public works project (submitted on or after March 1, 2015) unless registered with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 [with limited exceptions from this requirement for bid purposes only under Labor Code section 1771.1(a)].

DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 5 -

16.3This project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of Industrial Relations.

17. Discrimination. Letner Roofing Co. may not discriminate in the provision of services hereunder because of race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, sexual orientation, marital status, AIDS or disability.

18. Nuisance. Letner Roofing Co. may not maintain, commit, or permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection with the performance of services under this Agreement.

19. Records.

19.1 Letner Roofing Co. must maintain complete and accurate records with respect to costs, expenses, receipts and other such information required by the City for any services provided where compensation is on the basis of hourly rates, subcontractor costs, or other direct costs. Letner Roofing Co. must keep the records, together with supporting documents, separate from other documents and records and maintain them for a period of three years after receipt of final payment.

19.2 Letner Roofing Co. must maintain records in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of the Services and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Letner Roofing Co. must clearly identify all records and make them readily accessible to the City. At the City’s request, Letner Roofing Co. must provide records in an electronic format and, if necessary, access to any proprietary software to view such electronic records.

19.3 Letner Roofing Co. must allow the City to have free access to Letner Roofing Co.’s books and records and to inspect all work, data, documents, proceedings and activities related to this Agreement. The City has the right to examine or audit Letner Roofing Co.’s records, and Letner Roofing Co. agrees to cooperate with any examination or audit of its records. If a City audit discloses an error of 5% or more in information reported by Letner Roofing Co., Letner Roofing Co. agrees to pay the cost of the City’s audit computed on the basis of four times the direct payroll of the audit staff completing the audit and audit report.

20. Work Product; Reports.

20.1 Any work product prepared or caused to be prepared by Letner Roofing Co. or any subcontractor for this Agreement will be the exclusive property of City. No work product given to or prepared by Letner Roofing Co. or any subcontractor DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 6 -
pursuant to this Agreement may be made available to any individual or organization by Letner Roofing Co. without prior written approval by City.

20.2 At the City’s request, Letner Roofing Co. must furnish reports concerning the status of the Services.

21. Standard of Care. Letner Roofing Co. agrees to provide all Services, including services performed by any subcontractor, in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of Letner Roofing Co. ’ profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions.

22. Subcontractors.

22.1 If Letner Roofing Co. proposes to have any subcontractor perform any part of the Services, Letner Roofing Co. must submit a request for approval in writing, describing the scope of work to be subcontracted, the name of the proposed subcontractor, and the total price or hourly rates used in preparing an estimated cost for the subcontractor’s services. The City, in its sole discretion, may grant or deny the request.

22.2 Letner Roofing Co. will be responsible for the quality of any subcontractor’s work. Every subcontract or agreement of any kind entered into between Letner Roofing Co. and any subcontractor (or between any subcontractor and others) must contain the following provision:

This agreement is consistent with all terms and conditions of the Agreement No. 10855 (CCS) entered into between the City of Santa Monica and Letner Roofing Co.
on^^____________________.

23. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California, without regard to any choice of law provisions, will govern this Agreement.

24. Venue and Jurisdiction. The City and Letner Roofing Co. agree that the Services will take place in Los Angeles County. Any litigation arising out of this Agreement may only be brought in either the United States District Court, Central District of California, or the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, West District, as appropriate. The parties agree that venue exists in either court, and each party expressly waives any right to transfer to another venue. The parties further agree that either court will have personal jurisdiction over the parties to this Agreement.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2 10/30/2019

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) - 7 -

26. Exhibits. The following exhibits are incorporated by reference into this Contract as though fully set forth herein.

Exhibit A Scope of Services
Exhibit B Budget
Exhibit C Insurance Requirements
In witness whereof, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed the day and year first above written.

ATTEST:
______________________________

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

LANE DILG
City Attorney

CITY OF SANTA MONICA,
a municipal corporation
By: ______________________________

RICK COLE
City Manager
Letner Roofing Co. Corporation
By: ________________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2 10/23/2019
City Attorney
Lane Dilg
Jose Romero
Rick Cole
City Manager
10/30/2019
City Clerk
Denise Anderson-Warren
10/31/2019

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Exhibit A
Scope of Services

1. GENERAL. Letner Roofing Co. shall provide roofing repair and replacement services at various City facilities. Work may include roof replacements or repairs on a wide variety of roof types, emergency call outs for leak mitigation, and associated work involving coatings, flashings, gutters, HVAC unit replacements (roof work only), parapet well, roof drains/ scuppers, and skylights. Jobs shall be quoted individually and requested as required (no guaranteed usage).

2. APPROVAL OF WORK. Letner Roofing Co. shall provide a written proposal with pricing for approval for all jobs requested by Facilities Maintenance staff. All work under this contract must be authorized by the Carpenter Crew Leader, Facilities Supervisor or Facilities Services Administrator. City staff shall approve all jobs in writing prior to the start of work (generally in the form of an e-mail approval) with the exception of emergency work requested by staff to address a clear and present hazard to the public, City staff, the environment and/or City property. A written proposal or invoice shall be submitted to the City with accurate cost information as soon as is practicable after emergency work approval based on a verbally provided cost estimate.

3. CONTRACTORS LICENSE / REGISTRATION WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS. Letner Roofing Co. shall maintain a valid C-39 California Roofing Contractors License during the term of this agreement. Letner Roofing Co. must have appropriate certifications to work on certain roof material (e.g. Sika Sarnafil). If required, Letner Roofing Co. shall maintain a valid registration as a Public Works contractor on the Department of Industrial Relations website: http://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/PublicWorks.html

4. PERFORMANCE OF WORK. Work dates / times shall be coordinated in advance with City staff who shall facilitate access to City locations. The City may opt to provide materials and/or labor to assist with various work.

5. PREVAILING WAGE / CERTIFIED PAYROLL RECORDS. The City shall notify Letner Roofing Co. of projects to be performed under this contract where prevailing wage must be paid and certified payroll records must be submitted. Certified payroll records shall be submitted electronically via the State Department of Industrial Relations’ electronic Certified Payroll Reporting (eCPR) system, and if requested, to Facilities Maintenance staff.

6. WASTE MATERIALS DISPOSAL. Letner Roofing Co. shall remove any trash and waste materials generated by work performed under this contract unless otherwise specified by Facilities Maintenance staff.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Exhibit B
Budget
I. Labor Rates. Jobs shall be quoted individually with specifications provided by Facilities Maintenance Division staff using the labor rates noted below (per Bid 4377).

Contract Term Regular Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Overtime Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Years 1 & 2 $ 104.84 $ 137.45
II. Additional Pricing.

2.1.1. The after-hours / weekend labor rate (otherwise known as Overtime) shall be applicable for work completed on Saturday and Sunday – between 3 p.m. and 7 a.m.

2.1.2. The minimum call-out charge shall be $1,800.

III. Total Compensation.

3.1.1. The City will compensate Letner Roofing Co. for the services performed in an amount to exceed $200,000 for the Contract Term.

3.1.2. Extension Term: one (1) additional 3-year renewal option; the total amount for the Term and Extension Term shall not exceed $580,650.

IV. Invoices. Letner Roofing Co. shall invoice the City per job under Net 30 terms.

Extension Term Regular Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Overtime Labor Rate
(Per Hour)
Year 3 $120.57 $ 158.07
Year 4 $ 132.63 $ 173.88
Year 5 $ 145.89 $ 191.27
DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Exhibit C
Insurance Requirements
Contractual Services Agreement Insurance Requirements
Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property that may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors.

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

Other Insurance Provisions

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 10 11 85, or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38 and CG 20 37). b. Primary Coverage: For any claims related to this Agreement, the Contractor’s insurance shall be primary coverage as least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City of Santa Monica, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be in excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it. c. Notice of Cancellation: Each insurance policy required herein shall state that coverage shall not be cancelled except after notice has been given to the City of Santa Monica.
d. Waiver of Subrogation: Contractor hereby grants to the City of Santa Monica a waiver of any right of subrogation which any insurer of said Contractor may acquire against the City of Santa Monica by virtue of payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City of Santa Monica has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) The City of Santa Monica reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including the endorsements required herein, at any time.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 777F02F3-2FCE-41A5-B231-B5E5B3FD16F2

5.C.c
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Letner Roofing_Agreement 10855 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) 

 
This site uses cookies, some of which are required for the operation of the site. Learn More  OK  This document is now complete. CLOSE

5.C.d
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Maverick Roofing_Agreement 10856 (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service)

5.C.e
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Best Contracting OAKS (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service)

5.C.e
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Best Contracting OAKS (5910 : 1st Modification of Contract for Citywide Roofing Service) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 10, 2023
Agenda Item: 5.D
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Danielle Noble, Acting Director, Housing and Human Services Department Subject: Adoption of Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Resolutions Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Adopt the attached Resolution increasing the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee by

5.8 percent for new market-rate apartments and condominiums (Attachment A).

3. Adopt the attached Resolution increasing the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost by 5.8 percent (Attachment B).

Summary
A key element of Santa Monica’s strategy to increase housing affordability is requiring market-rate housing developers to assist with creating affordable housing. Developers must either construct residences that are affordable to low- and moderate-income households or pay a fee, which is used to subsidize affordable housing built by nonprofit developers. The City calculates and publishes adjustments to the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee and Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost on an annual basis, to keep pace with changes in land and construction costs.

The calculation methodology approved by City Council uses a combination of the annual change in median condominium sale prices in Santa Monica as a proxy measure for land cost changes and the change in construction costs based upon the Engineering News Record’s (ENR) Construction Cost Index specific to the Los Angeles area. The

5.D
Packet Pg. 244
2 of 5
land cost and construction cost factors are weighted based on development cost data for the most recently completed or under construction multi-family affordable developments financed by the City.

Based on 2022 sales data compiled using Los Angeles County Assessor and Recorder data (Attachment C), the weighted change for the City in median condominium sale prices from 2021 to end of year 2022 was positive 10.3 percent.

The ENR Construction Cost Index increased 4.0 percent between March 2022 and March 2023 (Attachment D). A land cost weight of 29.2 percent and construction cost weight of 70.8 percent results in a 5.8 percent increase ([10.3% x 29.2%] + [4.0% x

70.8%] = 5.8%). The table below summarizes the annual adjustment formula calculation.

The new Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee and Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost would be 5.8 percent higher than the existing amounts. The new amounts would become effective December 1, 2023, if approved. The table below summarizes the adjustments in previous years.

Historical Annual Adjustment Rate
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023

7.2% 4.9% 3.6% 5.0% 5.0% 2.2% 0.0% -2.7% 10.2 5.8
Discussion
The Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP), Chapter 9.64 of the City’s Municipal Code, implements Proposition R, which establishes that not less than thirty percent of all newly constructed multi-family housing in the City annually must be affordable to low- and moderate-income households for at least 55 years. The AHPP

5.D
Packet Pg. 245
3 of 5
requires developers of new market-rate multi-family housing to contribute to affordable housing goals by designating a portion of a development’s total residences as affordable housing, constructing affordable housing off-site, designating land for affordable housing development, or paying an affordable housing fee, in accordance with the following formulas:

1. Affordable housing unit base fee x floor area of multi-family project;

2. Multi-family projects with fractional affordable housing units of less than 0.50 based upon the formulas established in Section 9.64.050: Affordable Housing Unit Development cost x fractional percentage.

When the formula calculation for required affordable residences results in a fraction of less than 0.50, the obligation can be satisfied by payment of a fee based upon the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost. For example, if a development is required to provide 4.4 units of affordable housing, the developer is required to designate four affordable residences and pay 0.5 times the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost to satisfy the requirement associated with the fraction.

Annual Fee Adjustments
Section 9.64.070 of the AHPP provides that the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee and the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost shall be adjusted annually by Council resolution based on changes in construction and land costs. The fee adjustment methodology is detailed in Section 2 of the AHPP Administrative Guidelines (Attachment E) and reflects the methodology approved by Council in 2006. The fees are adjusted based on two factors: 1) changes in construction costs as measured by the Engineering News Records Construction Cost Index, and 2) changes in land costs measured by using the proxy of change in median condominium sales prices.

The table below summarizes the changes in these two factors since 2022, and the calculation results in a 5.8 percent increase in 2023:

Fee Description 2022 2023 %

5.D
Packet Pg. 246
4 of 5
Amount Amount Change
Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee –
Apartments (per square foot)
$39.12 $41.39 5.8%
Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee –
Condominiums (per square foot)
$45.70 $48.35 5.8%
Affordable Housing Unit Development
Cost
$410,451 $434,257 5.8%
The proposed Resolutions, Attachments A and B, would adjust the fees accordingly, effective December 1, 2023. Details of the calculations prepared by staff for the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee and the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost are provided in Attachment C and Attachment D. The revenue implications resulting from the proposed fees adjustment are anticipated to be minimal, as fee revenues depend on development activity in any given year.

On September 8, 2023, the City published notice in the Santa Monica Daily Press of this hearing and the availability of the staff analyses and republished the notice on September 22, 2023. Copies of the analyses have been available in the City Clerk's Office for public review since September 7, 2023.

Past Council Actions
October 25, 2022
(Attachment F)
The previous annual adjustment increasing the fees by 10.2 percent.

June 13, 2006
(Attachment G)
City Council approved the methodology for ascertaining changes in these costs and thereby calculating the adjustment.

July 21, 1998
(Attachment H)
The AHPP was adopted by the City Council and has been
periodically amended, as necessary.

Environmental Review
The new Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee and Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (common sense exception) which states that CEQA does not apply “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” The new rate reflects

5.D
Packet Pg. 247
5 of 5
annual fee adjustments, and therefore, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the new rates may have a significant effect on the environment.

Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
The proposed rate change in the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee and Unit Development Cost is expected to increase annual revenues by approximately $23,806 per unit as compared to the last adjustment period, depending on development activity levels. Revenues will be deposited in account 10420002.415300.

Prepared By: Lupe Madrid, Administrative Staff Assistant Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee B. Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost
C. Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee
D. Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost
E. AHPP Administrative Guidelines
F. October 25, 2022 Staff Report (Web Link)
G. June 13, 2006 Staff Report (Web Link)
H. July 21, 1998 Staff Report (Web Link)

5.D
Packet Pg. 248
Attachment A
1 City Council Meeting: 10-2023 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AUTOMATICALLY ADJUSTING

THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT BASE FEE FOR

NEW MARKET-RATE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO
SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9.64.070(B) BASED ON

CHANGES IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND LAND COSTS
WHEREAS, on November 8, 2005, the City Council amended Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.56.070, now renumbered Section 9.64.070, to provide that commencing on July 1, 2006, the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee shall be automatically adjusted annually by City Council resolution based on changes in construction costs and land costs; and
WHEREAS, in order to implement the Council’s decision, staff formulated a specific method of measuring changes in construction costs and land costs; and WHEREAS, this proposed methodology was detailed in an April 24, 2006 letter prepared by Paul S. Silvern of HR&A Advisors, Inc. (“HR&A”) on behalf of the City and approved by the Council on June 13, 2006; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on June 27, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10149 (CCS) which established an affordable housing unit base

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Attachment A
2 fee for condominiums of $28.15 per square foot and an affordable housing unit base fee for apartments of $24.10 per square foot; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on July 24, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10229 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $1.41 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $1.21 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on July 23, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10329 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $1.33 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $1.14 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on September 8, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10422 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $0.80 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.69 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on September 28, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10529 (CCS) which incrementally decreased these base fees by $0.41 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.35 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on June 14, 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10578 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Attachment A
3 $0.66 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.56 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on September 11, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10705 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $0.26 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.22 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 27, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10763 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $0.26 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.22 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 26, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10833 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $2.34 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $2.00 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 25, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10902 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $1.71 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $1.46 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 23, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10985 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Attachment A
4 $1.31 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $1.13 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 8, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11069 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $1.89 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $1.62 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 14, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11130 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $1.99 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $1.70 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 13, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11191 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted these base fees by $0.92 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.79 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 24, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11356 (CCS) which incrementally decreased these base fees by $1.15 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.99 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on October 25, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11478 (CCS) which incrementally decreased these base fees

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Attachment A
5 by $1.15 per square foot for new market rate condominiums and $0.99 per square foot for new market rate apartments; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 10149 (CCS), Resolution No. 10229 (CCS), Resolution No. 10329 (CCS), Resolution No. 10422 (CCS), Resolution No. 10529 (CCS), Resolution No. 10578 (CCS), Resolution No. 10705 (CCS), Resolution No. 10763 (CCS), Resolution No. 10833 (CCS), Resolution No. 10902 (CCS), Resolution No. 10985 (CCS), Resolution No. 11069 (CCS), Resolution No. 11130 (CCS), Resolution No. 11191 (CCS), and Resolution No. 11356 (CCS), and Resolution No. 11478(CCS) thereby established an affordable housing unit base fee for condominiums of $ 45.70 per square foot and an affordable housing unit base fee for apartments of $39.35; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.64.070 and the City Council’s approved methodology, staff has calculated the required incremental adjustment to these base fees based on the changes to construction costs and land costs that have occurred since the adjustment undertaken last year; and WHEREAS, on, September 8, 2023, the City published a notice that at the October 10, 2023 City Council meeting, the City Council would consider a proposed resolution to incrementally adjust the affordable housing fee that private developers pay to the City for the production of affordable housing based on this methodology and that the staff analysis was available for review in the City Clerk’s Office; and

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Attachment A
6 WHEREAS, the City republished this notice on September 22, 2023 and WHEREAS, a copy of staff’s analysis has been available in the City Clerk’s Office for public review September 7, 2023; and
WHEREAS, based on this analysis, an increase in the amount of $2.27 per square foot of the current Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee of $39.12 for apartments and an increase in the amount of $2.65 per square foot of the current Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee of $45.70 for condominiums would be appropriate,

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

SECTION 1. The current Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee for new market rate condominiums of $45.70 per square foot established by Resolution No. 10149 (CCS), Resolution No. 10229 (CCS), Resolution No. 10329 (CCS), Resolution No. 10422 (CCS), Resolution No. 10529 (CCS), Resolution No. 10578 (CCS), Resolution No. 10705 (CCS), Resolution No. 10763 (CCS), Resolution No. 10833 (CCS), Resolution No. 10902 (CCS), Resolution No. 10985 (CCS), Resolution No. 11069 (CCS), Resolution No. 11130 (CCS), Resolution No. 11191 (CCS), Resolution No. 111356 (CCS) and Resolution No. (CCS) 11478 shall be increased by $2.65 per square foot of floor area.

SECTION 2. The current Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee for new market rate apartment of $39.12 per square foot established by Resolution No. 10149 (CCS), Resolution No. 10229 (CCS), Resolution No. 10329 (CCS), Resolution No. 10422

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Attachment A
7 (CCS), Resolution No. 10529 (CCS), Resolution No. 10578 (CCS), Resolution No. 10705 (CCS), Resolution No. 10763 (CCS), Resolution No. 10833 (CCS), Resolution No. 10902 (CCS), Resolution No. 10985 (CCS), Resolution No. 11069 (CCS), Resolution No. 11130 (CCS), Resolution No. 11191, Resolution No. 111356 (CCS), and Resolution No. (CCS) 11478 shall be increased by $2.27 per square foot of floor area.

SECTION 3. Resolution No. 10149 (CCS), Resolution No. 10229 (CCS), Resolution No. 10329 (CCS), Resolution No. 10422 (CCS), Resolution No. 10529 (CCS), Resolution No. 10578 (CCS), Resolution No. 10705 (CCS), Resolution No. 10763 (CCS), Resolution No. 10833 (CCS), Resolution No. 10902 (CCS), Resolution No. 10985 (CCS), Resolution No. 11069 (CCS), Resolution No. 11130 (CCS), Resolution No. 11191 (CCS), Resolution No. 11356 (CCS), and Resolution No. (CCS) 11478 shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be superseded or altered by this resolution in any way.

SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect on December 1, 2023.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
City Attorney

5.D.a
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Production 1 City Council Meeting: 10-10-2023 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL

OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AUTOMATICALLY ADJUSTING

THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT DEVELOPMENT COST PURSUANT
TO SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9.64.070(C)

BASED ON CHANGES IN CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND LAND COSTS
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2006, the City Council amended Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.56.070, now renumbered Section 9.64.070, to provide that the City’s affordable housing unit development cost shall be established by resolution and that commencing on July 1, 2007, the affordable housing unit development cost shall be automatically adjusted annually by City Council based on changes in construction costs and land costs; and
WHEREAS, Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.64.020 defines “affordable housing unit development cost” as “the City’s average costs to develop a unit of housing affordable to 30% income households, 50% income households, 80% income households or moderate-income households;” and
WHEREAS, in order to implement the Council’s decision that the affordable housing unit development cost be adjusted based on changes in land and construction

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing 2 costs, staff formulated a specific method of measuring changes in construction costs and land costs; and
WHEREAS, this proposed methodology was detailed in an April 24, 2006 letter prepared by Paul S. Silvern of HR&A Advisors, Inc. (“HR&A”) on behalf of the City and approved by the Council on June 13, 2006; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on July 24, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10230 (CCS) which established an affordable housing unit development cost of $265,632; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on July 23, 2008, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10330 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $11,953; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on September 8, 2009, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10423 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $7,217; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on September 28, 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10530 (CCS) which incrementally decreased this unit development cost by $3,702; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on June 14, 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10579 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $5,903; and

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing 3 WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on September 11, 2012, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10706 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $2,296; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 27, 2013, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10764 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $2,314; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 26, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10834 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $20,996; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 25, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10903 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $15,318; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 23, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 10986 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $11,805;
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 8, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11070 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $16,987; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 14, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11131 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $17,836; and

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing 4 WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 13, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11192 (CCS) which incrementally adjusted this unit development cost by $8,240; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on August 24, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11357 (CCS) which incrementally decreased this unit development cost by $10,335; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to this methodology, on October 10, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 11479 (CCS) which incrementally increased this unit development cost by $37,991; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 10230 (CCS), Resolution No. 10330 (CCS), Resolution No. 10423 (CCS), Resolution No. 10530 (CCS), Resolution No. 10579 (CCS), Resolution No. 10706 (CCS), Resolution No. 10764 (CCS), Resolution No. 10834 (CCS), Resolution No. 10903 (CCS), Resolution No. 10986 (CCS), Resolution No. 11070 (CCS), Resolution No. 11131 (CCS), Resolution No. 11192 (CCS), Resolution No. 11357 (CCS), and Resolution No. 11479 (CCS) thereby established an affordable housing unit development cost of $410,451; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.64.070 and the City Council's approved methodology, staff has calculated the required incremental adjustment to the unit development cost based on the changes to

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing 5 construction costs and land costs that have occurred since the adjustment undertaken last year; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2023, the City published a notice that at the October 10, 2023 City Council meeting, the City Council would consider a proposed resolution to adjust the affordable housing unit development cost that private developers may pay to the City for the production of affordable housing based on this methodology and that the staff analysis was available for review in the City Clerks Office; and WHEREAS, the City republished this notice on September 22, 2023; and WHEREAS, a copy of staff’s analysis has been available in the City Clerk’s Office for public review since September 7, 2023; and
WHEREAS, based on this analysis, an increase in the amount of $23,806 to the current affordable housing development cost of $410,451 would be appropriate,

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

SECTION 1. The current Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost of $372,460 established by Resolution No. 10230 (CCS), Resolution No. 10330 (CCS), Resolution No. 10423 (CCS), Resolution No. 10530 (CCS), Resolution No. 10579 (CCS), Resolution No. 10706 (CCS), Resolution No. 10764 (CCS), Resolution No. 10834 (CCS), Resolution No. 10903 (CCS), Resolution No. 10986 (CCS), Resolution No. 11070 (CCS), Resolution No. 11131 (CCS), Resolution No. 11192 (CCS),

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing 6 Resolution No. 11357 (CCS), and Resolution No. 11479 (CCS) shall be increased by $23,806.

SECTION 2. Resolution No. 10230 (CCS), Resolution No. 10330 (CCS), Resolution No. 10423 (CCS), Resolution No. 10530 (CCS), Resolution No. 10579 (CCS), Resolution No. 10706 (CCS), Resolution No. 10764 (CCS), Resolution No. 10834 (CCS), Resolution No. 10903 (CCS), Resolution No. 10986 (CCS), Resolution No. 11070 (CCS), Resolution No. 11131 (CCS), Resolution No. 11192 (CCS), Resolution No. 11357 (CCS), and Resolution No. 11479 (CCS) shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be superseded or altered by this resolution in any way.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect on December 1, 2023.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
City Attorney

5.D.b
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Resolution Automatically Adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost [Revision 1] (5925 : Affordable Housing Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Danielle Noble, Acting Director, Housing and Human Services Department Re: Proposed FY 20233-24 Annual Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost
This memo summarizes the results of applying an annual adjustment to the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section

9.64.070.C (“. . . Commencing on July 1, 2007 and on July 1st of each fiscal year thereafter, the City’s affordable housing unit development cost shall be adjusted based on changes in construction costs and land costs . . .”). The inflation methodology is the same as that used to produce annual adjustments for the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee, pursuant to SMMC Section 9.64.070.B. That methodology was approved by the Santa Monica City Council at a public hearing on June 13, 2006, based on the recommendation of HR&A in a letter to City staff dated April 24, 2006. A copy of the April 24, 2006 letter is included for reference as Attachment A hereto.

SMMC Section 9.64.070.A.2 provides that developers of market rate multi-family housing are eligible to pay a fee equal to a fraction of an affordable unit when the number of units otherwise required by Section 9.64.050.D is less than 0.5. In such cases, the amount of the fee is equal to the City’s Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost multiplied by the fractional unit. The City’s Affordable Housing Development Unit Cost is defined as the average cost to the City to develop a unit of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households. The Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost was originally estimated to be $239,949, as contained in the nexus study prepared by HR&A in 20051 to support the imposition of the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee. The amount of the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost is equal to the City’s total cost to develop a unit of affordable housing (i.e., land, construction, professionalfees andother “soft” costs and financing costs) minus the amount of construction loan that can be supported by the net operating income derived from operating a typical City-assisted affordable housing development. A 2005-2007 cumulative inflation increase for the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost to $265,632 using the 1 Hamilton, Rabinovitz & Alschuler, Inc., The Nexus Between New Market Rate Multi-Family Developments in the City of Santa Monica and the Need for Affordable Housing, 2005 Update, July 1, 2005, prepared for the City of Santa Monica.

5.D.c
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee (5925 : Affordable Housing approved methodology was adopted by the City Council when it approved Resolution No. 10230 (CCS) on July 24, 2007. The City Council approved the last annual increase for FY 2022- 23 using this methodology when it adopted Resolution No. 111357 (CCS) on October 25, 2022.

For the construction cost inflation component of the calculation approach, the Engineering News Record’s(ENR) Construction CostIndex specific to the Los Angeles metro area is utilized, because it is updated monthly and is readily available via the Internet with a subscription. The applicable index change was 4.0 percent measured between March 2023 (the current budget adoption year) andMarch 2022, as comparedwith a 10.1percent change between March 2022 and March 2021.

Although there is no comparable index for inflation in land cost, the City-adopted calculation method usesthe weighted average annual change in median condominium sale prices, by ZIP Code, as a proxy measure for land cost changes measured for the immediately preceding calendar year. Based on our analysis of 2022 sales data compiled from Los Angeles County Assessor records, the weighted average change for the City during 2021 was 10.3 percent, as compared with a 10.6 percent increase during 2022.

The relative balance between land cost inflation (based on changes in median condo prices) and construction cost inflation (based on a construction cost index) continuesto be based on development cost data for the two most recently completed and/or under-construction multi-family affordable developments assisted by the City. For the current analysis, the two City-assisted projects are 1819 Pico Boulevard and 1834-1848 14th Street. The City-adopted calculation approach uses a simple average of the ratio between land purchase price and the sum of land cost and hard construction cost to derive the land value percentage (29.2%). The inverse of the land value percentage is the construction cost share (70.8%).

Table 1, on the following page, presents the annual adjustment calculation establishing the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost for FY 2023-24. It shows that a weighted average inflation index using the City Council-approved approach results in a 5.8 percent annual increase (compared with a 10.2 percent increase for FY 2022-23), to $434,257, which is a $23,806 increase per apartment compared with the FY 2022-23 Housing Unit Cost.

The results of the calculations shown in Table 1 will be the basis for a Resolution changing the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost for FY 2022-24.

5.D.c
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee (5925 : Affordable Housing

5.D.c
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee (5925 : Affordable Housing Memorandum
To: City Council
From: Danielle Noble, Acting Director, Housing and Human Services Department RE: Proposed FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee
This memo summarizes the results of applying the annual adjustment calculation methodology adopted by the City to establish the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.64.070.B (“the affordable housing unit base fee shall be adjusted [annually] basedon changes in constructions costs and land costs.”). Thismethodology was approved by the Santa Monica City Council at a public hearing on June 13, 2006, based on the recommendation of HR&A in a letter to City staff dated April 24, 2006. A copy of the April 24, 2006 letter is included for reference as Attachment A hereto. The City Council approved the last annual increase for FY 2022-23 using this methodology when it adopted Resolution No. 111356(CCS) on October 25, 2022.

For the construction cost inflation component of the calculation approach, the Engineering News Record’s (ENR) Construction Cost Index specific to the Los Angeles metro area is utilized, because it is updated monthly and is readily available via the Internet by subscription. The applicable index change was 4 percent measured between March 2023 (the current budget adoption year) and March 2022, as compared with a 10.1 percent change between March 2022 and March 2021.

Although there is no comparable index for inflation in land cost, the City-adopted method uses the weighted average annual change in median condominium sale prices, by ZIP Code, as a proxy measure for land cost changes measured for the immediately preceding calendar year.

Based on our analysis of 2022 sales data compiled by RSG from Los Angeles County Assessor records, the weighted average change for the City during 2022 was 10.3 percent, as compared with a positive 10.6 percent during 2021.

The relative balance between land cost inflation (based on changes in median condo prices)

5.D.d
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost (5925 : Affordable and construction cost inflation (based on a construction cost index) continues to be based on development cost data for the two most recently completed and/or under-construction multifamily affordable developments assisted by the City. For the current analysis, the two Cityassisted projects are 1819 Pico Boulevard and 1834-1848 14th Street. The City-adopted calculation approach uses a simple average of the ratio between land purchase price and the sum of land cost and hard construction cost to derive the land value percentage (29.2%). The inverse of the land value percentage is the construction cost share (70.8%).

Table 1, on the following page, presents the annual adjustment calculation establishing the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee for FY 2023-24. It shows that a weighted average inflation index using this City Council-approved approach results in a 5.8 percent annual increase (as compared with a 10.2 percent adjustment for FY 2022-23):
▪ $41.39 per square foot for apartment developments (an increase of $2.27per square foot from the FY 2022-23 Fee).
▪ $ 48.35per square foot for condominium developments (an increase of $2.65 per square foot from the FY 2022-23 Fee); and
The results of the calculations shown in Table 1 will be the basis for a Resolution changing the Affordable Housing Base Fee for FY 2023-24.

5.D.d
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost (5925 : Affordable

5.D.d
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost (5925 : Affordable

5.D.d
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Staff Analysis - FY 2023-24 Annual Automatic Adjustment for the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost (5925 : Affordable Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program

AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION PROGRAM

ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES

CITY OF SANTA MONICA
(Pursuant to Chapter 9.64 of the Municipal Code)
Prepared by
The City of Santa Monica Housing Division
Approved by City Council April 12, 2016

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
i
Table of Contents

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1

2. Fee Methodology........................................................................................................ 2 A. Establishment and Periodic Adjustment of Base Fee............................................. 2 B. Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost ........................................................... 3

3. On-Site Affordable Residence Option ........................................................................ 4

4. Off-Site Affordable Residence Option ........................................................................ 4 A. One-Quarter Mile Radius Maximum....................................................................... 5 B. Exceptions to the One-Quarter Mile Radius Maximum........................................... 5 C. Evidence of Site Control......................................................................................... 6 D. Simultaneous Development of Off-Site Affordable Residences ............................. 7

5. Land Acquisition Option ............................................................................................. 7 A. Eligible Land Parcels.............................................................................................. 7 B. Evidence of Site Control....................................................................................... 10 C. Conveyance of the Site ........................................................................................ 10 D. Simultaneous Conveyance of Land or Option...................................................... 12 E. Eligible Non-Profit Affordable Housing Developer................................................ 12

6. For-Sale Affordable Residence Requirements ......................................................... 13 A. Establishment of the Initial Sales Price ................................................................ 13 B. Re-Sale of an Affordable Residence to a Subsequent Purchaser........................ 15 C. Subordination ………. .......................................................................................... 16 D. Default and Foreclosure....................................................................................... 16 E. Distribution of Insurance and Condemnation Proceeds ....................................... 16

7. Tenant and Purchaser Eligibility Procedures............................................................ 17 A. Priority Households .............................................................................................. 17 B. Persons Ineligible to Occupy an Affordable Residence........................................ 18 C. Establishment, Maintenance, and Update of Income-Qualified Tenants and Purchasers List .................................................................................................... 20 D. Tenant Income Increases, Initial Ineligibility and Advance Notice to City............. 25

8. Adjustments or Waivers ........................................................................................... 28

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
ii

ATTACHMENTS
1-A Municipal Code Section 9.64 – Affordable Housing Production Program 1-B AHPP Options Comparison Table
2-A Fee Adjustment Methodology
2-B Current Base Fees for Apartment and Condominium Projects 3-A Affordable Residences Table - Condominium Projects w/4+ Residences in Multifamily Zones
3-B Incentives Table – Affordable Housing Developers
3-C Extremely-Low, Very-Low, Low and Moderate Income Levels 3-D Maximum Allowable Rents
3-E Deed Restriction Sample
4-A Affordable Housing Eligibility List Sample Application 4-B Waiting List Referral Form Sample

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
1 1. Introduction
These Administrative Guidelines provide guidance on the implementation of the City’s Affordable Housing Production Program, Chapter 9.64 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code (“AHPP”) (see Attachment 1-A for a complete copy of the AHPP). The AHPP was originally adopted by the City Council on July 21, 1998. It has been amended on several occasions since then. The AHPP gives developers of multi-family housing a variety of options for satisfying the City’s affordable housing requirements. The precise options vary depending on the housing type and location of the housing being produced.

All new multi-family housing developments of two or more residences, including multifamily housing that is part of commercial or other developments, must comply with Chapter 9.64 unless specifically exempted by the terms of Chapter 9.64. See Attachment 1-B for a comparison table on the various options for complying with Chapter 9.64. The AHPP implements Proposition R. Approved by Santa Monica voters in November, 1990, Proposition R requires that not less than 30 percent of all newly constructed multi-family residential housing in the City each year be permanently affordable to, and occupied by, low- and moderate-income households.

Section 2 of these Guidelines describes the Fee Methodology. Section 3 provides information about the number of affordable residences required and the development incentives associated with the On-Site Option. The remaining sections expand upon the AHPP and provide additional requirements regarding the Off-Site Option (Section 4), the Land Dedication Option (Section 5), For-Sale Affordable Residences (Section 6), the Tenant and Purchaser Eligibility Procedures (Section 7) and Adjustments or Waivers (Section 8).

Questions about how a particular multifamily project applicant shall satisfy the affordable housing obligation (pay a fee, build residences onsite or offsite, or provide land dedications) should be directed to either the City Planning Division at (310) 458-8341, or

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
2 to the Planning Counter in Room 111 in City Hall. Questions about current maximum rents and sales price calculation, or Tenant Eligibility and Selection Procedures should be directed to staff in the Housing Division at (310) 458-8702.

2. Fee Methodology
One way to satisfy the affordable housing obligation is through payment of the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee (§ 9.64.070). The amount of the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee ("Base Fee") is based upon the floor area of the project. The floor area of the project, as defined in the Municipal Code § 9.04.02.030.315, is multiplied by the Base Fee in order to determine the total fee owed by each project. The proceeds from this Base Fee are deposited into a special City Trust Fund and used to facilitate the development of housing affordable to very low-income, low-income and moderate-income households. The Fee Option is not available for ownership projects of four or more residences in the City’s multi-family residential zones.

A. Establishment and Periodic Adjustment of Base Fee
The Base Fee is set by a Resolution of the City Council (See Municipal Code 9.64.070 (b)) and is subject to annual adjustment based on changes in land cost and construction cost. The methodology for making these annual adjustments was established by the City Council in June 2006. More specifically, construction cost inflation is established based on the Engineering News Record’s (ENR) Construction Cost Index, which is updated monthly and is readily available via the Internet. The methodology uses annual change in median condominium purchase prices as a proxy measure for land cost changes. The relative balance between land cost inflation (based on changes in median condo prices) and construction cost inflation (based on a construction cost index) is determined based on current development cost data for recently completed or construction-in-progress multi-family affordable developments assisted by the City. A detailed explanation of the annual adjustment methodology is provided in Attachment 2-A.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
3 There are different base fees for condominiums and apartment projects. Attachment 2- B contains the current Base Fee amounts for apartment and condominium projects.

B. Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost
The Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost is set by a Resolution of the City Council (See Municipal Code 9.64.070(C)) and is subject to annual adjustment based on changes in land cost and construction cost. The methodology for making these annual adjustments was established by the City Council in June 2006 and is the same methodology used in adjusting the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee described in Section (3)(A). The Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost is the average cost to the City to develop a residence of housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households. The Affordable Housing Production Program provides that when developers of market rate multi-family housing are providing affordable residences on- or off-site, and the calculation of the number of affordable residences required results in a fractional residence, these developers are eligible to pay a fee equal to the cost of producing that fractional residence based on the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost if that fraction is less than 0.75. See Attachment 2-A.

Example (6-residence condominium project)
6 X .20 = 1.2 affordable housing residences
1 residence would be constructed on-site
Fee payment of 0.2 X $327,927 = $65,585.40

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
4 3. On-Site Affordable Residence Option
Another way to satisfy the affordable housing requirements of Chapter §9.64 is by constructing affordable residences on the same site as the proposed new multi-family project (See § 9.64.050). Ownership projects or 4 or more residences in multifamily zones must provide affordable residences either onsite or offsite (See § 9.64.040). All housing developments that provide onsite affordable residences in accordance with the AHPP are entitled to a bonus over the maximum allowable number of residences on the site (i.e., density bonus) or a development bonus (commercial/industrial zones) and incentives (See Section 9.64.050[I] and Section 9.22). This includes all residences for sale or rent such as:
• Substantial remodel and conversion of commercial buildings to residential residences
• Substantial remodel of residential buildings
• Condos and apartments
Attachment 3-A provides a table indicating the minimum number of affordable residences required in an ownership project in a multifamily zone and the fractional portion of a residence that may be paid as a fee. Attachment 3-B provides information on density bonus and other development incentives allowed when providing onsite affordable residences. Attachments 3-C and 3-D provide information on the most current income eligibility and rent limits. Attachment 3-E provides an example of an “Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property” between the City and a developer regarding a project containing affordable housing residences.

4. Off-Site Affordable Residence Option
This section of the Guidelines specifies certain additional requirements concerning the location of the Off-Site Affordable Residences, site control, and concurrent development of the market-rate project and the off-site residences.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
5 A. One-Quarter Mile Radius Maximum
Except as provided below, the alternative site for the Off-Site Affordable Residences shall be located within a one-quarter mile radius of the parcel on which the market rate residences are proposed, and within the boundaries of the City. (SMMC § 9.64.060(C)) The outer limit of this one-quarter mile radius area shall be determined by the Planning and Community Development Department. The Department’s method for so doing shall be similar to the method used for determining the area within which written notice of a pending development permit is given. Specifically, on a map of City parcels, the project applicant shall submit as part of the project application a set of one-quarter mile radii from the corners of the parcel on which the market rate residences will be constructed. Any multi-family parcel or commercial parcel on which multi-family housing is a permitted use, located, in whole or in any part, within these intersecting one-quarter mile radii is an eligible parcel for development of Off-Site Affordable Residences.

B. Exceptions to the One-Quarter Mile Radius Maximum
The maximum one-quarter mile radius requirement may be waived by majority vote of the City Planning Commission (whose decision shall be appealable to the City Council), based upon substantial evidence demonstrating that the location of Off-Site Affordable Residences more than one-quarter mile from the site of the market rate residences, but still within the City limits, better accomplishes the goals of the City’s zoning and planning regulations, including maximizing affordable housing production and dispersing affordable housing throughout the City. (SMMC § 9.64.060(F)) The project applicant shall have the burden of demonstrating why a location for the OffSite Affordable Residences of more than one-quarter mile from the market rate residences better accomplishes the City’s affordable housing objectives. In making its determination, the Planning Commission shall consider the recommendations of the Planning Director and the Housing Manager on the petition. An application for an exception to the one-quarter mile radius shall be submitted as part of the planning

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
6 application for any other discretionary approvals on the project that are within the purview of the Planning Commission.

By way of example, but not by limitation, factors that may justify the special exception include:
• No Available Sites. There are no multi-family or suitably zoned non-residential parcels within the strict boundaries of the one-quarter mile radius that can accommodate the required number of Affordable Off-Site Residences. • Dispersal of Affordable Residences. The alternative location makes it possible to locate Off-Site Affordable Residences throughout the City. • More Affordable Residences. The size, price or other characteristics of the alternative site results in a project that yields more affordable residences than the project would yield if it were located within the strict limits of the one-quarter mile radius.
• Deeper Level of Affordability. The size, price or other characteristics of the alternative location makes it possible to offer the Off-Site Affordable Residences to households at a lower household income level than would be possible within the strict limits of the one-quarter mile radius.

In no event, however, shall the Off-Site Affordable Residences be located outside a radius of one mile from the market rate residences. No more than five project exceptions to the one-quarter mile radius shall be approved in any one City fiscal year.

C. Evidence of Site Control
In order to exercise the Off-Site Affordable Residence Option, the applicant must provide evidence that the site is owned in fee or that an option to purchase, subject to City project approval, has been secured. (SMMC § 9.64.060(B)) Evidence of such site control (e.g.,

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
7 copies of purchase or option agreements) shall be provided to the City as part of the project application package.

D. Simultaneous Development of Off-Site Affordable Residences All affordable housing residences in a multi-family project or a phase of a multi-family project shall be constructed concurrently with the construction of market rate residences in the multi-family project or phase of that project. No building permit for the market rate residences shall be issued until a building permit has been issued for the Off-Site Affordable Residences, and no final City construction permit sign-off or occupancy permit shall be granted for the market rate residences until final construction permit sign-off or occupancy permit has been granted for the Off-Site Affordable Residences. Off-Site Affordable Residences shall be offered for rent or sale, as applicable, prior to or concurrently with rental or sale of the market rate residences.

5. Land Acquisition Option
This section of the Guidelines specifies additional requirements for exercising the Land Acquisition Option.

A. Eligible Land Parcels
Only land parcels meeting the following minimum characteristics shall be eligible under the Land Acquisition Option:

1. Zoning
Land parcels eligible for conveyance to the City, or an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer, shall be located in a City multi-family housing, commercial or industrial district in which multi-family housing is a permitted use.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
8 2. Minimum Land Value
For sites dedicated to the City, or an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer, the fair market value of the parcel(s) shall be at least equal to the amount of the Affordable Housing Production Fee that would otherwise apply were the market rate project applicant to elect that option under Chapter 9.64 instead of the Land Acquisition Option. The fair market value of the parcels proposed under this Option shall be supported by an estimate of value prepared by a qualified real estate appraiser, subject to the City’s reasonable review of the appraisal. For situations involving option payments, rather than conveyance of land in fee, see below. For below market rate sales, or option transfers, see below.

3. Site Characteristics
The parcel shall satisfy the following minimum criteria:
- 6,000 square feet
- Can be developed with at least 4 dwelling units
- Free of characteristics that would make it difficult or impossible to develop in a timely manner (i.e., irregular shape, excessive sloping, soil or other contamination, adjacent to incompatible land use)
A Phase I environmental evaluation report shall be required before any parcel can be considered for conveyance.

4. One-Quarter Mile Radius Maximum
Except as provided below, the land parcel(s) proposed to be conveyed to the City, or an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer, shall be located within a onequarter mile radius of the parcel on which the market rate residences are proposed and within the City limits. (SMMC § 9.64.080) The outer limits of this one-quarter mile radius area shall be determined by the Planning and Community Development Department. The Department’s method for so doing shall be similar to the method used for determining the area within which written notice of a pending development permit is given. Specifically, on a map of City parcels, the project applicant shall

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
9 draw a set of one-quarter mile radii from the corners of the parcel on which the market rate residences will be constructed. Any multi-family parcels located, in whole or in any part, within these intersecting one-quarter mile radii is an eligible parcel for the Land Acquisition option.

5. Exceptions to the One-Quarter Mile Radius Maximum
The maximum one-quarter mile radius requirement may be waived by majority vote of the City Planning Commission (whose decision shall be appealable to the City Council), based upon substantial evidence demonstrating that the location of land more than one-quarter mile from the site of the market rate residences better accomplishes the goals of the City’s zoning and planning regulations, including maximizing affordable housing production and dispersing affordable housing throughout the City. (SMMC § 9.64.080)
The project applicant shall have the burden of demonstrating why a proposed site more than one-quarter mile from the market rate residences (but still within the City limits) better accomplishes the City’s affordable housing objectives. In making its determination, the Planning Commission shall consider the recommendations of the Planning Director, the Housing Manager, and the Housing Commission. An application for an exception to the one-quarter mile radius shall be processed simultaneously with any other discretionary approvals on the project that are within the purview of the Planning Commission.

By way of example, but not by limitation, factors that may justify the special exception include:
 No Available Sites. There are no multi-family parcels within the strict boundaries of the one-quarter mile radius that are suitable for multi-family development.  Dispersal of Affordable Residences. The alternative location makes it possible to locate affordable housing throughout the City.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
10  More Affordable Residences. The size, price or other characteristics of the alternative site could result in an affordable housing project that yields more affordable residences than would otherwise be required under the On-Site Affordable Residences option or the Off-Site Affordable Residences option in Ordinance 1918.
 Deeper Level of Affordability. The size, price or other characteristics of the alternative location makes it possible to offer affordable residences to households at a lower household income level than would be possible within the strict limits of the one-quarter mile radius.

In no event, however, shall the Land Acquisition Option apply to a site located outside a radius of one mile from the market rate residences. No more than five project exceptions to the one-quarter mile radius maximum shall be approved in any one City fiscal year.

B. Evidence of Site Control
In order to exercise the Land Acquisition Option, the market rate multi-family project applicant shall provide evidence, subject to reasonable City approval, that the site to be conveyed to the City, or an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer, is owned in fee by the applicant, or that an option to purchase has been secured. Evidence of such site control, including a current title report, and a copy of the option or lease agreement, if applicable, shall be included as part of the application for the market rate project.

C. Conveyance of the Site
An eligible site, or option to purchase an eligible site, shall be conveyed to the City, or an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer, as follows:

1. Fee Title Transfer
The site shall be sold or dedicated to the City or to a qualified non-profit housing developer free of any encumbrances, contractual, physical or financial, that would

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
11 prevent it from being developed in a timely way by the City, or a qualified non-profit housing developer, for affordable multi-family housing.

If the site is dedicated to the City, or to an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer at no cost, the City shall provide reasonable cooperation as may be requested to help the applicant secure any state or federal tax credit for which such a dedication may be eligible.

If the site is sold to the City, or to an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer at below market rate, the difference between the fair market value and the below market sale price must be at least equal to the amount of the Affordable Housing Production Fee otherwise due, if that option had been selected by the project applicant.

2. Option to Purchase
If the market rate project applicant secures an option for another site to fulfill the Land Acquisition Option, the option must have a minimum term of six months and clearly state that the option may be transferred to a third party, such as the City or a qualified non-profit housing developer, under the same terms and conditions, including the agreed upon purchase price. A copy of the option agreement and a current title report shall be included with the application for the market rate project.

Any costs incurred by applicant to maintain the option from the date of project application through successful transfer of the option to the City or to a qualified non-profit developer shall be the responsibility of the applicant. If the sum of the applicant’s out-of-pocket option-related expenses, from date of project application through conveyance of the option, is less than the amount of the Affordable Housing Production Fee Option, these costs will be treated as a credit against the Affordable Housing Production Fee that would otherwise be due the City under that Chapter 9.64 option. The applicant shall pay any difference to the City as a reduced Affordable Housing Production Fee. The applicant shall provide the City a full accounting of all option payments and out-of-pocket option-related costs

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
12 eligible for offset against the Affordable Housing Production Fee amount, which accounting shall be subject to reasonable City review and approval.

The land offered for option must have the following minimum site characteristics:
- 6,000 square feet
- Can be developed with at least 4 dwelling units
- Free of characteristics that would make it difficult or impossible to develop (i.e., irregular shape, excessive sloping, soil or other contamination, adjacent to incompatible land use)
A Phase I environmental evaluation report shall be required before any parcel can be considered for option.

The City shall exercise reasonable discretion in considering the option. The land option must be consistent with all City funding requirements, including the Consolidated Rental Housing Trust Fund Guidelines.

D. Simultaneous Conveyance of Land or Option
Conveyance of land or an option to purchase land to the City or an eligible non-profit affordable housing developer, pursuant to Chapter 9.64, shall be completed prior to the City’s final sign-off on construction permits for the market rate residences, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first.

E. Eligible Non-Profit Affordable Housing Developer
Dedication of land, below market rate sale of land or transfer of an option to purchase may be made either to the City or an “eligible non-profit affordable housing developer.” For purposes of the Land Acquisition Option of Chapter 9.64, an eligible not-profit affordable housing developer is a private, non-profit corporation with: (1) a current exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code; (2) a certificate of good standing from the Secretary of State in which the organization is incorporated; (3) has the development of housing affordable to low-income households as one of its

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
13 principle missions; and (4) has been approved by the City Housing Manager, based on reasonable review of the organization’s record of performance developing multi-family housing affordable to low-income households. The non-profit affordable housing developer intended as the recipient of land pursuant the Land Acquisition Option must be identified as part of the project application.

6. For-Sale Affordable Residence Requirements
In the event that the affordable residences required under either the On-Site Affordable Residence Option or the Off-Site Affordable Residence Option are intended to be for-sale residences, rather than rentals, the following rules shall apply.

A. Establishment of the Initial Sales Price
The developer shall establish the initial sales price for the affordable residence so that the Total Monthly Housing Costs for the purchaser do not exceed the following formula:

Area Median Income x 110% x Bedroom Adjustment x 35% / 12. Total Housing Cost includes mortgage principal and interest, property taxes, property insurance, homeowners’ association dues and mortgage insurance, if applicable Area Median Income is defined in SMMC Section 9.64.020(K) and determined periodically by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Los Angeles area.

The Bedroom Adjustment Factors are:
0 Bedroom 0.7 3 Bedrooms 1.0
1 Bedroom 0.8 4 Bedrooms 1.08
2 Bedrooms 0.9

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
14 The conventional financing shall conform to all of the following terms:

Loan Term: 30 Years
Interest Rate: Fixed
Minimum Down payment: 5%
Maximum Front End Debt-to-Income Ratio1: 38%
Maximum Back End Debt-to-Income Ratio2: 41%
The buyer must be income-qualified pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter

9.64 and this Agreement.

The actual price of the affordable residence will be a combination of the bank loan amount a buyer qualifies for plus the down payment provided by the buyer (consistent with the total monthly housing costs and the financing terms listed above). The lending criteria used by the private lender must be reasonable and customary and shall be subject to review and approval by the City Housing Division prior to completion of the purchase transaction. Moreover, any purchase price for an affordable residence underwritten with a back-end ratio of more than 41 percent (the maximum generally required by the secondary mortgage market) will also require review and reasonable approval by the City prior to completion of the purchase transaction.

1. Front End Ratio: ratio of total monthly housing costs (including mortgage principal and interest, property taxes, property insurance, homeowners’ association dues and mortgage insurance, if applicable) to total gross household income.

2. Back End Ratio: ratio of total monthly housing costs (including mortgage principal and interest, property taxes, property insurance, homeowners’ association dues and mortgage insurance, if applicable) plus other monthly payments on long-term household debt to gross household income.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
15 B. Re-Sale of an Affordable Residence to a Subsequent Purchaser

1. First Right of Refusal to the City
Throughout the 55-year period of the Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property, the City shall have the first opportunity to purchase affordable for-sale residences created pursuant to the On-Site Affordable Residence Option or the Off-Site Affordable Residence Option (“Option to Purchase”). Owners wishing to sell their residences shall notify the City in writing at least 60 days before the residence is offered for sale to another qualifying party. The seller shall ensure that the residence is clean, in good repair and is available to be shown to prospective buyers. Any Option-related time periods in favor of the City shall be tolled until these conditions are met to the City’s reasonable satisfaction.

The City shall have 60 days to notify the seller of its intent to exercise the Option to Purchase, either by City purchase, by its designee (e.g., a non-profit affordable housing developer), or by referral of a qualified moderate-income buyer. (See below for the method for calculating the subsequent purchase price.) In the event that the City does not exercise the Option to Purchase, or an offer to purchase by the City or a qualified buyer is not accepted by the seller, the Option shall terminate and the owner may sell the residence to any income qualifying buyer at a price consistent with Section 6(B)(2) of these Guidelines. Seller shall only accept an offer by an income qualified buyer at a price consistent with Section 6(B)(2) of these Guidelines. Closing costs shall be divided between seller and buyer as is customary for like real estate transactions in Santa Monica at the time that escrow is opened.

2. Maximum Subsequent Selling Price
The resale price restriction will provide that the price for resale of the affordable residence shall be calculated using the same formula and factors set forth in Section 6(A).

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
16 3. Continuous Use as a Primary Residence
Each purchaser of an affordable residence shall certify, prior to the close of escrow, in a form acceptable to the City that the residence is being purchased and shall be maintained as the purchaser’s primary residence. Failure of the purchaser to maintain eligibility for a homeowner’s exemption from property tax shall be construed as evidence that the residence is not the primary residence of the purchaser.

C. Subordination
At the request of the qualifying household’s lender, the City may subordinate the foregoing income eligibility and resale price restrictions to a first Deed of Trust at the time of purchase, provided that the Deed of Trust does not exceed the purchase price of the residence.

D. Default and Foreclosure
A Request for Notice of Default shall be recorded along with the Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property. The Agreement will provide that any Notice of Default will constitute an owner’s Notice of Intent to Sell, and that the City may exercise its Option to Purchase. In the event that the City does not exercise its Option and the residence is foreclosed upon, proceeds of the foreclosure sale shall be used first to satisfy the lender’s lien(s), and any surplus proceeds, up to the amount that the owner would have received had there been no foreclosure, shall be paid to the owner. The remaining balance of any surplus shall be paid to the City for deposit into the Citywide Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

E. Distribution of Insurance and Condemnation Proceeds
In the event that the residence is destroyed and insurance proceeds are distributed to the low-income household owner instead of being used to rebuild, or in the event of liquidation of the homeowners’ association and distribution of the assets of the association to the members, including the owner, any surplus remaining after payment of encumbrances shall be distributed as set forth above with respect to default and foreclosure.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
17 7. Tenant and Purchaser Eligibility Procedures
Per Chapter 9.64, multi-family project applicants who have opted to satisfy the affordable housing obligation through the on-site or off-site option are required to fill vacant affordable residences by selecting income-eligible tenants from a City-developed list of income-qualified households, except if there are no qualified households on the Citydeveloped list or if the project applicant is developing ownership projects of four or more residences in the City's multi-family residential zones. Under these exceptions, the project applicant may choose themselves to select income-qualified households which shall be subject to eligibility certification by the City.

This section establishes priorities for eligibility to occupy On-Site Affordable Residences, describes categories of persons ineligible to occupy On-Site Affordable Residences, and outlines the procedures whereby the City Housing Division shall establish, maintain, and update the list of eligible tenants.

A. Priority Households
In establishing the list of households eligible to occupy affordable residences, the Housing Division shall adhere to the following priorities:
1) First Priority
Persons who have been permanently displaced or face permanent displacement from their housing residences in Santa Monica as a result of any of the following:
a) Ellis Act, owner-occupancy, or removal permit eviction b) Earthquake, fire, flood, or other natural disaster
c) Funding reductions in Santa Monica housing voucher assistance programs

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
18 d) Governmental Action, such as Code enforcement
e) Closure of a mobile home park
2) Second Priority
Persons who are:
a) Residents of Santa Monica
b) Working in Santa Monica at least 36 hours per week
B. Persons Ineligible to Occupy an Affordable Residence Section 9.64 of the Municipal Code (see § 9.64.110(B)) specifically disqualifies the following categories of persons from occupying Affordable Residences:
- All employees and officials of the City or its agencies, authorities, or commissions who have, by virtue of their position, policy-making authority or influence over the implementation of the Affordable Housing Production Program, as well as the immediate relatives of employees of such City employees and officials. - The immediate relatives of the applicant or owner, including a spouse, child, parent, grandparent, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law.

Other parties disqualified from occupying affordable residences include:
- Tenants for whom the affordable residence will not be their sole residence.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
19 - Employees of the owner or the owner’s agents, including but not limited to employees of the property management company, except as required by law. An example of an exception would be a 100 percent affordable building that is required by law to provide onsite management, and must therefore use an affordable residence.
- Employees of any corporation or other entities where the owner has more than a 10 percent equity, participation, revenue, or ownership interest. - Immediate relatives, including a spouse, child, parent, grandparent, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law, of any other individual or entity with a financial interest in the property.
- Households where all adults are full-time students unless all members of the household meet all of the following criteria:
- Twenty-four years of age or older,
- Have lived separate from their parents for at least one year, - Are not claimed as a dependent pursuant to IRS regulations on any tax return for the most recent tax year, and
- The head of household provides written certification of all outside financial assistance.
- and at least one member of the household meets one of the following criteria:
- A veteran or active duty member of the U.S. military, - Have one or more legal dependents other than a spouse, - Live with a recognized disability,
- Be a graduate or professional student,
- Be married, or
- Have been an orphan or ward of the court through age 18.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
20 C. Establishment, Maintenance, and Update of Income-Qualified Tenants and Purchasers List
The Santa Monica Housing Division shall be responsible for preparing and maintaining an Eligibility List for this program and shall follow these Guidelines for preparing, maintaining, and updating the Eligibility List. Subject to the requirements below, the establishment, maintenance and update of the Eligibility List shall be generally modeled after the Housing Authority Administrative Plan with the Housing Division retaining the authority to adjust these protocols as appropriate for this local program.
1) Public Noticing Procedures
To create the Eligibility List, the Housing Division shall publish notices in newspapers circulated widely in Santa Monica, including newspapers that reach minority communities, at a minimum. At least one notice shall be published in a Spanish-language newspaper of general circulation. Examples of appropriate newspapers include the Santa Monica Daily Press, L.A. Times, La Opinion, and The Sentinel. The notices should briefly explain what affordable housing is, state the applicable income requirements, indicate how to apply for the Eligibility List, state when the application period opens and closes, indicate priorities for eligible occupants, and provide a telephone number for questions.

Applications may require name, address, telephone number, household size, income, date of birth, information relevant to program priorities, and applicant’s signature.
2) Creating the Eligibility List
The Housing Division shall create an Eligibility List using the information provided on the applications received, including name, household size, income, age, residency, place of employment (if applicable), priority status, and

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
21 any other relevant information. Additionally, the Eligibility List will include households on any existing waiting list who indicated their intent to be included in the Eligibility List after being contacted by the Housing Division. Households will be drawn from the Eligibility List as affordable residences become available or in anticipation of affordable residences becoming available in the near future and shall be income qualified for use in referrals for available affordable residences.
3) Eligibility List and Referral Process
Each time affordable residences become available for occupancy, the owner and the Housing Division shall follow these procedures:
a) At least 90 days prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy by the City for newly developed residences, or within 5 business days of notice of tenant vacation in existing developments, owners shall notify the City of the number and type (affordability level, number of bedrooms, ownership or rental) of residences available.
b) Within 20 business days of notice by the owner, the City shall provide the owner with a Referral Form, for each household drawn from the Eligibility List, and provide at least five names for each residence available.

Additional names may be provided to the owner upon request, subject to availability.
c) Owners shall directly contact the persons on the Referral Forms provided by the City. Owners shall give applicants at least 5 business days to submit a completed application. Owners who are not able to fill vacant residences from the Referral Forms provided may request additional names from the City. Additional names will be provided within 5 business days, subject to availability.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
22 d) Owners shall conduct all further screening and selection of applicants. All applicable State Fair Housing laws must be observed.
e) Candidates on the City’s Eligibility List may be referred up to a maximum of five times, except in cases involving a reasonable accommodation. After the fifth referral, candidate names will be removed from the Eligibility List. 4) Updating the Eligibility List
a) Periodic Update: The Eligibility List shall be periodically updated at least every two years. Letters shall be sent to all households on the Eligibility List requesting verification of all information, including name, address, place of residency, place of employment (if applicable), and continued interest in staying on the list. Eligibility List households shall be given two weeks to respond. At the end of the two week period, the names of households who have failed to respond shall be taken off the Eligibility List. The Eligibility List shall also be updated to incorporate any changes in status (place of residency, eligibility for priority status, etc.) for each applicant. b) Emergency Additions to Eligibility List: At any time, even if the Eligibility List is closed, persons displaced from Santa Monica housing as set forth in Section 7(A)(1) of these Guidelines (i.e., “first-priority” households) will result in the automatic addition of that household to the Eligibility List with the applicable priority.
c) The City will provide a Referral Form to the owner for each household selected from the Eligibility List. The owner shall complete the Referral Form indicating whether a residence was offered to the household and whether the residence was accepted or refused. A sample Referral Form is provided in Attachment 4-B. If a residence was not offered because of a poor credit history or for any other reason, the owner will note this as well.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
23 The City will incorporate this information into the Eligibility List, but not disclose such information to other owners.
d) Households on the City’s Eligibility List will be referred only for those residences for which they qualify. For example, moderate income households will only be referred for vacancies in moderate income residences. Households on the City’s Eligibility List must report any changes to address, household size, Santa Monica residency, employment in Santa Monica, and/or, income to the Housing Division within 10 days of the change.
5) Persons Dependent Upon Income from Other Sources
Households on the City’s Eligibility List must report income from all sources.

Any households on the City’s Eligibility List receiving support, including tuition payments, rent payments, and/or, regular gifts, and/or any household who appears as a dependent upon the tax return of another individual must so disclose. In these cases, the income of the other party will be considered along with the income of the applicant/tenant household in determining eligibility. 6) Automatic Removal from Eligibility List
Applicant names will be removed immediately from the Eligibility List for:
a) Failure to appear for a scheduled qualification interview or prior to the interview time contact the Housing Division to arrange an alternate time or date, or
b) More than two refusals of offered residences, or
c) Misrepresentative statements on eligibility documentation, in qualification interview(s), or Informal Review, or
d) Failure to disclose dependent status or receipt of substantial support, or

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
24 e) Acceptance of an affordable residence stemming from a Referral.

Households whose names are removed from the Eligibility List will also have their names removed from the Referral Form upon which their names appear.

Households whose names are removed from the Eligibility List shall be notified by mail at the address which they have supplied to the City. The reason for removal will be specified as part of the notification.
7) Appeal Process
a) Right to Appeal
The decision by the City to remove a name from the Eligibility List or from a Referral Form may be appealed. All appeals must be in writing and delivered to the Housing Division in person or by first class mail, by the close of the business day, no later than 10 business days from the date of the Housing Division’s notification of removal from the Eligibility List. b) Scheduling an Informal Review
Upon receipt of an appeal in writing, the Housing Division shall conduct an Informal Review. The Housing Division will schedule an Informal Review to take place within 10 days of receipt of the appeal. Once the Informal Review date is set, the appellant may reschedule only upon showing "good cause," which is defined as an unavoidable conflict seriously affecting the health, safety or welfare of the Appellant or his/her family.
c) Failure of Appellant to Appear for Informal Review
If the appellant does not appear at a scheduled Informal Review and has not rescheduled the Informal Review in advance, the appellant must contact the Housing Division within two working days. The Housing Division shall reschedule the Informal Review only if the appellant's absence was caused by medical emergency or incarceration. In this event, the Informal Review may be rescheduled only once.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
25 d) Conduct of the Informal Review
The informal review must be conducted by a person other than the one who made or approved the decision under review, or a subordinate of this person. The Appellant must be provided an opportunity to present written or oral objections to the decision to remove them from the Eligibility List and both the Appellant and the Housing Division have a right to present any information pertinent to the issue of the Informal Review. e) Notification of the Informal Review Decision
The Housing Division must notify the Appellant within 14 days of the decision regarding the Informal Review, including an explanation of the decision and the associated findings. This decision shall be final and not subject to further administrative review.

D. Tenant Income Increases, Initial Ineligibility and Advance Notice to City This subsection of the Guidelines provides protocols for changes in tenant income during occupancy, property owner and tenant responsibilities when tenant was not income eligible at the time of initial occupancy, and advance notice to the City regarding rent increases.
1) Tenant Income Increases
The published Maximum Allowable Income applies to the household from the day the tenant moves in through the first year of occupancy or the first annual recertification, whichever comes first. If after the first year of occupancy in an affordable apartment, or during the first annual recertification, the household income is found to exceed the maximum allowable income limit for the apartment, the tenant(s) may remain in the apartment as long as the household income does not exceed 140 percent of the income limit for the residence.

However, if the tenant’s income exceeds 140 percent of the income limit for the apartment, the following shall apply:

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
26 a) If there is a vacant affordable apartment in the same building for which the household qualifies, the household will be offered that apartment, providing the move does not violate any other provisions of the law, including minimum occupancy requirements. If the relevant “Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property” allows it, the property owner may also switch the affordability levels of the two apartments to prevent the household from having to move their belongings. The rent will then be adjusted to reflect the higher level of affordability.

If the household refuses to move to the higher affordability level apartment for which they qualify, or refuses to pay the higher rent, they will be provided with a one-year notice to vacate the apartment.

If, before the term of the notice has passed, the tenant recertifies the household income and they again qualify for the apartment, the one year notice to vacate will be rescinded.
b) If the previous section does not apply, and there is a vacant market-rate apartment of equal accommodations in the same building, the owner may designate the market-rate apartment as the affordable apartment. The rent in the formerly affordable apartment may then be raised to the market-rate for the apartment. However, this option cannot be chosen if the relevant “Agreement Imposing Restrictions on Real Property” specifically enumerates which apartments in the building are designated as the affordable apartments.
c) If neither of the two previous sections apply, the household will be provided with a one-year notice to vacate the apartment.
i) If, before the term of the notice has passed, a market-rate apartment becomes vacant in the same building, the tenant under notice to

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
27 move will have first right of refusal to lease the market-rate apartment.
ii) If, before the term of the notice has passed, the tenant recertifies the household income and they again qualify for the apartment, the oneyear notice to vacate will be rescinded. 2) Initial Tenant Ineligibility
If during compliance monitoring by the City, or the property owner, it is determined that the tenant’s income exceeded the income limit for the residence at the time the tenant initially moved into the residence, the tenant shall be given a 90-day notice to vacate the residence. Notwithstanding the above, if the tenant would qualify for an affordable apartment targeted to a higher affordability level and such a vacant residence is available within the subject property, then the tenant may be allowed to move to that vacant residence, subject to Section 7(D)(3) below. 3) Property Owner to Pay for Relocation
When it is determined that a tenant’s income exceeded the income limit for an affordable residence at initial occupancy, then it shall be the property owner’s responsibility to pay the costs directly associated with relocating the tenant to another residence within Santa Monica or adjacent area, unless the tenant misrepresented pertinent information to obtain the residence. Such costs would include packing/unpacking, moving/movers and utility connection fees, but would not include the differential in rent between the affordable (AHPP) residence and new residence.
4) Notice to City of Rent Increases
A property owner must provide a 30-day advanced written notice to the City before issuing a rent increase notice to a tenant. The information provided in the property owner’s notice to the City shall include the residence identification, tenant name, affordability level of the residence (i.e., extremely low-, very low-, low- or moderateincome) current rent, amenities included in rent (e.g., parking, water, trash),

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
28 proposed rent, and proposed rent start date. The City will have 30-days upon which to review the proposed rent increase and notify the property owner of any objections before the property owner may issue a rent increase notice to a tenant.

In the absence of any other, more stringent, rent increase limitations on the property, the rent of an affordable apartment shall not be increased by more than five percent in any twelve month period, up to the published maximum allowable rent.

8. Adjustments or Waivers
The AHPP authorizes a project applicant to request an adjustment or waiver of the AHPP based on a showing that applying the requirements of this Chapter would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property.

To receive an adjustment or waiver, the applicant must submit an application to the Director of Housing and Economic Development, or his/her designee, at the time the applicant files a multi-family project application. The applicant bears the burden of presenting substantial evidence to support the request and set forth in detail the factual and legal basis for the claim, including all supporting technical documentation.

In making a determination on an application to adjust or waive the requirements of this Chapter, the Director of Housing and Economic Development, or City Council on appeal, may assume each of the following when applicable:
(1) The applicant is subject to the affordable housing requirement of this Chapter; (2) The applicant will benefit from the inclusionary incentives set forth in this Chapter and the City’s Municipal Code;

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
29 (3) The applicant will be obligated to provide the most economical affordable housing residences feasible in terms of construction, design, location and tenure.

The Director of Housing and Economic Development must make a written decision within ninety days after a complete application is filed. The Director’s decision may be appealed to the City Council if such appeal is filed within fourteen consecutive calendar days from the date of the decision.

If the Director of Housing and Economic Development, or City Council responding to an appeal of the Director’s decision, determines that applying the requirements of this Chapter would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property, the affordable housing requirements shall be adjusted or waived to reduce the obligations under this Chapter to the extent necessary to avoid an unconstitutional result. If an adjustment or waiver is granted, any change in the use within the project shall invalidate the adjustment or waiver. If the Director, or City Council on appeal, determines that no violation of the United States or California Constitutions would occur through the application of this Chapter, the requirements of this Chapter shall remain fully applicable.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
30 ATTACHMENTS
1-A Municipal Code Chapter 9.64 (Subject to Amendments) 1-B AHPP Options Comparison Table
2-A Fee Adjustment Methodology
2-B Current Base Fees for Apartment and Condominium Projects (Adjusted Annually) 3-A Affordable Residences Table - Condominium Projects w/4+ Residences in Multifamily Zones
3-B Development Incentives Table
3-C Very Low, Low and Moderate Income Levels (Adjusted Annually) 3-D Maximum Rents (Adjusted Annually)
3-E Sample of Deed Restrictions
4-A Sample Application for Affordable Housing Waiting List 4-B Referral Status Form

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 1
ATTACHMENT 1-A
Municipal Code Chapter 9.64
Chapter 9.64 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION PROGRAM

9.64.010 Findings and Purpose
The City’s affordable housing production program requires developers of market rate multifamily developments to contribute to affordable housing production and thereby help the City meet its affordable housing need. As detailed in the findings supporting the ordinance codified in this Chapter, the requirements of this Chapter are based on a number of factors including, but not limited to, the City’s long-standing commitment to economic diversity; the serious need for affordable housing as reflected in local, state, and federal housing regulations and policies; the demand for affordable housing created by market rate development; the depletion of potential affordable housing sites by market-rate development; and the impact that the lack of affordable housing production has on the health, safety, and welfare of the City’s residents including its impacts on traffic, transit and related air quality impacts, and the demands placed on the regional transportation infrastructure. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.020 Definitions
The following words or phrases as used in this Chapter shall have the following meanings:

A. 30% Income Household means a household whose gross income does not exceed the 30% income limits applicable to the Los Angeles-Long Beach Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HUD.

B. 50% Income Household means a household whose gross income does not exceed 50% of the area median income, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HUD. 50% income households include 30% income households.

C.80% Income Household means a household whose gross income does not exceed 80% of the area median income, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HUD. 80% income households include 50% income households.

D.Adjusted for Household Size means 70% adjustment for a household of one person, 80% adjustment for a household of two persons, 90% adjustment for a household of three persons, 100% adjustment for a household of four persons, 108% adjustment for a household of five persons, 116% adjustment for a household of six persons, 124% adjustment for a household of seven persons, 132% adjustment for a household size of eight persons. For households of more than eight persons, adjustments shall be made in accordance with applicable HUD regulations.

E. Adjusted for Household Size Appropriate for the Unit means for a household of one person in the case of a studio unit, two persons in the case of a one-bedroom unit, three

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 2
persons in the case of a two-bedroom unit, four persons in the case of a three-bedroom unit, and five persons in the case of a four-bedroom unit.

F. Affordable Housing Fee means a fee paid to the City by a multi-family project applicant pursuant to Section 9.64.070 of this Chapter to assist the City in the production of housing affordable to 30% income households, 50% income households, 80% income households, and moderate-income households.

G.Affordable Housing Unit means a housing unit developed by a multi-family project applicant pursuant to Section 9.64.050 or 9.64.060 of this Chapter which will be affordable to 30% income households, 50% income households, 80% income households, or moderate-income households.

H.Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost means the City’s average cost to develop a unit of housing affordable to 30% income households, 50% income households, 80% income households or moderate income households.

I. Affordable Ownership Housing Cost. Affordable ownership housing cost means: For moderate income households whose gross incomes exceed the maximum income limits for 80% income households, affordable housing cost shall not be less than 28 percent of the gross income of the household, nor exceed the product of 35 percent times 110 percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit.

J. Affordable Rent. Affordable rent means:

1. For 30% income households, the product of 30 percent times 30 percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit.

2. For 50% income households, the product of 30 percent times 50 percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit.

3. For 80% income households whose gross incomes exceed the maximum incomes for 50% income households, the product of 30 percent times 60 percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit.

4. For moderate income households, the product of 30 percent times 110 percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit.

For purposes herein, affordable rent shall be adjusted as necessary to be consistent with pertinent Federal or State statutes and regulations governing Federal or State assisted housing.

K. Area Median Income or AMI. Area median income or AMI means the median family income published from time to time by HUD for the Los Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan Statistical Area.

L. Dwelling Unit. One or more rooms, designed, occupied or intended for occupancy as separate living quarters, with full cooking, sleeping and bathroom facilities for the exclusive use of a single household. Dwelling unit shall also include single-room occupancy units as defined in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.52.020 or any successor thereto.

M. Floor Area. Floor area as defined in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.52.020 or any successor thereto.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 3
N.Gross Income. Gross income has the same meaning as provided in Title 25, Section 6914 of the California Code of Regulations, as amended from time to time, in accordance with law.

O.HCD. The California Department of Housing and Community Development or its successor.

P. Housing Cost. Housing cost has the same meaning as provided in Title 25, Section 6920 of the California Code of Regulations, as amended from time to time in accordance with law.

Q.HUD. The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development or its successor.

R.Income Eligibility. Income eligibility is based upon the gross income of the household, including the income of all wage earners, elderly or disabled family members, and all other sources of household income.

S. Market Rate Unit. A dwelling unit as to which the rental rate or sales price is not restricted by this Chapter.

T. Moderate Income Household means a household whose gross income exceeds the maximum income for an 80% income household and whose gross income does not exceed the lesser of: (i) 120% of the area median income, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HCD or (ii) twice the income limit for 50% income households, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HUD.

U.Multi-family Project. A multi-family residential development, including but not limited to apartments, condominiums, townhouses or the multi-family residential component of a mixed use project, for which City permits and approvals are sought.

V. Multi-family Project Applicant. Any person, firm, partnership, association, joint venture, corporation, or any entity or combination of entities which seeks City development permits or approvals to develop a multi-family project.

W. Multi-family Residential District. Any district designated in the Santa Monica Zoning Ordinance as a multi-family residential district.

X.Parcel. Parcel as defined in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.52.020 or any successor thereto.

Y. Rent. Rent has the same meaning as provided in Title 25, Section 6918 of the California Code of Regulations, as amended from time to time in accordance with law.

Z. Vacant Parcel. A parcel in a multi-family residential district that has no residential structure located on it as of August 20, 1998 or which had a residential structure located on it on that date which was subsequently demolished pursuant to a demolition order of the City. No demolition of structures shall be permitted except in accordance with Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.25 et seq. or any successor thereto. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 4

9.64.030 Applicability of Chapter
A.The obligations established by this Chapter shall apply to each multi-family project involving the construction of two or more multi-family units, which project has not received its ministerial or discretionary planning approvals including, without limitation: variances, conditional use permits, administrative approvals, development review permits, and development agreement ordinances which have not yet become effective (collectively, “Approvals”) on or before July 26, 2013. No building permit shall be issued for any multifamily project unless such construction has been approved in accordance with the standards and procedures provided for by this Chapter. Notwithstanding the above, a multifamily rental housing project that will be developed by a nonprofit housing provider receiving financial assistance through one of the City’s housing trust fund programs shall not be subject to the requirements of this Chapter so long as the project is an affordable housing project meeting the requirements of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section

9.52.020 or any successor thereto and the project’s affordability obligations will be secured by a regulatory agreement, memorandum of agreement, or recorded covenant with the City for a minimum period of fifty-five years.

B. Multi-family projects which have received Approvals prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be subject to the provisions of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section

9.64.010 et seq., as they existed on the date of their approvals, except that pricing requirements for affordable housing units shall be published by the City on an annual basis instead of adoption by resolution of the City Council.

C.A designated landmark building or contributing structure to an adopted Historic District that is retained and preserved on-site as part of a multi-family project shall not be considered or included in assessing any of the requirements under this Chapter. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.040 Affordable Housing Obligation
A.Except as provided in Section 9.23.030(A), all multi-family project applicants shall comply with the requirements of this Chapter in the following manner:

1. Multi-family project applicants for multi-family ownership projects of four or more units in multi-family residential districts shall choose one of the two following options:
a. Providing affordable housing units on-site in accordance with Section

9.64.050;
b. Providing affordable housing units off-site in accordance with Section

9.64.060.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 5

2. In addition to the options established in subsections (1)(a) and (b), all other multifamily project applicants may also choose one of the following options:
a. Paying an affordable housing fee in accordance with Section 9.64.070; b. Acquiring land for affordable housing in accordance with Section

9.64.080.

B.A multi-family project application will not be determined complete until the applicant has submitted a written proposal which demonstrates the manner in which the requirements of this Chapter will be met. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.050 On-Site Option
The following requirements must be met to satisfy the on-site provisions of this Chapter:

A.For ownership projects of at least four units but not more than fifteen units in multi-family residential districts, the multi-family project applicant agrees to construct at least: (1) twenty percent of the total units as ownership units for moderate-income households, or as an alternative; (2) twenty percent of the total units as rental units for 80% income households if these rental units are provided by the applicant in accordance with Civil Code Sections 1954.52(b) and 1954.53(a)(2); (3) ten percent of the total units as rental units for 50% income households if these rental units are provided by the applicant in accordance with Civil Code Sections 1954.52(b) and 1954.53(a)(2); or (4) five percent of the total units as rental units for 30% income households if these rental units are provided by the applicant in accordance with Civil Code Sections 1954.52(b) and 1954.53(a)(2).

B.For ownership projects of sixteen units or more in multi-family residential districts, the multi-family project applicant agrees to construct at least: (1) twenty-five percent of the total units as ownership units for moderate-income households, or as an alternative; (2) twentyfive percent of the total units as rental units for 80% income households if these rental units are provided by the applicant in accordance with Civil Code Sections 1954.52(b) and 1954.53(a)(2); fifteen percent of the total units as rental units for 50% income households if these rental units are provided by the applicant in accordance with Civil Code Sections 1954.52(b) and 1954.53(a)(2); or (4) ten percent of the total units as rental units for 30% income households if these rental units are provided by the applicant in accordance with Civil Code Sections 1954.52(b) and 1954.53(a)(2).

C.For all other multi-family applicants, the multi-family project applicant agrees to construct at least:

1. Five percent of the total units of the project for 30% income households;

2. Ten percent of the total units of the project for 50% income households;

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 6

3. Twenty percent of the total units of the project for 80% income households; or

4. One hundred percent of the total units of a project for moderate income households.

D.Except as provided in Section 9.23.030(A), any fractional affordable housing unit that results from the formulas of this Section that is 0.75 or more shall be treated as a whole affordable housing unit (i.e., any resulting fraction shall be rounded up to the next larger integer) and that unit shall also be built pursuant to the provisions of this Section. Any fractional affordable housing unit that is less than 0.75 can be satisfied by the payment of an affordable housing fee for that fractional unit only pursuant to Section 9.64.070(A)(4) or by constructing all the mandatory on-site affordable units with three or more bedrooms.

The City shall make available a list of income levels for 30% income households, 50% income households, 80% income households, and moderate income households, adjusted for household size, the corresponding maximum affordable rents adjusted by household size appropriate for the unit, and the minimum number of units required for 30% income households, 50% income households, or 80% income households required for typical sizes of multi-family projects, which list shall be updated periodically.

E.The multi-family project applicant may reduce either the size or interior amenities of the affordable housing units as long as there are not significant identifiable differences between affordable housing units and market rate units visible from the exterior of the dwelling units; provided, that all dwelling units conform to the requirements of the applicable Building and Housing Codes. However, except as provided in Section

9.23.030(A), each affordable housing unit provided shall have at least two bedrooms unless:

1. The proposed project comprises at least ninety-five percent one bedroom units, excluding the manager’s unit, in which case the affordable housing units may be one bedroom;

2. The proposed project comprises at least ninety-five percent zero bedroom units, excluding the manager’s unit, in which case the affordable housing units may be zero bedroom units;

3. The proposed project comprises zero and one bedroom units, excluding the manager’s unit, in which case the affordable housing units must be at least one bedroom units; or

4. The multi-family project applicant has elected not to pay the affordable housing fee pursuant to Section 9.64.070(A)(4), in which case the affordable housing units must be at least three bedroom units. The design of the affordable housing units shall

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 7
be reasonably consistent with the market rate units in the project. An affordable housing unit shall have a minimum total floor area, depending upon the number of bedrooms provided, no less than the following:
0 bedrooms 500 square feet 1 occupant
1 bedroom 600 square feet 1 occupant
2 bedrooms 850 square feet 2 occupants
3 bedrooms 1,080 square feet 3 occupants
4 bedrooms 1,200 square feet 5 occupants
Affordable housing units in multi-family projects of one hundred units or more must be evenly disbursed throughout the multi-family project to prevent undue concentrations of affordable housing units.

F. All affordable housing units in a multi-family project or a phase of a multi-family project shall be constructed concurrently with the construction of market rate units in the multifamily project or phase of that project.

G.On-site affordable housing units must be rental units in rental projects. In ownership projects, these affordable housing units may be either rental units or ownership units.

H.Each multi-family project applicant, or his or her successor, shall submit an annual report to the City identifying which units are affordable units, the monthly rent (or total housing cost if an ownership unit), vacancy information for each affordable unit for the prior year, verification of income of the household occupying each affordable unit throughout the prior year, and such other information as may be required by City staff.

I. A multi-family project applicant in a residential district who meets the requirements of this Section shall be entitled to the density bonuses and incentives provided by Section

9.22.020 or any successor thereto and Section 9.22.030 or any successor thereto and the waiver/modification of development standards provided by Section 9.22.040 or any successor thereto. A multi-family project applicant in a commercial or industrial district shall be entitled to the development bonuses and incentives provided in the Land Use and Circulation Element and implementing ordinances.

J. All residential developments providing affordable housing on-site pursuant to the provisions of this Section shall receive priority building department plan check processing by which housing developments shall have plan check review in advance of other pending developments to the extent authorized by law.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 8
K.The City Council may by resolution establish compliance monitoring fees which reflect the reasonable regulatory cost to the City of ensuring compliance with this Section when affordable housing units are being initially rented or sold, when the required annual reports are submitted to the City, and when the units are being re-sold or re-leased. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.060 Off-Site Option
The following requirements must be met to satisfy the off-site option of this Chapter:

A.The multi-family project applicant for ownership projects of four or more units in multifamily residential districts shall agree to construct twenty-five percent more affordable housing units than number of affordable housing units required by Section 9.64.050(A) and (B).

B.For all other multi-family project applicants, the applicant shall agree to construct the same number of affordable housing units as specified in Section 9.64.050(C).

C.The multi-family project applicant shall identify an alternate site suitable for residential housing which the project applicant either owns or has site control over (e.g., purchase agreement, option to purchase, lease) subject to City review to ensure that the proposed development is consistent with the City’s housing objectives and projects.

D.The off-site units shall be located within a one-quarter mile radius of the market rate units.

E.The off-site units shall satisfy the requirements of subsections (D) through (J) of Section

9.64.050.

F. The off-site units shall not count towards the satisfaction of any affordable housing obligation that development of the alternative site with market rate units would otherwise be subject to pursuant to this Chapter.

G.Exceptions to the location of the off-site units specified in this Section may be granted by the Planning Commission on a case-by-case basis upon a showing by the multi-family project applicant, based upon substantial evidence, that the location of off-site units in a location different from that specified in this Section better accomplishes the goals of this Chapter, including maximizing affordable housing production and dispersing affordable housing throughout the City.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 9
H.The City Council may by resolution establish compliance monitoring fees which reflect the reasonable regulatory cost to the City of ensuring compliance with this Section when affordable housing units are initially being rented or sold, when the required annual reports are submitted to the City, and when the units are being re-sold or re-leased. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.070 Affordable Housing Fee
A multi-family project applicant eligible to meet the affordable housing obligations established by this Chapter by paying an affordable housing fee shall pay the fee in accordance with the following requirements:

A.An affordable housing fee may be paid in accordance with the following formulas:

1. Affordable housing unit base fee x floor area of multi-family project;

2. Multi-family projects with fractional affordable housing units of less than 0.75 based on the formula established in Section 9.64.050:
(City’s affordable housing unit development cost) x (fractional percentage) B.For purposes of this Section, the affordable housing unit base fee shall be established by resolution of the City Council. Commencing on July 1, 2006 and on July 1st of each fiscal year thereafter, the affordable housing unit base fee shall be adjusted based on changes in construction costs and land costs. The amount of the affordable housing fee that the multi-family project applicant must pay shall be based on the affordable housing unit base fee resolution in effect at the time that the affordable housing fee is paid to the City.

C.For purposes of this Section, the City’s affordable housing unit development cost shall be established by resolution of the City Council. Commencing on July 1, 2007 and on July 1st of each fiscal year thereafter, the City’s affordable housing unit development cost shall be adjusted based on changes in construction costs and land costs. The affordable housing fee that the multi-family project applicant must pay shall be based on the affordable housing unit development cost resolution in effect at the time of payment to the City.

D.The amount of the affordable housing unit base fee may vary by product type (apartment or condominium) and shall reflect, among other factors, the relationship between new market rate multi-family development and the need for affordable housing.

E.The affordable housing fee shall be paid in full to the City prior to the City granting any approval for the occupancy of the project, but no earlier than the time of building permit issuance.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 10
F. The City shall deposit any payment made pursuant to this Section in a reserve account separate from the General Fund to be used only for development of affordable housing, administrative costs related to the production of this housing, and monitoring and evaluation of this affordable housing production program. Any monies collected and interest accrued pursuant to this Chapter shall be committed within five years after the payment of such fees or the approval of the multi-family project, whichever occurs later.

Funds that have not been appropriated within this five-year period shall be refunded on a pro rata share to those multi-family project applicants who have paid fees during the period. Expenditures and commitments of funds shall be reported to the City Council annually as part of the City budget process.

G.An affordable housing fee payment pursuant to this Section shall not be considered provision of affordable housing units for purposes of determining whether the multi-family project qualifies for a density bonus pursuant to Government Code Section 65915. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.080 Land Acquisition
A.A multi-family project applicant may meet the affordable housing obligations established by this Chapter by making an irrevocable offer:

1. Dedicating land to the City or a non-profit housing provider;

2. Selling of land to the City or a non-profit housing provider at below market value; or

3. Optioning of land on behalf of the City or a non-profit housing provider.

Each of these options must be for a value at least equivalent to the affordable housing obligation otherwise required pursuant to this Section.

B.The multi-family project applicant must identify the land at the time that the development application is filed with the City. Any land offered pursuant to this Section must be located within one-quarter mile radius of the market rate units unless the multi-family project applicant demonstrates that locating the land outside of this radius better accomplishes the goals of this Chapter, including maximizing affordable housing production and dispersing affordable housing throughout the City. The City may approve, conditionally approve or reject such offers subject to administrative guidelines to be prepared by the City Manager or designee. If the City rejects such offer, the multi-family project applicant shall be required to meet the affordable housing obligation by other means set forth in this Chapter. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 11

9.64.090 Fee Waivers
The Condominium and Cooperative Tax described in Section 6.76.010 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or any successor thereto and the Park and Recreation Facilities Tax established in Chapter 6.80 of Article 6 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or any successor thereto, the Transportation Impact Fee required by Chapter 9.66, or any successor thereto, the Open Space Fee required by Chapter 9.67, or any successor thereto, and the Childcare Linkage Fee required by Chapter 9.65, or any successor thereto, shall be waived for required affordable housing units and for 30%, 50%, 80% and moderate-income dwelling units developed by the City or its designee using affordable housing fee. However, any multi-family project applicant who elects to pay an affordable housing fee shall not be eligible for any fee waiver under this Section. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.100 Pricing Requirements for Affordable Housing Units The City shall publish, on an annual basis, the 30%, 50%, 80%, and moderate income household levels, and affordable rents for affordable housing units, adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.110 Eligibility Requirements
A.Only 30%, 50%, 80% and moderate-income households shall be eligible to occupy or own and occupy affordable housing units. The City shall develop a list of income-qualified households. Multi-family project applicants shall be required to select households from the City-developed list of income-qualified households, except applicants of ownership projects of four or more units in the City’s multi-family residential zones may themselves select income-qualified households which shall be subject to eligibility certification by the City.

B.The following individuals, by virtue of their position or relationship, are ineligible to occupy an affordable housing unit:

1. All employees and officials of the City of Santa Monica or its agencies, authorities, or commissions who have, by the authority of their position, policy-making authority or influence over the implementation of this Chapter and the immediate relatives and employees of such City employees and officials;

2. The immediate relatives of the applicant or owner, including spouse, children, parents, grandparents, brother, sister, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, sister-in-law, and brother-in-law. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.120 Relation to Units Required by Rent Control Board 30%, 50%, 80% and moderate-income dwelling units developed as part of a market rate project, pursuant to replacement requirements of the Santa Monica Rent Control Board,

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 12
shall count towards the satisfaction of this Chapter if they otherwise meet applicable requirements for this Chapter including, but not limited to, the income eligibility requirements, deed restriction requirements, and pricing requirements. New inclusionary units required by the Rent Control Board which meet the standards of this Chapter shall count towards the satisfaction of this Chapter. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.130 Deed Restrictions
Prior to issuance of a building permit for a project meeting the requirements of this Chapter by providing affordable units on-site or off-site, the multi-family project applicant shall submit deed restrictions or other legal instruments setting forth the obligation of the applicant under this Chapter for City review and approval. Such restrictions shall be effective for at least fifty-five years. In addition to the administrative guidelines specifically required by other provisions of this Chapter, the City Manager or designee shall be the designated authority to enter into recorded agreements with multi-family project applicants. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.140 Enforcement
No building permit or occupancy permit shall be issued, nor any development approval granted, for a project which is not exempt and does not meet the requirement of this Chapter. All affordable housing units shall be rented or owned in accordance with this Chapter. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.150 Annual Report
The City Manager or designee, shall submit a report to the City Council on an annual basis which shall contain information concerning the implementation of this Chapter. This report shall also detail the projects that have received planning approval during the previous year and the manner in which the provisions of this Chapter were satisfied. This report shall further assess whether the provisions of Proposition R have been met and whether changes to this Chapter or its implementation procedures are warranted. In the event the provisions of Proposition R have not been met, the City Council shall take such action as is necessary to ensure that the provisions will be met in the future. This action may include, but not be limited to, amending the provisions of this Chapter or its implementation. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

9.64.160 Principles and Guidelines
The City Manager or designee, shall develop guidelines to implement this chapter, which guidelines shall be subject to approval of the City Council. The guidelines shall include, but not be limited to, the methodology for the establishment and periodic adjustment of the base fee and the affordable housing unit development cost; for-sale affordable unit requirements, tenant and purchaser eligibility procedures; and additional requirements for exercise of the off-site option and land acquisition option. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-A: Page 13

9.64.170 Adjustments or Waivers
A.A multi-family project applicant may request that the requirements of this Chapter be adjusted or waived based on a showing that applying the requirements of this Chapter would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property.

B.To receive an adjustment or waiver, the applicant must submit an application to the City Manager or designee, at the time the applicant files a multi-family project application. The applicant shall bear the burden of presenting substantial evidence to support the request and set forth in detail the factual and legal basis for the claim, including all supporting technical documentation.

C.In making a determination on an application to adjust or waive the requirements of this Chapter, the City Manager or designee, or City Council on appeal, may assume each of the following when applicable:

1. The applicant is subject to the affordable housing requirement of this Chapter;

2. The applicant will benefit from the inclusionary incentives set forth in this Chapter and the City’s Municipal Code;

3. The applicant will be obligated to provide the most economical affordable housing units feasible in terms of construction, design, location and tenure.

D.The City Manager or designee shall render a written decision within ninety days after a complete application is filed. The City Manager’s or designee’s decision may be appealed to the City Council if such appeal is filed within fourteen consecutive calendar days from the date that the decision is made in the manner provided in Chapter 9.37 Common Procedures of this Code or any successor thereto.

E. If the City Manager or designee, or City Council on appeal, upon legal advice provided by or at the behest of the City Attorney, determines that applying the requirements of this Chapter would effectuate an unconstitutional taking of property or otherwise have an unconstitutional application to the property, the affordable housing requirements shall be adjusted or waived to reduce the obligations under this Chapter to the extent necessary to avoid an unconstitutional result. If an adjustment or waiver is granted, any change in the use within the project shall invalidate the adjustment or waiver. If the City Manager or designee, or City Council on appeal, determines that no violation of the United States or California Constitutions would occur through application of this Chapter, the requirements of this Chapter remain fully applicable. (Added by Ord. No. 2486CCS §§ 1, 2, adopted June 23, 2015)

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 1-B
ATTACHMENT 1-B
AHPP Options Comparison Table
Project Type: Rental Ownership Ownership Ownership Ownership Project Size: 2+ Apartments 2-3 Units 4-15 Units 16+ Units 2+ Units Zoning: Any Multifamily Multifamily Multifamily Not Multifamily Developer Chooses
One Option Below:

1. Construct Units
Onsite:

Moderate Income
Units1 100% 100% 20% 25% 100%
80% Income
Household Rental 20% 20% 20% 25% 20%
50% Income
Household Rental 10% 10% 10% 15% 10%
30% Income
Household Rental 5% 5% 5% 10% 5%

2. Construct Units
Offsite:

Same as
Onsite Options
Same as
Onsite Options
Onsite
Options +25%
Onsite
Options +25%
Same as Onsite
Options

3. Pay Affordable
Housing Fee: $31.25/Sq.Ft. $36.51/Sq.Ft. Not Applicable Not Applicable $36.51/Sq.Ft.

4. Acquire and Donate
Land
See SMMC

9.64.080
See SMMC

9.64.080 Not Applicable Not Applicable See SMMC 9.64.080 Note 1: Moderate-Income residences in this row are the same as the Project Type in terms of owner versus renter.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 2-A: Page 1
ATTACHMENT 2-A
Fee Adjustment Methodology
Table 1 – Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 2-A: Page 2
ATTACHMENT 2-A
Fee Adjustment Methodology
Table 2 – Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 2-B
ATTACHMENT 2-B
Current Base Fees for Apartment and Condominium Projects

FEE FOR APARTMENT PROJECTS
Current Fee: $31.25 (Effective November 1, 2015)

FEE FOR CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS
Current Fee: $36.25 (Effective November 1, 2015)

TIMING OF FEE PAYMENT
Base Fee is due prior to completion of project, but not before building permit issuance, and the amount of fee due is based on fee amount in effect at time of payment.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-A
ATTACHMENT 3-A
Affordable Housing Table for 4+ Ownership Residences
in Multi-Family Zones
Number of
residences
in project before
density bonus
Number of
affordable
residences to be
provided**
FRACTIONS***
Fraction eligible
for fee payment
Fractional cost of
developing a residence
ON-SITE OPTION*
[# RESIDENCES X 20%]
2 On-site or off-site residences are not mandatory.
3 May pay affordable housing fee.
4 1.00 0.00 $0.00
5 1.00 0.00 $0.00
6 1.00 0.20 $65,585.40
7 1.00 0.40 $131,170.80
8 1.00 0.60 $196,756.20
9 2.00 0.00 $0.00
10 2.00 0.00 $0.00
11 2.00 0.20 $65,585.40
12 2.00 0.40 $131,170.80
13 2.00 0.60 $196,756.20
14 3.00 0.00 $0.00
15 3.00 0.00 $0.00
16+ [# residences x
25%] [fraction < 0.75] [fraction x unit development cost] OFF-SITE OPTION*
[# RESIDENCES X 25%]
2 On-site or off-site residences required are not mandatory 3 May pay affordable housing fee.
4 1.00 0.00 $0.00
5 1.00 0.25 $81,981.75
6 1.00 0.50 $163,963.50
7 2.00 0.00 $0.00
8 2.00 0.00 $0.00
9 2.00 0.25 $81,981.75
10 2.00 0.50 $163,963.50
11 3.00 0.00 $0.00
12 3.00 0.00 $0.00
13 3.00 0.25 $81,981.75
14 3.00 0.50 $163,963.50
15 4.00 0.00 $0.00
etc. etc. [fraction < 0.75] [fraction x unit development cost] *Ownership residences must be available for very low, low, or moderate income households *Rental residences must be available for very low or low income households **For fractions of 0.75 or more - round up to next whole number ***For fractions less than 0.75 - there are 2 options:
1) Pay the fractional cost of developing the unit based on affordable housing unit development cost ($327,927 per residence)
2) Construct all mandatory affordable residences with 3+ bedrooms

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-B: Page 1
ATTACHMENT 3-B
Development Incentives
Density Bonus Table for Housing Developments in Residential Zones * See Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.22 for more information.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-C
ATTACHMENT 3-C
Extremely-Low, Very-Low, Low- and Moderate Income Levels 2015 Income Limits

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE INCOME (ANNUAL)
Household
Size
Extremely
Low (30%)
Very Low
(50%)
Low
(80%)
Moderate
(120%)
1 $17,950 $29,900 $47,850 $54,450
2 $20,500 $34,200 $54,650 $62,200
3 $23,050 $38,450 $61,500 $70,000
4 $25,600 $42,700 $68,300 $77,750
5 $28,410 $46,150 $73,800 $83,950
6 $32,570 $49,550 $79,250 $90,200
7 $36,730 $52,950 $84,700 $96,400
8 $40,890 $56,400 $90,200 $102,650

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-D
ATTACHMENT 3-D
Maximum Allowable Rents
2015 Maximum Allowable Rent Limits

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE RENTS
(Based on 30% Affordability Standard)
Residence
Type
Extremely
Low (30%)
Very
Low
(50%)
Low
(80%)
Moderate
(120%)
0-Bdrm $340 $567 $680 $1,247
1-Bdrm $389 $648 $778 $1,426
2-Bdrm $437 $729 $875 $1,604
3-Bdrm $486 $810 $972 $1,782
4-Bdrm $525 $875 $1,050 $1,925
Rents: Median Income for 4-person household x Income Level x Bedroom Adjustment x Affordability Standard (30%) / 12. (Ref: CA H&SC 50053, H&SC 50052.5(h), SMMC 9.64.020(D)) * Rents limits reflect a hold-harmless approach and are therefore held at their highpoint reached in 2011.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-E
ATTACHMENT 3-E
Sample Deed Restriction

AGREEMENT IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS

ON RENTS & OCCUPANCY OF REAL PROPERTY

THIS AGREEMENT IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS ON RENTS & OCCUPANCY OF REAL PROPERTY, entered into this [____] day of [month, 20--], by and between the CITY OF SANTA MONICA, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter the "City"), and [name of applicant], a [California Limited Liability Company] (hereinafter the "Developer"), is made with reference to the following:

R E C I T A L S:

A. Developer is the owner of certain real property located at [address] in the City of Santa Monica, in the County of Los Angeles, California (hereinafter referred to as the "Subject Property"). The Subject Property is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

B. Developer wishes to construct a [project description include # stories, building square footage, form of ownership apt/condo] a (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). The City has approved [type of application #AA, DR, VAR etc.] for the Project. The City approved the [type of application] subject to the conditions of this Agreement, which are imposed for the benefit of the City, the public and surrounding landowners and without which the [type of application] would not be approved.

C. The Project is subject to the requirements of the City's Affordable Housing Production Program, Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.64, and the Administrative Guidelines for Chapter 9.64, as they may be amended from time to time (all collectively, referenced herein as "Affordability Restrictions"). The Developer has agreed to satisfy the Affordability Restrictions by fully complying with this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows:

1. RECITALS.

The Recitals stated above, are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement and adopted by the parties to this Agreement as true and correct.

2. DEFINITIONS.

2.1 “Affordable Units” means dwelling units within the Project that are

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-E
available to and occupied by Fifty Percent Income Households and Eighty Percent Income Households at Affordable Rent.

2.2 “Affordable Rent” means:
(a) For thirty percent income households, the product of thirty percent times thirty percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit.
(b) For fifty percent income households, the product of thirty percent times fifty percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit. (c) For eighty percent income households whose gross incomes exceed the maximum incomes for fifty percent income households, the product of thirty percent times sixty percent of the area median income adjusted for household size appropriate for the unit.

2.3 “Area Median Income or AMI” means the median family income published from time to time by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") for the Los Angeles-Long Beach Metropolitan Statistical Area.

2.4 “Eighty Percent Income Household” means a household whose gross income does not exceed the eighty percent income limits applicable to the Los AngelesLong Beach Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HUD. Eighty Percent Income Households include Fifty Percent Income Households.

2.5 “Fifty Percent Income Household” means a household whose gross income does not exceed the fifty percent income limits applicable to the Los AngelesLong Beach Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HUD. Fifty percent income households include Thirty Percent Income Households.

2.6 “Life of the Project” shall mean a period commencing on the date of Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the Project and ending on the date which is fiftyfive (55) years from Certificate of Occupancy for the Project; provided, however, that if the Project is damaged or destroyed and cannot be rebuilt in accordance with the development standards permitted in this Agreement, then the Life of the Project shall be deemed to have ended as of the date of such damage or destruction.

2.7 “Rent” has the same meaning as provided in title 25, section 6918 of the California Code of Regulations, as amended from time to time in accordance with law.

2.8 “Thirty Percent Income Household” means a household whose gross income does not exceed the thirty percent income limits applicable to the Los AngelesLong Beach Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area, adjusted for household size, as published and periodically updated by HUD.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-E

3. CONTRACT WITH CITY.

Developer hereby acknowledges that in issuing the [type of application] for the Project, the City is reducing or modifying development standards otherwise applicable to the Project such as increasing unit density, reducing parking and other property development standards, and/or waiving fees. In exchange for such forms of assistance from the City, which are of financial benefit to the Developer, Developer has entered into this contract with this City and agreed to the other conditions of the [type of permit see above], including the requirement included in this Agreement to provide and maintain [#] Affordable Units on the Subject Property for occupancy by qualified households who meet the requirements specified in this Agreement. The parties agree and acknowledge that this is a contract providing forms of assistance to the Developer within the meaning of Civil Code Section 1954.52 (b) and Government Code Section 65915 et seq.

4. DEVELOPER TO PROVIDE AND MAINTAIN [Total # deed restricted units] Example: TEN (10) AFFORDABLE UNITS.
(a) Upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project, Developer shall provide and maintain [#] Affordable Units on the Subject Property, as follows:
[# and type of unit] Example: Ten (10) one-bedroom Affordable Units shall be available to and occupied by [insert affordability level] Example: Fifty Percent Income Households at Affordable Rent.

Developer shall submit plans to the City's Building Official, identifying the unit numbers and exact locations of all of the Affordable Units. The submittal of these plans with the required identification of Affordable Units shall be a condition precedent to Developer's obtaining a building permit for the Project. (b) The Affordable Units shall be rental units and the maximum rent shall be calculated pursuant to the formula set forth in Section 5 of this Agreement. (c) The City shall issue a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project ("Certificate") expressly contingent upon compliance with the terms of this Agreement. A valid Certificate shall be required at all times to continue to use or occupy the Project. A breach of this Agreement shall be grounds for revoking the Certificate. The City shall provide reasonable notice and an opportunity to cure any breach of this Agreement prior to revoking the Certificate.

5. TERMS FOR THE RENTAL OF THE AFFORDABLE UNITS.

The maximum Affordable Rent for the [#] Affordable Units on the Subject Property shall be as follows:

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-E
(a) If the household is receiving a rental housing subsidy, the maximum allowable rent shall be the lesser of the Affordable Rent calculated under subparagraph (b) of this Section 5 or the payment standard authorized by the Santa Monica Housing Authority.
(b) If the household is not receiving federal rental assistance as defined above, the maximum allowable rent for the unit shall be calculated as follows:

For Fifty Percent Income Households
Area Median Income x 50% x Bedroom Adjustment Factor x 30% = Maximum Affordable Rent (Annual).

For Eighty Percent Income Households
Area Median Income x 60% x Bedroom Adjustment Factor x 30% = Maximum Affordable Rent (Annual).

The Maximum Allowable Rent figures must be divided by twelve to determine the maximum allowable monthly rent.

The formula for the calculation of rents as of the date of this Agreement is as follows:
(c) Area Median Income - As periodically published by HUD, currently $64,800 (for a family of four).
(d) Bedroom Adjustment Factors
0 Bedroom .7 3 Bedrooms 1.00
1 Bedroom .8 4 Bedrooms 1.08
2 Bedroom .90
(e) Affordable Rents 2015, to be updated annually3
Studio 1-BR 2-BR 3BR
Fifty Percent Income Household $567 $648 $729 $810
Eighty Percent Income Household $680 $778 $875 $972
(f) In the event the standards for establishing the monthly rental rate of the Affordable Units set forth in Section 5 cease to exist, the parties shall substitute a similar

3 These numbers include the utility allowance adopted by the City's Housing Authority for 2015, and is adjusted annually thereafter.

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-E
standard established by HUD or its successor governmental agency. If the parties are unable to agree upon a substitute standard, the parties shall refer the choice of the substitute standard to binding arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association.
(g) Minimum Occupancy Requirements
0 bedroom 1 occupant
1 bedroom 1 occupants
2 bedroom 2 occupants
3 bedrooms 3 occupants
4 bedrooms 5 occupants

6. HOUSEHOLD ADJUSTMENT FACTORS.

The Household Adjustment Factors are as follows:
1 person 0.7
2 persons 0.8
3 persons 0.9
4 persons 1.0
5 persons 1.08
6 persons 1.16
7 persons 1.24
8 persons 1.32
During the duration of this agreement, developer agrees to make reasonable efforts to rent vacant Affordable Units within sixty days.

7. TENANT SELECTION.

Developer shall select households from the City-developed list of income qualified households. Only households selected from the City-developed list of income qualified households shall occupy any of the Affordable Units.

8. CITY APPROVAL OF DOCUMENTS.

The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's), if any, for the Subject Property shall include reference to all applicable obligations and duties of the parties created by this Agreement. The City Attorney of the City of Santa Monica shall approve as to form the CC&R's prior to recordation of the final subdivision or parcel map for the Subject Property.

Developer shall rent the Affordable Units pursuant to the terms and conditions of

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-E
a lease or rental agreement approved by the City. At least ninety days prior to the expected completion date, Developer shall submit to the City Housing Division for review a copy of the lease agreement to be used. In addition to any other provision required by the City to ensure compliance with Chapter 9.64 and the Administrative Guidelines for Chapter 9.64, as they may be amended from time to time, said lease or rental agreement shall contain a provision prohibiting subleasing of the Affordable Units or revising the composition of the household without Developer's permission. Developer shall not approve any change that renders the Affordable Units in noncompliance with the household income requirements of this Agreement. The addition to the household of minor children, a spouse, or registered domestic partner shall not be deemed a change in the household requiring Developer's prior approval pursuant to this Section.

Developer shall lease the Affordable Units concurrently with all other units in the Project so as to avoid prolonged vacancy of the Affordable Units during lease-up of the Project.

9. ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS.

In the event of any controversy, claim or dispute between the parties hereto, arising out of or relating to this Agreement or breach thereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover from the losing party reasonable expenses, attorneys' fees and costs.

10. APPOINTMENT OF OTHER AGENCIES.

The City may designate, appoint or contract with any other public agency to perform City's obligations under this Agreement.

11. SEVERABILITY.

In the event any limitation, condition, restriction, covenant or provision contained in this Agreement is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining portions of this Agreement shall, nevertheless, be and remain in full force and effect.

12. NOTICES.

All notices required under this Agreement shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the following addresses:

TO THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA: City of Santa Monica
Planning and Community Development
Department
1685 Main Street, Room 212
Santa Monica, California 90401

5.D.e
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: AHPP Administrative Guidelines (5925 : Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Update) Administrative Guidelines
Affordable Housing Production Program
Attachment 3-E
Attention: Director, Planning and
Community Development Department
TO THE DEVELOPER: [enter developer name/address]
Any party may change the address to which notices are to be sent by notifying the other parties of the new address, in the manner set forth above.

13. HOLD HARMLESS.

As between the City and the Developer, the Developer is deemed to assume responsibility and liability for, and the Developer shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, servants or employees from and against any and all claims, loss, damage, charge or expense, whether direct or indirect, to which the City or its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, servants or employees may be put or subjected, by reason of any damage, loss or injury of any kind or nature whatever to persons or property caused by or resulting from or in connection with any act or action, or any neglect, omission or failure to act when under a duty to act, on the part of the Developer or any of Developer's officers, agents, servants, employees or subcontractors in his or their performance hereunder.

14. BURDEN TO RUN WITH PROPERTY.

The covenants and conditions herein contained shall apply to and bind the heirs, successors and assigns of all the parties hereto and shall run with and burden the Subject Property for the benefit of the City, the public and surrounding landowners, until terminated in accordance with the provisions hereof. Developer shall expressly make the conditions and covenants contained in this Agreement a part of any deed or other instrument conveying any interest in the Subject Property.

15. SALE OR CONVERSION OF PROPERTY.

In the event of sale or conversion of the subject property, any Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's) for the property, shall incorporate by reference all obligations and duties of the parties created by this Agreement. Reporting obligations set forth in Section 24 below, shall be set forth in the CC&R's if any, for the project.

Santa Monica City CouncilOctober 10, 2023

Santa Monica City Council
October 10, 2023