Design and Urban Form
* Site design (i.e., the arrangement of buildings,
landscaping and site amenities and their rela•
tionship to surrounding develop,ment and the
beach) will be addressed in the 1:::011te.~t of specific project concepts. * Site design will be environrner1tally sensitive
and incorporate model sustainability develop•
ment practices. '.ii' Uses at the site will serve a diverse public and provide a broad array of facilities and services to
reflect the socio-economic needs of the regional
population. ·Jr; Site design will allow for the inckision of public art either by incorporation in, the design
process or by a separate public art component. -;,. The site will be used during; the day and evening, on weekends and throughout the year.
6 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
PROCESS
ta..
w
(/}
tu
0 Analyze site, site
history, opportunities
and conslraints
>
0 z
The City Council appointed a 415 PCH Working
Groupi to develop a recommendation for the use
of 415 PCH.
The Working Group members are:
Ken Genser, Co-Chair (City Council)
M/cflael Feinstein, Co-Chair (City Council)
Mar;got Alofsin (Landmarks Commission)
Ken Breisch (Planning Commission)
Susan WI/son (Recreation and Parks)
Sergio Zeba/Jos (Architectural Review Board)
(.)
w
0 z
<(
.,
Development or four
Conceptual Alternatives
CJ
UJ
LL
I
u ..J
0::: 0:::
<t: a.. ~ <(
Development of
Preferred
Alternative
The consultants hired by the City to develop the
alternatives are:
Mou/e & Po/yzoides,
Architects and Urbanists
(Planning and Design)
Landmark Partners
(Economic Consultant)
Kaku Associates, Inc.
(Traffic Etigi11eer)
Staff support was provided by the City's
Department of Community and Cultural Services.
w
>- z <t: :::,. ~ ..,
Review of Preferred
Alternative by City
Boards ands
Commissions
~ ::J
l \i<"lU """) l ~l'1<t
Presenlation lo
City Council
Process 1/me/ine
The Working Group began meP.ting in
September of 1997 and met a1oproxirnatel~·
twice a month. Meetings were publicly posted and advertised, and more th an 150 people attended these meetings and participated in public input opportunities.
The Working Group spent four sessions
studying the site, its histmy. an,d its various
possibilities and restrictions.
The results of these meetings were present
ed in an open house on NovemtJter 15, 1997.
The Working Group then developed four different alternatives and presented them February 1. 1998 at a communi1y workshop.
A final preferred scheme was then developed
and is presented in this report.
7 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
ALTERNATIVES
. . !{[
.'-. ® / ___ )~ , . . . I ; ~-----.:.. . I I . . . -·-;....+---+ --... I . . i ~,1 ! ---'(---· =--- --·-·--------IIIIJi:L.i..~L i .. ;,1,,...,~----·~ ........ ~. J ·. r-
// r / __ j
: ':;
I,'/\.
I ! ! / -, ~ ~ '
;:!· (·, ;,-
/_', 1;,
Public Park
Most of the site is devoted to gardens and
contemplative park space. The historic pool
is retained as a water feature or fountain.
The North House and Main Building are
reused as a community meeting and banquet facility .
The scheme would require large operational
subsidies from the City.
Recreational Park
Most of the site is devoted to courts and
fields for active recreation. The historic pool
is retained as a swimming facility. The
North House is used for community meet
ings.
The scheme would require large operational
subsidies from the City. 8
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the ALTERNATIVES. CONT.
: : : :•: : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : • .... ~ " M : : : : :::: ::: ::::::::::::::::: ::: : :: :- • h • • • • ,._., .. -- ........ :: :::::::::: :: :: :: : ::::::::~-..
Public Beach Club
A beach club oriented toward day and montt,
passes would have cabanas. a pool area, pao
die tennis courts, meeting anc1 banquet spacf::
concessions. and locker rooms. A lc1rge twl\·
level parking deck would be requ1rt't1
This scheme woulc1 require ,rn opt=m1tinnr1I sul·•
sioy troni the City
Meeting Center
This would be a facility dedicated to organi1eo1
meetings, conferences. or educ-.ational activities
There would also be a large banquet facil1tv.
The scheme woulo generate positi11e eco110111i1·
returns to the Cit~
9 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
RECOMMENDED SCHEME
,,•~:~ ••r•~h•
-~.: ·1 ••• ·•_...,
<.
...... -~:-·•7-'"•".•-· .:_·~- --~
• • • - • .. ._,,,.:• I.~ ..
.. ·-~··:.
•
SITE PLAN
Ocean Avenue
Palisades Park
CJiffs
Pacific Coast Highway
415 PCH Site
B~ke Patti
Beach
Pacific Ocean
The recommended scheme fo,
415 PCH is a "hybrid s,cheme"
combining several of the more
public components of the alternatives with a revenue-generating use (Banquet Center}. The important historical buildings and elements have been retained, and there is an emphasis on put)lic
open space and beach access.
10 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the RECOMMENDED SCHEME: BUILDING PLAN
Note: Public Restrooms are incorporated In all bulldinga. 11 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the RECOMMENDED SCHEME: OPEN SPACE PLAN
VOU.EYBALL
COURTS
BIKE PATH
. ~· .... " . CHILDREN'S
PLAY AREA
Pacific Coast Highway
12 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
RECOMMENDED SCHEME SITE DESIGN
view of North House and Banquet Center courtyard gardens view of North Hause and Banquet Center courtyard gardens
COMPONENTS
The site can be viewed as ct1v1ded ,nto a r111rnt11;,r
of "zones", the banquevmeP.tin& center. thP.
recreational pool area. the visitor's center ancl a
new "beach square.··
The zones are integralec1 with gP.11eri:11s (lpen
space and garctens, and r.onner.ted w 1th pc111',-
wa:,,s and a promenadn. The gre1°11 spaces cc111
be used for recreatio11al ~is1to• use. c1:s well dS
tented as µart of outdoor l.Janqueb.
Parking is located on the north and s1.)utl1 edge!'>
of the site in a pattern similar lo the existing, tiut
with the addition of trees and la1111scaoe Ill brea~.
up the large e~panses of asphalI
Restrooms and Concession Stands are also located throughout the site. On the beach side of the property are volleyball courts r1nd a ci'1ilc1ren's
play area.
The North House is restored as a meeting facility
with an emphasis 011 com111u111ty and 11ur1 nro!il
aciti11ities
Tt1e Main Locker Buih.1111g wil1 t,e rcl1a lJiliWte(J as a Banquet Building. The first flt:o,ir wII cc,rta111
meetirg c1nd recepti,:;11 roo111-; a~ wfll ,'ha c:;;1.,1 ing kitchen. The SP.COnd tlnm \~Ill t:e ;:i 1W(t-S1(Jr, banquet space with views to the ocea 11. "I 1·,c
Banquet Building and Nortt, House"'" 11 f,;,J• a
landsraped ce>url}cml
13 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
RECOMMENDED SCHEME SITE DESIGN
view of pool area and banquet building in background
view of pool ares
COMPONENTS
The t1istoric pool and (lP.CkHlf. Will l)r, r estort:il IOI recreational swim. A chilclren·s wading pool w1I!
also be added, as well as some small ct1im~1P1;
and showering facilitie~ .
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
RECOMMENDED SCHEME SITE
view of beach square and promenade
DESIGN COMPONENTS
view of visitor ce11te,
A palI11 l111etl Promenade de11utes '.he' i,,o.ad
edge of the Site. r:onncctI,g Ilic I W'.) lliH~llll',
lots illlU givirig cll'.Ct~::iS l\J all !),If b d tile Silt;.
Tt11s Promenade widens al tile soutt1ern edge
to form a Beach Square. This informal gather
ing place is formed on two sides by ampitheatrical stairs, and by the existing Restaurant on the third side.
The existing restaurant will remain, with recommendations for ne,\ covered to"rr;-ices lac ing the hear.t1 ;inc! puhk sqII,1,r·
.A. Visitor Center 11,1s htY•n l.x.1t,~,J ,-,,· , .. ,. s r,· .. p1.>ssitJlv fur :tie Naliu•idl r,11~. 3L•'v11:,: •1,l1i.l1 has shown ,ntert,st 111 an j,·,krpn•t11,1i, ,,,,,,_ •.
ancl gatewa~ site t:1 th,, Sanr..1 l\'cni:· a
i\1oi;ntains Natic,r,;,I Re~rPat,crn ~ •~ii
15 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
RECOMMENDED SCHEME PROJECT FINANCING
DEVELOPMENT COSTS ANNUAL OPERATING COSTS 1. City Operation. City staff handles al• opoerat,uns.
The total capital cost for the Recommended Unlike most City park and community facilities, 2. Ew-Profit Lessee. City leases builcling to a woiessicr· Scheme is approximately $9.5 million. which are fully subsidized by the City, the al banquet operator but directly operates •ecrcalio11 Recommended Scheme inclu,ctes several rev- uses. Lease Is based on a ,n;nirnurn rent plus percen'.- Propo:sed funding sources include: enue sources to offset most, but not all, annual age rent. A one-time capital coritrib:Jtion is also * A City capital contribution of about $2.5 million; operating costs: assumed. * Public debt financing 3. ewt=il2lliill Ma!Jiilil:rJlS:nl !:&Imai;1. Cit"( hires a pro- * Parking. 300 spaces are provided. Revenues fessional banquet manager for an an11ual · 'ee and Cly assume 65% validation (Nortll House, Main manages recreation uses directly.
Use of Funds Amount Building &nd Visitor Center) a11d 35% non-validation. Parking revenues are projected to Net Main Building Scenarios !Restore North House $1,189,500 exceed parking operating costs. Revenue& '1,1ain Biuilding Rehab 1,500,000 City Ops Lessee Prof. Mgr rv'isitor Center 600,000 * North House. Meeting cenuer focusing on Concession Stands 75,000 non-profit and community uses. Meeting room Parking $218,369 $218.369 $218,369 Restore Pool/Pool House 590,000 rentals are projected to exceed operating North House 14,850 14,850 14,850
Park/Rec.Areas/Pkg Lots 1,463,500 Visitor Ctr. 90,000 90,000 90,000 Site Prepl\Jtill1ies ~
expenses. Concessions 5,0,000 50,000 50,000
Subtotal 6,128,820 Recreation (367,437) (367,437) (367,4371 Contingency @10% 6,123,881 * Visitor Center. Lease to a Federal or State Main Indirect Costs@25% 1,685,426 agency. such as the National Park Service and Buildino $520,313 $500,00 S545,875 Add'I Kitchen Cost 500,000 the California Department of Parks and i:urn., Fixtures & Equip. §.QQJlQ.Q Recreation. Rental income is ,projected to TOTAL $526.095 $505,782 S551,657 Total Capital Cost sa l22Z 1211
exceed City's operating costs.
Less Annual
• Financing Costs 780,792 * Beach Concessions. Lease revenues from Debt concessionaires for beach amenities and food Service' (640,105) (594,560) (640105'1 TOTAL PROJECT COST $10.307,919 are projected to exceed concession operating Less Existing costs. Par1ting
Revenues (110500 (110,500,l (110 500) * Recreation Uses. Use fees for the pool help Sources of Funds Amount City Ca1pital Contribution S2,500.00
offset, but do not completely pay for staffing NET
::land/Debt Financina 7 807 919
and other operating costs of the pool, park, play SURPLUS TOTAL $10,307,919
fields and volleyball courts. l(DEFIC!TI (224,510) (199 27B) (198,948) * The Main Building. The banquet and meeting • Lessee Operation cl the Main Bu,ld,ng assu'Tles a one-:ine facility will be the project's pri;ncipal revenue $500,000capilal co11tribution wt-ich ,edtJCes the Cit;-'s a,•n~•al source. Three operating scenarios are possible, debt service. C•ty debt service assu-nes 25-year t:ion<Js el e !>% 1nteresl
each with a different net revenue result: 16
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the
RECOMMENDED SCHEME
Pa1rking and Access
Approximately 300 parking spaces are provided on two lots connected by the existing frontage driveway. Total parking demand
includes the 168 e~isting spaces for public
beachgoers plus the incremental project
demands
Some shared parkmg between beachgoers and
pooU and visitor center users is c1ssurned.
Parking limitations would require that banquets
not be sGheduled during pea~; summer beach
hours. Revenue pro_ject1cns assume this
rest ricticn on use.
There would be access by car to each of tl1€
parking lots. Because of the high traffic volumes and car speeds on PCH. a new traffic signal. or halt signal. i~highly rncommended and should l>e µursued l>y ll1~ City with Caltra11s.
Especially during the summer, t11ere would be
hea..,·y foot traffic from ttw t1each, as well as
lJicy-clists and skaters 011 tne bike p.:ith. The
numerous paths connecting the beach and
llike path to the promenade encourage this
l:cnr1ectior1
.A.lternat,v•:: means of lrnnsporta11on to th~ site
sho1UI(! lJe pursued by the City. including shuttle
buses from parking lots. and shuttle service
tJetv•,een destinations such as Thirlf Streel
Promenade, Santa Monica Pier. and the
415 PCH site.
PARKING AND ACCESS
17 DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Marion Davies Beach House Operating Agreement ~,
EXHIBIT C -STD 21, DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DRUG1-FREE WORKPLACE CERTIFICATION STD. 21 (Rev. 12/93JICA ST PKS, EXCEL 4/9/1999) . CERTIFICATION
I, the official named below, hereby swear that I am duly authorized to legally to bind the contractor or grant recipient to the certification described below. I am fully aware that this certification, execute<! on the date below, is made under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California.
CONTRACTOR/BIDDER FIRM NAME FEDERAL ID NUMBER
BY IAulhorizld Signaturo) DATE EXECUTED
PRINTED NAME ANO TITLE OF PERSON SIGNING TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include Af9a Code) ( ) TITLE
CONTRACTOR/BIDDER FIRM'S MAILING ADDRESS
The contractor or grant recipient named above hereby certifies compliance with Government Code Section 8355 in matters relating to providing a drug-free workplace. The above named contractor or grant recipient will:
I~ Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a).
2. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355(b), to infonn employees about all of the following:
(a) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace,
(b) The person's or organization's policy in maintaining a drug-free workplace, (c) Any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs, and ( d) Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations.
3. Provide as required by Government Code Section 8355(c), that everyone who works on the proposed contract or grant:
(a) Will receive a copy of the company's drug-free workplace policy statement, and (b) Will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the contract or grant.
4. At the election of the contractor or grantee, from and after the "Date Executed" and until (NOT TO EXCEED 36 MONTHS), the state will regard this certificate as valid for all contracts1 or1grants
entered into between the contractor or grantee and this state agency without requiring the contractor or grantee to provide a new and individual certificate for each contract or grant. If the contractor or grantee elects to fill in the blank date, then the tenns and conditions of this certificate shall have the same force, meaning, effect and enforceability as if a certificate were separately, specifically, and individuaJly provided for each contract or grant between the contractor or grantee and this state agency.
C-1
--- ---- -----------
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
Exhibit 5.
Request for Proposals
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Community Services
RELEASE DATE: September 7, 2021
DEADLINE FOR QUESTIONS: September 17, 2021
RESPONSE DEADLINE: October 18, 2021, 5:00 pm
APPROVED FOR ADVERTISEMENT
CITY CONTACT:
Joyce Perez
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Scope of Work
3. Vendor Questionnaire
4. Evaluation Criteria
5. Award Process
6. Terms & Conditions
Attachments:
A - Proposer Checklist
B - Non-Discrimination Policy, Debarment Certification & Non-Collusion Declaration
C - Lease Area
D - FY21-22 Living Wage Certification
E - Oaks Intitiative Disclosure Form
F - Sample Concession Agreement
G - Certificate of Compliance
H - Insurance Requirements
I - Sustainable & Healthy Food Purchasing Guidelines
J - Performance Bond
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Summary
The City of Santa Monica, (referred to hereafter as “the City”) is inviting proposals from qualified persons or firms interested in providing food and beach equipment rental services at the Annenberg Community Beach House at Santa Monica State Beach for an initial term of ten (10) years with one (1) option for renewal of five (5) years, to be exercised at the City’s sole discretion.
1.2 Background
The City operates the Annenberg Community Beach House (“Beach House”) at Santa Monica State Beach under an Operating Agreement by and between the State of California and the City. The mission of California State Parks is to provide for the health, inspiration, and education of the people of California by helping to preserve the state’s extraordinary biological diversity, protecting its most valued natural and cultural resources, and creating opportunities for high-quality outdoor recreation.
The City agrees to develop, operate, control, and maintain the Premises at its own cost and expense as a public recreation facility with related concessions and/or other facilities accessible and subject to the use and enjoyment of the general public.
1.3 Contact Information
The City has designated Joyce Perez, as its contact (the “City Contact”) for this request for proposals (this “RFP”). The City Contact’s information is listed below:
Any inquiries or requests regarding this procurement should be submitted via ProcureNow. Other City officers, agents, employees or representatives do not have authority to respond on behalf of the City. Contact with unauthorized City personnel during the selection process may result in disqualification.
Project Contact:
Joyce Perez
Sr. Administrative Analyst
415 Pacific Coast Highway
Annenberg Community Beach House
Santa Monica, CA 90402
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (310) 458-2201 Ext: 5144
Procurement Contact:
Joyce Perez
Sr. Administrative Analyst
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
415 Pacific Coast Highway
Annenberg Community Beach House
Santa Monica, CA 90402
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (310) 458-2201 Ext: 5144
Department:
Community Services
Department Head:
Andy Agle
Director of Community Services
1.4 Timeline
Proposal Calendar
The following is a list of key dates:
Release Project Date September 7, 2021
Question Submission Deadline September 17, 2021, 12:00pm Question Response Deadline September 24, 2021, 12:00pm
Proposal Submission Deadline October 18, 2021, 5:00pm
Final Candidate Interviews TBD
Staff Recommendation Made to
Council for Bid Award
TBD
Start Date of Contract TBD
2 SCOPE OF WORK
Insert detailed statement/scope of work and deliverables including reporting requirements. List the criteria that must be met and that will be used to score and evaluate the proposals.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
2.1 Goal of this Request for Proposals (RFP)
The goal of this RFP is to award a concession contract to an individual or business entity to develop, operate, and maintain food and beach equipment rental services to enhance the visitor recreational experience at the Beach House.
2.2 Objectives of this RFP
• Concessions must be distinct and clearly unique to Santa Monica Beach culture, and celebrates its rich history, active lifestyle, sustainability, and accessibility. This includes menus, concept(s), and creativity. The City does not want a generic enterprise; food, beverages, and retail and rental items, shall reflect the City of Santa Monica, its values, lifestyle and environment.
• If brands are to be used, they should be local and consistent with the goal outlined above.
• The City seeks to optimize food, beverage and retail revenue for the City, not through high prices to customers but through elevating the use of the café by beach-goers and local residents on a year-round basis to the fullest extent possible and practical. • In order to optimize revenues on a year-round basis, the concessionaire should provide reasonable prices, excellent cost-value perception, high quality, use of fresh ingredients wherever possible and hopefully not just be a place to get a sandwich and a drink when at the beach, but food and beverage locations that visitors have heard and read about and look forward to using as part of the Santa Monica beach visit. If local residents find these attributes they are more likely to use these facilities and support year-round use.
• Retail and rental items offered should be of high quality, well made, have a Santa Monica beach experience theme, well-maintained and fairly priced in order to optimize usage and revenues.
• Proposers should review the City of Santa Monica's Sustainable and Healthy Food Purchasing Guidelines in the Attachment I of this RFP and be certain that these goals are addressed to the fullest extent possible and practical.
2.3 Site History and Description
The City is responsible for the operation and enhancement of Santa Monica’s most recognized and intensely used public space – Santa Monica State Beach. Five acres of this prized public resource is the Annenberg Community Beach House, a unique community beach and event facility. Located north of the Santa Monica Pier at 415 Pacific Coast Highway, the Beach House at Santa Monica State Beach incorporates historic elements of the former Marion Davies Estate with relatively new and modern additions. The site, which is open year-round, has something for everyone, including spectacular views, community & cultural events, and amenities such as the splash pad, playground, gallery, beach courts & fields, Marion Davies Guest House, historic pool, free wi-fi and the adjacent café.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
Due to its prime location, first-class amenities, and rich history, this one of- a kind public beach facility has become a popular destination for those seeking a quintessential Southern Californian experience - "an easy day at the beach."
2.4 Beach House Facilities
The Beach House is available to rent year-round for social and corporate events and meetings, and film and photo shoots that may provide opportunities for catering services from the concessionaire or other caterers on the approved list. Catering license fees are different from the rental percentage and are subject to current percentages imposed on the approved caterers.
A varied schedule of cultural programs, classes, docent tours of the Marion Davies Guest House, art exhibits and recreational amenities are offered to the public yearround. During the summer, amenities and programs including summer inspired classes, the pool, Monday Fun Day, Game Room, annual events such as the Community Picnic and Cardboard Yacht Regatta may provide additional and unique concession opportunities.
2.5 Beach Café
Currently known as Back on the Beach Café, the existing restaurant at 445 Pacific Coast Highway has been managed by an independent operator. The café currently provides daily indoor and outdoor food service year-round, with possible closures on Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Its casual atmosphere, ocean views, and the rare opportunity to dine on the sand make it a favorite of locals and visitors alike.
The concessionaire will be required to operate the existing beach café for sit-down food service beginning in TBD 2021 and throughout the term of the ten-year contract. The concessionaire will also be required to provide take-away food service from the beach café and beach-related equipment rentals and catering services for special events and meetings held on the site.
The concessionaire shall be responsible for all tenant improvements to the building and for providing all interior decor.
2.6 Beach Concession Building
A beach concession building of approximately 1,000 square feet is located at the north end of the site near the beach volleyball courts and large area of sand. The concessionaire has access to the 210 square foot concession room with a 31 square foot restroom; the remaining area of the building is occupied by Beach Maintenance.
The concessionaire will be responsible for making all tenant improvements to the concession room needed to provide equipment rentals, such as beach chairs and umbrellas, to the beach-going public.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
2.7 Description of Concession Operations
This section is intended to provide prospective proposers an overview of the current and proposed services covered in this RFP.
Gross Sales and Rent: The City of Santa Monica does not disclose gross sales information for individual businesses; rent revenue for beach concessions is public information and is included is the City’s annual budget documents. The amounts below include rents paid by the current concession operation.
Fiscal Year Rent Paid to the City
FY 2013-14 $242,354
FY 2014-15 $266,687
FY 2015-16 $297,807
FY 2016-17 $313,508
FY 2017-18 $352,956
Outdoor Seating: Outdoor seating is flexible based on operator set-up within defined space and boundaries.
Gross Square Footage of Building (est.) Café: 3,770 sq.ft Concession Building: 210 sq. ft.
Operating Days & Hours Café
• Daily: Opening at 8AM
• Closing will change per season, allowing for breakfast and lunch at minimum and dinner May through September
• Concession may close Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and New Year’s Day Equipment Rentals
• April – September: Daily, hours to be mutually agreed upon with Beach House management relative to Beach House operating schedule
• October – March: Upon demand during business hours
• Concession may close Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day and New Year’s Day The City will work with the concessionaire as it relates to the above days and hours during inclement weather and/or other unusual or out-of-the-ordinary circumstances that affect operations. Concessionaire may open longer hours and extended days at concessionaire’s option, subject to prior written approval of the City.
Building Description: See photos and floorplans of the current buildings in Lease Area, Attachment C of this RFP. Note that all equipment, furniture and fixtures are the property of the incumbent concessionaire and are not part of the as-is condition provided by the City.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
Menu, Retail/Rental & Pricing: High quality, healthy, reasonably priced sandwiches, salads, beverages, desserts, snack items, retail and rental items found in similar operations in Santa Monica area and other similar beach environments. Healthy menu options and menu items consistent with the City of Santa Monica’s Sustainable and Healthy Food Purchasing Guidelines included as Attachment I of this RFP, and a children’s menu (with pricing and portions) are very important.
Pricing must be reasonable, provide excellent price-value, and be set at levels that optimize customer counts and participation.
Parking: Parking is available year-round on a first come, first served basis. Park & Pay machines are located in each section of the lot.
The City will provide a limited number of monthly parking passes for the concessionaire’s employees based on the City’s pre-approved number of passes.
Build-Out and Minimum Capital Investment: The City will provide the buildings in an asis condition. Personal property, furniture, equipment, and signage installed by the current concessionaire remains the property of the current concessionaire and will be removed.
Concessionaire will be responsible for building-out the interior as well as any exterior renovations, all of which are to be ADA compliant, at operator total cost and expense.
All design, equipment, furnishings, signage, etc. shall be subject to the prior review and approval of City Departments, Boards and Commissions. When installed, ownership of all improvements will revert to the City.
Equipment: Concessionaire will provide all required Loose Equipment, including, but not necessarily limited to pots, pans, utensils, table ware, point of sale system, menu boards, office equipment, safe, retail fixtures, bikes, skates, etc. Concessionaire will retain ownership to all Loose Equipment.
Architectural Guidelines: The City, in its proprietary capacity, reserves the right to review all proposed build-out, renovation and remodeling to the buildings and all such work must be representative of the character of Santa Monica State Beach. All proposed improvements must comply with applicable law.
2.8 Minimum Agreement Requirements & Qualifications
This ten (10) year concession agreement with one (1) option for renewal of five (5) years will provide for the operation of food service and beach equipment rental services at the Beach House. The intent of the concession agreement is to provide the public with high-quality, reasonably priced food service in an authentic manner and atmosphere that enhances the visitor’s experience and the natural and cultural resources of the Santa Monica State Beach.
The following is a summary of important concession agreement provisions. It is critical for proposers to understand all the terms and conditions of the Sample Concession Agreement included herein as Attachment F. The successful proposer shall be expected to accept the provisions of the Sample Concession Agreement as written. If DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
necessary, minor clarifications, approved by the City Attorney, and approved by the State, may be made prior to the concession agreement execution.
At a minimum, the successful proposer will be required to:
2.8.1. Use the concession facilities solely for the operation and maintenance of concession stands selling approved beach concession Items consisting of (i) food, (ii) alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages, and (iii) beach related sundries.
2.8.2. Pay rent to the City for all concession services including food service and beach equipment rental operations on a monthly basis. The rent, at a minimum, shall be eight (8%) percent of gross receipts or $200,000 annually, whichever is greater. The Minimum Annual Rent of $200,000 shall be adjusted to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), estimated at 3-5% annually. The final rent to be paid will be negotiated between the City and the selected proposer based on the bid amount presented in the proposal, the proposed Operations Plan, and the extent of proposed tenant improvements.
2.8.3. Implement the Operations Plan and Tenant Improvement Plan, as described in Proposal instructions that clearly demonstrates the proposer’s plan to provide accessible services and facilities that comply with Federal, State, and Local accessibility guidelines. The plans will become exhibits of the final concession contract subject to City and State review and approval.
2.8.4. Maintain the premises, facilities, furnishings, and equipment in good condition in accordance with City standards and concession agreement provisions
2.8.5. Procure and maintain for the term and any extension of the contract a Security Deposit in the amount of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000). In addition, the concessionaire shall have procured and shall maintain for a minimum of one year a Performance Bond, included in this RFP as Attachment J, in the amount of one year's Minimum Annual Rent ($200,000) as described in the Sample Concession Agreement included as Attachment F.
2.8.6. Pay for all taxes applicable to the operation of the concession, including possessory interest taxes, and all utility services as required by the concession agreement.
2.8.7. Provide commercial general liability, worker’s comp, and property insurance as required by the concession agreement, detailed in Insurance Requirements, Attachment H.
2.8.8. Obtain all necessary licenses, permits, and approvals as set forth in the concession agreement and abide by all applicable health, safety, and environmental codes and regulations.
2.8.9. Comply with the letter and spirit of current and subsequent guidelines or plans, including Santa Monica State Beach General Plan amendments or updates, management and interpretive plans, historic structure reports, and others that may apply.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
2.8.10. Demonstrate compliance with labor laws as specified in the concession agreement.
2.8.11. Equip and maintain high-quality, sit-down food service at the beach café.
2.8.12. Equip and maintain high-quality, take-away food service during the summer months, some holidays and possibly some off-season public events.
2.8.13. Make available high-quality catering services for special events and meetings at the Beach House. The right to cater at the Beach House is not exclusive, and is subject to the same fees and restrictions as other approved Beach House caterers.
2.8.14. Promote healthy and sustainable food practices such as serving healthy, locally, and sustainably grown, organic foods, and organic ingredients whenever possible.
2.8.15. Use recycled products that, at a minimum, are consistent with existing City regulations and modified as necessary to meet future regulations.
2.8.16. Equip and maintain high-quality, beach-related equipment for rent and related items for sale at the beach concession building, beach cart or from the Café, such as chairs, umbrellas, and boogie boards, and various sundries that provide for the health, safety, and convenience of visitors.
2.8.17. Maintain an “A” rating from the Los Angeles County Health Department. Anytime the County Health Department rating drops below an “A”, concessionaire shall notify City within two business days and shall have ten days to correct any deficiency.
2.9 Additional Concession Services
Proposers may suggest other unique concession opportunities to enhance visitor experience at the Beach House. These suggestions will be considered during the proposal review process and will be negotiated with the successful proposer along with the level of service, hours of operation, and financial terms. Examples of additional services that may be considered include:
• Seasonal, public food service in specific areas of the site, such as food carts, or poolside food and beverage service. • "Beach butler" service to provide sand and beach-side chair and umbrella rental and set-up.
The successful proposer will not:
• Provide sales or services considered inappropriate, deemed objectionable, or denied by the City of Santa Monica.
• Charge prices in excess of those approved by the City of Santa Monica. • Promote or participate in activities that are incompatible with the rules, regulations, guidelines, or the mission of the City of Santa Monica.
Note: Terms and conditions of the agreement are set forth in detail in the Sample Concession Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
2.10 Minimum Qualification of Proposer
Certain minimum qualifications have been established in order for proposals to be considered as described in this RFP. Proposers shall have:
• Ten (10) or more years of continuous experience in the operation and management of a high-quality retail or food service operation.
• Demonstrated managerial, and staffing resources to maintain high quality, successful operation.
• Demonstrated financial capacity to finance proposed improvements and operating costs for the project that it proposes.
• A valid Small Business Qualification
The proposing entity and any proposed sub-contractors must meet the requirements of California's Small Business Certification Program. Certification must be valid at time of submission, and for the term of the contract. In order for a business to be eligible for certification, it must:
• Be independently owned and operated;
• Not dominant in field of operation;
• Have principal office located in California
• Have owners (officers, if a corporation) domiciled in California; and • Including affiliates, be either:
A business with 100 or fewer employees; an average annual gross receipts of $15 million or less, over the last three tax years;
A manufacturer with 100 or fewer employees; or
A micro business. A small business will automatically be designated as a micro business if gross annual receipts are $5,000,000 or less; or the small business is a manufacturer with 25 or fewer employees.
2.11 Original Documents
Proposer shall complete and return the following documents:
• Proposal (including cost proposal)
• RFP Addenda if issued
• Non-Discrimination Policy Acknowledgement
• Non-Collusion Declaration (this does not need to be notarized) • Certification Regarding Debarment
If selected to provide the service, the following form must be submitted:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
• Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form (if the award amount is >$25,000 annually; identifies recipients of public benefit in relation to political donation restrictions: click here for more information)
A City of Santa Monica business license must be obtained, or current business license number provided. For more information, go to the Business License page. 3 VENDOR QUESTIONNAIRE
3.1 Proposal
3.1.1 Letter of Transmittal*
Please upload your letter of Transmittal as a PDF here. Make sure to include the following items.
A. Identify the submitting organization;
B. Identify the name, title, telephone and e-mail address of the person authorized by the organization to contractually obligate the organization; C. Identify the name, title, telephone and e-mail address of the person authorized to negotiate the contract on behalf of the organization;
D. Identify the names, titles, telephone and e-mail addresses of persons to be contacted for clarification;
E. Be signed by the person authorized to contractually obligate the organization; F. Acknowledge receipt of any and all amendments to this RFP. *Response required
3.1.2 Experience & Qualifications*
Provide a detailed description of the relevant experience and qualifications of the proposing organization including the experience of principal individuals of the organization (last ten years). Include information sufficient to understand the full scope of the proposer's experience developing and managing food service and retail sales including specific roles and accomplishments; dates, size, and type of operation; type of capital improvements; and amount of annual revenues. If applicable, include experience and qualifications of sub-contractor(s).
*Response required
3.1.3 Key Personnel*
Describe the project team composition and include resumes of key personnel. Proposed members should be available for ninety (90) days from the proposal due date. The City must be promptly notified of any changes in key personnel prior to award.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
*Response required
3.1.4 References*
Provide the name, address, phone number, and email for at least two business references that can verify the experience and qualifications of the proposing entity and at least two financial references that can verify the financial statements included in the proposal. If the proposing entity or any of its principals have previously held or currently hold a public concession contract, include the contact name and telephone number of the agency administering the contract
*Response required
3.1.5 Ability to Finance*
Present evidence that the proposer has the financial capability to carry out the tenant improvements and operations as proposed. Identify and describe the specific sources of funding to be used. Evidence may include complete financial statements, audited if possible, and/or a detailed financial resume/balance sheet listing all income, expenses, and assets, including partial ownership interest in and income from any partially owned assets, and list direct and contingent liabilities. Please include a detailed pro forma, including amortization of capital expenditures and operations for at least three years. *Response required
3.1.6 Operations Plan*
Provide a detailed description of the type of operation proposed. Please provide information sufficient to evaluate your understanding of and commitment to the visitorserving nature of the Beach House; the type and style of service to be provided; the type of foods to be served; the types, costs, and quality of items to be sold or rented; and the management and operational policies and procedures. Please address the following aspects in your proposal:
• Vision/Mission statement to guide development and operation of the concession • Description of the products, merchandise, and services to be offered including a sample menu and prices for sit-down, take-away, and catering food services, and a list of proposed rental and retail items
• Customer service plan that ensures the highest level of service to Beach House visitors including how complaints will be managed and employee training policies • Food preparation methods
• Organizational structure of staffing and management that includes position titles and salaries for all job classifications, a summary of the job qualifications and duties, and the number of existing or proposed employees in each job classification and duties • Proposed use of subcontractors including a rationale for why subcontracting is preferred and how it best meets the goal of providing high-quality service to visitors • Employee training policies
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
• Employment opportunities for youth
• Marketing and/or advertising plan
• Community involvement activities
• Environmental and sustainable practices, including conservation and recycling • Description of furnishings, equipment, and decor
• Description of thematic uniforms, menus, decor, or other elements • Maintenance and housekeeping plan including a description of how funds will be allocated
• Interpretive (educational) elements highlighting the environmental and/or cultural history of the site
• Other programs and/or services to complement the public's beach experience.
Healthy Foods Plan
Describe how the proposed operation provides healthy, locally, and sustainably grown, organic foods, and uses sustainable practices, locally-grown and organic ingredients, and recycled products whenever possible. Identify the suppliers and measures necessary to achieve these goals. Additional measures that promote sustainable practices and healthy foods may be included.
Tenant Improvement Plan
Describe any proposed tenant improvements beyond those that will be completed by the City. The description should list the type of improvements and a timeline for completion. Please note, due to the restrictions imposed by Proposition S (City Council Resolution 8121) and other laws, the total amount of improvements allowed may be limited. It is the responsibility of the concessionaire to understand and comply with any and all applicable planning and zoning requirements including but not limited to the California Coastal Act, Proposition S, and County Health Codes. *Response required
3.1.7 Rental Bid*
Describe the proposed annual rent for the concession operations as proposed including the restaurant and beach concession. The proposal should be structured as "a guaranteed amount (Minimum Annual Rent) or a Percentage Rent, whichever is greater." Proposers shall bid both the Minimum Annual Rent and the Percentage Rent and each year shall pay whichever amount is greater. For the purposes of this RFP, the Minimum Annual Rent bid must be NO LESS THAN two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) per year and the Percentage Rent bid must be at least eight percent (8%) of gross sales.
Proposers may bid a different Percentage Rent for each of the different profit centers (food and non-alcoholic beverages, alcoholic beverages, retail sales and rentals, and catering).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
*Response required
3.2 Other Required Responses
3.2.1 RFP Addenda if issued
3.2.2 Business License Requirements
WHO NEEDS A BUSINESS LICENSE?
1. Is this vendor physically located in the City of Santa Monica? Yes (Vendor must have a City of Santa Monica business license - contact the Business License unit for the appropriate forms. Skip question 2 & continue to “ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS” section below)
No (Continue to the next question)
2. Does this vendor physically come into the City of Santa Monica to conduct business and/or make deliveries?
Yes (Vendor must have a City of Santa Monica Out-of City Business License. contact the Business License unit for the appropriate forms. Continue to “ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS” section below)
No (STOP, no license needed)
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
If this vendor is located in or comes into the City of Santa Monica to conduct business, in addition to having a CITY OF SANTA MONICA BUSINESS LICENSE, they will be required to have insurance (see agreement for descriptions).
The business license documentation is only required from the successful Proposer.
3.2.3 Notice Regarding Disclosure of Contents of Documents* All responses to this Request for Proposal (RFP) accepted by the City of Santa Monica (City) shall become the exclusive property of the City. All proposals accepted by the City shall become a matter of public record and shall be regarded as public, with the exception of those elements of each proposal which are defined by the contractor as business or trade secrets and plainly marked as "Trade Secret", "Confidential" or "Proprietary". Each element of a proposal which a contractor desires not to be considered a public record must be clearly marked as set forth above, and any blanket statement (i.e. regarding entire pages, documents or other non-specific designations) shall not be sufficient and shall not bind the City in any way whatsoever. If disclosure is required or permitted under the California Public Records Act, or otherwise by law, the City shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any such records or part thereof.
☐ Please confirm
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
*Response required
4 EVALUATION CRITERIA
No. Evaluation Criteria Scoring Method Weight (Points)
1. Experience & Qualifications
Assign points that may be awarded based
on evaluation of the scope, extent
applicability and quality of proposer’s
experience. Evaluation will be based on
documented experience on similar projects,
level of previous projects of comparable
complexity, scale and nature; training and
proven expertise in the area of work
required; experience in projects completed
for public entities.
Points Based 15
(15% of Total)
2. Project Team/Key Personnel
Assign points that may be awarded for
relevant experience and qualifications of
key personnel based upon the resumes
and experience narratives submitted.
Points Based 10
(10% of Total)
3. Financial Resources
Assign points that may be awarded based
on the financial resources, history, and
references of the proposer, as well as the
financial ability to finance tenant
improvements and operations as proposed.
Points Based 15
(15% of Total)
4. Project Understanding & Approach
Assign points that may be awarded based
on the proposer’s effective communication
and understanding of the project goals and
quality of responses to the Operations Plan.
Points Based 30
(30% of Total)
5. Compatibility
Assign points that may be awarded for the
compatibility of proposed operation with the
surrounding uses and local community.
Points Based 5
(5% of Total)
6. Rental Bid
Assign points that may be awarded based
on evaluation of the competitiveness,
appropriateness and feasibility of proposed
Minimum Annual Rent and Percentage
Rent and the ability to maintain competitive
pricing with the proposed annual rent to the
City.
Points Based 15
(15% of Total)
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
7. Proposal/Presentation
Assign points that may be earned based
upon overall quality of responses,
thoroughness and completeness of the
proposal and responsiveness to RFP
requirements.
Points Based 10
(10% of Total)
5 AWARD PROCESS
5.1 Selection
The City of Santa Monica, through either the City Council or the City Manager (or his designee) has the sole authority to select the consulting firm and reserves the right to reject any and all proposals. The City reserves the right to approve or reject all subconsultants and engineers proposed to be retained by the prime consultant. Upon signing of the agreement, no change in proposed personnel or sub-consultants can be made without the City’s review and written authorization.
By submitting a response to this RFP, prospective consultants waive the right to protest after award or seek any legal remedies whatsoever regarding any aspect of this RFP.
The City reserves the right to select any number of finalists. In addition, the City reserves the right to issue written notice to all prospective consultants of any changes in the RFP terms or proposal submission schedule, should the City determine in its sole and absolute discretion that such changes are necessary.
The City reserves the right to request additional information from any proposing consultant and to reject any and all proposals. All original work products, including computer files, shall remain the property of the City.
The City reserves the right to retain an expert to evaluate the proposing consultant’s work or qualifications at all stages in the selection process. Additionally, any contract entered into will be subject to termination at any stage if in the judgment of the City, such termination is in the best interest of the City. In the event such decision is made, appropriate written notice would be given before any termination and the consultant would be compensated on a pro-rata basis for work performed.
The responsible proposer whose proposal is the most advantageous to the City, taking to consideration all the evaluation factors will be recommended for the contract award.
Notwithstanding the Evaluation Team’s selection, the City reserves the right to award this RFP and the resultant Contract in any manner it deems to be in the best interest of the City and make the selection based on its sole discretion. The City is the sole and exclusive judge of quality and compliance with proposal specifications in any of the matters pertaining to this RFP.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
5.2 Contract Award and Execution
Selection of a proposer with whom the City enters into contract negotiations with, or a recommendation of an award by the Evaluation Committee or any other party, does not constitute an award of Contract. Once the City formally awards the contract, the successful consultant will be notified to enter into an agreement. If the selected consultant does not enter into the agreement, the City will begin negotiations with the second highest ranking proposing consultant.
Please review all contract forms prior to submitting a proposal. The City of Santa Monica intends to use these forms as the baseline agreements with the successful consultant. The City will not entertain proposals to make material changes to the contract form once the project has been awarded. If you wish to request changes to the contracting forms, you must do so during the proposal process. In addition, the City requires compliance with several other policies and ordinances, proposing consultants will need to complete these Exhibits and submit with their Proposal.
The RFP document and the successful proposal response, as amended by agreement between the City of Santa Monica and the successful consultant, will become part of the contract documents. Additionally, the City of Santa Monica may verify the successful consultant’s representations that appear in the proposal. Failure of the successful consultant to perform as represented may result in elimination of the successful consultant from further negotiation or in contract cancellation or termination.
No oral explanation or instruction of any kind or nature whatsoever given before the award of a contract to a consultant shall be binding. The City of Santa Monica shall not be bound, or in any way obligated, until the City has awarded the contract and all documents have been executed. The proposing consultant may not incur any chargeable costs prior to final contract execution.
6 TERMS & CONDITIONS
6.1 Best Qualified Person Or Firm
The award, if any, will be made to the best qualified person or firm(s). In evaluating whether a proposer(s) is (are) the best qualified person or firm(s) pursuant to the Santa Monica Municipal Code, City staff may utilize some or all of the following criteria:
A. The training, credentials and experience of the person or firm; B. The demonstrated competence, ability, capacity and skill of the person or firm to perform the contract or provide the services;
C. The capacity of the person or firm to perform the contract or provide the service promptly, within the time specified, and without delay; DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
D. The sufficiency of the person’s or firm’s financial and other resources; E. The character, integrity, reputation and judgment of the person or firm; F. The ability of the person or firm to provide such future service as may be needed; G. The price which the person or firm proposes to charge, including whether the price is fair, reasonable and competitive; and
H. Any other factor which will further the intent set forth in Section 608 of the City Charter.
The City shall have absolute discretion in determining the applicability and weight or relative weight of some or all of the criteria listed above and is not required to select the lowest monetary proposer.
6.2 Receiving Time / Late Proposals
It is the responsibility of proposer to see that their proposal is submitted with sufficient time to be received by the City prior to the proposal closing time. The receiving time in the City Office will be the governing time for acceptability of proposals.
Late proposals are not accepted.
6.3 Acceptance of Conditions Governing this RFP
Submission of a proposal constitutes acceptance of the Evaluation Factors contained in this RFP.
6.4 Incurring Cost
Any cost incurred by the proposer in preparation, transmittal, presentation of any proposal or material submitted in response to this RFP shall be borne solely by the proposer.
6.5 Prime Consultant Responsibility
Any agreement that may result from the RFP shall specify that the prime consultant is solely responsible for fulfillment of the agreement with the City. The City will make agreement payments only to the prime consultant.
6.6 Sub-consultants
Use of sub-consultants must be clearly explained in the proposal, and major subconsultants must be identified by name. Prime consultants shall be wholly responsible for the entire performance whether or not sub-consultants are used.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
6.7 Amended Proposals
A proposer may submit an amended proposal before the deadline for receipt of proposals. Such amended proposals must be complete replacements for a previously submitted proposal and must be clearly identified as such in the transmittal letter. City personnel will not merge, collate, or assemble proposal materials.
6.8 Proposer’s Rights to Withdraw Proposal
Proposers will be allowed to withdraw their proposals at any time prior to the deadline for receipt of proposals. The proposer must submit a written withdrawal request signed by the proposer’s duly authorized representative addressed to the City Contact.
6.9 Proposal Offer Firm
Responses to this RFP, including proposal prices, will be considered firm for ninety (90) days after the due date for receipt of proposals or sixty (60) days after receipt of a best and final offer, if one is requested.
6.10 Best and Final Offer
The City reserves the right to request Best and Final Offers from any or all proposers.
This will be the only opportunity to amend or modify proposals based on feedback from the City. Information from competing proposals will not be disclosed to other proposers prior to submission of a Best and Final Offer.
6.11 Living Wage Requirement
Any agreement issued as a result of this Request for Proposal may be subject to the City’s Living Wage Ordinance, Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 4.65 (LWO), and its implementing regulations.
6.12 Disclosure of Proposal Contents
All proposals are subject to the provisions of the California Public Records Act, California Government Code section 6250 et seq., and any information submitted with a response is a public record subject to disclosure, unless a specific exemption applies.
6.13 Notice Regarding Disclosure of Contents of Documents All responses to this Request for Proposal (RFP) accepted by the City of Santa Monica (City) shall become the exclusive property of the City. All proposals accepted by the City shall become a matter of public record and shall be regarded as public, with the exception of those elements of each proposal which are defined by the contractor as business or trade secrets and plainly marked as "Trade Secret", "Confidential" or "Proprietary". Each element of a proposal which a contractor desires not to be DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
considered a public record must be clearly marked as set forth above, and any blanket statement (i.e. regarding entire pages, documents or other non-specific designations) shall not be sufficient and shall not bind the City in any way whatsoever. If disclosure is required or permitted under the California Public Records Act, or otherwise by law, the City shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any such records or part thereof.
6.14 No Obligation
This RFP in no manner obligates the City to the eventual rental, lease, purchase, etc., of any goods or services offered until a valid written agreement is executed by the City and the selected proposer.
6.15 Termination
This RFP may be canceled at any time and any and all proposals may be rejected in whole or in part when the City determines such action to be in the best interest of the City of Santa Monica.
6.16 Sufficient Appropriation
Any agreement awarded for multiple years as a result of this RFP may be terminated if sufficient appropriations or authorizations do not exist. Such termination will be effected by sending written notice to the selected proposer. The City’s decision as to whether sufficient appropriations and authorizations are available will be accepted by the selected proposer as final.
6.17 Errors and Restrictive Specifications
If a proposer discovers any ambiguity, conflict, discrepancy, omission, or other error in the RFP, the proposer should immediately notify the City Contact designated in Section I, B. Without disclosing the source of the request, the City may issue a written addendum to clarify the ambiguity, or to correct the problem, omission, or other error.
If prior to the submission date, a proposer knows of or should have known of an error in the RFP but fails to notify the City Contact of the error, the proposer shall submit their proposal at his, her or its own risk, and, if awarded an agreement, shall not be entitled to additional compensation or time by reason of error or its later correction.
6.18 Legal Review
The City requires that all proposers agree to be bound by the General Requirements contained in this RFP.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
6.19 Governing Law
This RFP, and any agreement entered into pursuant to this RFP, are governed by the laws of the State of California.
6.20 Oral Changes and Basis for Proposal
Proposers may not rely upon oral explanations. All changes and addenda will be issued in writing. Only information supplied by the City in writing through the City’s Contact, or in this RFP should be used as the basis for the preparation of proposals.
6.21 Agreement Terms and Conditions
The agreement between the City and the selected proposer(s) will follow the format specified by the City and contain the terms and conditions set forth in Attachment F, Sample Concession Agreement. However, the City reserves the right to negotiate with a successful proposer the final provisions or provisions in addition to those contained in this RFP. The contents of this RFP, as revised and/or supplemented, and the successful proposal will be incorporated into and become part of the agreement.
Should a proposer object to any of the City’s terms and conditions, as contained in this Section or in Attachment F, that proposer must propose specific alternative language in his, her, or its proposal. Proposer must provide a brief discussion of the purpose and impact, if any, of each proposed changed followed by the specific proposed alternate wording. The City may or may not accept the alternative language. General references to the proposer’s terms and conditions or attempts at complete substitutions are not acceptable to the City and may result in disqualification of the proposer.
6.22 Proposer’s Terms and Conditions
Proposers must submit with the proposal a complete set of any additional terms and conditions that they expect to have included in an agreement negotiated with the City.
6.23 Proposer Qualifications
The City may make such investigations as necessary to determine the ability of the proposer to adhere to the requirements specified within this RFP.
6.24 Right to Waive Minor Irregularities
The City reserves the right to waive minor irregularities and the right to waive mandatory requirements, provided that all of the otherwise responsive proposals fail to meet the same mandatory requirements and/or doing so does not otherwise materially affect the procurement. This right is at the sole discretion of the City.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
6.25 Change in Agreement or Representatives
The City reserves the right to require a change in the selected proposer or representatives if the assigned representatives are not, in the opinion of the City, meeting its needs adequately.
6.26 City Rights
The City reserves the right to award the proposal to separate proposers on any of the services as set forth in the proposer’s proposal. It is further understood that if the proposer to whom any recommended award is made fails to enter into an agreement with the City, award may be made to the next best qualified person or firm, who shall be bound to perform as if she, he or it received the award in the first instance.
6.27 Right to Publish
Throughout the duration of this procurement process and agreement term, potential proposers, and proposers, must secure from the City written approval prior to the release of any information that pertains to the potential work or activities covered by this procurement or the subsequent agreement. Failure to adhere to this requirement may result in disqualification of the proposer or termination of the agreement.
6.28 Ownership of Proposals
All documents submitted in response to the RFP shall be become the property of the City of Santa Monica and are subject to the provisions of the California Public Records Act, as described in Section II. A. 11. herein.
6.29 Agreement Award
Proposal will be evaluated by a committee comprised of City staff and may include outside consultants (the “Evaluation Committee”). The Evaluation Committee will make an award recommendation to City staff. City Council may give approval of the agreement and/or direct staff to negotiate the final terms and execute the agreement.
This agreement shall be awarded to the proposer or proposers whose proposal is best qualified, taking into consideration the evaluation factors set forth in the RFP. The most qualified proposal may or may not have received the most points or be the lowest cost proposal. Proposers will be notified when the award is being made or an award recommendation goes to the City Council for approval.
6.30 Protest Deadline
All parties wishing to file a protest shall comply with the procedures set forth in Santa Monica Municipal Code section 2.24.260 found here. Proposer may file a written protest with the Director of Finance no more than seven calendar days following the posting of DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City of Santa Monica
Community Services
Request for Proposals
BEACH CAFE AND EQUIPMENT RENTAL CONCESSION
award recommendation on the City’s online vendor portal website.
Protests received after the deadline will not be accepted.
6.31 Records and Audits
The Consultant shall maintain such detailed records as may be necessary to demonstrate its performance of the duties required by this Agreement, including the date, time and nature of services rendered. These records shall be maintained for a period of three years from the date of the final payment under this Agreement and shall be subject to inspection by City. The City shall have the right to audit any billings or examine any records maintained pursuant to this Agreement both before and after payment. Payment under this Agreement shall not foreclose the right of City to recover excessive and/or illegal payments
6.32 Enforcement of Agreement/Waiver
A party's failure to require strict performance of any provision of this Agreement shall not waive or diminish that party's right thereafter to demand strict compliance with that or any other provision. No waiver by a party of any of its rights under this Agreement shall be effective unless expressed in writing and signed by the party alleged to have granted the waiver. A waiver by a party of any of its rights shall not be effective to waive any other rights.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
Exhibit 6.
Waiver of Liability and
Release
There are significant elements of risk in any adventure, sport or activity associated with (referred to herein as “activity”) use of any equipment. It is up to you to master the basics‐moving, maneuvering, shifting gears, braking and turning‐before beginning your activity, to obey traffic regulations and to yield to pedestrians.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RISKS: I recognize that there are inherent risks in this type of activity. These risks my result in serious injury or death, and include but are not limited to the following: 1)falls; 2)collisions with pedestrians, cycles, cycle riders, vehicles, manmade and natural objects; 3)hazards of trails, routes or roadways including even or unstable surfaces, steep grades, sharp turns, and or; 4)the presence of water, sand, gravel, mud, oil and debris – which may inhibit my ability to maneuver or stop; 5)cold weather and heat related injuries or illnesses including hypothermia, frosting, frostbite, heat exhaustion, heat stroke, and dehydration; 6)inclement weather, fog banks which can reduce visibility to near zero, varied or severe wind, weather or physical coordination, ability to balance or control the equipment, the speed at which I travel and my ability to follow directions; 7)loss of or damage to personal property; 8)fatigue, chill and or dizziness, which my diminish my/our reaction time and increase the risk of an accident; and 9)accidents or illnesses occurring in remote places where there are no available medical facilities.
I understand the description of these risks is not complete and that unknown or unanticipated risks may result in injury, illness or death. I understand the use of alcohol or drugs may impair my abilities.
EXPRESS ASSUMPTION OF RISK AND RESPONSIBILITY: I agree to assume responsibility for those risks identified herein and those not specifically identified. I certify that I am (we are) physically and mentally capable of participating in this activity. My/Our participation in this activity is purely voluntary. No one is forcing me/us to participate. I/We elect to participate in spite of the risks. Therefore, I assume full responsibility for myself and any minor children for which I am responsible, for bodily injury, accidents, illness, death, loss of personal property, and any related expenses.
CONVENANT OF GOOD FAITH: I recognize that you as provider of services, will operate under a covenant of good faith and fair dealing but that you may find it necessary to terminate an activity due to forces of nature, medical necessities or problems in the group, and/or refuse or terminate, the participation of any person you judge to be incapable or meeting the rigors or requirements or participation in the activity. I accept your right to take such actions for the safety of myself and or other participants I acknowledge that no guarantees have been made with respect to cycling objectives.
AUTHORIZATION: I hereby authorize any medical treatment deemed necessary in the event of any injury while participating in the activity. I either have appropriate insurance or in its absence agree to pay all costs of rescue and/or medical services as may be incurred on my/our behalf. I agree that any film or photographs of me/us, as participants, become your property and may be used for promotional or commercial purposes.
RELEASE: In consideration of services or property provided, I, for myself and any minor children for which I DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
am a parent, legal guardian or otherwise responsible and heirs, personal representatives assigns, do hereby release (CONCESSIONAIRE) its principles, directors, officers, agents, employees and volunteers, and each and every land owner, the City of Santa Monica and the County of Los Angeles, The State of California, their municipal and/or governmental agencies upon whose property an activity is conducted, all of its affiliates, from all liability and waive any claim for damage arising from any cause whatsoever (except that which is the result of gross negligence).
I HAVE READ THE FOREGOING WARNING, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RISKS, ASSUMPTION OR RISKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, AND RELEASE OF LIABILITY. I UNDERSTAND BY SIGNING THIS DOCUMENT I MAY BE WAIVING VALUABLE LEGAL RIGHTS.
Date Name (please print) Age Signature Refused
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
If the participant is under 18, the Parent or Legal Guardian must also sign DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
Exhibit 7.
Menu
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement california omelette 18
cage-free eggs, feta, tomato, spinach, breakfast potatoes, mini scone cheese omelette 16
choice of cheddar, gruyere or jack, breakfast potatoes, mini scone. add bacon or ham, +$2
ocean house scramble 18
cream cheese, avocado, jack cheese, side breakfast potatoes, mini scone two eggs any style 12 three eggs any style 15
breakfast potatoes, mini scone breakfast potatoes, mini scone polenta & eggs 18
crispy polenta, mushrooms, spinach, marinara, parmesan, two eggs over medium breakfast quesadilla 18
scrambled egg whites, spinach, jack cheese, salsa, breakfast potatoes sub egg whites + $2.50 sub fruit +$2.50 add chicken chorizo +$3. back on the beach egg sandwich 18
fried egg, bacon, aged cheddar, avocado, arugula, tomato aioli, breakfast potatoes north african shakshuka 19
house-made lamb sausage, eggs, tomato and pepper stew, feta cheese, side grilled bread tofu scramble vegan 18
sauteed vegetables, red onion, black beans, soyrizo, side breakfast potatoes huevos rancheros 18
crispy corn tortilla, fried eggs, avocado, ranchero salsa, rice, black beans, queso fresco buttermilk pancakes 13
+$1 to add banana, blueberry, or chocolate chips
+$1 to add 2oz pure maple syrup
french toast 14
+$1 to add 2oz pure maple syrup
bananutella french toast 18
sliced bananas, nutella, almonds, whip cream
oatmeal 11
raisins, walnuts, & brown sugar upon request
granola sundae house-made 13
organic vanilla yogurt, seasonal fruit
fruit plate 13
bagel & lox 20
capers, red onion, sliced tomato, cream cheese, fruit garnish bagel 4.25 sausage 4
toast 2.5 ham 4
mini scone 2.5 bacon 4
sorry, no substitutions during busy peak hours
DAYTIME
MENU
page 42
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement fred's salad 18
romaine, chicken salad, grilled potatoes, blue crumbles, parmesan, lemon herb dressing
marion davies salad 17
organic greens, cranberries, candied pecans,
blue crumbles, lemon vinaigrette
santa fe salad 17
chopped romaine, black beans, grilled corn, red onion,
tomato, avocado, cilantro lime dressing
chicken, apple, goat cheese salad 20
romaine, arugula, goat cheese, almonds,
honey lemon vinaigrette
caesar salad 14
romaine hearts, croutons, caesar dressing, parmesan
add mary's grilled chicken breast $6.75 / add tuna salad or chicken salad $6.5 / add grilled salmon $8.75 back on the beach burger 20
grass-fed beef, aged cheddar, avocado, arugula, tomato aioli, fries, potato chips or green salad grass-fed burger 18
fries, potato chips or green salad
impossible burger 20
vegan ground beef patty, lettuce, tomato, onion, fries, potato chips or green salad black bean & portabello veggie burger
with gruyere cheese, lettuce, tomato, garlic aoli, side fries or green salad 20 blackened chicken breast sandwich 19
mary's chicken, caramelized onion, cole slaw, piquillo pepper aioli, pimento cheese, on ciabatta, fries, potato chips or green salad
mary's chicken salad sandwich 18
bacon, avocado, lettuce, grain mustard aioli, toasted sourdough, fries, potato chips or green salad tuna salad sandwich pole / line caught tuna 19
lettuce, tomato, multi-grain grain bread, fries, potato chips or green salad turkey wrap 19
house-roasted turkey, lettuce, tomato, cheddar, cranberry mayo, fries, potato chips or green salad vegetarian power bowl vegan 17
brown rice, roasted zucchini, yellow squash, broccolini, butternut squash, avocado salmon a la plancha 21 / rainbow trout a la plancha 22
with seasonal vegetables and grilled potatoes
grilled fish tacos 20
marinated alaskan cod, slaw, pico de gallo, rice & beans fish & chips 19
tempura-battered alaskan cod, tartar sauce, lemon
french fries 5 sweet potato fries with chipotle aioli 8 fried calamari tartar sauce 17
page 43
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement kid's menu
chicken fingers fries or potato chips 11.50
grilled cheese sandwich fries or potato chips 10.00
kid's burger grass-fed fries or potato chips 10.25
kid's cheeseburger grass-fed fries or potato chips 10.75 hot dog kosher fries or potato chips 10.25
veggie dog fries or potato chips 10.25
pancake plain buttermilk 7.00
pancake blueberry or banana 7.50
pasta butter 9.00
pasta marinara 9.75
beverages
ice tea 3.5 lemonade 3.5
mineral water 3 / 5.5 gatorade 3.5
coke diet coke, root beer, orange, sprite 3 cranberry juice 'ocean spray' 3.5 orange juice fresh squeeze 3 / 4.5 apple juice 'martinelli's 3.25 San Pelligrino sparkling juices blood orange, lemon, or grapefruit 3.5 smoothies strawberry, mango, or pina colada 5
coffee organic 'intelligentsia' 3.5 espresso organic 4
cappuccino 4.75 cafe mocha 5.25
ice-blended mocha 5 hot chocolate 4.75
tea organic ginger beer non-alcoholic bundaberg 6
earl grey, breakfast, mint, chamomile 4.5
beer & wine
IPA ice-cold DRAFT lagunitas california 9 angry orchard gluten-free hard cider 8 blonde ale DRAFT angel city la 9 guinness stout ireland 12 orange wheat DRAFT hanger 24 9 lambic framboise raspberry belgian beer, since 1822 14 corona mexico 9 heineken holland 9
corona light mexico 9 hard seltzer white claw black berry or mango 8 chardonnay cabernet sauvignon 14 hands washington 12/42 girasol california organic 12/42 imagery sonoma 48
the snitch napa 60 red velvet (blend) cupcake california 38 sauvignon blanc kim crawford nz 14/50 pinot noir rare earth california organic 11/38 pinot grigio pertico italy 14/50 merlot velvet devil washington 36 sparkling brut wolf blas australia 12/42 rose Listel 12/42 proseco cupcake italy 40 mimosa 13
rose proseco pasqua italy 55 aperol spritz italian aperitif 13 byob corkage fee 15 margarita from 100% fermented agave, delicious 13 18% gratuity added to groups of 6 or more. During peak hours, we seat only complete parties & please only 1.5 hours max at table if other families are waiting to be seated. page 44
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement Back on the Beach Cafe
dinner menu
to begin
salmon poke
ponzu, avocado, green onions, toasted sesame seeds, crispy tortilla chips 16 mezze plate
hummus, red pepper spread, eggplant tapenade, herb feta tomato, olives, flatbread 17 grilled selva shrimp
5 selva shrimp, blistered cherry tomatoes, over creamy polenta 18 [ selva shimp is certified by both asc (aquaculture stewardship council) & ocean-wise ] fried calamari
chipotle aioli, fresno chili 17
cauliflower milanese florets
lemon garlic aioli 15
sweet potato fries 7
spicy chipotle mayo
starters salads
small market salad
mixed greens, shaved market vegetables 10
small caesar salad 10
croutons, parmesan
entrees
salmon a la plancha
mashed potatoes, market vegetables, lemon caper sauce 28 grilled rainbow trout
garbanzo lentil medley, soyrizo, topped w/celery slaw 29 mary's half chicken
garlic mashed potatoes, market vegetables, cherry tomato, chicken au jus 28 grilled steak
10oz hanger, herb potatoes, creamy spinach 28
crispy peanut tofu
brown rice, snap peas, zucchini, brocolini, siracha soy sauce vegan 24 enchiladas verdes
soyrizo papa, tomatillo salsa, jalapeno tofu crema, with brown rice and nopal cactus salad vegan 23 fred's salad
romaine, chicken salad, grilled potatoes, blue crumbles, parmesan, lemon herb dressing 18 santa fe salad
chopped romaine, black beans, grilled corn, red onion, tomato, avocado, cilantro lime dressing 17 back on the beach burger
grass-fed beef, aged cheddar, avocado, wild arugula, tomato aioli, side fries or green salad 20 impossible burger
vegan ground beef patty, lettuce, tomato, onion, side fries or green salad 20 black bean & portabello veggie burger
with gruyere cheese, lettuce, tomato, garlic aoli, side fries or green salad 20 DINNER
MENU
page 45
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement beverages
ice tea passion berry unsweetened 3.5 coffee organic 'intelligentsia' 3.5 lemonade 3.5 espresso organic 4
mineral water still or sparkling 3 / 5.5 cappuccino organic 4.75 fountain drinks 3 cafe mocha 5.25
coke, diet coke, root beer, orange, sprite hot chocolate 4.5 ginger beer 6 personal-pot-of-tea organic 4.5
'bundaberg' non-alcoholic ginger soda english breakfast, earl grey, green, mint, chamomile bottled juices ice-blended mocha 5
apple 'martinelli's 3.25 smoothies ice-blended & sweet 5 cranberry 'ocean spray' 3.5 strawberry, mango, or pina colada san pelligrino sparkling juices 3.5
pomegranate orange, lemon, or grapefruit
beer
IPA ice-cold DRAFT lagunitas california 9 angry orchard hard cider gf 8 blonde ale ice-cold DRAFT angel city LA 9 guinness stout ireland 12 Orange Wheat Ale DRAFT hanger 24 calif. 9 lambic framboise raspberry belgian beer, since 1822 14 corona mexico 9
hard seltzer white claw blk berry or mango 8 corona light 9 heineken zero non-alcoholic 7 heineken holland 9
wine
whites reds
chardonnay girasol ca organic 12/42 cabernet sauvignon 14 hands washington 12/42 the snitch napa 60 imagery sonoma 48
sauvignon blanc kim crawford nz 14/50 merlot velvet devil washington 36 pinot grigio pertico italy 14/50 red velvet (blend) cupcake california 38 sparkling brut wolf blass australia 12/42 pinot noir rare earth ca organic 11/38 proseco cupcake italy 40 rose listel france 12/42
rose proseco pasqua italy 55
margarita made with real fermented agave 13
byob corkage fee 15. aperol spritz italian aperitif, refreshing 12 kid's menu
chicken fingers fries 11.50 pasta butter side parmesan 9.00 grilled cheese sandwich fries 11.00 pasta marinara side parmesan 9.75 kid's burger grass-fed fries 10.25 hot dog kosher fries 10.25 kid's cheeseburger grass-fed fries 10.75 veggie dog fries 10.25 pooches
although we love them, dogs/pets are not allowed on the beach in santa monica nor at the annenberg community beach house site. ADA service animals are exempt.
green
We strive to be environmentally correct. Our fish & seafood is sustainable. Our coffee & tea is organic, our ground beef is grass-fed, our eggs are cage-free. We purchase some organic produce, when in season. All office & restaurant paper products are a minimum of 20% post-consumer recycled. Our lighting is LED . . .
unruly kids will be sold to pirate ships waiting offshore. aargh...
During peak hours, we seat only complete parties & please only 1.5 hours max at table if other families are waiting to be seated. 18% gratuity added to groups of 6 or more.
warnings: Consuming raw or under-cooked meats, poultry, seafood, shellfish or eggs may increase your risk of foodborne illness. Please inform us in advance of any food allergies.
page 46
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement Fred's Salad romaine, chicken salad, grilled potatoes, blue crumbles, vinaigrette $17 Caesar Salad $11
Santa Fe Salad romaine, black beans, corn, red onion, tomato, avocado $16 Marion Davies Salad greens, cranberries, pecans, bleu $16 Side scoop chicken salad or tuna salad add + $6.50
Tuna Salad Sandwich $13
lettuce, tomato ( ala carte )
Chicken Salad Sandwich $12
Mary's chicken salad, lettuce, tomato ( ala carte )
Grilled Turkey Wrap $13
house-roasted turkey, lettuce, tomato, cheddar, cranberry mayo ( ala carte ) Hamburger grass-fed 8 ounce $17
lettuce, tomato with side fries add cheese + 1.00
Black Bean Veggie Burger $19
black bean & mushroom patty, lettuce, tomato with side fries Impossible Burger vegan patty $19
lettuce, tomato with side fries
Vegetarian Power Bowl vegan $16
brown rice, roasted vegetables, carrot puree, avocado
Grilled Fish Tacos $19
three tacos, marinated alaskan cod, slaw, pico de gallo
TAKEAWAY WINDOW MENU
page 47
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement french fries 5 ice cream bar 4
sweet potato fries 7 fruit popcycle bar 2.25
whole fruit 1.50
chips small / large 2 / 5
chicken fingers fries 11.00
kids burger grass-fed fries 9.75
kids cheeseburger fries 10.25
hotdog fries 9.75
veggie dog fries 9.75
lemonade 3.5 ice tea 3.5
cranberry juice 3.5 apple juice 3.25
gatorade 3.5 milk 2.75
sodas coke, sprite, fanta, root beer 3
sparkling juices San Pelligrino blood orange, lemon, or grapefruit 3.5 mineral waters 3 / 5.5
coffee 3.5
note: the cafe tables are for full-service dining and not for take-away food page 48
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- north room gatherings
310.393.8282 ask for louise or fred
(sample)
choice menu
fred's salad
romaine, chicken salad, potatoes, blue crumbles, lemon vinaigrette, parmesan tuna salad sandwich
sustainable line-caught tuna, lettuce, tomato, on sliced multigrain bread, fries or green salad
fish tacos
alaskan cod, pico de gallo, shredded lettuce, crema fresca, corn tortilla, black beans & rice
california omlette
feta, tomato, spinach, side grilled potatoes and mini scone coffee, lemonade, ice tea
kid's choices
chicken fingers & fries
pasta marinara
SAMPLE CATERING MENUS
page 49
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- hors'doeuvre / coctail party menu
310.393.8282 / [email protected]
sample menu
$38.50/guest (beverage service additional)
passed hors' doeuvres
spanikopitas
spinach & cheese flaky phyllo triangles
maui shrimp spring roll
sweet & spicy sauce
buratta & tomato confit crostini
mini potato rostis
with smoked salmon & dill cream cheese
fruit & cheese table
jarlsberg, brie, aged cheddar, cambozola
grapes, dried apricots and marcona almonds
crackers & toasts
beverages
iced tea lemonade, waters & assorted sodas
beer, wine & champagne
wine-based cocktails
cosmos, cucumber mules, pomegranite mojitos
additional food choices available / prices vary depending on items selected beverages, assorted non-alcoholic $8.00/person
beverages, including beer & wine: $24/person for 4 hour open bar, or 'on consumption' labor estimate for 100 guests: $1650
9.5% sales tax
20% service charge (This fee covers all pre and post event labor, workman's comp and liabiltiy insurance and other costs incurred in the planning and production of your event. This is not a gratuity which is left to the client's discretion.) items & prices subject to change (need to be confirmed at time of booking). other costs to consider: rentals, décor & entertainment.---------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------
page 50
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement meetings & retreats
48 hour advance notice 15 person minimum
310.393.8282 ask for fred or louise
classic breakfast
$16.50/person
mini scones & croissants
seasonal fresh fruit
granola house-made & vanilla yogurt organic
coffee, tea, fresh oj
+$7.50/person to include egg scramble with jack & avocado egg, cheese & bacon croissant sandwiches
+$30.00/hour service staff (3 hour minimum)
just coffee service $38.00 (16-18 cups), includes drop off & pick up sandwich & salad table
$22.50/person
sandwich varieties, choose 4:
tuna salad albacore, chicken salad mary's, turkey house-roasted, roast beef, ham&swiss, caprese fresh mozzarella, tomato, basil, or grilled vegetable caesar salad
red-jacket potato salad
roasted corn salad with arugula and red onion
lemonade & iced tea
luncheon buffet
$30.00/person
poached salmon dill cream sauce
mango chicken salad with apples, grapes & jicama
orzo pasta with grilled vegetables
page 51
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement marion davies salad greens, cranberries, blue crumbles, caramelized walnuts bread rolls & butter
lemonade & iced tea
(additional salad options available)
+$6.00/person mini desserts: cookies, brownies, pecan bars, apple crumble bars +$2.00/each assorted sodas
+$38.00 thermal coffee (16-18 cups)
+$30.00/hour service staff (3 hour min)
9.5% tax & 20% service additional
items and prices subject to change
box lunch
$16.50/each
sandwich, bag of chips, whole fruit, cookie
20% administrative & production charge
(this fee covers all kitchen equipment and serving wares, workman's comp and liability insurance and other costs incurred in the administrative planning and production of your event. This is not a gratuity which is left to the discretion of the client)
----------------------------------------------------------------- page 52
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement (sample) mitzah
310.393.8282 / [email protected]
each event is customized, this is meant to be a conversation starter tray passed hors' doeuvres
california rolls
bbq chicken skewers
flatbread margarita pizza
kids buffet
grass-fed beef sliders
chicken fingers
tater tots
caesar salad
penne marinara
adults buffet
whole roasted salmon
dill cream sauce
chicken piccatta
mary's chicken, lemon caper sauce
grilled market vegetables
rice pilaf
marion davies salad
dessert s'more bar & assorted finger sweets
beverages soft drinks, lemonade, water, coffee
estimated costs:
food $32./kid & $46./ adult dessert $12./person beverages, non-alcoholic $8./person beer & wine: (a) $24/adult for 4 hour open bar, or (b) 'on consumption' where you pay per opened bottle. labor for 100 guests for this type of event is estimated at $1650. rentals for 100 guests (standard linens, glassware, plates, flatware) estimated at $1800.
9.5% sales tax
20% service charge (This fee covers all pre and post event labor, workman's comp and liabiltiy insurance and other costs incurred in the planning and production of your event. This is not a gratuity which is left to the client's discretion.) items & prices subject to change (need to be confirmed at time of booking) other costs to consider: décor & entertainment------------------------------------------------------------------- page 53
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement -------------------------
weddings
310.393.8282 / [email protected]
each event is customized, this is meant to be a conversation starter sample
buffet menu
$60.00/guest
appetizer station anitpasta bar
long-stemmed artichoke hearts, black & green olives
sliced meats & salamis, fine assorted cheeses
passed hors' doeuvres
spanikopitas
chicken sate skewers
buratta & tomato confit crostini
tenderloin of beef
carving station, horseradish cream sauce
wild alaskan salmon salmon
dill cream sauce
spinach cannelloni
light crepes filled with spinach, ricotta, mushrooms
mashed potatoes or rice pilaf
tuscan grilled vegetables
insalata ricci
organic greens, tomato, feta, toasted almonds
page 54
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement sample
sit-down choice menu (wedding)
$65.00
passed hors' doeuvres
spicy tuna sashimi mini tacos
with avocado
wild mushroom tartlets
shrimp spring rolls
mini potato rostis
with smoked salmon & dill cream cheese
grilled stone fruit starter salad
colman farm arugula, burata, tarragon vinaigrette
(stone fruits available in summer season)
filet mignon
mashed potatoes & grilled asparagus
black cod
miso marinaded, sticky brown rice, asian vegetables
polenta with spanish leeks
eggplant, romesco sauce
page 55
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement additional food options
hors' doeuvres
tray-passed
mini potato rostis
with smoked salmon & dill cream cheese
lobster tartlets
fred salad cups
crostinis
buratta & tomato confit, white bean & sage,
eggplant parmesan, marinated shrimp & goat cheese, classic tomato basil suppli
saffron-infused arborio rice balls
classic deviled eggs
crab cakes
lump crab meat, tartar sauce
ceviche shooters
sushi varieties
stationary
sushi bar
crudite
hummus & pita
baked brie with walnuts, brown sugar,
entrees
rack of lamb
pork tenderloin
niman ranch short ribs
chicken milanese
chicken piccatta
rosemary chicken breast
herb-crusted halibut
ginger-glazed salmon
seabass
stuffed portabello mushrooms
page 56
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement whole roasted tomatoes with couscous
stuffed cabbage and stuffed peppers
rolled eggplant parmesan
squash lasagna
sides
sauteed brocollini haricot verts grilled brussel spouts fingerling potatoes potatoes au gratin
heirloom baby carrots
couscous quinoa rices
food prices vary depending on items selected
beverages, assorted non-alcoholic $8.00/person
beer & wine: (a) $24/adult for 4 hour open bar,
or (b) 'on consumption' where you pay per opened bottle. labor estimate for 100 guests: $24.00.00 for plated events, $1650 for buffets. rentals for 100 guests (standard linens, glassware, plates, flatware) estimated at $1800.
9.5% sales tax
20% administrative & production charge (This fee covers all kitchen equipment and serving wares, workman's comp and liability insurance and other costs incurred in the planning and production of your event. This is not a gratuity which is left to the client's discretion.) items & prices subject to change (need to be confirmed at time of booking). other costs to consider: dessert, décor & entertainment. ------------------------------------------------------- page 57
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement beach canopy platters
summer 2016
310.393.8282 / [email protected]
48 hour advance notice please
platters feed 8 – 12 guests
sandwich platters
$100.00 / 10 sandwiches halved
choose 2 of the following types per platter
tuna salad sandwich
green leaf lettuce, tomato
smoked salmon wrap
spinach wheat tortilla, red onion, basil, cream cheese, arugula caprese sandwich
fresh mozzarella, basil, pesto, tomato
turkey avocado sandich
green leaf lettuce
mary's chicken salad sandwich
green leaf lettuce, tomato
picnic salad platters
$80.00
mediterranean pasta salad
garbanzo beans, almonds, olive, tomatoes, parmesan, sun-dried tomato vinaigrette red quinoa salad
grilled corn, red bell pepper, asparaugs, lime vinaigrette soba noodle salad
sesame dressing, crunchy vegetables, ginger tofu
kale caesar salad
garlic croutons, parmesan, caesar dressing
cold entree platters
$125.00
beach bowl
teriyaki mary's chicken, broccolini, brown rice, pineapple vietnamese pork lettuce wrap
ground pork, soy and fish sauce, fresno chili, lime, shaved carrot, lettuce page 58
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
Exhibit 8.
Annual Evaluation
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement Back on the Beach
Annual Evaluation Form
Concession Agreement
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CONCESSIONAIRE DATE
BUILDING LOCATION TYPE OF CONCESSION EXCELLENT (E) SATISFACTORY (S) NEEDS IMPROVEMENT (NI) NONCOMPLIANCE/ UNACCEPTABLE (NON) COMPLIANCE (COM) NOT APPLICABLE (NA)
MONTHLY BASE RENT
8 6 2 0
MONTHLY PERCENTAGE RENT
4 3 1 0
ACCURACY OF STATEMENTS
4 3 1 0
ANNUAL REPORT OF GROSS SALES
0 4
MAINTAINS REGISTER
JOURNAL/$TRAIL 0 4
PERFORMANCE BOND
0 4
LIABILITY INSURANCE
0 4
AUTO INSURANCE
0 4
OTHER:
0 4
REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS
0 4
TIME SCHEDULE
0 4
CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT
0 4
OTHER:
0 4
OPERATING DAYS/HOURS
4 3 1 0
AUTHORIZED FOOD/EQUIPMENT
RENTAL/RETAIL ITEMS
4 3 1 0
PERMITTED
SIGNAGE/ADVERTISING 4 3 1 0
OPERATING WITHIN BOUNDARIES
OF LEASE SPACE (EXHIBIT#4)
4 3 1 0
OTHER:
4 3 1 0
EQUIPMENT RENTAL AND RETAIL
ITEMS
8 6 2 0
FOOD AND BEVERAGE
8 6 2 0
PRICES
4 3 1 0
BEST EFFORT TO PROMOTE
HEALTHY FOOD AND SUSTAINABLE
FOOD PRACTICES
4 3 1 0
CUSTOMER SERVICE
8 6 2 0
CONCESSION PERFORMANCE RATING
Community Services Department
Cultural Affairs Division
COMMENTS
Explain items which are rated excellent, needs
improvement or noncompliance/ unacceptable. Make
recommendations for correction for NI and NON
rating. Attach additional sheets as necessary.
BONDS/INSURANCE/FINANCIAL COMPLIANCE
CATEGORIES
Circle the appropriate points in each
category. If category is not applicable,
check not applicable (NA) box.
CONSTRUCTION USE OF PREMISES QUALITY ASSURANCE
1 of 2
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement Back on the Beach
Annual Evaluation Form
Concession Agreement
CONCESSION PERFORMANCE RATING CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Community Services Department
Cultural Affairs Division
OTHER: 4 3 1 0
(E) (S) (NI) (NON) (COM) (NA)
FIRE SAFETY/PREVENTION
4 3 1 0
GAS/ELECTRIC
4 3 1 0
GENERAL SAFETY
4 3 1 0
OTHER:
4 3 1 0
INTERIOR -
HOUSEKEEPING/CLEANLINESS
4 3 1 0
INTERIOR -
FACILITY MAINTENANCE
4 3 1 0
EXTERIOR -
HOUSEKEEPING/CLEANLINESS
4 3 1 0
EXTERIOR -
FACILITY MAINTENANCE
4 3 1 0
EXTERIOR - APPROVED
PAINTING AND DISPLAYS
4 3 1 0
OTHER: 4 3 1 0
TOTAL POINTS PER COLUMN
TOTAL POINTS RECEIVED
FROM ALL CATEGORIES PERCENT RATING
( ) ( ) X 100 =
OVERALL RATING (Based on percent rating)
ARE THERE ANY NONCOMPLIANCE OR UNACCEPTABLE RATINGS IN ANY CATEGORY
RATER'S SIGNATURE TITLE DATE
Date:
In signing this report I do not necessarily agree with the conclusion of the rater.
CONCESSIONAIRE'S SIGNATURE TITLE DATE
*NOTE: A rating of UNACCEPTABLE or NONCOMPLIANCE in any category will result in an overall rating of no higher han NEEDS IMPROVEMENT. /
MAXIMUM POINTS POSSIBLE
FOR RATED CATEGORIES
RATER DISCUSSED REPORT WITH
CONCESSIONAIRE?
CATEGORIES COMMENTS
SAFETY FACILITY MAINTENANCE
Yes No
EXCELLENT (90% to 100%) SATISFACTORY (70% to 89%) NEEDS IMPROVEMENT (60% to 69%) UNACCEPTABLE (less than 60%) Yes
No
2 of 2
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
Exhibit 9.
Improvement Plan
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement RFP 2021 Back on the Beach Cafe
Capital Improvement Plan (work performed during non-summer months) Year 1
$125,000. Roof replacement
$ 7,000 Roof-top mechanical screen
$20,000 Replace all 3 roof-top Upblast Exhaust Fans & Swamp cooler $ 5,000 Repair exterior cracking cement foundation border on south wall base. $157,000 subtotal
Year 2
$25,000 Access renovating restrooms, including new tiled walls, sinks, fixtures, and partitions.
$30,000 Retractable canopy over exterior south facing deck with wall-mount heaters.
This proposed simple metal frame with retractable fabric canopy, when and if approved, can be built as a temporary structure.
$ 18,000 Dining room floors. Remove carpeting, resurface floors $73,000 subtotal
Year 3
$55,000 Access replacing all exterior doors & windows
$15,000 Replace existing walk-in cooler
$70,000 subtotal
$300,000. projected total for 3 years, to be paid for out of savings page 41
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
Exhibit 10.
Insurance Requirements
Concessionaire 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 Concessionaire’s possession, occupancy, operation or use of the premises by Concessionaire, its directors, officers, agents, representatives, employees, contractors, subcontractors, volunteers, guests, customers, an invitees.
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. Liquor Liability: Insurance with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.
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).
4. Property Insurance: Insurance covering all personal property stored on the premises, along with any tenant improvements and betterments. The policy shall be written on an “all risks” basis (excluding earthquake) and insure the personal property and improvements/betterments at full replacement cost. The policy shall also be endorsed to provide business interruption coverage in an amount equivalent to one year of monthly base rent at the time of the loss.
If Concessionaire 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 Concessionaire. 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 the use, occupancy, operations or maintenance of the leased premises, including work or operations performed by or on behalf of Concessionaire. CGL coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Concessionaire’s insurance DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
(at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CG 20 10 11 85, or if not available, through the addition of both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38 and CG 20 37). b. Primary Coverage: For any claims related to this Agreement, the Concessionaire’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 Concessionaire’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: Concessionaire hereby grants to the City of Santa Monica a waiver of any right of subrogation which any insurer of said Concessionaire may acquire against the City of Santa Monica by virtue of payment of any loss. Concessionaire 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 Concessionaire, its employees, agents and subcontractors.
e. Loss Payee: The property insurance shall name the City of Santa Monica as Loss Payee as its interests appear.
Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City of Santa Monica. The City of Santa Monica may require the Concessionaire 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
Concessionaire 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).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement AGREEMENT NO. 11238 (CCS)
All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City of Santa Monica before the lease commences. However, failure to obtain required documents prior to the lease beginning shall not waive the Concessionaire’s obligation to provide them. The City of Santa Monica reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including the endorsements required herein, at any time.
Failure to Maintain Insurance Coverage
If Concessionaire, 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 Concessionaire resulting from said breach.
Maintenance/Concessionaire Improvements
Concessionaire shall require and verify that all contractors hired by the Concessionaire maintain CGL with limits of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and comply with the insurance requirements stated herein for all maintenance, repair and tenant improvements performed on the leased premises. Contractors performing capital improvements must maintain CGL limits of no less than $3,000,000 per occurrence. All exceptions must be approved in writing by the Risk Manager.
Footnotes
# 1: Workers’ Compensation insurance coverage is not required if the Concessionaire does not have employees. The Concessionaire must, however, execute the City’s Workers’ Compensation Coverage Exemption Declaration Form.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 82485F9D-778F-4B63-8A9F-F111E5219D7B
5.D.d
Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: 02_Concession_Agreement_2022-FINAL w EXHIBITS EXECUTED 040722 (6200 : Back on the Beach Cafe Concession Agreement City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024
Agenda Item: 5.E
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 Updating Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Article 11 Elections Code
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.
Executive Summary
At its meeting on January 23, 2024, the City Council introduced for first reading an Ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Article 11 Elections Code.
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-Elections Code Update 2d
5.E
Packet Pg. 391
1 City Council Meeting February 13, 2024 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA AMENDING SECTIONS 11.04.120, 11.04.150, 11.04.171, 11.04.185, AND 11.04.190 OF THE SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO
ELECTIONS
WHEREAS, elections in the State of California are conducted in accordance with the California Elections Code; and
WHEREAS, Santa Monica is a Charter City with authority to establish procedures for municipal elections such as the distribution of information for candidates and committees; and
WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 13307 allows candidates to submit statement of qualifications in the County’s Official Sample Ballot; requires the City Clerk to distribute and provide Spanish translations of candidate statements to voters; and authorizes local agencies to charge candidates for all or part of printing, handling, translation, mailing, and electronically distributing candidate statements; and WHEREAS, the City previously paid for the cost of candidate statements and now desires to require that candidates bear the cost of candidate statements; and WHEREAS, California Elections Code section 9202 authorizes local agencies to establish a fee, not exceeding two hundred dollars, to any person filing a Notice of Intent with the Elections Official, and to refund the fee if the petition is certified sufficient within one year of filing the Notice; and
5.E.a
Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: ORD-Elections Code Update 2d (6236 : Second Reading-Elections Code) 2 WHEREAS, some California Elections Code sections have been repealed, and it is therefore necessary to remove reference to those sections from the City’s code.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 11.04.120(d) is hereby amended to read as follows:
11.04.120 Candidate’s statement of qualifications
(d) If a candidate files a statement, then the estimated costs of printing, handling, translating, mailing and electronic distribution of any statement submitted pursuant to this section shall be paid by the candidate at the time of filing nomination papers for elections occurring in or after November 2024. In the event of overpayment and pending the final actual cost, the City shall prorate the excess amount among the candidates and refund the excess amount paid within 30 days of the election.
In the event of underpayment, the City shall pay the balance of the cost incurred.
Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 11.04.150 is hereby amended to read as follows:
11.04.150 Distribution of information for candidates and committees In order to insure that each candidate and proponent or opponent of a measure has full opportunity to understand and fulfill the requirements of the Political Reform Act and Municipal Code, the City Clerk shall make available to each candidate, to each proponent or opponent of a measure and to each committee supporting or opposing a measure the latest revision of the State of California Information Manual on Campaign Disclosure Provisions of the Political Reform Act and a schedule outlining required filing dates for campaign statements. In
5.E.a
Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: ORD-Elections Code Update 2d (6236 : Second Reading-Elections Code) 3 addition, candidates are to receive a Candidate Information Guide outlining basic municipal candidacy requirements.
Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 11.04.171 is hereby amended to read as follows:
11.04.171 Fees for petitions
There shall be a $200 fee for filing a Notice of Intent for a petition for recall, initiative, referendum or amendment of the City Charter, which will be refunded if the measure qualifies for the ballot within one year of the date of filing the Notice of Intent.
Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 11.04.185(b) is hereby amended to read as follows:
11.04.185 Mail in ballots for special elections
(b) Elections Code Sections 3001 through 3005, 3013, 3015 through 3018, and 3020 through 3021 shall not be applicable to City elections conducted pursuant to this Section. Chapter 1 of Division 4 of the Elections Code (commencing with Section 4000) and Elections Code Sections 4104 through 4108 shall not be applicable to the City elections conducted pursuant to this Section.
Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 11.04.190 is hereby amended to read as follows:
11.04.190 Public examination of ballot information
In lieu of making available the official election materials referred to in Elections Code Section 9295 and the official voters pamphlet referred to in Elections Code Section 13313, the City Clerk shall make available for public inspection a copy of the material referred to in Elections Code Sections 9223, 9280, 9281, 9282, 13307 and Section 11.04.125 of this Code.
5.E.a
Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: ORD-Elections Code Update 2d (6236 : Second Reading-Elections Code) 4 SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to 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 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney
5.E.a
Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: ORD-Elections Code Update 2d (6236 : Second Reading-Elections Code) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024
Agenda Item: 5.F
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 Section 3.12.900 on Overnight Parking Permits for Oversized Vehicles
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.
Executive Summary
At its meeting on January 23, 2024, the City Council introduced for first reading an Ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 3.12.900 on Overnight Parking Permits for Oversized Vehicles. 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-Oversized Vehicle Overnight Parking 2d
5.F
Packet Pg. 396
1 City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER_______ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 3.12.900 TO ADOPT ADDITIONAL
RESTRICTIONS ON OVERNIGHT PARKING PERMITS FOR OVERSIZED VEHICLES
AND AUTHORIZE THE ADOPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS WHEREAS, in 1975, the City adopted an ordinance defining oversized vehicles and creating a permitting process to allow for the limited on-street parking of oversized vehicles on City streets; and
WHEREAS, City staff states that there are roughly 45 to 50 active oversized vehicle permits in the City, consisting of full-size recreational vehicles and smaller (but still oversized) “sprinter” vans; and
WHEREAS, City staff receives complaints regarding oversized vehicles being parked far from the residences of permittees, oversized vehicles infrequent turnover of oversized vehicle parking, and oversized vehicles being used for storage; and WHEREAS, the amendments in this ordinance and the promulgation of administrative regulations will help address many of the complaints received by City staff and encourage good use of the overnight parking of oversized vehicle permit process.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 3.12.900 is hereby amended as follows:
5.F.a
Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: ORD-Oversized Vehicle Overnight Parking 2d (6237 : Second Reading-Overnight Parking, Oversized Vehicles) 2 3.12.900 Overnight parking permits for oversized vehicles.
Permits for overnight parking in residential areas may be issued by the City upon application of any person therefor, and subject to the following provisions:
(a) Each application for an overnight street parking permit shall be filed with the City, upon a form to be furnished by the City.
(b) Each such application shall set forth:
(1) The name, residence, address, and telephone number of the applicant, who must be a resident of the City of Santa Monica;
(2) The license number, make, model, and type of vehicle for which an overnight parking permit is requested;
(3) The name and current address of the registered owner of said vehicle; (4) The dates for which the permit is requested. Such dates shall commence in all cases at six p.m.;
(5) Such additional information as the City may require; (6) A statement that applicant declares under penalty of perjury that all statements in the application are true; and
(7) The signature of the applicant.
(c) Upon the filing of the application, the City may make such investigation as necessary to determine whether such a permit should be issued. An overnight parking permit shall be issued in a form designated by the City, specifying the periods for which it is valid.
Such permit shall be issued only for a noncommercial passenger vehicle, as defined by
5.F.a
Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: ORD-Oversized Vehicle Overnight Parking 2d (6237 : Second Reading-Overnight Parking, Oversized Vehicles) 3 the Vehicle Code, which together with any fixtures, accessories or property, except single post radio antennas, exceeds a width of eight feet, a height of eight feet, or a length of twenty feet, but in no event shall such a permit be issued where, upon investigation, it is determined by the City that to permit overnight parking of the vehicle for which the application is made would constitute a hazard to pedestrians, vehicular traffic or enforcement of the law.
(d) The overnight parking permit shall be visibly displayed on the vehicle for which it was issued as instructed by the City, and the permit shall not be effective unless it is so affixed. (e) A permitted oversized vehicle must park within a two-block radius, as described in the administrative regulations, of the residence of the permit holder. (f) No more than one overnight parking permit may be issued at a single residence address, and for no more than a one month period for an oversized vehicle registered to a Santa Monica resident.
(g) No overnight parking permit may be issued for more than one consecutive seven-day period per month for an oversized vehicle registered to a non-Santa Monica resident. (h) An overnight parking permit issued pursuant to this Section does not waive compliance with any other applicable parking law, regulation or ordinance. (i) The City Manager or designee is authorized to develop and adopt administrative regulations that are consistent with the purposes of this Chapter. (j) The Police Department shall have the authority to enforce the administrative regulations established pursuant to this Chapter.
5.F.a
Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: ORD-Oversized Vehicle Overnight Parking 2d (6237 : Second Reading-Overnight Parking, Oversized Vehicles) 4 (k) The City Council shall establish by resolution such fees as may be required for the review and processing of an overnight parking permit.
SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official 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.F.a
Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: ORD-Oversized Vehicle Overnight Parking 2d (6237 : Second Reading-Overnight Parking, Oversized Vehicles) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024
Agenda Item: 5.G
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 the City’s Tenant Protection Laws and Discussion of Potential Resolution for Charter Amendments for Additional Tenant Protections
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.
Executive Summary
At its meeting on January 23, 2024, the City Council introduced for first reading an Ordinance amending the City’s Tenant Protection Laws and discussion of potential resolution for Charter amendments for additional tenant protections. 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-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d
5.G
Packet Pg. 401
1 City Council Meeting February 13, 2024 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 CODE
SECTIONS 4.36.020, 4.36.030, 4.36.040, 4.36.050, 4.36.060, 4.28.030, 4.56.020,
4.56.040, and 4.56.050, AND ADDING SECTIONS 4.57.010, 4.57.020, 4.57.030 and
4.27.090.
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica is committed to protecting housing for all segments of the community, in particular for its most vulnerable residents, as a matter of social justice and human dignity and in order to preserve diversity; and WHEREAS, a housing crisis exists in the City of Santa Monica due to the lack of affordable housing, the high number of people experiencing homelessness, and the high number of people at risk of homelessness; and
WHEREAS, this crisis was created in part by high rental prices, insufficient production of affordable units, housing discrimination, tenant harassment, the inability of tenants to afford attorneys to represent them in evictions, and a lack of awareness of tenants’ rights; and
WHEREAS, the housing affordability crisis has been exacerbated by the COVID19 pandemic and its economic fallout, followed by high inflation in Santa Monica, in which many tenants have lost income while facing higher expenses to the extent they have difficulty paying all or part of their monthly rent; and WHEREAS, local, state, federal and court moratoriums on evictions have ended, setting up an unprecedented wave of attempted evictions, and
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 402 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 2 WHEREAS, approximately 71% of Santa Monica households rent their homes; and
WHEREAS, Santa Monica renters will not experience this housing affordability and eviction crisis equally in that poor and working-class tenants, tenants of color, families with children, and persons with disabilities are disproportionately impacted by the pandemic and housing crisis due to inequities and shortcomings in health care, employment, and housing; and
WHEREAS, this housing affordability and eviction crisis destabilizes families and neighborhoods, especially the most vulnerable among us, resulting in homelessness, and harm to social tranquility and the general welfare of Santa Monica; and WHEREAS, in an attempt to mitigate the eviction crisis that has been exacerbated by the pandemic, the Los Angeles City Council enacted eviction protections in January 2023, including requiring landlords to cover relocation costs for extreme rent increases that cause displacement; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Permanent Relocation Ordinance requires landlords of units subject to rent control or local just cause eviction laws to pay permanent relocation costs to tenants evicted from such units for any no-fault reason, such as owner occupancy or the Ellis Act; and
WHEREAS, tenants in units subject to the just cause eviction protections of the Housing Policies Charter Amendment (Article XXIII) often do not have any protection from excessive rent increases and may be subject to constructive eviction through economic displacement if landlords impose high rent increases the tenants cannot afford. In those situations, tenants who are forced to move through no fault of their own should receive
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 403 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 3 relocation benefits similar to the assistance they would receive for other no-fault evictions such as owner-occupancy; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of a requirement to pay relocation benefits for those tenants who are constructively evicted due to large rent increases would close a loophole that could allow landlords to avoid the just cause eviction protections in unprotected units.
Relocation assistance based on economic displacement for tenants in unprotected units would provide tenants the financial means to secure alternative housing if they are forced to move due to large rent increases; and
WHEREAS, tenants should not be displaced involuntarily when an excessive rent increase is imposed in bad faith with the intent to influence the tenant to vacate, in circumvention of a requirement that the landlord have just cause to evict the tenant, as this undermines and interferes with the City’s ability to regulate the reasons for evictions; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Tenant Harassment Ordinance (Section 4.56 of the Municipal Code) requires a landlord to make certain disclosures to tenants of rent controlled units prior to initiating buyout negotiations and to include certain required language in any buyout agreements, but these protections do not apply to tenants of units not subject to local rent control, many of whom are now protected from no cause evictions under the Santa Monica Housing Policies Charter Amendment and/or the Tenant Protection Act of 2019;
WHEREAS, the City’s Tenant Harassment Ordinance further prohibits certain forms of bad faith harassment by landlords which may induce or compel a tenant to move out involuntarily and further contribute to the housing crisis, but certain forms of
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 404 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 4 harassment are not specifically covered, including bad faith excessive rent increases and retaliation; and
WHEREAS specifically defining tenant harassment to encompass these and other forms of harassment will help to put landlords and tenants on notice of their rights and obligations and to may prevent harassment, including that which escalates to tenants being forced to move; and
WHEREAS the City’s Tenant Harassment Ordinance provides for a maximum civil penalty per violation of up to $10,000, but this amount has not been updated since 2015 and increasing this limit would more effectively deter violations and provide courts the ability to award various amounts of penalties depending on the severity of the violation; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Anti-Discrimination Ordinance (Section 4.28 of the Municipal Code) now prohibits bad faith housing discrimination based on source of income, but it does not currently cover discrimination based on “housing status,” which is a barrier to voucher holders seeking to rent a unit in Santa Monica; and WHEREAS, the City has received multiple housing complaints from tenants because landlords frequently reject unhoused or formerly unhoused applicants applying to rent with housing vouchers because they do not have a rental housing history or landlord references, undermining the City’s longstanding efforts to prohibit discrimination against voucher tenants and promote affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, another potential loophole exists for landlords to discriminate against Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher participants by refusing to make minimal repairs required by the program, thereby depriving the tenant of the opportunity to live in the
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 405 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 5 housing of their choosing, and this loophole could be closed by defining source of income discrimination to cover this tactic;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.27.090 is hereby added to read as follows:
4.27.090 Substantive eviction defenses for excessive rent increase (a) For purposes of this Section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
(1) “Landlord” means a current or former owner, lessor, sublessor or any other person entitled to receive rent for the use and occupancy of any Rental Unit, or an agent, representative, or successor of any of the foregoing.
(2) “Tenant” means a tenant, subtenant, lessee, sublessee or any other person entitled under the terms of a rental housing agreement to the use or occupancy of any rental unit.
(3) “Rental Housing Agreement” means an agreement, oral, written or implied, between a landlord and tenant for use or occupancy of a Rental Unit and for housing services.
(4) “Rental Unit” means any building, structure, or part thereof, or land appurtenant thereto, or any other rental property rented or offered for rent for living or dwelling house units, together with all housing services connected with use or occupancy of such property such as common areas and recreational facilities held out for use by the tenant.
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 406 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 6 (4) “Excessive Rent Increase” means an increase raising the rent to an amount that is substantially in excess of market rates for comparable units within the City of Santa Monica.
(b) It shall be an affirmative defense to an unlawful detainer brought on the basis of non-payment of rent which seeks to recover possession of a Rental Unit that is not a Controlled Rental Unit as defined by City Charter Section 1801, that the landlord imposed an excessive rent increase in bad faith with the intent influence the tenant to vacate through fraud, intimidation, or coercion in circumvention of any law requiring the landlord to have just cause to evict a tenant. Evidence of “bad faith” includes, but is not limited to, an excessive rent increase imposed:
(1) within six months of an unsuccessful attempt to evict a tenant for a “just cause.”
(2) within six months of the tenant’s complaints to the landlord or its agents, a government agency, or law enforcement regarding habitability, safety concerns, tenant harassment, discrimination, or neighbor to neighbor harassment. (3) when price gouging protections, including Penal Code 396 and Section
4.32.160 et seq., bar rent increases in excess of a particular amount during a state of emergency.
SECTION 2. Santa Monica Municipal Code Sections 4.28.030, Housing AntiDiscrimination Code, Prohibited Activities, is hereby amended to read as follows:
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 407 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 7 4.28.030 Prohibited activities.
It shall be unlawful for any person offering for rent or lease, renting, leasing, or listing any housing accommodation, or any authorized agent or employee of such person, to do or attempt to do any of the following:
(a) Refuse to rent or lease a housing accommodation, or access to or use of the common areas and facilities of the housing accommodation, serve a notice of termination of tenancy, commence an unlawful detainer action, or otherwise deny to or withhold from any person or persons, a housing accommodation on the basis of disability, age, source of income, housing status, parenthood, pregnancy, or the potential or actual occupancy of a minor child.
(b) Represent to any person, on the basis of disability, age, source of income, housing status, parenthood, pregnancy, or the potential or actual occupancy of the minor child that a housing accommodation is not available for inspection or rental when such housing accommodation is in fact available for inspection or rental. (c) Make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published any notice, statement, sign, advertisement, application, or contract with regard to a housing accommodation offered by that person that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination with respect to disability, age, source of income, housing status, parenthood, pregnancy, or the potential or actual occupancy of a minor child. (d) Include in any rental agreement or lease for a housing accommodation a clause providing that as a condition of continued occupancy, the tenants shall remain childless or
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 408 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 8 shall not bear children or otherwise not maintain a household with a person or persons of a certain age.
(e) Threaten to commence or commence eviction proceedings against any tenant on the grounds that he or she has breached a rental agreement if the alleged breach arises out of an increase in the number of occupants due to the marriage of the tenant, provided that the occupancy of the spouse and children of the spouse is otherwise lawful. (f) Threaten to commence or commence eviction proceedings against any tenant head of household on the grounds that he or she has violated the provisions of a rental agreement where the violation consists of an increase in the number of occupants arising out of the birth, adoption, or change of legal custody of a minor child of whom the tenant head of household or his or her spouse is the parent or legal guardian, and provided that the occupancy of said minor child is otherwise lawful.
(g) Refuse to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford a person with a disability equal opportunity to use and enjoy any dwelling. (h) Refuse to allow a person to make reasonable modifications, alterations or additions to existing premises occupied or to be occupied by a person with a disability that are necessary to make the rental property accessible by persons with disabilities, under the following conditions:
(1) The landlord is not required to pay for the alterations, additions, or restoration unless otherwise required by State or Federal law;
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 409 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 9 (2) The landlord has the right to demand assurances that all modifications will be performed in a professional manner, and in accordance with applicable building codes, permitting requirements and other applicable laws;
(3) The landlord may, where it is reasonable to do so, condition permission for modification on the tenant’s agreement to restore the interior of the premises to its preexisting condition, reasonable wear and tear excepted. (i) Refuse to accept from a prospective or current tenant rent in the form of rental assistance from any federal, State, local or non-profit-administered benefit or subsidy program including, but not limited to, the Section 8 voucher program. Refusal to accept includes failure or an unreasonable delay in filling out and returning any necessary paperwork, and refusing to make repairs required by the Housing Authority after a Housing Quality Standards inspection unless the landlord demonstrates it would economically infeasible to do so.
(j) For purposes of this part, “disability” includes, but is not limited to, any physical or mental disability as defined in California Government Code Section 12926. (k) For purposes of this part, “source of income” includes any lawful source of income or rental assistance from any federal, State, local or non-profit-administered benefit or subsidy program including, but not limited to, the Section 8 voucher programs, for an existing tenant or prospective tenant.
(l) For purposes of this part, “housing status” means currently or formerly experiencing homelessness, currently or formerly living in transitional, temporary, or shelter housing, or lacking a residential rental housing history. For the purposes of this
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 410 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 10 section, if an applicant for housing accommodation lacks a rental history or landlord references, the landlord must offer the option, at the applicant’s discretion, of providing lawful verifiable alternative evidence that the applicant will be a reliable tenant, including but not limited to personal references. If the applicant elects to provide such evidence, the landlord shall provide the applicant a reasonable period of time to do so and shall consider the evidence in determining whether to offer the housing accommodation to the applicant.
SECTION 3. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.020 is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.36.020 When permanent relocation fee required.
(a) A landlord shall pay a relocation fee to a tenant whose tenancy is terminated or caused to be terminated in any of the following circumstances. (1) The landlord has filed a notice of intent to withdraw the tenant’s rental housing unit from the rental housing market pursuant to Government Code Section 7060 et seq. (2) The landlord has filed a notice of intent to recover possession of the tenant’s rental housing unit pursuant to Section 1806(a)(8), 1806(a)(9), 2304(a)(8), or 2304(a)(9) of the City Charter.
(3) The landlord has filed an application for removal permit pursuant to City Charter Section 1803(t) to demolish or otherwise withdraw the tenant’s rental housing unit from the rental housing market. For purposes of this subsection, a tenant’s rental housing unit does not include a single-family home as defined in City Charter Section 2302 but does include any unit that was illegally converted to residential use.
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 411 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 11 (4) The tenant elects to relinquish their tenancy within 120 days after service of a notice of rent increase that exceeds the sum of any increase that would have been permitted pursuant to City Charter Section 1805 and any surcharges authorized by the Rent Control Board following the granting to the landlord of an exemption from provisions governing controlled rental units as provided for by Charter Section 1801(c)(4). (5) The tenant elects to relinquish their tenancy within 120 days after service of a notice of rent increase that exceeds the lesser of (1) the Consumer Price Index – All Urban Consumers, plus five percent, or (2) ten percent. For purposes of this subsection, the proposed rental increase, whether imposed as a single increase or payable periodically over a 12-month period, shall be calculated based on the highest legal monthly rate of rent established as of the date of the notice of rent increase, not any temporary, promotional, or discounted rent.
(6) The tenant elects to relinquish their tenancy following a period of temporary tenant relocation under Section 4.36.100 that has lasted for at least six months, but before the tenant has returned to her or his rental unit.
(7) The Code Enforcement Manager issues an order for permanent relocation based on a determination that the tenant was compelled to vacate as a result of the landlord’s violation of Section 4.56.020, Section 4.27.010, or California Civil Code Section 789.3.
(8) The Building Officer issues an order for permanent relocation based on a determination that the rental housing unit is not habitable and cannot be made habitable or
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 412 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 12 based on the tenant’s election to relinquish a tenancy in a rental housing unit that is not permitted for residential use and cannot or will not be permitted for residential use. (b) A relocation fee required pursuant to subsections 4.36.020(a)(1) through (a)(3) shall be due and payable to a tenant upon service by a landlord upon a tenant of a notice to terminate tenancy for one of the reasons set forth in Section 4.36.020(a)(1) through (a)(3) or within two working days of notice by a tenant upon a landlord of relinquishment of tenancy as set forth in Sections 4.36.020(a)(4) through (a)(6) or within two working days of service of the order on the landlord as set forth in Sections 4.36.020(a)(7) and (a)(8). (c) A relocation fee required by subsections (a)(1) through (a)(3) shall be due and payable to a tenant whether or not the landlord actually utilizes the rental housing unit for the purposes described in that subsection.
SECTION 4. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.36.030 Notice to tenants being displaced.
(a) Any notice to terminate a tenancy which is served upon tenants for any of the reasons set forth in Section 4.36.020 or shall be accompanied by the following on the form provided by the City:
(1) A written statement of the rights and obligations of tenants and landlords under this Chapter;
(2) A written statement informing the tenants that the required relocation fee has been placed in an escrow account or other account approved by the City;
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 413 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 13 (3) A written statement that the landlord has complied with Section 4.36.050. If the landlord has complied with Section 4.36.050 by obtaining City approval of a Displacement Plan, a copy of the Displacement Plan shall accompany the written statement. (b) Any notice of rent increase as described in 4.36.020(a)(4) or 4.36.020(a)(5) shall be accompanied by a written statement of the rights and obligations of tenants and landlords under this chapter on the form provided by the City.
(c) A landlord shall provide the statements required under 4.36.030(a) within two working days of notice by a tenant upon a landlord of relinquishment of a tenancy as set forth in Section 4.36.020(a)(4) through (a)(6).
SECTION 5. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.040 is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.36.040 Amount of relocation fee—Permanent Relocation
(a) The amount of the permanent relocation fee payable pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter shall be established by City Council resolution. (b) If a tenant is evicted from more than one rental housing unit on a property, the tenant shall not be entitled to receive separate permanent relocation fees for each rental housing unit. The tenant shall receive a single relocation fee based on the combined total number of bedrooms in the rental housing units from which the tenant is being evicted. If one of the rental housing units is a bachelor or single unit, it shall be counted as a onebedroom unit for purposes of determining the amount of the relocation fee (e.g., a tenant who is evicted from a bachelor rental housing unit and a one-bedroom rental housing unit would receive relocation benefits for a two-bedroom unit).
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 414 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 14 (c) Any tenant still in possession of a rental unit after the permanent relocation amounts have been updated pursuant to this Section, shall be entitled to the updated relocation amounts even if the landlord commenced the termination of the tenancy prior to the update. In the event that a landlord has already complied with the provisions of Section
4.36.060 based on the relocation amounts previously in effect, but has not yet received a written request from a tenant for distribution of the fee pursuant to Section 4.36.070, the landlord shall place in escrow the additional amount of relocation fee required by this Section within five working days of the effective date of the updated amount.
SECTION 6. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.050 is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.36.050 Additional fee for required counseling
(a) For each rental housing unit from which tenants are displaced for any of the reasons set forth in Sections 4.36.020(a), as soon as the relocation fee becomes due and payable pursuant to Section 4.36.020(b), the landlord shall pay a fee to the City in the amount of two hundred fifty dollars to be used by the City to pay for counseling or other assistance required by displaced tenants as a result of displacement. (1) In lieu of the fee required by subsection (a) of this Section, a landlord may prepare a Displacement Plan which must be approved by the Housing and Human Services Department prior to service of a notice to terminate tenancy. The Displacement Plan shall identify the special needs of the displaced tenants, identify the types of assistance that will be provided and include a commitment to pay for any such assistance. At the time of submitting the Displacement Plan to the City for review and approval, the landlord shall pay
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 415 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 15 a fee to the City for such review and approval in the amount of one hundred dollars for each rental housing unit.
SECTION 7. Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.36.060 is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.36.060 Deposit of relocation fee into escrow for permanent relocation. (a) The permanent relocation fee required by this Chapter shall be placed in an escrow account prior to service by a landlord upon any tenant of a notice to terminate tenancy for one of the reasons set forth in Section 4.36.020(a)(1) through (a)(3) or within two working days of notice by a tenant upon a landlord of relinquishment of tenancy as set forth in Sections 4.36.020(a)(4) through (a)(6) or within two working days of service of the order on the landlord as set forth in Sections 4.36.020(a)(7) and (a)(8). All costs of an escrow opened pursuant to the provisions of this Section shall be borne by the landlord. Escrow instructions shall be approved by the City.
(b) The escrow instructions shall provide that monies deposited in the escrow account shall only be distributed to displaced tenant in accordance with the instructions of the landlord and that no monies deposited in escrow may be returned to the landlord without the written approval of the City.
(c) In lieu of deposit of the permanent relocation fee in an escrow account, a landlord may deposit the fee in another account approved by the City.
SECTION 8. Santa Monica Municipal Code Sections 4.56.020, Tenant Harassment, Prohibition, is hereby amended to read as follows:
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 416 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 16 4.56.020 Prohibition
No landlord shall, with respect to property used as a rental housing unit under any rental housing agreement or other tenancy or estate at will, however created, do any of the following in bad faith:
(a) Interrupt, terminate or fail to provide housing services required by contract or by State, County or local housing, health or safety laws, or violate Section 4.27.010(a); (b) Fail to perform repairs and maintenance required by contract or by State, County or local housing, health or safety laws;
(c) Fail to exercise due diligence in completing repairs and maintenance once undertaken;
(d) Abuse the landlord’s right of access into a rental housing unit as that right is specified in California Civil Code Section 1954. This includes entries for “inspections” that are not related to necessary repairs or services; entries excessive in number; entries that improperly target certain tenants or are used to collect evidence against the occupant or otherwise beyond the scope of an otherwise lawful entry; (e) Abuse the tenant with words which are offensive and inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction;
(f) Influence or attempt to influence a tenant to vacate a rental housing unit through fraud, intimidation or coercion (Examples of such influence or attempts include, but are not limited to, the following: excessive rent increases, baseless threats to evict, threats to report immigration status, terminating a tenancy on a fraudulent basis of owneroccupancy, excessive and baseless entries by landlord or landlord’s agents, unreasonably withholding the right to sublease as set forth in City Charter Sections 1806(a)(2) and
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 417 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 17 2304(a)(2), and making buyout offers within 6 months after a tenant has notified the landlord in writing that the tenant does not wish to enter into a buyout agreement or buyout negotiations);
(g) Threaten the tenant, by word or gesture, with physical harm; (h) Violate any law which prohibits discrimination based on race, gender, sexual preference, sexual orientation, ethnic background, nationality, religion, age, parenthood, marriage, pregnancy, disability, AIDS or occupancy by a minor child, immigration status, source of income, housing status, gender identity, gender expression, or any other class expressly protected by a local, State, or Federal law.
(i)
(1) Take action to terminate any tenancy including service of any notice to quit or other eviction notice or bring any action to recover possession of a rental housing unit based upon facts which the landlord has no reasonable cause to believe to be true or upon a legal theory which is untenable under the facts known to the landlord. No landlord shall be liable under this subsection for bringing an action to recover possession unless and until the tenant has obtained a favorable termination of that action. (2) This subsection shall not apply to any attorney who in good faith initiates legal proceedings against a tenant on behalf of a landlord to recover possession of a rental housing unit;
(j) Interfere with a tenant’s right to quiet use and enjoyment of a rental housing unit as that right is defined by California law;
(k) Refuse to accept a tenant’s lawful rent payment or refuse to acknowledge receipt of a tenant’s lawful rent payment. This subsection shall not apply where a landlord refuses
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 418 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 18 to accept payment tendered after the expiration of a notice issued pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1161, and where acceptance of rent would waive the landlord’s right to pursue eviction based on the expired notice. (l) Interfere with a tenant’s right to privacy, including, but not limited to, entering or photographing portions of a rental housing unit that are beyond the scope of a lawful entry or inspection.
(m) Impose or attempt to impose an unlawful or excessive rent increase. An unlawful rent increase is a rent increase in excess of the maximum allowable increase or to an amount in excess of the maximum allowable rent permitted by the lease agreement or by a deed, other recorded document, agreement with a government agency, regulatory agreement, settlement agreement, or contract, or in excess of the maximum allowable increase or to an amount in excess of the maximum allowable rent permitted by law, including but not limited to Article XVIII of the Santa Monica City Charter (the Rent Control Charter Amendment), California Civil Code Section 1947.12 (the Tenant Protection Act), Penal Code Section 396 (the state price gouging law), or Section 4.32.160 et seq. of this Code (the city price gouging law), An excessive rent increase is a rent increase to an amount that is substantially in excess of market rates for comparable units. Evidence that an excessive rent increase was in bad faith includes, but is not limited to, imposition or attempted imposition of the excessive rent increase:
(1) within six months of an unsuccessful attempt to evict a tenant for a “just cause.” (2) within six months of the tenant’s complaints to the landlord or its agents, a government agency, or law enforcement regarding habitability, safety concerns, tenant harassment, discrimination, or neighbor to neighbor harassment.
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 419 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 19 (3) when price gouging protections, including Penal Code Section 396 or Section
4.32.160 et seq. of this Code prohibit rent increases in excess of a particular amount during a state of emergency.
(n) retaliate against a tenant for reporting any violation of, or for exercising any right protected by, any federal, state, county, or local housing, health or safety, fair housing, or other tenant protection law.
SECTION 9. Santa Monica Municipal Code Sections 4.56.040, Tenant Harassment, Enforcement and Penalties, is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.56.040 Enforcement and Penalties
(a) Criminal Penalty. Any person who is convicted of violating this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine of not greater than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
(b) Civil Action. Any person, including the City, may enforce the provisions of this Chapter by means of a civil action. The burden of proof in such cases shall be preponderance of the evidence. A violation of this Chapter may be asserted as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action.
(c) Injunction. Any person who commits an act, proposes to commit an act, or engages in any pattern and practice which violates Section 4.56.020 may be enjoined therefore by any court of competent jurisdiction. An action for injunction under this subsection may be brought by any aggrieved person, by the City Attorney, or by any person or entity who will fairly and adequately represent the interest of the protected class.
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 420 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 20 (d) Penalties and Other Monetary Awards. Any person who violates or aids or incites another person to violate the provisions of this Chapter is liable for each and every such offense for the actual damages suffered by an aggrieved party or for statutory damages in the sum of between one thousand dollars and twenty thousand dollars, whichever is greater, and shall be liable for such attorneys’ fees and costs as may be determined by the court in addition thereto. Any violator shall be liable for an additional civil penalty of up to five thousand dollars for each offense committed against a person who is disabled or aged sixty-five or over. The court may also award punitive damages to any plaintiff, including the City, in a proper case as defined by Civil Code Section 3294. The burden of proof for purposes of punitive damages shall be clear and convincing evidence. (e) Nonexclusive Remedies and Penalties. The remedies provided in this Chapter are not exclusive, and nothing in this Chapter shall preclude any person from seeking any other remedies, penalties or procedures provided by law.
SECTION 10. Santa Monica Municipal Code section 4.56.050, Buyout offers and Agreements, is moved to new Chapter 4.57 and amended to read as follows:
Chapter 4.57 BUYOUT OFFERS AND AGREEMENTS
4.57.010 Definitions
(a) Buyout Agreement. An agreement where a landlord pays a tenant money or other consideration to vacate a rental housing unit. An agreement to settle a pending unlawful detainer action shall not be a “buyout agreement.”
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 421 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 21 (b) Buyout Offer. An offer by a landlord to pay a tenant money or other consideration to vacate a rental housing unit. An offer to settle a pending unlawful detainer action shall not be a “buyout offer.”
(c) Minimum Buyout Amount. An amount not less than the permanent relocation fee required by Section 4.36.040.
4.57.020 Requirements for Buyout Offers and Agreements. (a) Applicability of Section. This Section shall apply to every rental housing unit in the City that is a controlled rental unit pursuant to City Charter Section 1800 et seq., (including a room in a single-family home, hotel or motel, rooming house or apartment, single-family home, mobile home or mobile home space, trailer or trailer space) and to every rental housing unit in the City that is a non-rent-controlled rental unit pursuant to City Charter Section 2300 et seq.
(b) Disclosure Prior to Buyout Offers. Prior to making a buyout offer, the landlord shall provide each tenant in that rental unit a written disclosure, on a form developed and authorized by the Rent Board for controlled rental units and by the Housing Office for nonrent-controlled rental units, that shall include the following:
(1) A statement that the tenant has a right not to enter into a buyout agreement; (2) A statement that the tenant may choose to consult with an attorney before entering into a buyout agreement;
(3) A statement that the tenant may rescind the buyout agreement for up to thirty days after it is fully executed;
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 422 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 22 (4) A statement that the tenant may visit the Rent Board for rent controlled rental units for information about other buyout agreements in the tenant’s neighborhood and other relevant information;
(5) Any other information required by the Rent Board for rent controlled rental units or the Housing Office for non-rent-controlled rental units consistent with the purposes and provisions of this Section; and
(6) A space for each tenant to sign and write the date the landlord provided the tenant with the disclosure.
(7) A statement that offering payments to a tenant to vacate within six months after the tenant has notified the landlord in writing that the tenant does not wish to enter into a buyout agreement or buyout negotiations may constitute bad faith harassment of the tenant under Section 4.56.020(f) of this Code;
(8) A statement that the tenant is entitled to at least the minimum buyout amount and how much the minimum buyout amount is.
The landlord shall retain a copy of each signed disclosure form for five years, along with a record of the date the landlord provided the disclosure to each tenant. (c) Requirements for Buyout Agreements. Every buyout agreement shall:
(1) Be in writing. The landlord shall give each tenant a copy of the buyout agreement at the time the tenant executes it.
(2) Include the following statements in bold letters in at least fourteen-point type in close proximity to the space reserved for the signature of the tenant(s):
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 423 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 23 (A) “You may cancel this agreement in writing at any time before the thirtieth day after all parties have signed this agreement.” (B) “You have a right not to enter into a buyout agreement.” (C) “You may choose to consult with an attorney or the Rent Control Board for rent controlled units before signing this agreement. The Rent Control Board may have information about other buyout agreements in your neighborhood.” (3) Be for at least the minimum buyout amount.
A buyout agreement that does not satisfy all the requirements of this subsection shall not be effective and may be rescinded by the tenant at any time. (d) Rescission of Buyout Agreements. A tenant shall have the right to rescind a buyout agreement for up to thirty days after its execution by all parties. In order to rescind a buyout agreement, the tenant must hand-deliver, email, or place in the U.S. mail a statement to the landlord indicating that the tenant has rescinded the buyout agreement. (e) Filing of Buyout Agreements. The landlord shall file a copy of the buyout agreement no sooner than the thirty-first day after the buyout agreement is executed by all parties, and no later than sixty days after the agreement is executed by all parties. Buyout agreements for rent controlled units shall be filed with the Rent Control Board unless the Board opts not to adopt regulations implementing this Section, in which case buyout agreements shall be filed with the City Clerk. Buyout agreements for non-rent-controlled units shall be filed with the City Clerk. This filing requirement does not apply to buyout agreements rescinded under subsection (d). Failure to comply with the requirement of this
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 424 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 24 subsection may be asserted as an affirmative defense in an action brought by the landlord to recover possession of the unit.
4.57.030 Enforcement and Penalties
(a) Criminal Penalty. Any person who is convicted of violating this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished by a fine of not greater than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail for not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
(b) Civil Action. Any person, including the City, may enforce the provisions of this Chapter by means of a civil action. The burden of proof in such cases shall be preponderance of the evidence. A violation of this Chapter may be asserted as an affirmative defense in an unlawful detainer action.
(c) Penalties and Other Monetary Awards. Any person who violates or aids or incites another person to violate the provisions of this Chapter is liable for each and every such offense for the actual damages suffered by an aggrieved party or for statutory damages in the sum of between one thousand dollars and twenty thousand dollars, whichever is greater, and shall be liable for such attorneys’ fees and costs as may be determined by the court in addition thereto. Any violator shall be liable for an additional civil penalty of up to five thousand dollars for each offense committed against a person who is disabled or aged sixty-five or over. The court may also award punitive damages to any plaintiff, including the City, in a proper case as defined by Civil Code Section 3294. The burden of proof for purposes of punitive damages shall be clear and convincing evidence.
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 425 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) 25 (d) Nonexclusive Remedies and Penalties. The remedies provided in this Chapter are not exclusive, and nothing in this Chapter shall preclude any person from seeking any other remedies, penalties or procedures provided by law.
SECTION 11. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 12. 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 13. 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 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney
5.G.a
Packet Pg. 426 Attachment: ORD-ord-Tenant Protection Amendments 2d (6238 : Second Reading-Tenant Protection Amendments) City Council
Redevelopment Successor
Agency Report
City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024
Agenda Item: 5.H
1 of 5
To: Redevelopment Successor Agency, Mayor and City Council From: Oscar Santiago, Director, Finance Department, Revenue Subject: Annual Investment Policy Update
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. Review and approve the City’s revised Investment Policy.
3. Extend the delegation of investment authority to the Director of Finance, as City Treasurer, from March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2025.
Staff also recommends that the Redevelopment Successor Agency Governing Board:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exception) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Review and approve the City Investment Policy for Redevelopment Successor Agency Investments.
3. Extend investment authority to the Treasurer of the Redevelopment Successor Agency, from March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2025.
Summary
Per State law, the treasurer or chief fiscal officer of a local agency may annually render an investment policy to its governing body for consideration at a public meeting. While not required, staff believes that it is important to follow best practices and provide transparency by submitting the City’s Investment Policy (Attachments 1 and 2) to Council annually for consideration and approval at a public meeting. The Santa Monica City Charter designates the Director of Finance (as the City Treasurer) as the custodian of all public funds. Additionally, State law requires that the Council delegate investment
5.H
Packet Pg. 427
2 of 5
authority to the City Treasurer for a one-year period, renewable annually. The current delegation of authority carries through February 28, 2024.
Discussion
City investments are made only in those instruments specifically authorized by California State laws, primarily Sections 53601, 16429.1, and 53684 et seq. of the Government Code. Within these legal guidelines, the three primary objectives of the City’s Investment Policy and investment practices, in priority order are:
• Safety – Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the City’s investment program. City investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio by diversifying its investments among a variety of securities offering independent returns. • Liquidity – City investments are kept sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature concurrently with anticipated cash needs to the extent possible. Investments are primarily made in securities with active secondary or resale markets. Additionally, an adequate liquidity buffer is maintained for extraordinary circumstances.
• Rate of Return – The City’s investment portfolio is designed with the objective of attaining a benchmark rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles taking into account safety and liquidity requirements. The benchmark may vary from time to time depending on the economic and budgetary conditions present.
The City continues to abide by the highest professional standards in the management of public funds. While the investment strategy is flexible and can change based on market and economic conditions, the legal and policy guidelines governing these investment decisions remain relatively static. The City’s Investment Policy also includes socially responsible investment principles. In addition to following the guidelines previously set by Council, the City considers Economic, Social, and Governance (ESG) ratings and performance as well as certain social impact factors when making investment decisions.
5.H
Packet Pg. 428
3 of 5
On March 8, 2022, Council directed staff to divest City funds from Russian assets.
The City’s general investment portfolio has no direct investments in Russian companies and holds no sovereign Russian debt. As of November 30, 2023, the portfolio does include approximately $58.3 million (book value) in bonds from corporations that had business relationships in Russia or may have investment holdings in Russia. Most have announced a termination, suspension, or limitation of business activity in Russia. Additional detail is included in the April 6, 2022 Information Item included as an attachment to this report. Sale of all bonds of companies that had been doing business in Russia would result in a loss of approximately $3.4 million (based on 11/30/2023 market values), which would cause fiscal harm to the City. The City’s Russian divestment actions as outlined in the April 6, 2022 Information Item will remain in place.
On an on-going basis, staff reviews public agency investment best practices and regulatory or legal changes to ensure City compliance. Effective January 1, 2024, there were minor changes to the investment policy rules in the Government Code, but these changes will not have a material impact on City investment practices. Specifically, the Local Government Omnibus Act of 2023 (SB 882), amended Government Code section 53601 to clarify limitations imposed on public investment in a privately issued mortgage passthrough security, collateralized mortgage obligation, mortgage-backed or other paythrough bond, equipment lease-backed certificate, consumer receivable passthrough certificate, or consumer receivable-backed bond. Santa Monica does not invest in these securities so there is no impact to current investment procedures.
SB 882 also amended Government Code Section 27000.7 to eliminate one of the options for a person to demonstrate eligibility to be elected or appointed to the office of county treasurer, county tax collector, and county treasurer-tax collector. As this provision relates to counties there is no impact to Santa Monica.
The City can invest up to $75 million per account in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), a pooled state fund managed by the Office of the California State Treasurer. Previously, LAIF accounts were established for both the City and the
5.H
Packet Pg. 429
4 of 5
Successor Agency (SA), formerly the Redevelopment Agency (RDA). However, due to a low balance, the SA LAIF account will be closed in spring 2024 and remaining funds will be transferred to the SA bank account maintained at Union Bank.
Revisions to City’s Investment Policy
Staff recommends two revisions. The first improves the City’s opportunities with investments and the second updates the list to include only active Funds:
• Increase the maximum maturity for local agency bonds from 5 years to up to 15 years. This change provides the City with more investment flexibility, the opportunity for increased yields particularly on longer term investments, and little to no additional risk.
• Update to Attachment 1-A City of Santa Monica Funds for Cash Pooling to account for new and closed Funds.
Both revisions have been incorporated into Investment Policy attached to this report.
Environmental Review
The updated investment policy is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, 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 policy is administrative in nature. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the agreement would not result in adverse physical impacts on the environment, and as such, is exempt from CEQA.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended actions. Staff provides monthly reports to the City Council and the City Manager describing the present status of City investments and monies held by the City, as well as summarizing all investment transactions for the month. Interest earnings from the City’s pooled investment portfolio are allocated to the various City funds based
5.H
Packet Pg. 430
5 of 5
upon each fund’s share of total City cash and investments. Projected investment earnings for each fund are included in the FY 2023-24 Revised Budget.
Prepared By: Stephanie Manglaras, Assistant City Treasurer Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 B. Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment
5.H
Packet Pg. 431
1 Revised 2/2024
ATTACHMENT 1
INVESTMENT POLICY FOR THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
1. POLICY
It is the policy of the City of Santa Monica (City) to invest public funds in a manner which will safely preserve portfolio principal, provide adequate liquidity to meet the City’s cash flow needs, and optimize returns while conforming to all federal, state, and local statutes governing the investment of public funds. Should any applicable provisions of these statutes change from those included herein, such provision shall be considered incorporated in the policy. The policy should be submitted to the City Council annually for review and approval.
2. SCOPE
This investment policy applies to all cash and financial investments of the various funds of the City of Santa Monica as identified in the City's Annual Financial Report, with the exception of those financial assets explicitly excluded from coverage by the Investment Policy for legal or operational reasons. Cemetery and Mausoleum Perpetual Care Funds are private funds held in trust and managed by the City. These funds do not fall under the guidelines of the Government Code sections noted in Section 8.0 of this Policy but are invested by an outside investment manager under guidelines established by the City Council.
All City funds are listed in Attachment 1-A. The Investment Policy will also apply to all new funds created unless specifically exempted.
Except as otherwise noted, City funds are pooled for investment purposes.
Investment income will be allocated to the various funds based on their respective participation and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Interest is allocated on a quarterly basis.
3. PRUDENCE
All investments and evaluation of investments shall be made with the Prudent Investor Standard as set forth in California Government Code Section 53600.3.
Investments shall be made with judgment and care, under circumstances then prevailing, including, but not limited to, the general economic conditions and the anticipated needs of the agency that a prudent person acting in a like capacity and familiarity with those matters would use in the conduct of funds of a like character and with like aims, to safeguard the principal and maintain the liquidity needs of the agency.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 432 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 2 The standard of prudence shall be applied in the context of managing an overall portfolio. Investment officers acting in accordance with written procedures and the investment policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security’s credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations from expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments.
4. INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of all City investments, in priority order, shall be:
4.1 SAFETY
Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. City investments shall be undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. To attain this, the City will diversify its investments by investing funds in securities of various types and maturity dates, and from various issuers offering independent returns.
4.2 LIQUIDITY
Liquidity is the ability to change an investment into its cash equivalent on short notice at its prevailing market value. The City’s investment portfolio shall remain sufficiently liquid to enable the City to meet all operating requirements which might be reasonably anticipated. This is accomplished by structuring the portfolio so that securities mature concurrently with anticipated cash needs.
Since all possible cash demands cannot be anticipated, the portfolio will maintain a liquidity “buffer” and invest primarily in securities with active secondary or resale markets.
4.3 RATE OF RETURN
The City’s investment portfolio shall be designed with the objective of attaining a benchmark rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, taking into account safety and liquidity requirements. The benchmark may vary from time to time depending on the economic and budgetary conditions present. At no time shall funds be invested in any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity except as specified in Section 8.2 of this policy.
5. INVESTMENT AUTHORITY DELEGATION
In accordance with the Santa Monica City Charter, Section 711, the City Council delegates to the City Treasurer the authority to invest City funds. The Director of Finance, as City Treasurer, delegates this authority to the Assistant City Treasurer.
In the absence of the Director of Finance and the Assistant City Treasurer, the Treasury Administrator or the Senior Treasury Analyst may execute investment transactions per instructions from the Director of Finance and/or Assistant City
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 433 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 3 Treasurer or per prior written authorization. Section 53607 of the State of California Government Code limits the authorization of the legislative body to delegate investment authority to a one- year period, renewable annually.
5.1 INVESTMENT PROCEDURES
The Director of Finance is responsible for conducting and reporting on all City investments. To facilitate this function, the Director of Finance or their designee will prepare and maintain an Investment Procedures Manual detailing procedure for the operation of the investment program consistent with this policy. The manual should include reference to safekeeping, banking services contracts, collateral/depository agreements, and repurchase agreements. The manual shall also include explicit delegation of authority to persons responsible for investment transactions. No person may engage in investment transactions except as provided under the terms of this policy and the procedures established by the Director of Finance. Additionally, the manual will explicitly include a current listing of all City of Santa Monica financial institution deposit and investment accounts, a current copy of or link to State laws pertinent to City investments, a description of specific controls to ensure the proper execution of the City Investment Policy, and copies, with instructions, of all investment reports required by law or by City Investment Policy.
5.2 INVESTMENT COMMITTEE
An Investment Committee (the Committee) shall be established consisting of the City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, the Director of Finance, the Assistant City Treasurer, one other department head serving one-year terms on a rotating basis, and one qualified citizen representative, appointed by the City Manager for a one-year term, who possesses strong skills and knowledge in the areas of finance and economics. The one-year terms for the citizen representative and the department head may be extended at the discretion of the City Manager. The purpose of the Committee is to provide general oversight and act in an advisory capacity. The Committee will attempt to meet once each calendar quarter to review and evaluate previous investment activity, to review the current status of all funds held by the City, to discuss anticipated cash requirements and investment activity for the next quarter, and to discuss investment strategy.
6. ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The Director of Finance and other employees involved in the investment process shall refrain from personal business activity that could conflict with proper execution of the investment program, or which could impair their ability to make impartial investment decisions. The Director of Finance and other employees involved in the investment process shall disclose any material interests in financial institutions with which they conduct business within their jurisdiction, and they shall further disclose any material personal financial/investment positions that could be related to the
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 434 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 4 performance of the City’s investment portfolio and shall refrain from personal investment transactions with the same individual or firm with whom business is conducted on behalf of the City.
The Director of Finance and other employees involved in the investment process are required to file annual disclosure statements as required by the Fair Political Practices Commission. During the course of the year, if there is an event subject to disclosure that could impair the ability of the Director of Finance or investment employees to make impartial decisions, the City Council will be notified in writing within ten (10) days of the event.
7. AUTHORIZED FINANCIAL DEALERS AND INSTITUTIONS
The City shall transact business only with issuers, banks, savings and loans, and registered securities dealers. The purchase of any investment, other than those purchased directly from the issuer, shall be purchased from either an institution licensed by the State as a broker/dealer as defined in Section 25004 of the Corporation Code, who is a member of FINRA (Financial Industry Regulatory Authority), or a member of a federally regulated securities exchange, a national or state chartered bank, a federal or state association (as defined by Section 5102 of the Financial Code), or a brokerage firm designated as a primary dealer by the Federal Reserve Bank.
The Director of Finance’s staff shall periodically conduct a “Request for Qualifications” process to investigate broker/dealers that wish to do business with the City. All institutions that desire to become a broker/dealer for the City must complete the City’s “Broker/Dealer Request for Information” and “Broker/Dealer Certification”. Staff will evaluate broker dealers based on the qualifications of the firm and the individual broker(s) assigned to the City. The evaluation will be based on experience of the broker in servicing public fund investment portfolios, market capitalization of the firm, the brokers’ ability to access markets in securities appropriate to the City’s needs, and the brokers’ agreement to abide by the City’s Investment Policy. Selection as an approved broker/dealer does not guarantee that the firm will conduct any investment transactions with the City The Director of Finance shall conduct periodic reviews of the financial condition and other qualifications of all approved financial institutions and broker/dealers to determine if they continue to meet the City’s guidelines for qualification as defined in this section. Additionally, the City shall keep the current audited financial statements on file for each approved financial institution and broker/dealer with which the City conducts investment transactions. A listing of websites where these financial statements may be viewed may substitute for physical hard copies of the statements.
8. AUTHORIZED AND SUITABLE INVESTMENTS
Investments shall be made only in those instruments specifically authorized by California State laws, primarily Sections 53601, 53601.6, 53601.8, 16429.1, and
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 435 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 5 53684 et seq. of the Government Code and to no greater an extent than authorized by those laws. These laws are summarized in Attachment 1-B.
Additional City guidelines are as follows:
Instruments Additional City Guidelines
U.S. Federal Agencies No more than 50% of portfolio, per agency Banker's Acceptances (BA) Maximum of 10% of portfolio per issuer Negotiable Certificates of Deposit Maximum of 10% of portfolio per issuer (NCD)
Commercial Paper (CP) Maximum of 25% of portfolio
It is recognized that legal or other events may occur that could require exceptions to certain guidelines. The percentages listed in the above guidelines are based on book value of the portfolio at the time of purchase.
In addition to following all legal guidelines, the portfolio will preserve principal, maintain adequate liquidity to meet all City obligations, contain an appropriate level of interest rate risk, and be diversified across types of investments, maturities, and institutions to minimize credit risk and maintain an appropriate return.
8.1 REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS
Investments in repurchase agreements are allowable and shall be made only with financial institutions with which the City has an executed master repurchase agreement. The financial institution must be a primary dealer of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
8.2 PROHIBITED INVESTMENTS AND TRANSACTIONS
a) Prohibited investments include inverse floaters, range notes, interest only strips derived from a pool of mortgages (collateralized mortgage obligations), and any security that could result in zero interest accrual if held to maturity, as specified in Section 53601.6.
b) Notwithstanding the prohibition in paragraph (a), the City may invest in securities issued by, or backed by, the United States government that could result in zero- or negative-interest accrual if held to maturity, in the event of, and for the duration of, a period of negative market interest rates.
This shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2026.
8.3 INVESTMENTS H EL D AND/OR MANAGED BY FISCAL AGENTS
A N D TRUSTEES
In addition, the main pooled portfolio, the City may hold and invest certain other funds that are restricted as to use. One example is bond proceeds held by fiscal agents. Investments of bond or loan proceeds will be made in accordance with Government Code Section 53601 (m), which states that money from bond proceeds should be invested as specified by bond documents, and in accordance with specific bond covenants. In most cases
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 436 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 6 these investments will be made under the same guidelines as other City investments. Another example is funds received from legal settlements that are restricted for a certain purpose, which will be invested in accordance with legal or escrow agreements that may be more restrictive than the City’s Investment Policy.
As noted previously in this Policy, Cemetery and Mausoleum Perpetual Care Funds are private funds held in trust by the City. These funds are invested by an outside investment manager under guidelines adopted by the City Council and do not fall under the guidelines of the Government Code sections noted in Section 8.0 of this Policy. The Director of Finance’s staff monitors all investment activity of these funds to ensure guidelines are followed.
9. INVESTMENT POOLS/MUTUAL FUNDS
A thorough investigation of any pooled investment funds, including mutual funds, is required prior to investing, and on a continual basis. To accomplish this, a questionnaire will be used to evaluate the suitability of the pooled fund. The questionnaire will answer the following general questions:
• A description of eligible investment securities, and a written statement of investment policies and objectives.
• A description of interest calculations and how it is distributed, and how gains and losses are treated.
• A description of how the securities are safeguarded (including the settlement processes), and how often the securities are priced and the program audited. • A description of who may invest in the program, how often, and what size deposit and withdrawal are allowed.
• A schedule for receiving statements and portfolio listings. • Are reserves, retained earnings, etc., utilized by the pool/fund? • A fee schedule, and when and how fees are assessed.
• Is the pool/fund eligible for bond proceeds and/or will it accept such proceeds? For mutual funds, a fund prospectus can substitute for the questionnaire.
10. COLLATERALIZATION
California Government Code Sections 53652, et seq. requires depositories to post certain types of collateral for public funds above the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance amounts. The collateral requirements apply to bank deposits, both active (checking and savings accounts) and inactive (non-negotiable certificates of deposit).
Collateralization is also required for repurchase agreements. In order to anticipate market changes and provide a level of security for all funds, the collateralization level
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 437 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 7 will be 102% of the market value of principal and accrued interest, and the value shall be adjusted no less than quarterly. Collateral will be in the form of U.S. Treasury Obligations or U.S. Agency Securities.
Collateral will always be held by an independent third party with whom the entity has a current custodial arrangement. A clearly marked evidence of ownership (safekeeping receipt) must be available to be supplied to the City, if requested, and retained. The right of collateral substitution is granted.
11. SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY
In accordance with California Government Code Section 53601, all securities owned by the City shall be held in safekeeping by the City’s custodial bank or a third-party bank trust department, acting as an agent for the City under terms of the custody agreement. Collateral for repurchase agreements will be held by a third-party custodian under terms of the Master Repurchase Agreement.
All securities will be received and delivered using a delivery vs. payment (DVP) basis, which ensures that securities are deposited with the third-party custodian prior to the release of funds. Securities held by the third-party custodian will be evidenced by safekeeping receipts and/or bank statements. Investments in the State Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) or money market mutual funds are undeliverable and are not subject to delivery or third-party safekeeping.
Investment trades shall be verified against bank transactions and broker confirmation tickets. On a monthly basis, the custodial asset statement shall be reconciled with the month-end portfolio holdings.
12. DIVERSIFICATION
The City will diversify its investments by security type, institution, and maturity date.
Concentration limits are set by the State Government Code (see Attachment B) and Section 8.0 (Authorized and Suitable Investments) of this policy.
13. MAXIMUM MATURITIES
To the extent possible, the City will attempt to match its investments with anticipated cash flow requirements. Most investments will be made in securities with a term remaining to maturity of five years or less. However, on February 22, 2022, the City Council granted authority to invest in securities with a remaining term in excess of five years as part of the City’s overall investment program. Per that authorization, up to 15% of the portfolio value may be invested in U.S. government, Federal Agency, or local agency securities with remaining maturities at the time of purchase between five and fifteen years. Per State law, the settlement date of the investment purchase is considered the start date of the remaining term to maturity.Further maturity limitations
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 438 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 8 per State Code are shown in Attachment B. The weighted average maturity of the investment portfolio should be three years or less.
In order to minimize the impact of market risk, most investments will be purchased with the intent to hold to maturity. Investments may be sold prior to maturity for cash flow needs, portfolio rebalancing and/or appreciation purposes, or in order to mitigate portfolio risk by limiting potential losses. However, no investment shall be made based solely on earnings anticipated from capital gains. Due to the uncertain nature of cash flow requirements, a portion of the portfolio should be continually invested in readily available funds.
14. INTERNAL CONTROLS
The Director of Finance shall be responsible for ensuring that all investment transactions comply with the City’s Investment Policy and for establishing internal controls that are designed to prevent losses due to fraud, negligence, and third-party misrepresentation.
The Director of Finance will also establish internal control procedures addressing wire transfer controls, separation of duties and administrative controls, avoidance of collusion, separation of transaction authority from accounting procedures, documentation of investment transactions, and monitoring of results.
As part of its annual audit of the City, the City’s external auditor will review compliance with statutes, policies, and procedures.
15. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
The portfolio shall be designed with the objective of obtaining a rate of return throughout budgetary and economic cycles, commensurate with investment risk constraints and cash flow needs.
15.1 MARKET YIELD (Benchmark)
The City’s overall investment strategy is passive. Given this strategy, the basis used by the Director of Finance to determine whether appropriate and suitable market yields are being achieved shall be to identify a comparable benchmark to the portfolio’s investment duration, e.g., the Constant Maturing Two Year Treasury bill index. Benchmarks may change over time depending on the portfolio’s duration.
16. REPORTING
In accordance with State law and the City Charter, monthly reports will be made to the City Council and the City Manager describing the present status of City
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 439 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 9 investments and monies held by the City, as well as summarizing all investment transactions for the month. Schedules in the monthly report should include the following:
• A complete list of investments including the type of the investment, name of the issuer, maturity date, par value, book value, and market value • The source of market value data
• The weighted average maturity and yield to maturity of the portfolio • Coupon, discount, or earnings rate for each security
• Percentage of portfolio represented by each investment category • A certification of compliance with the Investment Policy • A statement denoting the City’s ability to meet its anticipated expenditures requirements for the next six months
• Benchmark comparison
Records of all investment transactions will be kept and filed in the Finance Department in accordance with legal guidelines and records retention policies.
17. SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE INVESTING
RESTRICTIONS – The direct investment of City funds are restricted as follows:
a. Investments should be made in entities that support clean and healthy environment, including following safe and environmentally sound practices. b. No investments will be made in fossil fuel companies as defined by “The Carbon Underground 200” list maintained and published by the organization FFI Solutions or in banking institutions that provide financing to said companies. c. No investments are to be made in tobacco or tobacco-related products. d. No investments are to be made to support the production of weapons, military systems, or nuclear power.
e. Investments should be made in entities that support equality of rights regardless of sex, race, age, disability or sexual orientation.
f. Investments should be made in entities that promote community economic development.
Funds invested with a trustee and/or outside investment managers such as the Cemetery and Mausoleum Perpetual Care Funds will comply with this section of the policy.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 440 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) 10 18. COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT (CRA)
The City will deposit funds only in those financial institutions, which have a CRA rating (as determined by the appropriate regulatory body) of "Outstanding" or "Satisfactory".
19. INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION
The City’s investment policy shall be reviewed and adopted by the City Council annually. The Investment Committee will review the policy periodically to ensure its consistency with the overall objectives of preservation of principal, liquidity, and return, and its conformance with current law, financial and economic trends, and cash flow needs of the City.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 441 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) A-1
ATTACHMENT 1-A
City of Santa Monica Funds for Cash Pooling
The following listed City of Santa Monica funds shall have their cash balances pooled for investment purposes.
FUND
NUMBER FUND NAME
1 GENERAL FUND
10 SPECIAL REVENUE SOURCE FUND
11 BEACH RECREATION FUND
12 HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND
14 TENANT OWNERSHIP RIGHTS CHARTER AMENDMENT
16 CLEAN BEACHES AND OCEAN PARK PARCEL TAX FUND
17 TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND
18 SCAQMD AB2766 FUND
19 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CBDG) FUND
20 MISCELLANEOUS GRANTS FUND
21 ASSET SEIZURE FUND
22 CITIZENS OPTION FOR PUBLIC SAFETY FUND
25 RENT CONTROL FUND
26 GAS TAX FUND
27 LOCAL RETURN FUND
28 PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES FUND
29 MEASURE GS FUND
41 LOW/MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ASSET FUND
50 WATER FUND
51 WASTEWATER FUND
52 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FUND
53 PIER FUND
54 RESOURCE RECOVERY & RECYCLING FUND
57 AIRPORT FUND
59 CEMETERY FUND
60 BIG BLUE BUS FUND
61 PARKING AUTHORITY FUND
70 VEHICLE MANAGEMENT FUND
71 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT & SERVICES FUND
72 SELF INSURANCE-GENERAL LIAB/AUTO FUND
73 SELF INSURANCE-BUS FUND
74 SELF INSURANCE WORKERS-COMPENSATION FUND
75 SELF INSURANCE-ADMIN FUND
80 GENERAL TRUST FUND
81 CEMETERY PERPETUAL CARE FUND
82 MAUSOLEUM ENDOWMENT FUND
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 442 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) B-1
ATTACHMENT 1-B
Summary of State of California Statutes Applicable to Municipal Investments The following investments are authorized by California State Code, Title 5, Division 2, and Sections 53600, 53601, 53631.5 and 53635. See code sections for complete descriptions.
Authorized Investment Legal Limit
(%)
Other Constraints
Local Agency Bonds No limit Maximum maturity 5 years.**** U.S. Treasury Obligations No limit Maximum maturity 5 years except as noted below.****
State Obligations -
California and Others
No limit Maximum maturity 5 years.
California Local Agency
Obligations
No limit Maximum maturity 5 years.
U.S. Agency Obligations No limit Maximum maturity 5 years except as noted below.****
Bankers’ Acceptance 40% Eligible for purchase by the Federal Reserve System and not to exceed 180
days to maturity. No more than 30% may
be in bankers' acceptances of any one
commercial bank.
Commercial Paper – Non
Pooled Funds
40% "A -1 /P - 1/F - 1" rating; if the issuer has
long-term debt, it must rated “A”; U.S.
corporate assets over $500,000,000;
purchases may not represent more than
10% of outstanding commercial paper
and medium-term notes. Commercial
paper may not exceed 270 days to
maturity.***
Commercial Paper –
Pooled Fund
40% "A -1 /P - 1/F - 1" rating; if the issuer has
long-term debt, it must rated “A”; U.S.
corporate assets over $500,000,000;
purchases may not represent more than
10% of outstanding paper and may not
exceed 270 days to maturity.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 443 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) B-2
Authorized Investment Legal Limit
(%)
Other Constraints
Negotiable Certificates of
Deposit
30% Maximum maturity 5 years. State and
Federally chartered banks and savings
institutions, including U.S. branches of
foreign banks regulated by State
regulatory authorities (“Yankee CD”).
Deposit/CD Placement
Services
50%** Maximum maturity 5 years. Deposits with
any one private sector placement service
are limited to 50% of the portfolio. This
limit does not apply to placement serviceassisted CD’s.
Repurchase Agreement No limit Maximum maturity 1 year. Securities used as collateral for repo's must be
investments allowable under Govt. Code
(i.e., T-bills, Agencies, BAs, CDs, etc.);
must be collateralized at 102% of market
value or greater; securities must be safe
kept by third party.
Reverse Repurchase
Agreements/Securities
Lending Agreements
20% Must be made with primary dealers of the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York and
the securities used for the agreement
must have been held by the local agency
for at least 30 days. The maximum
maturity is 92 days.
Medium-Term Corporate
Notes
30% Maximum maturity 5 years; bonds must
be rated minimum of “A” by a nationally
recognized rating service.
Mutual Funds and Money
Market Mutual Funds
20% No more than 10% may be invested in
any one mutual fund. Funds are
invested in securities and obligations
authorized by sub- divisions (a) through
(m) of Section 53601 and
53635, (any of the authorized
investments for local agencies) the
investment company must be in highest
ranking provided by not less than two of
the three largest nationally recognized
rating services OR must have the
investment advisor registered with the
SEC with no less than 5 yrs. experience
and have assets under mgmt. in excess
of $500 million.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 444 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) B-3
Authorized Investment Legal Limit
(%)
Other Constraints
Supra Nationals
(International Bank for
Reconstruction and
Development.
International Finance
Corporation, InterAmerican Development
Bank
30% Maximum maturity 5 years. Must be
rated AA or better by a nationally
recognized rating service. Must be
senior unsubordinated obligations
denominated in U.S. Dollars.
Money Market Funds 20% The money market funds must have an average weighted maturity of 90 days or
less and abide by SEC regulations;
funds must receive the highest ranking
by 2 of the 3 largest nationally
recognized rating agencies OR retain an
investment advisor who is registered, or
exempt from registration, with the SEC
and has at least 5 years’ experience
managing money market funds in
excess of $500 million.
Collateralized Certificate
of Deposit
No limit Maximum maturity 5 years. Banks:
deposit not to exceed the total of paid-in
capital surplus. S&Ls: deposit not to
exceed the greater of total net worth or
$500,000. State and Federal credit
unions: deposit shall not exceed the
greater of the total of unpaired capital and
surplus or $500,000. Must be
collateralized to 110% of the CD value by
other eligible securities. Investments in
certificates of deposits of state or federal
credit unions if any member of the city’s
governing or managing officers (council,
city manager, fiscal officers) serves on
the credit union board or key committee
positions is prohibited.
Mortgage Pass-Through 20% Maximum remaining maturity of 5 years; bonds must be rated in top two rating
categories by a nationally recognized
rating service. Shall not exceed 95% of
the mortgage security's fair market value.
Bank/Time Deposits No limit Maximum maturity of 5 years.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 445 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) B-4
Authorized Investment Legal Limit
(%)
Other Constraints
Local Agency Investment
Fund (LAIF)
$ 75 million* Monies are invested in pooled state fund
managed by State Treasurer. Maximum
15 transactions per month.
Joint Powers Authority
Pool
No limit
County Pooled
Investment Funds
No limit
Public Bank No limit Commercial paper, debt securities, or other obligations of a public bank, as
defined in Section 57600.
* Per LAIF account. Separate accounts can be established for different legal entities. ** Per AB 945, limit increased from 30% to 50% effective January 1, 2020 until January 1, 2026, at which time limit will return to 30%.
*** In effect until January 1, 2026.
**** Per Council authorization, up to 15% of the portfolio may be invested in remaining term to maturity of over five and up to fifteen years.
Bond Proceeds
Bond proceeds may be invested in accordance with the State Code and bond indenture provisions.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 446 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) C-1
ATTACHMENT 1-C
GLOSSARY
AGENCIES: Federal agency securities and/or Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE’s).
ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT (ACFR): The official annual report for the City of Santa Monica. It includes basic financial statements for each individual fund and account group prepared in conformity with GAAP. It also includes supporting schedules necessary to demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual provisions, extensive introductory material, and a detailed Statistical Section.
ASKED: The price at which securities are offered for sale.
BANKERS’ ACCEPTANCE (BA): A draft or bill of exchange accepted by a bank or trust company. The accepting institution guarantees payment of the bill, as well as the issuer.
BASIS POINT: A basis point equals one one-hundredth of 1% (.01%).
BENCHMARK: A comparative base for measuring the performance or risk tolerance of an investment portfolio. The benchmark should represent a close correlation to the level of risk and the average duration of the portfolio.
BID: The price offered for securities.
BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission.
CALLABLE SECURITY: A security that can be redeemed by the issuer before the scheduled maturity date.
CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT (CD): A time deposit with a specific maturity evidenced by a certificate. Large denomination CD’s are typically negotiable.
COLLATERAL: Securities, evidence of deposit or other property which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies.
COMMERCIAL PAPER (CP): An unsecured promissory note with a fixed maturity no longer than 270 days. Usually sold in discount form.
COUPON: (a). The annual rate of interest that a bond's issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond's face value. (b) A certificate attached to a bond evidencing interest due on a payment date.
DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 447 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) C-2
and selling for his own account.
DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT (DVP): There are two methods of delivery of securities:
delivery versus payment and delivery versus receipt (also called free). Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities.
DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer.
DERIVATIVES: (1) Financial instruments whose return profile is linked to, or derived from, the movement of one or more underlying indices or securities, and may include a leveraging factor, or (2) financial contracts based on notional amounts whose value is derived from an underlying index or security (interest rates, foreign exchange rates, equities, or commodities).
DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price of a security and its value at maturity when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling below original offering price shortly after sale also is considered to be at a discount.
DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-interest-bearing money market instruments that are issued at a discount and redeemed at maturity for full face value (e.g., U.S. Treasury bills, commercial paper, Agency discount notes).
DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities, issuers, and maturity dates offering independent returns.
DURATION: A measure of the timing of the cash flows, such as the interest payments and the principal repayment, to be received from a given fixed-income security. This calculation is based on three variables: term to maturity, coupon rate, and yield to maturity.
The duration of a security is a useful indicator of its price volatility for given changes in interest rates.
FEDERAL AGRICULTURAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FARMER MAC): Farmer Mac was created to increase access to and reduce the cost of capital for the benefit of American agriculture and rural communities. Farmer Mac provides financial solutions to a broad spectrum of the agricultural community, including agricultural lenders, agribusinesses, and other institutions.
FEDERAL CREDIT AGENCIES: Agencies of the Federal government set up to supply credit to various classes of institutions and individuals, e.g., S&L's, small business firms, students, farmers, farm cooperatives, and exporters.
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): A federal agency that insures bank deposits, currently up to $250,000 per deposit.
FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORPORATION (FFCB): The Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corporation is a leading provider of loans, leases and services
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 448 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) C-3
to rural communities and U.S. agriculture.
FEDERAL FUNDS: Non-interest-bearing deposits held by member banks at the Federal Reserve. Also used to denote "immediately available" funds in the clearing sense. "Fed Funds" also used to refer to these funds.
FEDERAL FUNDS RATE: The rate of interest at which private banks lend funds to other private banks. The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) sets a target rate. This actual rate is currently pegged by the Federal Reserve through open-market operations.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS (FHLB): Government sponsored wholesale banks (currently 12 regional banks) which lend funds and provide correspondent banking services to member commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions, and insurance companies. The mission of the FHLB’s is to liquefy the housing related assets of members who must purchase stock in their district Bank.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION (FHLMC): A Government Sponsored Enterprise that provides liquidity to the mortgage markets, much like FNMA and FHLB. Also referred to as “Freddie Mac”.
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FNMA): FNMA, like GNMA was chartered under the Federal National Mortgage Association Act in 1938. FNMA is a federal corporation working under the auspices of the Department of Housing & Urban Development, H.U.D. It is the largest single provider of residential mortgage funds in the United States. Fannie Mae, as the corporation is called, is a private stockholder-owned corporation. The corporation’s purchases include a variety of adjustable mortgages and second loans in addition to fixed-rate mortgages. FNMA's securities are also highly liquid and are widely accepted. FNMA assumes and guarantees that all security holders will receive timely payment of principal and interest.
FEDERAL OPEN MARKET COMMITTEE (FOMC): Consists of seven members of the Federal Reserve Board and five of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank Presidents. The President of the New York Federal Reserve Bank is a permanent member while the other Presidents serve on a rotating basis. The Committee periodically meets to set Federal Reserve guidelines regarding purchases and sales of Government Securities in the open market as a means of influencing the volume of bank credit and money.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM: The central bank of the United States created by Congress and consisting of a seven-member Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., 12 Regional Banks, and about 5,700 commercial banks that are members of the system.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 449 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) C-4
GOVERNMENTAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (GNMA or Ginnie Mae):
Securities influencing the volume of bank credit guaranteed by GNMA and issued by mortgage bankers, commercial banks, savings and loan associations and other institutions. Security holder is protected by full faith and credit of the U.S. Government.
Ginnie Mae securities are backed by FHA, VA or FMHM mortgages. The term passthroughs is often used to describe Ginnie Maes.
GREEN BONDS: Green bonds are used to finance projects that promote environmental and/or climate benefits. Green bonds eligible for inclusion in the City’s investment portfolio are issued by government agencies, private corporations, and institutions such as the World Bank.
INVERSE FLOATERS: A structured note in which the coupon increase as interest rates decline and decrease as rates rise.
LIQUIDITY: Liquidity is the ability to change an investment into its cash equivalent on short notice at its prevailing market value. In the money market, a security is said to be liquid if the spread between bid and asked prices is narrow and reasonable size can be done at those quotes.
LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF): The aggregate of all funds from political subdivisions that are placed in the custody of the State Treasurer for investment and reinvestment.
MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold.
MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: A written contract covering all future transactions between the parties to repurchase-reverse repurchase agreements that establishes each party's rights in the transactions. A master agreement will often specify, among other things, the right of the buyer-lender to liquidate the underlying securities in the event of default by the seller-borrower.
MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable.
MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (bills, commercial paper, bankers' acceptances, etc.) are issued and traded.
OFFER: The price asked by a seller of securities (When you are buying securities, you ask for an offer). See ASKED AND BID.
OPEN MARKET OPERATIONS: Purchases and sales of government and certain other securities in the open market by the New York Federal Reserve Bank, as directed by the FOMC, in order to influence the volume of money and credit in the economy. Purchases inject reserves into the bank system and stimulate growth of money and credit; sales have the opposite effect. Open market operations are the Federal Reserve's most important and most flexible monetary policy tool.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 450 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) C-5
PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor.
PRIMARY DEALERS: A group of government securities dealers that submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) registered securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms.
PRIME RATE: The rate at which banks lend to their best or "prime" customers.
PRINCIPAL: 1) the dollar cost of an issue excluding accrued interest. 2) The one who takes ownership in a transaction, as opposed to brokering or acting as agent.
PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. In some states the law requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in a list of securities selected by the state (the so-called legal list). In other states, the trustee may invest in a security if it is one, which would be brought by a prudent person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of capital.
QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not claim exemption from the payment of any sales or compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for the benefit of the commission eligible collateral having a value of not less than its maximum liability and which has been approved by the Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits.
RATE OF RETURN: The yield obtainable on a security based on its purchase price or its current market price. This may be the amortized yield to maturity on a bond or the current income return.
REPURCHASE AGREEMENT (RP OR REPO): A holder of securities sells these securities to an investor with an agreement to repurchase them at a fixed price on a fixed date. The security "buyer" in effect lends the "seller" money for the period of the agreement, and the terms of the agreement are structured to compensate him for this.
Dealers use RP extensively to finance their positions. Exception: When the Fed is said to be doing RP, it is lending money that is increasing bank reserves.
REVERSE REPO: An agreement whereby the dealer agrees to buy securities and the investor agrees to repurchase them at a later date.
SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by banks for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank's vaults for protection.
SECONDARY MARKET: A market made for the purchase and sale of outstanding issues following the initial distribution.
SEC RULE 15C3-1: See uniform net capital rule.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 451 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) C-6
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION: Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transaction by administering securities legislation.
SOCIAL IMPACT BONDS: Social impact bonds are used to finance programs such as affordable housing, poverty reduction, or other positive sustainable and social outcomes.
Social impact bonds eligible for inclusion in the City’s investment portfolio are typically issued by government agencies, and institutions such as the World Bank.
STRUCTURED NOTES: Notes issued by Government Sponsored Enterprises (FHLB, FNMA, etc.) and Corporations which have embedded options (e.g. call features, step-up coupons, floating rate coupons, derivative based returns) into their debt structure. Their market performance is impacted by the fluctuation of interest rates, the volatility of the imbedded options, and shifts in the shape of the yield curve.
SETTLEMENT DATE: The date on which a trade is cleared by delivery of securities against funds. This date may be the same as the trade date or later.
SUPRA NATIONALS: For purposes of this investment policy - obligations issued by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Finance Corporation, or Inter-American Development Bank.
TRADE DATE: The date on which the buyer and seller agree to a transaction. The trade date may or may not be the date on which the securities and money changes hands (settlement date).
TREASURY BILLS: A non-interest-bearing discount security issued by the U.S. Treasury to finance the national debt. Most bills are issued to mature in three months, six months, or one year.
TREASURY BOND: Long-term coupon-bearing securities U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities of more than ten years.
TREASURY NOTES: Intermediate term coupon-bearing U.S. Treasury securities issued as direct obligations of the U.S. Government and having initial maturities of from one to ten years.
UNIFORM CAPITAL RULE: Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that member firms as well as non-member broker-dealers in securities maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1; also called net capital rule and net capital ratio. Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital includes cash and assets easily converted into cash.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 452 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) C-7
YIELD: The rate of annual income return on an investment, expressed as a percentage. (a) INCOME YIELD is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) NET YIELD or YIELD TO MATURITY is the current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond.
YIELD TO MATURITY: The rate of return yielded by a debt security held to maturity when both interest payments and the investor's capital gain or loss on the security are taken into account.
5.H.a
Packet Pg. 453 Attachment: Attachment 1 - Annual Update on City Investment Policy-REVISED 2024 (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item
1 Date: April 6, 2022
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Gigi Decavalles-Hughes
Subject: Report on the City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
Introduction
On March 8, 2022, the Council approved Agenda Item 13-A condemning the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. As part of the approved action, Council directed the City Manager to research any sanctions or steps the City of Santa Monica might take to deplete the power of the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, and any Russian Oligarchs, including divesting any city fund possessing Russian assets, and lobbying CalPERS in favor of divesting any state funds possessing Russian assets and the termination of state contracts with Russian firms.
Background
The City’s investment policy has historically included socially responsible guidelines.
Examples of this include the prohibition of investments in fossil fuel-related companies and banks that lend to those companies, in tobacco or tobacco-related products, and in weapons systems or nuclear power. Also, the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) profile of corporations is a component of credit analysis when considering investments in corporate medium-term notes. Additionally, Council has at times directed divestments based on certain geopolitical and/or humanitarian reasons.
Examples of these are South Africa during apartheid and Myanmar following a military coup and subsequent human rights violations.
Attachment 2
5.H.b
Packet Pg. 454 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
2 The City’s general investment portfolio has no direct investments in Russian companies and holds no sovereign Russian debt. The City also oversees the Cemetery and Mausoleum Perpetual Care funds through the use of an outside investment manager.
This portfolio also has no direct investment in Russian companies or Russian debt.
Discussion
As of February 28, 2022, the book value of the City’s investment portfolio (exclusive of cash in bank accounts) was $572.8 million. The City of Santa Monica holds no investments in any Russian companies or Russian sovereign debt. The City does own bonds in companies that had business operations in Russia at the time of the Ukraine invasion.
Corporate Debt
As of February 28, 2022, the City’s portfolio included approximately $124.8 million in corporate debt. Of this amount approximately $17.8 million was in bonds from United States based non-profit entities that do not have business in Russia. The remaining $107 million was bonds issued by 23 private corporations and the endowment funds of two universities. One of the corporate bonds ($2 million) matured in March 2022 reducing the outstanding amount to $105 million issued by 22 corporations. Staff has attempted to ascertain the level of divestment from Russia of the entities from which it holds investments. It can be difficult to get the complete picture since many companies’ operations in Russia are through third party arrangements with other corporations.
The two business sectors with the most exposure to and business relationship with Russia are the oil and banking sectors. Since the City has already divested from fossil fuel companies and banks lending to such companies, the current investment portfolio has no investments related to Russia from these sectors. Two of the companies that have bonds included in the portfolio do not appear to do business in Russia. The two university endowment funds mentioned, Yale University and Texas A&M University, have announced plans to pull all investments in Russian entities.
Attachment 2
5.H.b
Packet Pg. 455 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
3 Of the remaining 18 companies for which the City holds bonds in its investment portfolio, 12 have publicly announced either a termination, suspension, or limiting of business activities in Russia. The other four are insurance companies. Since insurance companies maintain large investment portfolios, the exposure to Russia could be to Russian businesses or the holding of investments in Russia. Staff has not been able to determine the extent of Russian involvement of these companies in Russia and have seen no public statements regarding divestment.
Supranationals
The portfolio also includes approximately $25.6 million in bonds issued by World Bank related institutions such as the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Finance Corporation. These bonds, also known as Supranationals, provide funding for projects related to clean water, climate change, and infrastructure enhancement. Russia is a member of the World Bank. On March 2, 2022, the World Bank halted all programs in Russia due to their war on Ukraine.
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)
LAIF is a short-term investment pool managed by the California State Treasurers Office used by over 400 local agencies in California, including Santa Monica, for short-term cash and liquidity needs. LAIF has announced that it has no investments in Russian entities.
Cemetery and Mausoleum Perpetual Care Funds
The City oversees the Cemetery and Mausoleum Perpetual Care funds through use of an outside investment manager. This portfolio follows the same socially responsible investment guidelines included in the City’s Investment Policy. This portfolio has no direct investment in Russian companies or Russian debt and is also divested from the Russia-heavy sectors of fossil fuels and banking.
Attachment 2
5.H.b
Packet Pg. 456 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
4 CalPERS
The California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS) is the United States' largest public fund. CalPERS has reported that it has over three quarters of a billion dollars in Russian investments, consisting of $420 million in public stocks and $345 million in illiquid real estate assets. None of CalPERS holdings include Russian government debt.
Although these are sizable amounts, CalPERS claims that combined they represent only
0.17% of its total investment portfolio.
In response to Russia's attack on Ukraine, CalPERS has announced the following actions:
• CalPERS has ceased all transactions in Russian publicly traded equity and has stopped the flow of any new investments into the country. • CalPERS is actively assessing its real estate investments and determining a path forward.
• CalPERS is reviewing all its investments in emerging markets, including Russia, due to the impacts the crisis has had on all financial markets. • CalPERS is following all regulatory requirements promulgated by U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control and the sanctions that are in place.
SB 1328, recently introduced in the State legislature, would require CalPERS to divest from Russian and Belarusian assets and companies. SB 1328 would prohibit CalPERS (and other public retirement systems) from investing public employee retirement funds in a company with business operations in Russia or Belarus or a company that supplies military equipment to Russia or Belarus. It would also prohibit future State investments in Russia or Belarus until the invasion is over and sanctions removed.
Summary and Recommendations
Santa Monica has no direct investments in Russian companies or the Russian government. The City does own bonds issued by a number of companies that have historically done business in Russia, but not from the most heavily invested sectors of fossil fuels and banking. For the most part, entities in which the City does hold Attachment 2
5.H.b
Packet Pg. 457 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
5 investments have announced plans to either terminate, suspend, or limit business in Russia.
Based on staff’s review, the following actions are recommended:
1. No current investments will be sold based on the Russian invasion. Sale of all the bonds of companies that were doing business with Russia would result in a loss of approximately $2.7 million which would cause fiscal harm to the City. Sale of the Supranationals would add another $0.7 million to the loss. Attachment A includes a listing of the bonds, their involvement in Russia, and includes the estimated loss the City would realize if the investments were sold.
2. Until such time either (1) Russia halts the invasion and occupation of Ukraine as determined by the U.S. Department of State; or (2) The United States revokes all sanctions against Russia imposed because of its participation in the February 24, 2022, invasion of Ukraine, no new investments should be made in companies that have not announced a termination, suspension, or limitation of business in Russia.
3. Staff will continue to monitor the status of entities and their Russian business activity and may restrict future new investments in companies that resume business operations in Russia or do not adequately reduce their business operations in Russia before 1) Russia halts the invasion and occupation of Ukraine as determined by the U.S. Department of State; or (2) The United States revokes all sanctions against Russia imposed because of its participation in the February 24, 2022, invasion of Ukraine.
4. The City supports SB 1328 calling for the CalPERS divestment of all Russian assets.
On March 21, 2022, Mayor Sue Himmelrich sent a letter of support for SB 1328 on behalf of the City. The letter is attached as Attachment B.
Prepared By: Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, Director of Finance Attachments: A. SB 1328 Letter to Senator McGuire
B. City of Santa Monica Corporate Investments with Status of Russian Exposure
Attachment 2
5.H.b
Packet Pg. 458 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
6 ATTACHMENT A
SB 1328 LETTER TO SENATOR MCGUIRE
5.H.b
Packet Pg. 459 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
7 5.H.b
Packet Pg. 460 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
8 ATTACHMENT B
CITY OF SANTA MONICA CORPORATE INVESTMENTS WITH STATUS OF RUSSIAN EXPOSURE
5.H.b
Packet Pg. 461 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Information Item: City of Santa Monica’s Direct and Indirect Investments in and Divestment from Russian Assets
9 5.H.b
Packet Pg. 462 Attachment: Attachment 2 - Information Item Russian Divestment [Revision 1] (6187 : Annual Investment Policy Update) Redevelopment Successor
Agency Report
City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024
Agenda Item: 5.I
1 of 1
To: Redevelopment Successor Agency
From: Nikima Newsome, Interim City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Approval of Minutes for Redevelopment Successor Agency Meeting Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Successor Agency approve the minutes of the December 12, 2023 meeting.
Prepared By: Nikima Newsome, Interim City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. December 12, 2023 Redevelopment Successor Agency Minutes
5.I
Packet Pg. 463
December 12, 2023
1 (NOT APPROVED)
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
REDEVELOPMENT SUCCESSOR AGENCY MEETING MINUTES
DECEMBER 12, 2023
A special meeting of the Santa Monica Redevelopment Successor Agency was called to order by Chair Brock at 8:20 p.m., on Tuesday, December 12, 2023, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA.
Roll Call: Present: Chair Phil Brock
Chair Pro Tem Lana Negrete
Agency Member Gleam Davis
Agency Member Oscar de la Torre
Agency Member Christine Parra
Agency Member Caroline Torosis
Agency Member Jesse Zwick
Also Present: Executive Director David White
Agency Attorney Douglas Sloan
Assistant Agency Secretary Nikima Newsome
CONVENE On order of the Chair, the Redevelopment Successor Agency convened to a joint meeting with the City Council at 8:20 p.m., with all members present.
REPORT ON MEETING
COMPENSATION
Pursuant to State law, Assistant Agency Secretary Nikima Newsome announced that members will receive no compensation for meeting as the Redevelopment Successor Agency.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
JOINT MEETING WITH
THE REDEVELOPMENT
SUCCESSOR AGENCY
There being a Consent Calendar for the Redevelopment Successor Agency and the City Council, the two Consent Calendars were heard concurrently. All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a member for discussion.
Motion by Chair Pro Tem Negrete, seconded by Agency Member Parra, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Items 5.A. and 5.F, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Agency Members de la Torre, Torosis, Davis, Parra, Zwick, Chair Pro Tem Negrete, Chair Brock
5.I.a
Packet Pg. 464 Attachment: December 12, 2023 Redevelopment Successor Agency Minutes [Revision 1] (6250 : RSA Minutes (1 min)) December 12, 2023
2 LOW-MOD HOUSING
INCOME ASSET FUND
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5.O. Annual Report on Low-Mod Housing Income Asset Fund, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council and Redevelopment Successor Agency:
1. Receive the Annual Report on the Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund for Fiscal Year 2022-23 and authorize the City Manager to post the report on the City's website by December 31, 2023;
2. Direct the City Manager to present the independent audit of the Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund to the Council upon completion of the independent audit of the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and authorize the City Manager to post the results of the audit on the City's website after presentation to City Council; and
3. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
RECOGNIZED
OBLIGATION PAYMENT
SCHEDULE (ROPS)
5.P. Approval of Annual Recognized Obligation Payment
Schedule (ROPS), was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Successor Agency:
1. Adopt Resolutions Nos. 43 (SA) and 44 (SA) approving the Agency’s recognized obligation payment schedule and
administrative budget for July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025.
2. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
ADJOURNMENT: On order of the Chair, the Redevelopment Successor Agency meeting was adjourned at 9:17 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Nikima S. Newsome Phil Brock
Assistant Agency Secretary Chair
5.I.a
Packet Pg. 465 Attachment: December 12, 2023 Redevelopment Successor Agency Minutes [Revision 1] (6250 : RSA Minutes (1 min)) 1 December 12, 2023
(NOT APPROVED)
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
DECEMBER 12, 2023
A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Davis at 5:34 p.m., on Tuesday, December 12, 2023, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA.
Roll Call: Present: Mayor Gleam Davis
Mayor Pro Tem Lana Negrete
Councilmember Phil Brock
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre
Councilmember Christine Parra
Councilmember Caroline Torosis (arrive at 5:47 p.m.)
Councilmember Jesse Zwick (arrive at 5:39 p.m.)
Also Present: City Manager David White
City Attorney Douglas Sloan
Assistant City Clerk Nikima Newsome
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:34 p.m., with all members present except Councilmembers Zwick and
Torosis. Councilmember Parra led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.
GENERAL PUBLIC
INPUT:
Members of the public Michael Pitkin, Bryan Bishop, Dhun May, Burr Leonard, Jerry Rubin, Rhea Devlugt, Anthony, Johnathan Foster, John Medlin, Sara Lee, Zoe Muntaner, Rabbi Neil Commes-Daniels, Rev. Nate Rugh, Matthew Hom, and Lilliana Hernandez commented on various local issues.
PUBLIC INPUT FOR
CLOSED SESSION,
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS AND CONSENT
CALENDAR ONLY:
Member of the public Zoe Muntaner commented on closed session items.
Members of the public Cris Gutierrez, Pam O’Connor, Denise Barton, and Ericka Lesley commented on special agenda items.
Members of the public Lauren Salisbury, Denise Barton, Jim Harris, Jeff Clockie, and Don Camacho commented on consent calendar items.
PROCLAMATIONS/
COMMENDATIONS/
3.A. Commendation: City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren, was presented.
5.J
Packet Pg. 466 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 December 12, 2023
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS
3.B. Recognition of outgoing Mayor Gleam Davis and installation of new Mayor Phil Brock, was presented.
MAYOR TAKES CHAIR Mayor Brock assumed the Chair.
3.C. City Manager Report - Santa Monica Public Library Annual Report, was presented.
CLOSED SESSIONS On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 7:39 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 8:16 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:
4.A. Conference with Labor Negotiator: Government Code Section 54957.6 -- Agency Designated Representatives: Acting Director of Human Resources Oles Gordeev and Human Resources Manager Robert Scalise; Bargaining Unit: Coalition of Santa Monica City Employees.
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
REPORT ON COUNCIL
TRAVEL
There was nothing to report on Council travel.
REPORT ON MEETING
COMPENSATION
Pursuant to State law, Assistant City Clerk Nikima Newsome announced that Council will receive no compensation for meeting as the Redevelopment Successor Agency.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
JOINT MEETING WITH
THE REDEVELOPMENT
SUCCESSOR AGENCY
There being a Consent Calendar for the City Council and the Redevelopment Successor Agency, on order of the Mayor, with consensus of the Councilmembers, the Council convened to a joint meeting with the Redevelopment Successor Agency at 8:20 p.m., and the two Consent Calendars were heard concurrently, with all members present.
All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.
At the request of Chair/Mayor Brock, Item 5.F. was removed from the Consent Calendar.
Motion by Chair/Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, seconded by
Agency/Councilmember Parra, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Items 5.A. and 5.F, reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Agency/Councilmembers de la Torre, Torosis, Davis, Parra,
5.J
Packet Pg. 467 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 December 12, 2023
Zwick,
Chair/Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Chair/Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS
5.A. Adoption of a Resolution Amending the Policies for Board and Commission, was withdrawn at the request of staff.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a resolution amending the Policies for City Boards, Commissions, Committees, Task Forces, and Regional Advisory Boards, and repealing Resolution No. 11510 (CCS) to include language concerning term limits of chairs/vice chairs as approved by Council on July 27, 2021, and to revise the method for boards and commissions to provide their annual reports and workplans to Council; and
2. 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.
DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEES
5.B. Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees and Adoption of Transportation Impact Fee Resolution No. 11564 (CCS), was adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Review and accept the FY 2022-23 Annual Reporting of Development Impact Fees per the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code 66000-66025) and the FY 2022-23 Child Care Linkage Fee Report per SMMC Chapter 9.65;
2. Adopt Resolution No. 11564 (CCS) entitled "A RESOLUTION
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
ADOPTING FIVE-YEAR FINDINGS AS TO THE
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE,” and
3. 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.
AUDITING SERVICES 5.C. Award RFP and enter into Agreement No. 11514 (CCS) with Lance Soll & Lunghard LLP for Professional Auditing Services, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Award RFP# 377 to Lance Soll & Lunghard LLP, a California-based company for professional external auditing services; and
5.J
Packet Pg. 468 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 December 12, 2023
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a three-year agreement with a two-year option with Lance Soll & Lunghard LLP, for a total amount not to exceed $958,936 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
Costs for the first year of the agreement will not exceed $180,620; each year thereafter contains an annual increase of 3%.
COLLECTION AGENCY
SERVICES
5.D. Approval of Second Modification to MRI Software Contract No. 10786 (CCS) to Administer Housing Voucher Programs, was approved.
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. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to Agreement No. 10786 (CCS) in the amount of $385,013 with MRI Software, LLC, for software licensing, software maintenance, technical support services, as well as criminal background check services for the Housing Authority. This will result in a ten-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $705,341 (including a $20,000 contingency) with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
PREVAILING WAGE
AND PAYROLL
MONITORING
SERVICES
5.E. Award RFP and Enter into Agreement Nos. 11515 (CCS) and 11516 (CCS) with GCAP Services, Inc. and GAFCON for Prevailing Wage and Certified Payroll Monitoring Services, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Award RFP# 366 to GCAP Services, Inc. as the primary consultant, and GAFCON, Inc. as the secondary consultant, to provide prevailing wage and certified payroll monitoring services for public works projects for all City Departments.
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11515 (CCS) with GCAP Services Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,632,306, (including a $148,391 contingency) (for five years and rate increases of 5% in years 3, 4, and 5) for a total amount not to exceed $1,632,306 over a 5-year period with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11516 (CCS) with GAFCON, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $1,396,356 (including a $126,941 contingency) (for five years and
5.J
Packet Pg. 469 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 December 12, 2023
rate increases of 3% in years 2,3,4, and 5) for a total amount not to exceed $1,396,356 over a 5-year period with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
BANKING SERVICES 5.G. Award Contract No. 11518 (CCS) for Banking Services to JPMorgan Chase, was approved.
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. Award RFP #360 to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. to provide banking services for the Finance Department.
3. Authorize the Director of Finance/City Treasurer to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11518 (CCS) with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. in an estimated amount of $800,000 for eight years, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
DOUGLAS PARK
PLAYGROUND
RECONSTRUCTION
PROJECT
5.H. Award Design/Build Agreement No. 11519 (CCS) with
Landscape Structures, Inc. for the Douglas Park Playground Reconstruction Project, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 and 15302 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an Agreement No. 11519 (CCS) with Landscape Structures, Inc. for the design, purchase of equipment, and installation of an inclusive playground at Douglas Park for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process, pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section
2.24.250(c) and is for an amount not to exceed $1,900,000 (including a 10% contingency) for two years with a one-year renewal option.
ADVERTISING
PROGRAM
MANAGEMENT
5.I. Award Contract No. 11520 (CCS) for Managing Advertising Program in City Owned Parking Structures, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
5.J
Packet Pg. 470 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 December 12, 2023
2. Award RFP# 375 to BIG Outdoor, for sales, administration, and installation and maintenance of advertising in City-owned parking structures for the Department of Transportation; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an Agreement No. 11520 (CCS) with BIG Outdoor for sales, administration, and installation and maintenance of advertising in City-owned parking structures over a five-year period, with two one-year renewal options, with guaranteed minimum revenue of $90,000 dollars in year one, and an increase of 2% per year thereafter.
CYBERSECURITY
SOFTWARE LICENSES
5.J. Accept Bid with vCloud Tech for Proofpoint Cybersecurity Software Licenses, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff Recommends that the City Council
1. Award Bid #4471 to vCloud Tech to provide Proofpoint's Intelligent Classification and Protection, Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, and Web Security solutions, associated licensing, and services as required by the Information Services Department;
2. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with vCloud Tech for Proofpoint's Intelligent Classification and Protection, Enterprise Data Loss Prevention, and Web Security solutions, associated licensing, and services in the amount not to exceed $506,826 for an initial two-year term, with one additional one-year renewal option to extend on the same terms and conditions for a total amount not to exceed $799,918, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and
3. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(d)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
JAG PROJECT 5.K. Authorization to Accept the 2023 Justice Assistance Grant for implementation of the JAG Project to Impact Crime and Keep Neighborhoods Safe, was approved.
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. Authorize the City Manager to accept a grant award in the amount $55,117 from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant for implementation of the JAG 2023 Project to Impact Crime and Keep Neighborhoods Safe in the Police Department, and to accept all grant renewals;
5.J
Packet Pg. 471 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 7 December 12, 2023
3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant; and
4. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of the report.
FENCING UPGRADE
AND ACTIVATION
PROJECT
5.L. Award Construction Contract No. 11521 (CCS) to RAMCO for the 7th Street Fencing Upgrade and Activation Project, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities), Section 15302 (Replacement/Reconstruction), Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land), and Section 15311 (Accessory Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Award Bid #SP2577 to RAMCO General Engineering Contractor for construction services for the 7th Street Fencing Upgrade and Activation Project for the Department of Transportation.
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Contract No. 11521 (CCS) with RAMCO General Engineering Contractor in an amount not to exceed $1,985,000 (including a $250,000
contingency).
4. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue any necessary change orders to complete additional work within contract authority.
5. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.
FIRST RESPONDER
PROGRAM
5.M. Approval of Second Modification of Agreement No. 11338 (CCS) with Flying Lion for Drone as a First Responder Program, was approved.
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 a second modification to Agreement No. 11338 (CCS) in the amount of $1,200,000 with Flying Lion Incorporated (FLI) to provide air support services for the Police Department. This will result in a 5- year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $1,381,000, with future year funding contingent on council budget approval.
5.J
Packet Pg. 472 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 8 December 12, 2023
FEEDING ANIMALS 5.N. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2769 (CCS) entitled “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SANTA MONICA AMENDING SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 4.04.390 PERTAINING TO THE FEEDING OF BIRDS AND OTHER ANIMALS IN THE CITY PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY,” was
adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.
LOW-MOD HOUSING
INCOME ASSET FUND
5.O. Annual Report on Low-Mod Housing Income Asset Fund, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council and Redevelopment Successor Agency:
1. Receive the Annual Report on the Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund for Fiscal Year 2022-23 and authorize the City Manager to post the report on the City's website by December 31, 2023;
2. Direct the City Manager to present the independent audit of the Lowand Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund to the Council upon completion of the independent audit of the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and authorize the City Manager to post the results of the audit on the City's website after presentation to City Council; and
3. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
RECOGNIZED
OBLIGATION PAYMENT
SCHEDULE (ROPS)
5.P. Approval of Annual Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS), was approved.
Recommended Action
1. Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Successor Agency:
2. Adopt Resolution Nos. 43 (SA) and 44 (SA) approving the Agency’s recognized obligation payment schedule and administrative budget for July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025.
3. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
MINUTES 5.Q. Minutes of City Council - Special Meeting - Aug 22, 2023 5:31 PM, were approved.
MINUTES 5.R. Minutes of City Council - Regular and Special Meeting - Nov
5.J
Packet Pg. 473 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 9 December 12, 2023
28, 2023 5:30 PM, were approved.
MINUTES 5.S. Minutes of City Council - Special Meeting - Nov 28, 2023 5:35 PM, were approved.
LICENSE AGREEMENT 5.F. Authorize the City Manager to Enter into a License Agreement with Cirque du Soleil, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities), Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land), and Section 15323 (Class 23 Normal Operations of Facilities for Public Gatherings) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a license agreement with Cirque du Soleil to use a portion of Lot 1N from October 1, 2024 to January 24, 2025.
Councilmember Davis stated for the record that approximately 35 years ago while working in private practice, she represented Cirque du Soleil at trial.
Upon consultation with the City Attorney, she was advised that there was no potential conflict and therefore no need for her to recuse from the item.
Questions asked and answered of staff including will there be ways to mitigate financial losses by the pier and its tenants due to loss of parking and restaurant revenue; will Cirque du Soleil be hiring locally; will there be meetings of stakeholders held on a regular basis; did the 2009 study regarding financial impacts of the pier by Cirque du Soleil isolate what the impact were for the Pier; what are the anticipated showtimes; how will Cirque du Soleil communicate with the businesses on the Pier; will Council be able to review exact terms of agreement prior to approval; what will the community benefits be; can union lodging be encouraged; how will Cirque du Soleil ensure that Pier businesses are left whole; is Cirque du Soleil a union shop; will there be signs to encourage patrons to visit local businesses on the Pier, including Pacific Park; will there be a specific carve out for potential losses to Pacific Park; when does the license agreement need to be completed by; who will be involved in the license agreement process; can the parking footprint and floor plan be changed to maximize more access to businesses on the Pier; how will the Cirque du Soleil concession stand impact restaurant business; will local cafes and restaurants be incorporated with the concession stand; how can negotiations with Pacific Park be improved; what is a bounce back ticket; and will this event impact police overtime and what would the financial impact be to the City.
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to the
5.J
Packet Pg. 474 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 10 December 12, 2023
ambiguity in the language in the agreement concerning the impacts to the businesses and stakeholders of the Pier; developing holistic traffic plans for the City for various large events and not solely per event; articulation of specific community benefits in the contract; and reaching out to hotels regardless of union affiliation or not to ensure they too are able to capitalize on this opportunity.
Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Zwick, to approve the recommendation with the following direction (1) that the City Manager negotiate a very specific traffic plan with Cirque du Soleil but that the traffic and parking management plan include provisions that can be used for other large events and including safety provisions for employees of the Pier (2) that the City Manager negotiate, to the maximum extent possible, that there be synergy between the businesses on the Pier and throughout the City and Cirque du Soleil (3) that the stakeholder groups be involved throughout the process as per the recommendation of the Executive Director of the Santa Monica Pier Corporation; and (4) in regards to local hire, that the City Manager to the greatest extent possible, negotiate metrics relating to numbers and diversity equity and inclusion goals of the City, including small businesses. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers de la Torre, Torosis, Davis, Parra, Zwick Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ADJOURNMENT OF THE
SPECIAL JOINT
MEETING
On order of the Mayor/Chair, the special joint meeting with the Redevelopment Successor Agency was adjourned at 9:17 p.m., and the regular City Council meeting was reconvened with all Councilmembers present.
PUBLIC INPUT ON
REMAINING AGENDA
ITEMS:
Members of the public Bea Nemlaha, Denise Barton, Ann Bowman, and Cheryl Kushner commented on Item 16.A.
Member of the public Andrew Thomas commented on Item 16.B.
ORDINANCES:
LOBBYIST
REGISTRATION AND
REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
10.A. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code (SMMC) Section 4.85.020 Related to Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Introduce for first reading the attached ordinance to amend Section
4.85.020 requiring lobbyists to file lobbyist forms using the City’s new electronic lobbyist registration system, and
5.J
Packet Pg. 475 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 11 December 12, 2023
2. 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.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Parra, Davis, Torosis, de la Torre, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
CANNABIS 10.B. Introduction and First Reading of an Interim Zoning Ordinance Extending Interim Zoning Regulations Adopted by Interim Zoning Ordinance 2764 (CCS) to Amend 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, was presented 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 extending interim zoning regulations adopted by Interim Zoning Ordinance 2764 (CCS) 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 sell adult-use cannabis or adult-use cannabis products to persons 21 years of age and over.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Parra, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Parra, Davis, Torosis, de la Torre Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
5.J
Packet Pg. 476 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 12 December 12, 2023
ABSENT: None
COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
CIVIC AUDITORIUM
16.A. Request of Mayor Councilmember Davis and Mayor Pro Tem Negrete that the City Manager should issue a public notice to solicit letters of interest for the revitalization of the Civic Auditorium. The City Manager is being asked to prepare a public notice that shall indicate that the City will maintain ownership of the Civic Auditorium and will consider entering into a long-term lease. In addition, the public notice should indicate that the City is seeking letters of interest from individuals and/or entities that have the experience to operate the facility as a thriving entertainment and cultural arts venue, experience working with projects with landmark restrictions and express intention to preserve the distinguishing historical landmark attributes of the facility, to the greatest extent possible, and has the demonstrated financial wherewithal to operate the facility without any financial contribution from the City, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, to approve the recommended action.
The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote, with all Councilmembers present.
PARKING 16.B. Request of Councilmember Mayor Brock, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete and Councilmember de la Torre that the City Manager extend the amount of free parking offered by the City at its Downtown parking garages from 90 minutes to 3 hours from December 22 through December 24 to spur last minute holiday shopping as a gift to our residents and visitors, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember de la Torre, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, to approve the recommended action. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers de la Torre, Torosis, Davis, Parra, Zwick, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
5.J
Packet Pg. 477 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 13 December 12, 2023
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 9:54 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Nikima S. Newsome Phil Brock
Assistant City Clerk Mayor
5.J
Packet Pg. 478 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 12, 2023 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 1 December 19, 2023
(NOT APPROVED)
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
DECEMBER 19, 2023
A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Brock at 4:37 p.m., on Tuesday, December 19, 2023, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA and at Hotel Riu Plaza Guadalajara, Av. Adolfo López Mateos Sur 830, Chapalita, 44500, Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico.
Roll Call: Present: Mayor Phil Brock
Mayor Pro Tem Lana Negrete
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre (arrived via teleconference at 4:40 p.m.) Councilmember Christine Parra (arrived at 5:29 p.m.)
Councilmember Caroline Torosis (arrived at 5:08 p.m.)
Councilmember Jesse Zwick
Also Present: City Manager David White
City Attorney Douglas Sloan
Assistant City Clerk Nikima Newsome
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 4:37 p.m., with all members present except Councilmembers Parra, Torosis and de la Torre.
PUBLIC INPUT FOR
CLOSED SESSION:
No members of the public commented on closed session items.
CLOSED SESSIONS
(Councilmember de la Torre
arrived via teleconference at
4:40 p.m.)
(Councilmember Torosis
arrived at 5:08 p.m.)
(Councilmember Parra
arrived at 5:29 p.m.)
(Councilmember de la Torre
excused at 6:40 p.m.)
On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 4:40 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 6:43 p.m., with all members present except Councilmember de la Torre to report the following:
4.A. Conference with legal counsel, existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1) and (2): Smith v. City of Santa Monica; FAA Docket No. 16-16-02
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
4.B. Conference with legal counsel, existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): Yossi Shimshi v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 22SMCV01799
5.K
Packet Pg. 479 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 19, 2023 4:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 December 19, 2023
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
4.C. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code §54956.8; property: 1431 Second Street, Santa Monica, California (Parking Structure 6) (APN 4291-016-902); City negotiators: Jennifer Taylor, Economic Development Manager, and David Martin, Community Development Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Gerry Cottle, founder, Rooftop Cinema Club; under negotiation: price and terms of payment
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
4.D. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code §54956.8; property: 1654 19th Street, Santa Monica, California (City TV) (APN 4275-026-009); City negotiators: Jennifer Taylor, Economic Development Manager, and David Martin, Community Development Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Will Winkenhofer, Fidelis Advisors; under negotiation: price and terms of payment
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
4.E. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code §54956.8; property: 1444 7th Street, Santa Monica, California (Old Fire Station 1) (APN 4291-020-900); City negotiators: Jennifer Taylor, Economic Development Manager, and David Martin, Community Development Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Will Winkenhofer, Fidelis Advisors; under negotiation: price and terms of payment
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
4.F. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code §54956.8; property: 1444 7th Street, Santa Monica, California (Old Fire Station 1) (APN 4291-020-900); City negotiators: Jennifer Taylor, Economic Development Manager, and David Martin, Community Development Director; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Jesse Slansky, West Hollywood Community Corporation; under negotiation: price and terms of payment The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action
5.K
Packet Pg. 480 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 19, 2023 4:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 December 19, 2023
taken.
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 6:43 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Nikima S. Newsome Phil Brock
Assistant City Clerk Mayor
5.K
Packet Pg. 481 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Dec 19, 2023 4:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024
Agenda Item: 10.A
1 of 9
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Administration
Subject: Introduction and Adoption of an Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Extending Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2772 (CCS) Authorizing the Establishment by Resolution, of Objective Design Standards for Qualifying Housing Projects that Elect to Use the Streamlined, Ministerial Approval Process Established by Senate Bill 35.
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. Introduction and adoption of an Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance extending Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2772(CCS) authorizing Council to establish, by Resolution, objective design standards for housing projects that qualify for the streamlined, ministerial approval process established by SB 35 housing projects.
Summary
On December 19, 2023, Council adopted Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance 2772 (CCS) authorizing Council to establish, by Resolution, objective design standards for housing projects that qualify for the streamlined, ministerial approval process established by SB 35 housing projects. The adopted Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance (“EIZO”) includes objective design standards related to ground floor design, facades and materials, open space, and parking screening that will apply exclusively to qualifying SB 35 housing projects providing at least 50% of its units as affordable. SB 35 projects are provided streamlined review and are exempt from any discretionary consideration, including ARB design review. These objective design standards are
10.A
Packet Pg. 482
2 of 9
intended to implement the City’s design principles for housing projects absent the ARB’S review of qualifying SB 35 housing projects. The standards were developed with a focus on practicality, constructability, and minimal additional cost so as not to create barriers to housing production.
The emergency interim zoning ordinance became effective immediately upon its adoption by Council on December 19, 2023 and is set to expire on February 19, 2024.
Council may extend the emergency interim zoning ordinance through February 19, 2029, allowing the IZO to be effective up to 60 months in accordance with SMMC Section 9.46.090(C). Staff recommends extending the IZO for 24 months through February 19, 2026. Staff will continue to evaluate objective design standards for housing projects in the Bergamot Area Plan as part of the next phase of Housing Element Program implementation efforts that will continue through 2024. Accordingly, staff anticipates returning to the Council by Fall 2024 with additional zoning amendments as required by the Housing Element, including permanent adoption of these SB 35 objective design standards by resolution.
Staff recommends that the Council extend IZO 2772 (CCS) as adopted by the Council on December 19, 2023 with no changes. Council would retain the authority to modify or repeal the ordinance prior to February 2026 should it choose to do so.
Background
Senate Bill 35 (SB 35) was passed in 2017 by the California State Legislature and signed into law; it was subsequently amended most recently by SB 423 in 2023. SB 35 provides qualifying housing projects the opportunity to opt-in to a streamlined approval process in jurisdictions that have not adopted a compliant Housing Element or are not meeting State-mandated housing production goals. Some of the preconditions include a minimum percentage of affordable units, labor requirements and consistency with local planning standards. Each year, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issues an SB 35 determination that indicates which cities are subject to SB 35 (https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-communitydevelopment/statutory-determinations).
10.A
Packet Pg. 483
3 of 9
On June 30, 2023, HCD determined that Santa Monica is subject to SB 35 for housing projects that include more than 50% of their units as affordable units. This means that Santa Monica fell behind on addressing lower-income housing needs for the 5th Cycle Housing Element. SB 35 housing projects with more than 50% of their units as affordable units are therefore eligible for a streamlined, ministerial review process that does not require public hearings. As a result, the housing projects must only be reviewed against objective design standards (in addition to compliance with other development standards) and cannot be subject to the City’s standard architectural review process, which is designed to, among other things, prevent the development of structures or uses that are not of acceptable exterior design or appearance, are of inferior quality, or are likely to have a depreciating effect on the local environment or surrounding area by reason of appearance or value; to eliminate conditions, structures, or uses, which by reason of their effect tend to degrade the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Extending the subject IZO will ensure that the City will continue to have objective design standards in place applicable to SB 35 projects, should an applicant opt into using that process.
Similar to the City’s Administrative Approval (AA) process for housing projects, SB 35’s streamlining process is available to qualifying projects if they meet certain criteria. A comparison of the eligibility criteria for the SB 35 streamlining process as compared to the City’s streamlined AA process is shown in the table below:
Table 1: Comparison of SB 35 Process vs City’s Streamlined Process for Housing Projects SB 35 Streamlining Santa Monica AA Streamlining
Housing Project Type
At least 2 units - At least 2 units
- No more than 33% commercial - No more than 25% commercial - At least 50% on-site affordable to low income
households
- At least 15% on-site affordable per AHPP evenly
distributed across all income categories
- Must be consistent with objective standards
(eligible density bonus/
incentives/concessions/waivers through State
Density Bonus Law (SDBL) permitted)
- Must be consistent with Zoning Ordinance. May
include a variance or modification (eligible density
bonus/incentives/concessions/waivers through
SDBL permitted)
Site Requirements
10.A
Packet Pg. 484
4 of 9
SB 35 Streamlining Santa Monica AA Streamlining
- No limit on site size - Cannot be on sites 1 acre or more - Cannot be on a site:
• With prime farmland
• Designated as a hazardous waste site,
unless site cleared for residential use
• With a mobile home park
• With conservation areas/easement or
protected species
• With wetlands
• With a floodplain or floodway
• Within a designated very high fire hazard
severity zone
- No environmental site limitations
- Cannot demolish a historic structure - Cannot demolish a historic structure Prevailing Wage and Labor Requirements
- Prevailing Wage required for projects that are both
11+ units and non-public work
- Skilled and trained workforce requirements for any
project over 85 feet in height
- Healthcare benefits must be provided for projects
with 50 units or more
- None
Tenant Protections
- Project cannot demolish units:
• Occupied by tenants within last 10 years
• Subject to affordable deed restriction
• Subject to any form of local rent or price
control
Consistent with SB 330 state requirements:
- Project cannot reduce the total number of dwelling
units on-site
- Project must replace protected units, which are
units:
• Occupied by low-income tenants within last 5
years
• Subject to affordable deed restriction
• Subject to any form of local rent or price control
• Subject to Ellis Act withdrawal in last 10 years
Source: HCD
Objective Design Standards (ODS) Program
On April 29, 2021, the City of Santa Monica was awarded a grant from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) through the SCAG Sustainable Communities Program (SCP) program – Housing & Sustainable Development award, which provides direct technical assistance to SCAG member jurisdictions on planning and policy projects. The project seeks to help support participating cities with a greater understanding of the role of objective development and design standards in increasing housing production in Los Angeles County and throughout California. The project scope includes permit streamlining assistance, an online cost estimator tool, and the preparation of objective design standards. AECOM consultants have been assisting the
10.A
Packet Pg. 485
5 of 9
City on this ODS Project with technical assistance in preparing the proposed SB 35 objective design standards for Council’s consideration.
Staff and AECOM have been developing objective design standards based on the public comments provided during the project’s initial outreach with the community, ARB, and Planning Commission. Below is a brief overview of the public meetings held for the ODS project to date:
• On August 22, 2022, the City hosted a virtual community workshop with approximately 32 participants consisting of community members and stakeholders and provided an introduction to the Objective Design Standards project.
• On September 19, 2022, the Architectural Review Board held a study session on the ODS program and discussed the design features and concepts the Board is most interest in seeing developed in housing projects.
• On October 19, 2022, the Planning Commission held a study session on the introduction of the ODS Program and discussed design principals most important to the overall design of housing projects that should be evaluated as part of the ODS project.
• On October 26, 2023, the City hosted a second virtual community workshop with approximately 38 participants and discussed both SB 35 draft objective design standards and potential BAP conceptual design standards. • On November 6, 2023, the Architectural Review Board held a study session and provided comments on the draft SB 35 design standards and conceptual BAP design standards.
• On November 15, 2023, the Planning Commission held the first of two study sessions on objective design standards. The Commission was presented with and provided comments on draft SB 35 design standards that are the subject of this Emergency IZO currently proposed for City Council consideration. • On November 27, 2023, the City hosted a virtual community roundtable discussion including architects and affordable housing providers on the draft SB 35 objective design standards, with a particular focus on whether the draft
10.A
Packet Pg. 486
6 of 9
standards would be workable and not present barriers to developing affordable housing projects. Additional feedback received from affordable housing providers during this session has been incorporated into the proposed IZO standards. • On December 6, 2023, the Planning Commission held the second of two study sessions on objective design standards. The Commission was presented with and provided comments on an introduction to conceptual objective design standards for the Bergamot Area Plan (BAP) that will be evaluated in 2024 for possible adoption as part of Housing Element Program 1.E. • On December 19, 2023, Council adopted Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance 2772 (CCS) authorizing Council to establish, by Resolution, objective design standards for housing projects that qualify for the streamlined, ministerial approval process established by SB 35 housing projects.
The standards were developed with a focus on practicality, constructability, and minimal additional cost so as not to create barriers to housing production.
Discussion
Proposed SB 35 Objective Design Standards
The proposed objective design standards for SB 35 housing projects are not intended to replace existing development or objective design standards already in the zoning code.
Given that these standards apply only to SB 35 housing projects where more than 50% of the units are deed-restricted affordable units, the following objectives guided the creation of additional standards intended to replicate the ARB process:
• No replacement of existing objective design standards in zoning ordinance already extensively discussed throughout Housing Element process • Ensure that proposed standards are not a constraint on housing production • Ensure that proposed standards are within the scope of what the Architectural Review Board would typically review
10.A
Packet Pg. 487
7 of 9
The proposed SB 35 standards are based on common design-related issues that the ARB often discusses during its review of housing projects. Also included are standards that address recent changes in the zoning code for housing projects including the removal of restrictions that will allow ground floor residential units in non-residential districts. Additionally, in response to housing projects designing above-grade parking levels to reduce the cost of providing typical subterranean-level parking in density bonus projects, screening standards are proposed that seek to minimize its overall appearance. These objective design standards are provided in Resolution No. 11568 (Attachment B).
Extension of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance 2772 (CCS) Santa Monica is currently subject to SB 35 for qualifying housing projects with at least 50% affordable housing. Therefore, the proposed extension of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance 2772 (CCS) will authorize Council to establish, by Resolution, the objective design standards for housing projects that qualify for and elect to use the streamlined, ministerial approval process established by SB 35. Resolution No.11568 as adopted by Council on December 19, 2023 establishing the objective design review standards that will be applicable to qualifying projects will be maintained and unchanged as adopted. While staff has conducted multiple study sessions and community engagement on the proposed standards, the EIZO and Resolution allow the SB 35 objective design standards to be revisited for improvements upon further evaluation as necessary.
Because housing projects that opt in to the streamlined, ministerial approval process are only reviewed against objective design standards (in addition to compliance with other development standards) and are not subject to the City’s standard architectural review process, without objective design standards in place, housing projects could be approved without any design review that is intended to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community.
10.A
Packet Pg. 488
8 of 9
Environmental Analysis
The proposed approval of the EIZO extending the interim zoning ordinance that creates the mechanism to establish objective design standards for qualifying SB 35 projects is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines (common sense exemption).
Based on the evidence in the record, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed interim ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed ordinance is administrative and regulatory in nature in that it creates the mechanism to establish objective design standards by resolution to ensure that future SB 35 projects will be subject to design review consistent with SB 35. The extension of the interim zoning ordinance would not alter development standards for housing projects previously analyzed as part of the 2021-2029 6th Cycle Housing Element Environmental Impact Report (EIR) [SCH No. 20212269242021] that was certified by Council on October 12, 2021, with an Addendum to the EIR approved on October 11, 2022. Therefore, no further environmental review under CEQA is required.
Past Meetings
Meeting Date Description
12/19/23 Introduction and adoption of an Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance authorizing Council to establish, by Resolution, objective design standards for housing projects that qualify for the streamlined, ministerial approval process established by SB 35 housing projects
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future.
10.A
Packet Pg. 489
9 of 9
Prepared By: Steve Mizokami, Principal Planner
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. ODS Emergency IZO Extension Ordinance
B. Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23)
C. Council Staff Report ODS (12-19-23) - Web Link
10.A
Packet Pg. 490
1 City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
INTRODUCTION AND ADOPTION OF AN EMERGENCY INTERIM ZONING
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA EXTENDING EMERGENCY INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2772 (CCS)
AUTHORIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT, BY RESOLUTION, OF OBJECTIVE DESIGN
STANDARDS FOR QUALIFYING HOUSING PROJECTS THAT ELECT TO USE THE
STREAMLINED, MINISTERIAL APPROVAL PROCESS ESTABLISHED BY SENATE BILL 35
WHEREAS, in an effort to address the California housing shortage by increasing housing supply, Senate Bill (“SB”) 35, passed in 2017 by the California State Legislature and most recently amended by SB 423 in 2023, provides qualifying housing projects the opportunity to opt-in to a streamlined, ministerial approval process through which a housing project is only reviewed against objective zoning and design review standards; WHEREAS, SB 35 applies to jurisdictions that do not have a compliant Housing Element or have not met their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) goal for construction of above-moderate income housing and/or housing for households below 80% area median income (AMI); and
WHEREAS, each year, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) issues a SB 35 determination that indicates which cities are subject to the streamlining requirements of SB 35; and
WHEREAS, this determination is based upon Annual Progress Report (“APR”) data submitted by jurisdictions each year compared to the RHNA or prorated Lower (VeryLow and Low) and Above-Moderate RHNA for each jurisdiction; and
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 491 Attachment: ODS Emergency IZO Extension Ordinance [Revision 1] (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design 2 WHEREAS, on June 30, 2023, HCD determined that Santa Monica fell behind on addressing Lower-Income housing needs for the City’s 5th Cycle (2013-2021) Housing Element, and, therefore, Santa Monica is subject to SB35 for housing projects that include more than 50% of their units as affordable units and elect to comply with all other requirements of SB 35; and
WHEREAS, as a result, eligible housing projects must only be reviewed against objective design standards (in addition to compliance with other development standards) and cannot be subject to the City’s standard architectural review process, which is designed to, among other things: (1) prevent the development of structures or uses that are not of acceptable exterior design or appearance, are of inferior quality, or are likely to have a depreciating effect on the local environment or surrounding area by reason of appearance or value; and (2) to eliminate conditions, structures, or uses, which by reason of their effect tend to degrade the health, safety, or general welfare of the community; and WHEREAS, because the City was not subject to SB 35 prior to June 2023, the City, prior to the adoption of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance 2772, had no objective design standards in place for projects that qualify for and opt into the SB 35 process; and WHEREAS, without objective design standards, projects could be approved without any design review intended to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the community; and
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2023, City Council adopted Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance (IZO) No. 2772, which ensured that objective design standards were immediately in effect upon adoption of the IZO while allowing flexibility for the objective
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 492 Attachment: ODS Emergency IZO Extension Ordinance [Revision 1] (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design 3 design standards to be revisited for improvements upon further evaluation as necessary; and
WHEREAS, IZO No 2772 is set to expire on February 19, 2024, and the City Council desires to extend it for 24 months in accordance with SMMC 9.46.090(C), with a new expiration date of February 19, 2026, to allow adequate time for staff to continue to evaluate objective design standards for eligible housing projects as part of the next phase of Housing Element Program implementation efforts that will continue through 2024; and WHEREAS, staff anticipates returning to City Council by Fall 2024 with additional zoning amendments as required by the Housing Element, including permanent adoption of the SB 35 objective design standards; and
WHEREAS, the proposed extension would not preclude Council from revisiting the IZO prior to its expiration for any amendments to the IZO or to repeal it at any time; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds and declares that there continues to exist a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and general welfare due to the current lack of permanent comprehensive objective design standards for common design issues in housing projects eligible for SB 35 streamlining, which are otherwise exempt from discretionary design review, such that failure to approve the extension of this IZO, and allow for the continued adoption of objective design standards for eligible projects by resolution, would result in a threat to public health, safety, and welfare because no applicable design standards would be in place should an eligible project elect SB 35 streamlined review.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 493 Attachment: ODS Emergency IZO Extension Ordinance [Revision 1] (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design 4 SECTION 1. The Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.31.195 is hereby amended to read as follows:
§ 9.31.195 Multiple-Unit Dwelling Projects.
The purpose of this Section is to establish requirements for multiple-unit dwelling projects; however, 100% affordable housing projects are exempt from subsections (A) and (B) of this Section.
A. Unit Mix. Multiple-unit dwelling projects with more than 50 units shall incorporate the requirements set forth below, except Tier 2 projects shall comply with Section 9.23.030(A)(2).
1. For market rate units:
a. At least 10% of the units shall be three-bedroom units; b. At least 10% of the units shall be two-bedroom units; c. No more than 15% of the units shall be studio units.
2. Affordable housing unit mix shall be governed by Chapter 9.64, Affordable Housing Production Program.
3. The Director may grant a waiver from this unit mix requirement pursuant to the requirements and procedures for Waivers in Chapter 9.43.
B. Transportation Demand Management. Multiple-unit dwelling projects that meet the applicability established in Section 9.53.030 shall include the following Transportation Demand Management measures in addition to those required by Chapter 9.53, Transportation Demand Management:
1. For nonresidential components of projects, provide the following:
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 494 Attachment: ODS Emergency IZO Extension Ordinance [Revision 1] (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design 5 a. A transportation allowance equivalent to at least 75% of the cost of a monthly regional transit pass, in accordance with Section
9.53.130(B)(2)(b)(viii).
b. Bike valet, free of charge, during all automobile valet operating hours.
2. For residential components of projects, provide a transportation allowance equivalent to at least 75% of the cost of a monthly regional transit pass, in accordance with Section 9.53.130(B)(2)(c)(iv).
C. Air Quality Assessment Zone. Multiple-unit dwelling projects within the Air Quality Assessment Zone shall be required to prepare a technical memorandum that describes the effectiveness of design features to reduce exposure to diesel particulate matter (DPM) as a part of the early project design process. Such memorandum shall be submitted at the time of project application and shall be subject to review and approval by the Director prior to project approval.
D. Unit Replacement Requirements. Multiple-unit dwelling projects shall comply with all applicable residential unit replacement requirements, including, but not limited to, Government Code Section 66300(d) and State Density Bonus law.
E. Objective Design Standards for Streamlined, Ministerial Approval Process Established by Senate Bill 35. Qualifying multiple-unit dwelling projects that elect to use the streamlined, ministerial approval process established by Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), and set forth in Government Code Section 65913.4, shall be required to comply with objective design review standards, which may be established by resolution of the City Council.
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 495 Attachment: ODS Emergency IZO Extension Ordinance [Revision 1] (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design 6 SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Emergency 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 Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance.
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Emergency 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 Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Emergency 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 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 Emergency 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 Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance shall be effective immediately and shall be of no further force and effect as of February 19, 2026.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney
10.A.a
Packet Pg. 496 Attachment: ODS Emergency IZO Extension Ordinance [Revision 1] (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design 1 City Council Meeting: December 19, 2023 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER 11568 (CCS)
(City Council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
ADOPTING OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR QUALIFYING HOUSING
PROJECTS THAT ELECT TO USE THE STREAMLINED, MINISTERIAL APPROVAL PROCESS ESTABLISHED BY SENATE BILL 35
WHEREAS, in an effort to address the California housing shortage by increasing housing supply, Senate Bill (“SB”) 35, passed in 2017 by the California State Legislature and most recently amended by SB 423 in 2023, provides qualifying housing projects the opportunity to opt into a streamlined, ministerial approval process through which a housing project is only reviewed against objective zoning and design review standards; WHEREAS, SB 35 applies to jurisdictions that do not have a compliant Housing Element or have not met their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) goal for construction of above-moderate income housing and/or housing for households below 80% area median income (AMI); and
WHEREAS, each year, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) issues an SB 35 determination that indicates which cities are subject to the streamlining requirements of SB 35; and
WHEREAS, this determination is based upon Annual Progress Report data submitted by jurisdictions each year compared to the RHNA or prorated Lower (Very-Low and Low) and Above-Moderate RHNA for each jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, on June 30, 2023, HCD determined that Santa Monica fell behind on addressing Lower-Income housing needs for the City’s 5
th Cycle (2013-2021) Housing
Element, and, therefore, Santa Monica is subject to SB35 for housing projects that include DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 497 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 2 more than 50% of their units as affordable units and elect to comply with all other requirements of SB 35; and
WHEREAS, as a result, eligible housing projects must only be reviewed against objective design standards (in addition to compliance with other development standards) and cannot be subject to the City’s standard architectural review process, which is designed to, among other things: (1) prevent the development of structures or uses that are not of acceptable exterior design or appearance, are of inferior quality, or are likely to have a depreciating effect on the local environment or surrounding area by reason of appearance or value; and (2) to eliminate conditions, structures, or uses, which by reason of their effect tend to degrade the health, safety, or general welfare of the community; and WHEREAS, the proposed objective design standards supplement standards already in existence and seek to ensure quality building design while addressing designrelated issues often considered during the design review of housing project, including, but not limited to: (1) ground floor design standards for residential uses facing the street to ensure adequate design and pedestrian orientation; (2) standards for design details of façade materials, transitions, and overall visual interest; (3) design standards for open space for residential projects to ensure maximal resident use and enjoyment of the space; and (4) standards to ensure that any above-grade parking levels within housing projects are adequately screened and designed with materials that integrate well into the project’s design and minimize its appearance; and
WHEREAS, the proposed objective design standards have been developed in consultation with the Southern California Association of Governments (“SCAG”), AECOM, Architectural Review Board (“ARB”), Planning Commission, and commentary DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 498 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 3 received by members of the public during virtual community workshops occurring on August 22, 2022, October 26, 2023 and a roundtable discussion on November 27, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the following objectives guided the creation of the proposed standards: (1) no replacing of existing objective design standards in the zoning ordinance already extensively discussed throughout Housing Element process; (2) ensuring that proposed standards are not a constraint on housing production; and (3) ensuring that proposed standards are within the scope of ARB’s typical review; and WHEREAS, should the City not adopt any objective design standards, projects could be approved without any design review that is intended to promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council now desires to adopt Objective Design Standards attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution in compliance with SB 35 to ensure that the City has appropriate standards immediately in place to apply to qualifying SB 35 housing projects, should an eligible applicant opt into using that process.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby adopt the Objective Design Standards attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. In adopting these standards, the City Council finds and declares that, based on the oral and written testimony presented to the City Council at the public hearing on December 19, 2023, that there is substantial evidence in the record to support the standards set forth therein.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 499 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 4 SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney
Exhibit A - Objective Design Standards for Projects Subject to Senate Bill 35 DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 500 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35
EXHIBIT A
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 501 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 SB 35 Objective Design Standards
December 2023 | Final
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 502 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 1 I. Ground Floor
Design Intent
To promote an active, accessible, and comfortable pedestrian environment that enhances the public realm at a human scale, promotes a sense of openness, and enables flexible uses over time.
Objective Design Standards
A. Horizontal Element for buildings with a ground floor height of 15 feet or greater:
Incorporate a horizontal element between 9 and 14 feet above sidewalk elevation for a minimum of 30% of building frontage. Any horizontal elements shall not consist of vinyl or plastic materials. Elements may be continuous or intermittent, and may include but not limited to:
1) An awning, canopy, or other covering;
2) Signage band
3) An architectural projection of at least 18 inches; and/or 4) A trellis.
B. Entrances Except For Entrances to Residential Units: Street-facing façades shall provide a minimum of one entrance for each street frontage that opens onto the sidewalk. Entrances shall be articulated by one or more of the following:
1) A canopy, awning or other covering;
2) Signage band
3) Porch/portico;
4) Trellis; or
5) Recessed entryway.
C. Street-Facing Residential Uses: Ground floor residential units with street frontage shall have either an entrance or private Outdoor Living Area facing the street. Projects that do not provide street-facing residential units and provide a primary entry into the site or residential lobby may include street-facing residential amenity space pursuant to Section I(C)(6) below.
1) Entrances to residential units on the ground floor shall be set back a minimum of 4 feet from the street-facing property line.
2) Entrances shall have a minimum 3-foot covered landing area at the same grade as the interior floor.
3) Entrances shall incorporate at least three of the following:
a. Recession of entrance at least 2 feet from the building façade; b. Overhead projection (e.g. porch roof);
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 503 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 2 c. A sidelight window, adjacent window, or door with a window; d. At least one stair, up or down, from the pedestrian pathway; e. Paving material, texture, or pattern differentiated from the pedestrian pathway.
4) Stoops and patios: The side of a patio or stoop (when parallel to a sidewalk) taller than 30 inches shall be set back a minimum of 18 inches from the property line, separated by planted area.
5) Private Outdoor Living Area Adjacent to a Street: Ground floor private outdoor living areas adjacent to a street shall not be permitted to be enclosed with a fence, wall, or hedge greater than 5 feet in height. Any portion of fences, walls, and hedges above 42 inches in height shall be at least 50% visually transparent. 6) Housing Projects with a Single Primary Entry for Residents: Resident amenity space including but not limited to community rooms, gym or other active space for residents may be located on the ground floor facing the street if the project is designed with a single primary entrance into the site or building lobby for residents.
Such spaces shall be subject to transparency requirements for ground floor residential uses pursuant to Section II(A)(1).
D. Equipment Screening: Equipment including but not limited to electrical boxes, backflow preventers or similar connections required to be located at the street-facing elevations shall be screening with landscape material, or painted to match adjacent building materials, as permitted.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 504 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 3 II. Façades
Design Intent
To address the incorporation of architectural elements and features for visual interest, creating well-designed and coherent building façades with sufficient detail, relief and/or variation.
Objective Design Standards
A. Transparency: Street-facing façades shall incorporate glazing for at least 30 percent of the façade, inclusive of ground floor transparency.
1) Ground Floor Residential Uses: A minimum of 20% of each ground floor streetfacing façade shall be transparent, measured between floor and ceiling height.
B. Openings
1) Every room on an exterior wall shall contain an operable opening unless prohibited by Building Code or located within the Air Quality Assessment Zone. 2) Windows shall be recessed at least 2 inches from the face of the façade unless windows have an exterior shading device on a street facing façade.
C. Materials
1) Material transitions shall occur at the inside corner of a plane change. When material changes occur in the same plane, projecting or recessed architectural elements shall be used to create a corner for material transition. 2) Drainage shall be routed away from the façade to prevent the staining of materials. 3) No foam materials shall be utilized.
D. Roof Decks: Roof decks or portions of roof decks located within 12 feet of a residential zoning district shall be set back a minimum of 30 inches from the building edge.
E. Fences & Walls: Fences and walls shall be made of prefinished materials except for foam, plastic, or vinyl. If the wall is constructed of concrete block, the wall shall be stacked bond or polished block.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 505 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 4 III. Open Space
Design Intent
To provide a variety of open spaces that contribute enhanced livability by providing residents access to light and air as well as passive and active recreation. Common outdoor living areas typically consist of landscaped areas, landscaped courts, walks, patios, swimming pools, barbeque areas, playgrounds, turf, gardens, or other such improvements.
Objective Design Standards
A. Balconets: At least half of residential units without private outdoor living area shall have a balconet (e.g. Juliet balcony). The balconet is not required to allow residents to step beyond the façade; it may be a railing at the outer plane of a façade opening that extends to the floor.
B. Common Outdoor Living Area
1) Open-to-the-sky: No more than 20 percent of Common Outdoor Living Area may be covered by occupied building space.
2) Landscaping: A minimum of 25 percent of each Common Outdoor Living Area 500 square feet or greater shall be planting area with a minimum length and wide of 30 inches. For Common Outdoor Living Area less than 500 square feet and greater than 100 square feet, a minimum of 10% shall be planting area.
There shall be no requirement for spaces less than 100 square feet. 3) Trees: A minimum of one 24-inch box tree for every 500 square feet of Common Outdoor Living Area shall be planted within the Common Outdoor Living Area.
At least 50 percent shall be shade trees. A shade tree shall be defined as a deciduous tree that provides relief from direct sunlight for at least six months. 4) Social Space: A minimum of one social space, either soft or hardscape, with a minimum dimension of 10 feet in each direction shall be provided for every 25 units. Each required Social Spaces shall incorporate one of the following amenities:
a. Cooking facilities
b. Edible gardens
c. Pools and/or spas
d. Water features
e. Exercise space and/or equipment
f. Play space and/or play equipment
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 506 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 5 5) Seating: A minimum of 1 seat per 200 square feet of Common Outdoor Living Area shall be provided with a minimum of four seats. Benches at least 48 linear inches in length may be calculated as 2 seats. At least 50% of required seating shall be arranged in groups of four or more seats.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 507 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 6 IV. Parking
Design Intent
To reduce the visual impacts of above-grade parking.
Objective Design Standards
A. Design of Parking Entrances: Exterior building finishes shall wrap into parking entrances/exits for a minimum of 20 feet from the building façade.
B. Screening of Structured Parking: Facades shall be screened with materials that are used elsewhere in the building design or may use any of the following materials:
1) At least 13-gauge metal;
2) Precast concrete panels;
3) Laminated glass; and/or
4) Green walls.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 508 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 Adopted and approved this 19th day of December, 2023.
__________________________
Phil Brock, Mayor
I, Nikima Newsome, Assistant City Clerk of the City of Santa Monica, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 11568 (CCS) was duly adopted at a meeting of the Santa Monica City Council held on the 19th day of December, 2023, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Torosis, Davis, Parra, Zwick
Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember de la Torre
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
Nikima Newsome, Assistant City Clerk
DocuSign Envelope ID: 74F81C8B-0D81-42BE-B0D4-457DACFD3285
10.A.b
Packet Pg. 509 Attachment: Resolution No.11568 (CCS) (12-19-23) (6224 : Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance for Objective Design Standards for SB35 City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: February 13, 2024
Agenda Item: 11.A
1 of 18
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Jenny Rogers, Recreation and Arts Director, Recreation and Arts Department Subject: Approval of the Reframe: City Hall Mural Project Phase I Report Recommendations
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Review and accept the report’s community recommendations presented by Meztli Projects (Attachment A)
2. Direct City Staff to begin the implementation phase of the Reframe: City Hall Mural project, starting with planning for the 9 recommendations included in the report.
Summary
Following direction from Council to engage the community around the Stanton McDonald Wright mural in the historic City Hall lobby, a detailed community engagement process has taken place that included focus groups, workshops, public surveys, and individual meetings with stakeholders, particularly the Native people who trace their ancestry to the Santa Monica area over the past fourteen months. Phase I of the Reframe: City Hall Mural process engaged a broad range of community members from March 2023 to November 2023. Many participants engaged with the process more than once, suggesting a depth of engagement over time. Consultant Meztli Projects created a comprehensive report of the nationwide movement around civic memory concerns, the local specifics of the City Hall Mural, and the community process used to address the mural.
11.A
Packet Pg. 510
2 of 18
Reframe refers to the City of Santa Monica Acknowledge + Reframe Together (Reframe) Initiative, which centers community voices with the aim of creating a more just and equitable Santa Monica. Through a deliberative and collaborative process, each Reframe project starts with community members who have been historically excluded from discourse about representation in civic spaces, especially communities of color. Reframe utilizes a combination of art, storytelling and other community engagement strategies, and informs and shapes the City's public art collection and the creation of new public art.
The resulting nine recommendations that emerged from this process are:
1. Commission New Artwork(s) in City Hall Lobby
New artwork should present history from different perspectives and celebrate and reframe what is traditionally presented. The new work should create a welcoming environment for Indigenous people, working-class people and people of color.
2. Commission New Interpretive Panels
Create interpretive panels that offer context but make clear statements against the misrepresentations in the mural. The panels should give basic information about the mural and must also clearly condemn the depiction of Native people, the Mission System and white supremacy in general. The new interpretive panels should be written by an advisory group that includes at least one Indigenous person and Black, Latine/x, Asian American people and others who are excluded from the southwest mural panel.
3. Ensure that Santa Monica’s Public Art & Commemorative Landscape Centers Equity and Belonging
The Reframe: City Hall Mural process should be the beginning of a series of steps taken by the City of Santa Monica to revisit the policies and processes that govern public artwork and civic memory. These steps should begin with developing a set of equity and inclusion principles to govern decisions about existing works and how they might be addressed or deaccessioned, as well as future works and how they are commissioned. The City should review the rest of the artworks, monuments, and forms of civic memory (such as street names) in the City of Santa Monica using the criteria established.
4. Create additional educational materials about the mural
11.A
Packet Pg. 511
3 of 18
Many believe that the mural can serve an educational purpose in telling fuller histories about Santa Monica, including histories of First Peoples, the Rancho period, Black, Brown, and Asian communities, and working-class folks in Santa Monica. To do this well, the City should partner with a qualified educational institution with substantive partnerships and include other institutions to make this meaningful.
Beyond actions in the cultural sphere or recommendations for the City Hall Lobby, the community felt that the City should act to materially address issues related to the exclusions seen in the mural. The remaining recommendations echo the desires expressed by Gabrieleno/Tongva tribe’s formal letter (see Appendix D). “Centering the perspectives of First Peoples” and “doing something concrete, not just words” were highly rated values consistent with these recommendations. The suggestions here are not prescriptive for future processes, but pathways to open up opportunities for continued work in this area as well as deal with community members’ immediate concerns.
5. Expand DEI+ Trainings for City Staff
The City should build on actions taken since its Racial Equity Statement of 2020 and continue to go deeper to develop staff capacities around cultural exchange, decoloniality and social justice. To be successful, future efforts should focus on implementation strategies and tools for staff that center the overlapping experiences, shared spaces and mutual accountability of underrepresented peoples.
6. Adopt a Citywide Land/Territory Acknowledgment Initiative Santa Monica has an opportunity to adopt a City-wide land acknowledgment initiative that includes the actionable practices that often have been stripped from the original intentions of land acknowledgments. In developing this initiative, the City should involve but not overtax local First Peoples.
7. Improve Representation on Santa Monica Committees
Many of the issues across the country relating to the misrepresentation of peoples stems from systems that exclude marginalized communities. For Santa Monica to remedy these issues it should add First Peoples representatives to decision-making bodies such as the Airport, Landmarks, Arts and Planning Commissions among others as well as the Clean Beaches & Ocean Parcel Tax Citizens Oversight Committees, Metropolitan Water District and Urban Forest Task Force among similar bodies.
11.A
Packet Pg. 512
4 of 18
8. Facilitate Land Back in Santa Monica
In Santa Monica, there have been discussions about providing a right to return for displaced groups, such as incarcerated Japanese Americans, African Americans removed by urban renewal, and working-class people of all backgrounds pushed out by gentrification. Land Back considerations have not yet been part of the discussion in Santa Monica, but they can be brought into conversation alongside, not at the expense of, these other considerations.
9. Facilitate Kuruvungna Springs Relationships
While it is not in the City of Santa Monica, Kuruvungna Springs is an important site for repair and sovereignty for Santa Monica First Peoples. The Tribe named the return of the land at Kuruvungna Springs from the Los Angeles Unified School District to the Tribe in their letter to Santa Monica. In addition, Kuruvungna Springs is connected to the City Hall mural in that one of the primary legends concerning the naming of the City appears to be the encounter between Spanish settlers and the Kuruvungna Springs—an event that many believe is centrally depicted in the mural.
Consultant Meztli Projects noted in their report that “the mural and the controversy around it have created a rare and critical focal point of civic energy. The key is not to squander the moment and let it further perpetuate ill-will and distrust, but rather to use it to move towards equity, justice, and a better Santa Monica.” It is notable that this process did not result in recommending the removal of the mural at this time. Instead, the recommendations speak to the reparative actions community members signaled were of utmost importance and which are possible while keeping the mural in place.
On December 12, 2023, the Arts Commission voted to approve all of the recommendations with a focus on beginning implementation on Recommendations 1-4.
Background
On May 11, 2021, the City Council directed staff, as “part of the City’s efforts to eliminate and mitigate the vestiges of white supremacy and racial injustice in the City of Santa Monica,” to address community concerns related to the display of the 1930s Stanton McDonald Wright mural at the entrance to Santa Monica City Hall, and
11.A
Packet Pg. 513
5 of 18
specifically to “initiate a community engagement and education process around the representations depicted in the mural,” and engage an artist to “recontextualize the mural with artwork that…celebrates the diverse history of Santa Monica’s people”. The motion also directed staff to install a scrim in the short-term that would cover the mural (Attachment C). On September 28, 2021, Council appointed Councilmembers Christine Parra and Oscar de la Torre onto an Ad-Hoc Committee to study and make recommendations for the mural in the lobby of City Hall (Attachment D). On February 22, 2022, Council reaffirmed this action, and reversed the mandate to cover the mural, restating that the process should engage and educate our community and result “in the addition of artwork within the lobby to create a more inclusive and complete story of our City's history and vision for our future to advance the City’s commitment to equity, justice and respect for all” (Attachment E).
Civic Conversations around Representation in Public Art Civic conversations have taken place in communities around the country about public monuments and art that no longer reflect a contemporary understanding of history and community. These conversations have been taking place in government, higher education, and communities for more than a decade, increasing in frequency and urgency since the summer of 2020. From coast to coast, communities have grappled with this nation’s history of conquest, slavery, racialized violence and inequity, and homophobia to reimagine these legacies in their public spaces and buildings.
These efforts have resulted in a variety of approaches to addressing problematic public art. Some communities have moved or removed statues of individuals whose legacies bear reexamination. Others have recontextualized the original artworks through educational signage. And yet others have added new art that better reflects their understanding of community and history today. When communities have chosen to recontextualize rather than remove public art and monuments, the efforts are often driven by a desire to avoid erasing the stains of the past and to use the process and new artworks to educate, with the goal of acknowledging historic inequities and committing to a more just future.
11.A
Packet Pg. 514
6 of 18
Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
05/11/21 (Attachment C) Item directing staff to embark on a community process 09/28/21 (Attachment D) Item appointing an Ad-Hoc Committee 02/22/22 (Attachment E) Item reiterating the direction to execute a community process Discussion
Reframe: City Hall Mural project Phase I recommendations When Council appointed the Mural Ad Hoc Committee in 2021, the intent was to help navigate the divergent community perspectives that were voiced around the mural.
Council directed staff to guide a process to recontextualize the City Hall mural, including a community process that gathered informed community input, and then return to the full Council with a set of recommendations for consideration. This resulted in the Reframe: City Hall Mural project and the attached community engagement Phase I report (Attachment A). Should the City Council adopt the recommendations in the Phase I report, this would allow for implementation and inform an RFP to engage an artist or artist team to produce and install artistic recontextualization(s). The implementation of the recommendations will be considered as a Phase II of Reframe City Hall Mural project.
The City engaged Meztli Projects, an Indigenous-based arts & culture collaborative centering Indigeneity by using arts-based strategies to highlight Native and Indigenous Artists and systems-impacted peoples, to facilitate Phase I of the Mural project. Meztli Projects has been successful in empowering community members, and centering community interests, bringing in civic entities and finding ways to align goals. Meztli Projects was selected for their novel approach and expertise in public art, qualitative research, experience working with Indigenous communities, expansive community engagement strategies, and most importantly, for their deep involvement in emerging conversations around authentic and new approaches to public memory and commemoration at a local, regional and national levels.
Meztli Projects’ approach to this project included:
11.A
Packet Pg. 515
7 of 18
• A “Working Circle” composed of individuals with strong ties to very different parts of Santa Monica that served as an advisory body to the project team. Over six months, the Working Circle attended public programs as well as met as a cohort.
At the end of this process, the Working Circle discussed actions that could be taken in response to the mural. Their discussions informed the recommendations in this report.
• A series of public programs on relevant themes including a bus tour of sites of memory; virtual and in-person panel discussions about art, civic memory and alternate histories of Santa Monica; a virtual tour of relevant educational resources, a reflective listening workshop, and a screening of the documentary Town Destroyer. Additionally, they created programming through the perspective of First Peoples as a starting point to engage issues of equity and inclusion. • The creation and installation of lobby displays in Historic City Hall that explained the project and presented updates to City Hall visitors. • A feedback activity to survey members of the public about their perceptions of the mural and spark ideas for new public artworks.
• Interviews and small group engagements with a broad spectrum of individuals who have a stake in the mural conversation or have voiced opinions about it, subject matter experts, and local content experts. Meztli also visited existing community meetings and had one-on-one conversations with targeted constituencies, including City Hall staff.
Over the course of a year, the team produced public programs, conducted interviews and listening sessions with key stakeholders, surveyed hundreds of people across Santa Monica, and convened a working circle of individuals with ties to distinct communities with diverse perspectives on Santa Monica’s art and history.
11.A
Packet Pg. 516
8 of 18
The recommendations development process was supported by and marked by its breadth - outreach to and connection with a cross-section of people from markedly diverse perspectives; the quality and the depth of discussion and deliberation; and the degree of agreement found amongst these very diverse viewpoints. For instance, the Working Circle was selected to bring together individuals with diverse perspectives, histories, and ties to Santa Monica communities. The people who engaged through the feedback activity, interviews, small group engagements, and public programs widened the discussion even more. Everyone who engaged with us through all these methods brought deep feeling, knowledge, and thoughtfulness to the issue. The recommendations are infused with the learnings from all of the voices of those who engaged in the Reframe: City Hall Mural process.
The Working Circle
The Working Circle was made up of 13 individuals selected to represent a broad range of perspectives, life histories and community connections, and the model. This model pulled in people with connections to key Santa Monica communities to democratize knowledge and illuminate a diversity of community views. This was designed to be an intimate community group and over the course of Phase I of the project, Working Circle members engaged in open dialogue on civic history, representation and public art in Santa Monica. Additionally, this group connected to one another, gained new perspectives, and offered each one an opportunity to connect using new tools and perspectives, so they could be open to new ideas and unlearn others.
The legitimacy of the Working Circle’s process and resulting voice in the recommendations, stems from the breadth of the group–everyday citizens from astonishingly diverse starting points–and the quality and the depth of their monthly discussions. The Working Circle used a highly facilitated process similar to “Delphi Surveying'' in which the group was given three rounds of anonymous surveys to develop and refine their statements and recommendations. The group was able to find extremely significant points of agreement through this process.
Larger Public Engagement
11.A
Packet Pg. 517
9 of 18
Phase I of the Reframe: City Hall Mural process engaged people approximately 1300 times from March 2023 to November 2023. The number of unique participants is likely smaller, considering that many people engaged with the process in multiple ways. • 123 respondents to March 2022 survey distributed to Santa Monica residents and employees
• 100 youth participants in Summer 2022 Belonging in Santa Monica workshops with Glenna Avila
• 13 Working Circle members selected from 32 applications • Approximately 270 participants at 9 public events featuring 12 guest speakers or facilitators
• 15 interview participants
• Approximately 240 participants at 14 presentations or listening sessions with community groups
• At least 200 Feedback Activity sheets distributed at 5 additional community events
• 337 respondents to the Reframe: City Hall Mural Feedback Activity
11.A
Packet Pg. 518
10 of 18
2023 Timeline of engagement by group/activity.
11.A
Packet Pg. 519
11 of 18
Sample Perspectives and Community Responses
The following vignettes provide a sample of the complexities of community responses to the mural from some of the most local supporters and detractors. These responses were gathered through interviews and the feedback activities.
Organizers of the Pico Youth and Family Center (PYFC) have been at the forefront of getting the City to address the mural. Rooted in the Latine/x Pico neighborhood in Santa Monica, some members of the PYFC community identify as Chicana/o and some as part of the larger Indigenous community. Their concerns about the mural are rooted in the depictions of Brown bodies and how they are perceived as subservient or less human than the white figures in the mural. For the PYFC leadership and community, these depictions are connected to larger issues that they want addressed in their community, particularly youth issues, affordable housing, homelessness, and gentrification. Members of the Working Circle have deep ties to the community there and helped facilitate meetings with community members to gather feedback along the way.
Many PYFC community members would like the mural to be removed, while others are interested in programming and other artwork commissions to offset the settler colonial narrative perceived as reflected in the mural.
Other respondents identified themselves as Marquez family descendants. Marquez family descendants shared how proud they are that their ancestor is named in the mural, along with their knowledge of the history of the Rancho period.
For the Marquez family descendants, the mural represents a sense of pride and acknowledgment of the history of the land grant families whose time in the US predates contemporary immigration from the Americas. For them, the mural anchors their history in the region. The Marquez family descendants were opposed to removing, covering, or altering the mural, but were also strongly in favor of telling the fuller history of Santa Monica that includes the stories of people of color, such as a nuanced picture of the Rancho period, the removal of Japanese Americans during WWII, waves of Mexican
11.A
Packet Pg. 520
12 of 18
immigration after the Mexican Revolution, and African Americans who came to Santa Monica to work in the aerospace industry as part of the Great Migration.
The individuals who filled out the feedback activity and identified themselves as Santa Monica First Peoples (Gabrieleno, Tongva, Chumash, Tataviam, Acjachamen) almost all found the mural images offensive. The Gabrielino-Shoshone Nation of Southern California’s letter (Attachment G) specifically speaks to the harms of the mural and asks “to please reconsider your intentions to display this mural and have the common decency to think of those who this image offends and help move us forward not backwards.” Some people were against changing the artwork and removing a piece of Santa Monica history but enthusiastic about new opportunities for Tongva artists.
Additionally, Santa Monica First Peoples directly linked the mural to issues of land access and Land Back as well as other important issues Native communities in Santa Monica face. For example, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, in their letter to the City of Santa Monica stated, “rather than focus on the mural itself we view this as an opportunity to discuss additional education that can assist in promoting the awareness of our Tribe, history, and culture.” They urged the City to engage in a series of actions oriented to land acknowledgments, Land Back, affordability, historical representation, etc. (Attachment H).
Sharing the Recommendations
Between October 2023 and January 2024, Meztli and City staff met with the Ad Hoc Committee, the City Council, Arts Commissioners and local stakeholders for briefings on the results of the Phase I process and to discuss the recommendations. At the open house event at City Hall in November 2023, City leadership, Conservancy and Landmarks-affiliated members of the public and local First Peoples met in free-flowing conversations to share their views on the recommendations and potential future action.
Phase II – Arts Commission
The first four recommendations in the report can be led and managed by Arts Commission with Cultural Affairs staff. The remaining recommendations are more broadly addressing issues of equity and representation and will need to be overseen by
11.A
Packet Pg. 521
13 of 18
the Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (Equity) and a larger coalition of city staff stakeholders.
1. Commission New Artwork(s) in City Hall Lobby
2. Commission New Interpretive Panels
3. Ensure that Santa Monica’s Public Art & Commemorative Landscape Centers Equity and Belonging
4. Create additional educational materials about the mural Phase II – Equity
The City’s Equity team is currently undertaking the development of a city-wide equity plan that reflects the priorities of the diverse identities in Santa Monica, with an approach that is informed by insight from every City department. To create the plan, staff launched the process with a panel discussion featuring diverse representation to explore the concept of strategic allyship. This has been followed by a seven-month community engagement phase dedicated to collective issue identification, focused on gathering information about residents’ equity priorities and challenges. These engagement opportunities include large City community listening sessions, held both in person and virtually, as well as smaller, community led meetings. The City offered stipends to community groups to host these sessions, ensuring diverse voices were heard and their insights can be incorporated into the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) team’s analysis.
Following the community engagement process, the DEI team will present priorities and proposed solutions and ask the City Council to identify priority areas of focus. Cultural Affairs and Equity staff have been working together to ensure that DEI recommendations from the Reframe Phase I engagement process are considered when the Equity priorities are presented to Council. Specifically, these are:
5. Expand DEI+ Trainings for City Staff
6. Adopt a Citywide Land/Territory Acknowledgment Initiative
7. Improve Representation on Santa Monica Committees
8. Facilitate Land Back in Santa Monica
9. Facilitate Kuruvungna Springs Relationships
11.A
Packet Pg. 522
14 of 18
Presently, the City’s Equity team provides city staff trainings in:
• implicit bias and racial equity in local government
• interrupting microaggressions
• civility in the workplace with a focus on inclusion and equity These trainings provide a solid foundation for the “Expand DEI+ Trainings for City Staff” recommendation #5.
Implementation Priorities and Timeline– Arts Commission Dependent on Council input and approval of the recommendations, per the community input the greatest priorities for implementation are those addressing the lobby and mural directly, specifically recommendations #1 and #2 for the creation of new artwork and interpretive panels.
A potential proposed timeline and plan would be:
• March 2024: Begin RFP development for contracts to execute priority recommended actions; this might include the start of the RFP development process for new artwork commission(s), interpretive/contextualization information-gathering on the WPA mural, and other priorities. • June 2024: RFP released for artists or artist teams to produce further community engagement around new artwork for the lobby, including artistic response(s) and artwork design. RFP for contractors to manage process to synthesize input from community stakeholders, historians and culture-bearers and create interpretive panels for the WPA mural.
• June – August 2024: Selection and procurement process for new artwork; convene panel to review proposals and select artist(s), which is then brought to the Arts Commission for consideration. Comply with Landmarks and CEQA requirements with regard to placement and alteration in the lobby as necessary.
Develop RFP for citywide civic memory and art cultural assessment.
11.A
Packet Pg. 523
15 of 18
• August 2024 – August 2025: Implementation of project(s) approved by the Arts Commission and implementation of interpretive panel production. Selection, procurement, and implementation process for cultural assessment.
Placement Considerations
In advance of anticipated recommendations, City staff have been meeting to determine potential placements and understand what is possible within the historic and structural constraints. Preliminary conversations have identified open spaces and walls that could feature new artwork. New artwork would be fabricated and installed with sensitivity to the historic structure and ease of cleaning, adjustment, and conservation in mind.
11.A
Packet Pg. 524
16 of 18
City staff regularly accomplishes projects in and around the lobby and is always sensitive to the original tile, flooring, mural and other aspects of the lobby. In 1979, the Landmarks Commission designated Santa Monica City Hall a City Landmark (Attachment F). In 2011, the Landmarks Commission supplemented the City Hall designation to specify additional exterior character-defining features of the landscaping and grounds of the City Hall site. As the interior of City Hall is not included in the designation, formal review in the form of a Certificate of Appropriateness (C of A) is not issued by staff or the Landmarks Commission to complete alterations to the interior.
Staff has nonetheless ensured in previous projects that alterations to the interior of City Hall, including the restoration of the mural in 2003, and alterations affecting the historic tile, were completed in accordance with standard practice for treatment of historic features. Because the mural is described in the original designation, should alterations to the mural be proposed as a result of the community engagement process, any such alterations will be subject to appropriate review under CEQA and issuance of a C of A.
There have been other changes within the lobby in recent years, including the addition of an elevator, replacement of tiles, additions of wall monitors and public comment kiosks. It is also notable that the present-day chandelier does not correspond to the original design. Once a project is defined, staff will analyze it to ensure compliance with CEQA, including whether appropriate exemptions apply.
Actions of the Arts Commission
The Commission voted unanimously, at the December 12, 2023, special meeting, to support the adoption of the recommendations drafted by Meztli Projects as part of Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report. The Commission indicated that “Metzli Projects conducted a successful community engagement process to assess the range of people’s perceptions of and attitudes about the City Hall Mural.”
11.A
Packet Pg. 525
17 of 18
Next Steps
Should Council agree on this complete set of recommendations, which have been endorsed by a broad diversity of community stakeholders, staff has identified the first four priorities could be spearheaded by the Arts Commission and Cultural Affairs division over a five-year program timeline.
City Staff have secured $250,000 for preliminary implementation. This budget is sufficient to begin the process to create new artwork for the lobby and new interpretive signage in Historic City Hall. Future funding for other aspects of this project, which includes a city-wide assessment and city-wide responses to the civic memory landscape, would be requested in the future budgets and from grants. The total estimated cost for implementation of recommendations 1-4 is $1,300,000 over the next 5 years.
RECOMMENDATIONS 1-4 PROJECTS COST
Rec #1: Commission Lobby Artwork $440,000
Rec #2: Interpretive Panels $110,000
Rec #3: Educational Materials $100,000
Rec #4: Assessment + New Works $650,000
TOTAL BUDGET $1,300,000
Funding by Source
Project Source Amount Status
Commission new lobby artwork FY23-24 CIP $190,000 Included in budget New Interpretive Panels FY23-24 CIP $60,000 Included in budget Commission new lobby artworks CIP $250,000 FY 24-25 Request Interpretive Panels CIP $50,000 FY 24-25 Request
Educational Materials CIP $35,000 FY 24-25 Request
Educational Materials Grants $65,000 Not Started
Assessment of City monuments and
public artwork CIP $650,000 FY 26-27 Request
Expand DEI+ Trainings for City Staff
To DEI team for
consideration
Adopt a Citywide Land/Territory
Acknowledgment Initiative
To DEI team for
consideration
Improve Representation on Santa Monica
Committees No budget impact
Facilitate Land Back in Santa Monica
To DEI team for
consideration
11.A
Packet Pg. 526
18 of 18
Facilitate Kuruvungna Springs
Relationships
No budget impact
Environmental Review
No environmental review is necessary as no action is being undertaken at this time.
Fiscal Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action as a result of approving the recommendations in this report.
Prepared By: Sofia Klatzker, Cultural Affairs Manager
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report B. Executive Summary of Meztli Report and Recommendations C. 5/11/21Council Item directing staff to embark on a community process (Web Link)
D. 9/28/21 Council Item appointing two Councilmembers to an Ad-Hoc Committee (Web Link)
E. 2/22/22 Council Item reiterating the direction to execute a community process (Web Link)
F. City Hall Historic Designation documents
G. 2.25.23 Letter from Gabrielino Shoshone Tribe
H. 5.12.23 Letter from Gabrielino-Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians I. Written Comments
J. PowerPoint Presentation
11.A
Packet Pg. 527
Reframe: City Hall Mural
Phase I Report
January 2024
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 528 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report
Executive Summary
Introduction
Reframe: City Hall Mural Background
Larger civic memory and public art landscape
Beginnings of the Reframe: City Hall Mural project
Preliminary work
About Our Process
The Working Circle
Selection and composition
Working CirclejJourney
Public programs
Feedback activity engagement
Interviews and small group engagements
The History of the Mural
Stanton Macdonald-Wright as WPA administrator
Some common misconceptions
Interpretations of the Mural
The southwest or “recreation” side of the mural
The northwest side of the mural
Debated figures and features
Historical context and potential sources
Are the representations in the mural objectionable?
Current Conversations and Case Studies in the Field
Monument removals and historical revisions: Los Angeles Columbus Statue (1973) in Grand Park
Serra Statue (1930) at El Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical Monument National monuments and artwork case studies
Early Days sculpture within the Pioneer Monument (1894) in San Francisco Equestrian Statue of Theodore Roosevelt and Old New York diorama at the American Museum of Natural History
Dangers of the Mail (1937) at the William Jefferson Clinton Federal Building Life of Washington (1936) at George Washington High School Themes in the case studies
1 11
13 13
15 17
18 21
21 22
26 27
28 31
32 33
36 37
39 40
44 46
49 49
49 50
51 52
53 55
56 57
Table of Contents
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 529 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report
Feedback Activity Responses
Sentiments about the mural in the feedback activity
Suggested actions in response to the mural in feedback activity responses Feedback from Particular Constituencies
Santa Monica First Peoples
Larger Indigenous community
African American or Black, Asian American, and Latine/x Santa Monicans Pico Youth and Family Center
Santa Monica historic preservation community
Marquez family descendants
City of Santa Monica employees
Recommendations
Values supporting the recommendations
Why are we not talking about removing or covering the mural Recommendations concerning the mural and new artwork
Recommendation 1 – Commission new artwork in City Hall lobby Recommendation 2 – Commission new interpretive panels
Recommendation 3 – Ensure that Santa Monica’s public art and commemorative landscape centers equity and belonging
Recommendation 4 – Create additional educational materials about the mural Recommendations for City of Santa Monica to lead beyond the mural and new artwork
Recommendation 5 – Expand DEI+ trainings for City staff Recommendation 6 – Adopt a Citywide land/territory acknowledgment initiative Recommendation 7 – Improve representation on Santa Monica committees Recommendation 8 – Facilitate Land Back in Santa Monica Recommendation 9 – Facilitate Kuruvungna Springs relationships Conclusion
Credits and Acknowledgements
Appendices
Appendix A: City Hall Mural Recent Historical Timeline
Appendix B: Working Circle Discussion and Development of Values, Statements, and Recommendations
Appendix C: Engagement Details
Appendix D: Letters from Tribal Communities
58 58
60 61
61 62
62 63
64 64
65 66
66 67
68 68
69 70
71 71
71 72
73 73
74 75
76 79
80 81
93 102
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 530 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 1
The Reframe: City Hall Mural project emerged from protest and debates around the Stanton MacDonald-Wright mural in the lobby of Historic Santa Monica City Hall entitled History of Santa Monica and the Bay District. The mural has long been a point of controversy, but in 2015 a renewed effort brought public criticism for its depiction of First Peoples and settlers and its portrayal of 1930s Santa Monica as an affluent, all-white, predominantly male, center of leisure.
Starting the Process
The City of Santa Monica began work on addressing longstanding concerns around the WPA-era mural in the lobby of Historic City Hall with direction from the Arts Commission in 2018. This direction informed initial planning for the project and included a 5-point plan of committee work, programming, and funding for new artwork commissions to address the mural. These were:
Executive Summary
Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report
The City of Santa Monica Acknowledge + Reframe Together (Reframe) Initiative centers community voices with the aim of creating a more just and equitable Santa Monica. Through a deliberative and collaborative process, each Reframe project starts with community members who have been historically excluded from discourse about representation in civic spaces, especially communities of color. Reframe utilizes a combination of art, storytelling and deep community engagement, and results in the production of public art and civic memory projects.
This report is the culmination of Phase I of Reframe: City Hall Mural, summarizing the process of community engagement and subsequent community recommendations.
Background
The Working Circle meets at Historic Santa Monica City
Hall lobby. Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 531 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 2
1. Form a Mural Subcommittee. The Subcommittee will inform and guide the planning process managed by City staff (formed in November 2018).
2. Issue an Art Bank call specifically requesting artworks that respond to Indigenous or other often overlooked histories of Santa Monica (resulting in the Lives that Bind exhibit in City Hall East).
3. Coordinate a panel discussion series that will host open public dialogues with experts from diverse perspectives including Indigenous Peoples, History, and Art (executed by Meztli Projects as part of Phase I).
4. Commission a temporary participatory artwork in City Hall to collect community voices (evolved into the Meztli Projects Phase I lobby display and feedback activity).
5. Informed by the community engagement and panels series, commission a permanent educational panel or other artistic interpretation at City Hall to recontextualize the Macdonald-Wright mural (part of the recommendations included in this report by Meztli Projects arising from the community engagement process of Phase I).
City Council Direction
In the midst of the Arts Commission’s recontextualization work, Public Works Department staff received additional direction from the City Council in May 2021 to install a temporary scrim to cover the mural prior to the return to City Hall for in person, public meetings.
Simultaneously, the Arts Commission and Cultural Affairs were directed to initiate a community engagement and education process around the representations depicted in the mural, as well as “engaging an artist to recontextualize the mural with artwork that does not whitewash our past but rather celebrates the diverse history of Santa Monica’s people, culture and its renewed commitment to acknowledging the movement for equity, justice and respect for all.”
The Mural Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by Council on September 28, 2021 to serve as liaisons to the Landmarks and Arts Commissions to help guide the process to recontextualize the mural. Following the community process and informed by community input, the Ad Hoc Committee was tasked to return to the full City Council with a set of recommendations for Council consideration (this report). The adopted recommendations would then inform an RFP to engage an artist or artist team to produce and install artistic recontextualization(s). This phase was overseen by the Arts Commission under its authority as custodians of the City’s public art collection.
In February 2022, Council directed staff to no longer install a temporary scrim over the Stanton Macdonald-Wright mural in the lobby and instead directed staff “to launch a process that engages and educates the community and results in the addition of artwork within the lobby to create a more inclusive and complete story of the City’s history and vision for the future” and directed staff to “explore the creation of a temporary lobby display around the themes that will be explored during the larger community education and engagement process.” Cultural Affairs contracted with consultants Meztli Projects in 2022 to design a City Hall Mural project Phase I to engage Santa Monica community members in conversations both in general around representation and belonging, and with the specific questions arising from the lobby mural.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 3
The Meztli Projects facilitation team is composed of four artists, curators, and researchers: Joel Garcia, Robin Garcia, Susannah Laramee Kidd and Rosten Woo.
Meztli was selected by the City for its novel approach and expertise in public art, qualitative research, experience working with Indigenous communities, expansive community engagement strategies, and most importantly, for its deep involvement in emerging conversations around authentic and new approaches to public memory and commemoration at a local, regional and national levels.
Meztli Projects’ approach to the work:
• A “Working Circle” focus group composed of 13 individuals with strong ties to very different parts of Santa Monica that committed to attend public programs as well as meet as a cohort to act as an advisory body and think tank for six months. At the end of this process, the Working Circle discussed actions that could be taken in response to the mural. Their discussions informed the recommendations in this report.
• A series of Public Programs on relevant themes including a bus tour of sites of memory; virtual and in-person panel discussions about art, civic memory and alternate histories of Santa Monica; a virtual tour of relevant educational resources; a reflective listening workshop and a screening of the documentary Town Destroyer. Additionally, they created programming through the perspective of First Peoples as a starting point to engage issues of equity and inclusion.
• The creation and installation of Lobby Displays in Historic City Hall that explained the project and presented updates to City Hall visitors. • A Feedback Activity to survey members of the public about their perceptions of the mural and spark ideas for new public artworks.
• Interviews and Small Group Engagements with a broad spectrum of individuals who have a stake in the mural conversation or have voiced opinions about it, subject matter experts, and local content experts. Meztli also visited existing community meetings and had one-on-one conversations with targeted constituencies.
Public Programs Working Circle
Convenes
Lobby Display &
Feedback Activity
Interviews &
Small Groups
Report
Over six months, the team produced 8+ public programs, conducted 15 interviews with key stakeholders, surveyed over 300 people across Santa Monica, and convened a Working Circle made up of 13 individuals with ties to distinct communities and diverse perspectives on Santa Monica’s history and public art.
The Working Circle engaged one another in an ongoing deep group process to learn together and ultimately develop and prioritize recommendations.
Method
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 4
The Working Circle met a total of 13 times as a group – 4 of these were in person, with the rest taking place on Zoom. Working Circle members also attended the public programs when possible. Meetings were facilitated to create an environment that would allow trust to grow, make sure that all members felt that they had space to speak, and create a “brave” space where members ask difficult questions, and bring their authentic perspective. Meztli prioritized small group breakout discussions, as well as a “circle” format intended to make sure everyone had equal opportunity to speak.
The public programs explored themes of Indigeneity, art history, innovative civic memory projects, local sites of memory, alternative archives and public history projects based in Santa Monica, reflective listening and healing through story, and related controversies about public art and history. At each of these events, Meztli found an audience that was fully engaged by the topic and often eager to voice their opinions on the mural. Meztli was focused on expanding the conversation to engage a larger landscape of questions and concerns around inclusion, repair, civic memory and public space.
Meztli also conducted extensive research using archival materials and interviews with content experts. The findings from each of these kinds of engagement can be found in the following report.
History of Santa Monica and the Bay District is a “petrachrome” (similar to terrazzo) mural installed on the interior walls of the lobby of Santa Monica’s City Hall building, designed by Stanton Macdonald-Wright, an American artist who spent his early years in Santa Monica. The mural was commissioned through the Works Progress Administration’s (WPA) Federal Art Project. MacdonaldWright also acted as the administrator of the WPA project’s Southern California division, supervising numerous other artists and their projects. MacdonaldWright’s mural was completed in 1939 along with the building itself. The City of Santa Monica owns the mural and it is part of the City’s public art collection.
Santa Monica City Hall was landmarked in 1979 and the mural was mentioned in the designation. In 2011, the exterior of City Hall was given a supplemental landmark designation.
About the Mural
Detail of the mural “History of Santa Monica and the Bay District” by Stanton Macdonald-Wright, 1939. Southwest
panel shown to the left, northwest panel shown to the right.
Photos: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 534 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 5
It appears Macdonald-Wright had no outside guidance or oversight over the content, considering the complete absence of archival materials relating to the mural. Typically, mural artists would be asked to submit drawings and sketches before being permitted to produce and install public projects. The City Hall mural has almost no paper trail, suggesting that Macdonald-Wright, because he was both artist and commissioner, did not submit any concepts, written descriptions, drawings or plans to any oversight body.
Macdonald-Wright did speak explicitly about the mural in an interview about the objects, places, and figures in the southwest side: Will Rogers and his polo field, automobile racing on San Vicente or Wilshire Blvd, the Douglas Building, Harry M. Gorham, tennis players May Sutton and Tom Bundy, as well as the artist’s own dogs.
There are no recorded descriptions of who or what Macdonald-Wright was intending to render on the northwest side of the mural. We can only speculate about who or what is depicted, outside of the mural’s general title: History of Santa Monica and the Bay District.
It is mostly agreed that the northwest panel includes depictions of a Franciscan monk (most likely Father Serra); a man with a helmet (possibly Gaspar de Portolá); a figure on horseback (which could represent the Spanish period or an extension of the Portolá expedition); waterfalls (perhaps Kuruvungna Springs); and the two figures on the bottom right, who are intended to be Indigenous people.
The largest point of interpretive contention is whether the overall scene presented is objectionable. Throughout this process, Meztli encountered three different major kinds of objections and three major defenses regarding the First Peoples’ portrayal.
Objections
1. The figures are showing deference or subservience to the conquerors.
This portrayal is traumatic to survivors of generational violence because it depicts a triumphant moment of subjugation.
2. The figures are showing collaboration and goodwill towards their soonto-be oppressors. This portrayal is traumatic not only because it erases a history of extreme violence and cruelty but suggests that Native people welcomed it.
3. The figures are generally shown as less than the other white/Spanish figures and whether they are revered or vilified, they are not portrayed as real humans or on the same level as one another.
Defenses
1. The figures are shown in a way that honors Native people, because they relate to the earth, look strong, or their posture might reference East Asian figures such as bodhisattvas.
2. The figures are helpful because they acknowledge that people lived here before European invasion.
3. The figures are neutral and just happen to be in the higher and lower positions they are in because it makes a dynamic composition. The figures may or may not even be having an interaction.
These interpretations cannot be resolved definitively. While some viewers feel no offense at seeing these images, it is beyond debate that many other viewers most certainly do and feel very harmed by them.
Detail of the City Hall mural. Photo: Kenneth Lopez,
Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 535 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 6
Through a public feedback activity, Meztli had people engage directly with the mural images to understand not just how they interpreted the images, but also their emotional responses and attachments to the mural. They collected feedback activity responses from February 6, 2023, through May 10, 2023 and received 337 responses to the feedback activity.
The mural images are offensive, disturbing, or exclusionary. A majority of the respondents found one or both of the mural panels to be offensive, disturbing, or exclusionary. Overall, these respondents felt that the mural represented the hierarchies inherent in settler colonialism and white supremacy. In the northwest panels, they noted the lower position of the Native figures and the difference in detail in facial expressions and clothing between the European and Native figures. They reacted to the fact that the colonizing figures are shown facing the viewer in active positions (mid-stride). Many people read the images as representing the Native figures in a subservient position and noted that they appear to be faceless or turned away from the viewer.
In response to the southwest panels, respondents overwhelmingly noted the fact all the figures represented are white and appear to be upper class. Many noted that there is only one woman represented in either panel, and she also does not have facial detail. Children felt they were not adequately represented either.
Many respondents found this “recreation” panel to be the more problematic image in its representation of white elitism. Especially paired with the northwest panel and as a representation of “Santa Monica of the 1930s/present day,” it appears to suggest an erasure of both Indigenous people and anyone non-white in a contemporary Santa Monica.
The mural images are beautiful or valuable, but also contain troubling aspects that need addressing. Another, smaller group of respondents appreciated the mural for its artistic or historical significance, but also recognized that the images have significant flaws that require a response. Many of these respondents found the images beautiful, particularly the natural landscape depicted and how the images coordinate with the tile work and other architectural elements of the City Hall lobby. These respondents often placed a value on historic preservation, and some were aware of the New Deal origins of the artwork or other pieces by the artist. However, the concerns articulated by these respondents mirrored the concerns of the larger group of respondents who found the images particularly lacking in terms of Native representation and missing large groups of Santa Monicans.
The mural images are beautiful and there is nothing wrong with them. A roughly similarly sized group of respondents felt that the mural is perfect, and nothing needs to be done to address it. Many of these respondents provided less detail in their responses, but they have mostly positive or neutral interpretations of what is depicted in both panels. A few have negative interpretations but feel strongly that the images are still beautiful or valuable because of their historic significance. This group might have some minor suggestions about what is missing or how the images could be improved, but these suggestions, if they have them, are in the realm of “quibbles.” They are not offended by the mural.
Quite the contrary, overall, the artwork makes these respondents feel happy or proud, and some have very strong attachments to the mural.
The mural images are neutral or negative, but as historical artifacts, they have little bearing on the present. Another roughly similarly sized group of respondents was somewhat indifferent about the artworks. Some of them interpreted the images as having negative or exclusionary elements, but they were not particularly concerned about the images. As historic images were created in the past, some felt that these images are either unrelatable or have Summary of
Feedback
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 536 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 7
little import for today. Some felt that because they are historic images, they cannot or should not be changed.
The discussion about the mural is a distraction from other pressing issues in Santa Monica. A small number of respondents felt that the process of engagement around the mural was a waste of time and resources. They would have preferred that Santa Monica spent those resources addressing qualityof-life concerns and development pressures. Some of these respondents also expressed their strong attachment to the mural. Others were more indifferent or felt the mural had no bearing on the present.
While no group of such diverse people will ever agree on everything, there was substantial agreement about values among the Working Circle members and the following values helped drive the discussion about the recommendations in this report.
The Working Circle members were unanimous in their belief that Santa Monica should:
• Center Santa Monica First Peoples in the City’s response to the mural. • Do something concrete, not just words.
Nearly unanimously, the group felt it was important to:
• Center working class people and other people of color in the City’s response to the mural.
• Make sure visitors to City Hall know that the City understands the issues that people have with the mural.
• Make sure visitors to City Hall know that the City condemns the white supremacy worldview depicted in the mural.
• Make sure everyone who visits the Historic City Hall lobby feels welcome/ like they belong.
And about three-quarters of the group felt it was important to:
• Attend to the people who feel harmed by the mural.
• Address the material consequences of colonialism and provide considerations including financial considerations to Santa Monica First Peoples. • Protect future visitors to City Hall from the harm of seeing demeaning images. • Create new opportunities for artists.
• Have the City response deal with other things in addition to the mural. • Generate meaningful public discussion and engagement around the mural.
The harm that this mural has caused is important and considerable, and removing or covering the mural would guard against continuing this harm.
However, removal or covering does not address the harm that has already been done. Therefore, the immediate and urgent focus should be on actions that move towards repair for the communities harmed, such as those we have laid out in these recommendations.
Our Working Circle discussions supported this direction, even though some in the Working Circle would still like to see the mural removed. Several Working Circle members reflected at the end of the process that they believed, knowing Shared Values
Note About Actions
to Remove or
Cover the Mural
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 537 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 8
more about the histories represented in the mural and the history of the mural, that simply removing the mural would be letting the City “off the hook” for tacitly endorsing the images by letting them remain unaddressed for so long. This was a concern that was echoed by some throughout our engagement process, including City of Santa Monica employees, feedback activity respondents, and interviewees.
Just as the Council reversed their decision to cover the mural so that the mural would be visible during the process of public engagement, continuing to leave the mural up and uncovered can provide further opportunities to engage and address the harm that mural has caused. However, leaving it up does create an ongoing risk of continued harm if no other actions are taken. As a result, the Working Circle members were in strong agreement that the City should NOT “do nothing” with the mural, nor should the City sell or cover it at this time.
In addition, Santa Monica First Peoples are clearly among the most impacted by this artwork, but the process to remove and or cover the mural was not initiated by them. When advocacy efforts such as these are not rooted in the community that faces the biggest impacts by any issue (in this case First Peoples), they are burdened with uncompensated emotional, cultural, and intellectual labor that responds to the issue raised within a frame that First Peoples did not help construct. Not removing the mural offers an opportunity for First Peoples to uplift these issues from their perspective so that the outcomes and futurity of their reflections are driven by them. Many of the recommendations in this report speak to the reparative actions community members signaled were of utmost importance and were possible while keeping the mural in place for the time being.
Therefore, the City should make clear commitments to addressing the mural, including reasons for leaving the mural on display. This could include taking full accountability for the mural and making the lobby a space to publicly and clearly condemn the attitudes made manifest by the mural.
Recommendation 1:
Commission new artwork in City Hall lobby
This emerged as the highest priority. The art should present history from different perspectives and celebrate and reframe what is traditionally presented as “historically significant.” City Hall is a center of power, and the new work needs to balance or redress the exclusions exemplified in the existing mural.
The new work should address the hierarchies in the southwest panels as well— Black, Brown, Asian American, working-class people, unemployed people, and poor people who were in Santa Monica in 1939 and deal with themes of ongoing Indigenous presence in Santa Monica. The new work should create a welcoming environment for Indigenous people, working-class people, and people of color.
Recommendation 2:
Commission new interpretive panels
The City should create interpretive panels that condemn colonization, forced religious conversion, white supremacy generally and the mural’s portrayal of First Peoples in particular. These panels should be written by an advisory group including an Indigenous person and other people of color and should be at a scale and placement that is unmissable for viewers of the mural, ideally installed in close visual proximity.
Recommendations
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 538 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 9
Recommendation 3:
Ensure that Santa Monica’s public art and commemorative landscape centers equity and belonging
The Reframe: City Hall Mural process should be the beginning of a series of steps taken by the City of Santa Monica to revisit the policies and processes that govern public artwork and civic memory, including processes to support emerging and underrepresented artists in receiving new commissions. As part of this, the City should conduct a survey of the existing public art, monuments and sites of civic memory throughout Santa Monica, so that gaps and opportunities can be identified. The City should also commission new artwork on the theme of inclusion and representing other views of Santa Monica’s history in a location that is much more publicly visible and meaningful.
Recommendation 4:
Create additional educational materials about the mural Many believe that the mural can serve an educational purpose. All agreed that this would be a deep challenge and not something to be taken on lightly. Many felt that City staff are ill-equipped to do this work and would need substantive partnerships with other institutions to make this meaningful. This is a good opportunity for Santa Monica to invest in the creative and scholarly development of underrepresented communities.
BEYOND THE MURAL AND NEW ARTWORK
There was an extremely high level of agreement amongst the Working Circle that the City’s response should not be limited to actions related to the cultural sphere or the City Hall Lobby and that the City should act to materially address issues related to the exclusions seen in the mural. Centering the perspectives of First Peoples and “doing something concrete” were highly rated values consistent with the following recommendations. Implementation of the following recommendations would require collaboration and resources and may be considered in the context of developing a Citywide Equity Plan.
Recommendation 5:
Expand DEI+ trainings for City staff
City should build on actions taken since its Racial Equity Statement of 2020, which included the formation of an Office of Equity and Inclusion and the subsequent launch of an Equity Plan process. It should expand DEI training for all City staff. To be successful, future efforts should focus on implementation strategies and tools for staff, moving away from a white worldview and centering the overlapping experiences, shared spaces and mutual accountability of underrepresented peoples.
Recommendation 6:
Adopt a Citywide land/territory acknowledgment initiative Land Acknowledgements, although extremely important, can become diluted as these acknowledgments are the bare minimum of the protocols from which they originate. Santa Monica has an opportunity to adopt a city-wide land acknowledgment initiative that includes the actionable practices such as a new Indigenous Advisory Council (IAC) to help advise its decision-makers on issues similar to those raised through Reframe.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 539 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 10
Recommendation 7:
Improve representation on Santa Monica committees
As of the writing of this report there are no First Peoples serving as part of the Arts Commission or Landmarks Commission, among other bodies. Some of the issues raised from the City Hall Mural could have been mitigated if members of the communities excluded from and/or misrepresented in the mural had been included in these kinds of decision-making bodies.
Recommendation 8:
Facilitate Land Back in Santa Monica
There is an opportunity for Santa Monica to develop creative ways for First Peoples communities to practice sovereignty and self-determination. Santa Monica could partner with First Peoples to create opportunities for their members to return home.
Recommendation 9:
Facilitate Kuruvungna Springs relationships
While not in Santa Monica, Working Circle members had strong agreement that the City of Santa Monica continue to build relationships with the Kuruvungna Springs Foundation and support their efforts to have the land transferred back to them.
The mural and the controversy around it have created a rare and critical focal point of civic energy. The key is not to squander the moment and let it further perpetuate ill-will and distrust, but rather to use it to move towards equity, justice and a better Santa Monica. The mural has provided an incredible opportunity to reframe the conversation.
Authors
Meztli Projects Facilitation Team: Joel Garcia, Robin Garcia, Susannah Laramee Kidd and Rosten Woo
Reframe Working Circle Members
Tafari Alan, Brock Ramon Alvarado, Miguel Bravo, Lizette Hernandez, Bob Knight, Ruthann Lehrer, Kimberly Marshall, Mona Morales Recalde, Sharon Reyes, Emily Silver, Cathy Taylor, Paolo Velasco, and Zora Zajicek Santa Monica Arts Commission Mural Subcommittee
Public Art Committee Member Francois Bar and Arts Commissioners Michael Baroff, Kathleen Benjamin (Working Circle liaison), Janeen Jackson, Iao Katagiri and Deepa Subramanian
Santa Monica Landmarks Commission Mural Subcommittee
Commissioners Roger Genser (Working Circle liaison), Amy Green, and Dolores Sloan
Santa Monica City Council Mural Ad Hoc Committee
Councilmembers Christine Parra and Oscar de la Torre
Credits
Acknowledgements
from City of
Santa Monica
Reframe: City Hall Mural Project Phase I is a project of the City of Santa Monica.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 540 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 11
The Acknowledge + Reframe Together (Reframe) Initiative of Santa Monica Cultural Affairs produces public art and civic memory projects that center community voices with the aim of creating a more just and equitable Santa Monica.1 In particular, Reframe focuses on centering the voices and experiences of communities of color who have been historically excluded from discourse and representation in civic spaces. Belmar History + Art (2019-2021) was a demonstration project that inspired this initiative.2 The Reframe initiative also aligns with other recent City of Santa Monica equity and inclusion efforts. In 2020, the Santa Monica City Council voted to advance equity and inclusion work within the City organization, including the formation of a Racial Equity Committee and adoption of the Racial Equity Statement developed by staff participants in the Government Alliance on Race and Equity.3 In 2022, the City adopted a Statement of Apology to African American Residents and their Descendants.
With the Reframe: City Hall Mural project, the City has embarked on a public engagement process to reconsider the WPA-era mural by Stanton MacdonaldWright in the Historic City Hall lobby. The City of Santa Monica engaged Meztli Projects to create an engagement process and gather community feedback.
Meztli Projects is an Indigenous-based arts & culture collaborative centering Indigeneity by using arts-based strategies to highlight Native and Indigenous Artists and systems-impacted peoples. Meztli Projects has been successful in empowering community members, centering community interests, bringing in civic entities and finding ways to align goals.
Our facilitation team for this project is made up of four artists, curators and researchers: Joel Garcia, Robin Garcia, Susannah Laramee Kidd and Rosten Woo.
We were selected by the City for our novel approach and expertise in public art and qualitative research, experience working with Indigenous communities, expansive community engagement strategies, and most importantly, because we have been deeply involved in emerging conversations around authentic and new approaches to public memory and commemoration at local, regional and national levels. Additionally, Santa Monica selected our team’s proposal because our approach flattens hierarchies, expands notions of historical and artistic expertise and offers ways to resource community members with tools around the values of shared leadership.
1 For more information about the Acknowledge and Reframe Together initiative, visit https://santamonica. gov/programs/acknowledge-and-reframe-together.
2 For more information about the Belmar History + Art project, visit https://www.santamonica.gov/belmar-history-art. 3 For more information about the City of Santa Monica’s Equity work, visit https://santamonica.gov/equity.
Meztli Projects
Introduction
In the last decade, the City of Santa Monica has been focused on prioritizing equity, diversity, inclusion and justice in response to societal changes in understanding about the impact of systemic exclusion in our communities. The intent of this work is to address the unmet and unheard needs of marginalized community members, to center their experiences and respond with new policies and actions to address long-term harm.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 541 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 12
This report, written by Meztli Projects, is the summation of a six-month engagement process commissioned by the City of Santa Monica. The report contains specific recommendations for City staff to present to the City Council.
After delivery of this report, the Meztli team will produce bridge programming intended to continue engagement with the themes of this project between Phase I (public engagement and Working Circle meetings) and Phase II (actions in response to the mural and recommendations as directed by the City Council).
Bridge programming will set the stage for Phase II and continue the important conversations begun in Phase I.
Santa Monica
Arts Commission
Santa Monica
Landmarks
Commission
Santa Monica
City Council
City of Santa
Monica Cultural
Affairs
REFRAME
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
PHASE I:
Report and
Recommendations
• Allocates budgets
• Provides policy direction
• Appoints commissioners,
reviews appeals
• Will deliver Reframe
report and staff report
based on Reframe
Report to City Council
• Commissions and
promotes cultural
projects in Santa
Monica (including a
Phase II of Reframe)
• Approves public art
and selects artists
• Decision-making
body on any proposed
changes to designated
City Landmarks.
PHASE II:
Implementation of
Recommendations
Reframe: City Hall Mural Roles & Next Steps
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 542 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 13
Reframe: City Hall Mural Background
Larger civic
memory and
public art
landscape
This initiative is situated in a larger spectrum of projects that re-examine and re-imagine the landscape of civic memory and public art in ways that decenter white supremacist or settler colonial depictions of U.S. history and uplift other stories and perspectives. At a national level, beginning in 2013, movements such as Black Lives Matter responded to police brutality by activating a national response to white supremacy and called for intervention in policing and the criminal justice system. This spurred local and national efforts to reconsider, and in many cases, remove Confederate statues and monuments across the United States. This movement energized long-standing projects to engage portrayals of U.S. history that valorized colonizers like Christopher Columbus and colonial institutions like the Mission System. On the West Coast, this includes a reconsideration of figures like Junipero Serra, whose 2015 canonization by the Catholic Church was widely protested by Native American tribes up and down the West Coast.
This narrative change work requires new voices to lead efforts to tell their own stories. Local and regional governments are beginning to recognize this need and are working to provide tools, resources and support to these communities. Organizations like Monument Lab in Philadelphia have led the way in both creating an audit of our existing commemorative landscape as well as prototyping new forms and structures for producing civic memory.4 Progressive local and regional governments as well as major funders like the Mellon Foundation have invested heavily in this work; the Mellon Foundation has funded over 1,300 projects with $250 million since 2020.
Local examples of this work include the 2018 removal of the Columbus statue at Los Angeles’ Grand Park because of the political pressure brought on by Indigenous communities and the Native American Indian Commission. 4 “National Monument Audit,” Monument Lab. Philadelphia, PA. 2021. https://monumentlab.com/audit 5 Ashley Dobson, Tremayne Nez, and Representatives from the Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal Council, San Fernando Band of Mission Indians, and San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, “‘We Are Still Here.’ A Report on Past, Present, and Ongoing Harms Against Local Tribes” (Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission & Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture, January 2023). 2013
Black Lives Matter
protests
Photo: Fibonacci Blue
2018
Grand Park Columbus
statue fell
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
Local Tribes
The land that we call Santa Monica was originally and is still inhabited and cared for by the Tongva, Kizh, and Chumash peoples, and by the Tataviam and Serrano in the larger present day Los Angeles region. “As the Spanish expanded into Alta California, they enslaved Native peoples, forcing them to build and maintain the missions, pueblos, and presidios for the Spanish settlers while enduring unspeakable abuse at the hands of Spanish soldiers. Local Tribes were forced to move from their villages and give up their languages and culture.
Tribes were given new names after the missions, which is reflected in the names of many local Tribes today.”5 There are six Tribal groups in this region today:
• Fernandeño Tataviam Band of Mission Indians
• Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission
Indians
• Gabrielino Tongva Indians of California Tribal
Council
• Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians – Kizh Nation
• San Fernando Band of Mission Indians
• San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 543 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 14
In 2020, local community activists removed the Junipero Serra statue on Olvera Street in downtown Los Angeles, and that same year, the Columbus Statue was taken down in San Francisco. This, along with the racial reckoning taking place in the country, initiated a larger conversation around contested public art objects across Southern California. After the removal, as a step towards addressing the harm of the statue, the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture (LACDAC) partnered with Meztli Projects to produce Memory and Futurity in Yaangna/Yaanga,6 a series of programs looking at the authentic and multi-layered history of Yaangna/Yaanga (Downtown Los Angeles). The project explored memory culture, public space and civic art and presented works by Tongva7 artists Mercedes Dorame and Cindi Alvitre.
Also as part of the project, LACDAC hired a team of consultants to create a Land Access toolkit to guide the County in thinking through how to engage questions around land access and the various injustices done to Native communities.
The team released “ʻWe Are Still Here.’ A Report on Past, Present, and Ongoing Harms Against Local Tribes, which shares recommendations around land return and land access and provides some frameworks to think about the importance of public art in that conversation.8 Concurrently, as an extension of WE RISE 2022, the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health and Cause Communications in collaboration with Meztli Projects created the Oak Tree Rehoming Project to revitalize cultural spaces important to the Gabrieleno/ Tongva community. The project will plant sacred Oak Trees as an initiative to raise awareness about native plant life, land, and land access. These ancestor Oaks act as an alternative form of memorialization and have the power to anchor Gabrieleno/Tongva communities to their ancestral lands.
Simultaneously to this work at the County level, a conversation began in the City of Los Angeles with the Mayor’s Office Civic Memory Working Group, which convened for the first time in November 2019. In June 2020, local community activists removed the Junipero Serra statue on Olvera Street in downtown Los Angeles. The Civic Memory Working Group issued their report in April 2021, which included 18 key recommendations complemented by subcommittee reports, essays and photo essays, interviews and roundtable discussions.9 These conversations laid the foundation for a formal apology to Los Angeles First Peoples delivered by Mayor Eric Garcetti along with Councilman Mitch O’Farrell (Wyandotte) at Olvera where the Serra statue was toppled and other significant civic memory projects, such as the Memorial to the Victims of the 1871 Chinese Massacre.
Along a similar timeline in the Los Angeles region, the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians Tribe accepted a small parcel of land from a private donor and established the Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa10 Conservancy. The Conservancy is a Tongva-led organization created to care for this land and future land return. The Conservancy is composed of members from various Tongva Tribal Councils as a way to expand inclusivity across the various Gabrieleno communities that are situated in different parts of Los Angeles County. Because there is no mechanism in California to return land to First Peoples, the Tongva community established this land conservancy to create opportunities to receive and steward their homelands. Other local efforts to generate resources include the AcknowledgeRent initiative, established by the Fernandeño Tataviam Band 6 Pronounced: Yang-Na
7 Pronounced: TONG-və
8 Dobson, Ashley et al. “‘We Are Still Here.’ A Report on Past, Present, and Ongoing Harms Against Local Tribes.”
9 “Past Due: Report and Recommendations of the Los Angeles Mayor’s Office Civic Memory Working Group” (Huntington-USC Institute on California and the West, April 2021), http://civicmemory.la. 10 Pronounced: Tar-a-haht pah-hava
2020
Virginia Confederate
statues toppled
2020
Serra statue toppled
2021
Garcetti issues apology,
renames Serra park,
creates land easement
2019
Newsom issued an
apology for the state’s role
in violence toward and
displacement of Native
Americans in California
Photo: Ronnie Pitman
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
Photo: California Gov. Newsom’s Office
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 544 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 15
of Mission Indians to help fund the Tribal Administration operations, education, language revitalization, culture, wellness programming and federal recognition.
Similar conversations and interventions have been happening in the Bay Area as well. In 2018, the Early Days sculpture was removed from the Pioneer Monument.
In 2019, projects were commissioned to reclaim the space that the monument took up, including a portrait series in which 150 members of the Bay Area Indigenous community were photographed standing on the plinth where Early Days stood. In June 2020, the Columbus Statue was removed from Coit Tower by the San Francisco Arts Commission. In 2023, the San Francisco Arts Commission, Human Rights Commission and Recreation and Parks Department released the “Final Report of the Monuments and Memorials Advisory Committee,” with recommendations from the community and amendments to their public art policies and guidelines.11 Also in the Bay Area, the Shuumi Land Tax was established by the Sogorea Te Land Trust to support the return of Indigenous land, repatriation of ancestral remains and building Ohlone cultural spaces. The land tax is a suggested tax for organizations operating on Ohlone land.
Many of these interventions use creative tools to tell the stories of communities historically left out of political participation and civic engagement. It’s important to note that in all of this work, cultural issues are inherently bound up in other intersecting dimensions of life. While discussing the mural, we heard echoes of much larger conversations around settler colonialism, white supremacy, the displacement of Native Peoples, the rising costs of housing and displacement of working-class and people-of-color communities and affordability in Santa Monica. As such, the Reframe: City Hall Mural project is not only a response to the representations in the mural, but also the systems that produced the mural, and the systems that the mural reinforces, which are still very real today.
The mural in the lobby of Historic City Hall has long been a point of controversy and source of trauma among community members. In 2015, the controversy came to a head when members of Pico Youth and Family Center and other activists called for the mural’s removal, as a symbol of racism particularly because of its representation of Native people.12 The removal of the Columbus statue from Grand Park in 2018 and the Serra statue in 2020 from Olvera Street created opportunities to intensify pressure on the City of Santa Monica to reconsider the WPA-era mural as a way to connect to the larger national movement regarding monuments and civic memory. Elias Serna, artist, educator and organizer with the Pico Youth and Family Center remembers, During the George Floyd protests, Confederate statues were coming down.
I remember having a conversation with some friends and we were like, hey? You know what? Now’s the time to go to this mural. This is a monument.
It’s a tile mural. Our murals get painted over all the time. They’re taking down all those racist images. This is ours.13
Members of the Pico Youth and Family Center have a long history of engaging Santa Monica around issues of affordability, representation, gentrification, the justice system and youth-based issues. The mural became a focal point for the organization because of its presence in Santa Monica City Hall and its representation of Native people in relation to land, land loss and displacement. 11 “San Francisco Monuments and Memorials Advisory Committee Final Report” (San Francisco Arts Commission, Human Rights Commission, Recreation and Parks Department, May 2023). 12 Hector Gonzalez, “Activist Calls City Hall Mural of Kneeling Native Americans Santa Monica’s Confederate Flag,” Santa Monica Lookout, June 25, 2015, surfsantamonica.com. 13 Elias Serna. Interview with Meztli Projects, April 7, 2023.
Beginnings of the
Reframe: City Hall
Mural project
2022
Tongva Taraxat Paxaavxa
Conservancy starts with
land acquisition
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 545 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 16
In 2018, the City of Santa Monica Arts Commission and its Public Art Committee approved a Percent for Art budget allocation and 5-point plan of committee work, programming and new artwork commissions to address the mural. Before all elements of this plan could be implemented, the Belmar History + Art project was launched in response to a Coastal Commission requirement to acknowledge the history of the Black neighborhood that was displaced from the Civic Center site through eminent domain actions in the 1950s. The City Hall Mural project was put on hold for this time-sensitive priority and restarted in 2021, after the Belmar History + Art Project was completed.
In May 2021, City Council directed staff to install a temporary scrim to cover the mural.15 In response to this direction, the debate garnered renewed public attention and the City Council received letters for and against covering the mural. The Mural Ad Hoc Committee was appointed by the City Council on September 28, 2021 to serve as liaisons to the Landmarks and Arts Commissions to help guide the process to recontextualize the mural. In December 2021, the Public Works Department sent an Info Item about the covering project to Council.16
However, in February 2022, Council reconsidered and canceled the directive to cover the mural, instead directing staff to continue with the Arts Commission plans to engage the community and in the interim, to create a temporary lobby display.17 Following the community process and informed by community input, the Ad Hoc Committee was tasked to return to the full City Council with a set of recommendations for Council consideration (this report). The adopted recommendations would then inform an RFP to engage an artist or artist team to produce and install artistic recontextualization(s). This phase was overseen by the Arts Commission under its authority as custodians of the City’s public art collection. For a more detailed timeline of events leading up to the Reframe: City Hall Mural project, see Appendix A.
14 For more information about Japanese incarceration, visit https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/ japanese-relocation
15 Santa Monica City Council, “Staff Report 4575” (City of Santa Monica, May 11, 2021) http://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1266&MediaPosition=&ID=4575&CssClass=. 16 Susan Cline, Assistant City Manager, “Information Item: Recontextualizing City Hall’s Stanton Macdonald Wright Murals” (City of Santa Monica, December 23, 2021) https://www.smgov.net/Departments/council/ infoitems.aspx.
17 Santa Monica City Council, “Staff Report 4999” (City of Santa Monica, February 22, 2022) http://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1307&MediaPosition=&ID=4999&CssClass=.
Successive Displacements
After First Peoples were forced into the missions, many others have been displaced from the land that is now Santa Monica, often for racist reasons. When California became a US state, many people of Spanish descent began to lose their claims to their Ranchos, large tracts of land granted originally by the Spanish and Mexican governments. During World War II, Japanese Americans were removed from California and incarcerated purely because of their race.14 After the end of slavery, Black Americans were prevented from owning property by means of redlining and racial covenants. Eminent domain was employed by governmental agencies to seize and raze disproportionately Black and Brown communities for public projects, including the I-10 freeway and the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 546 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 17
Before the selection and contracting of the Meztli Projects team for the Reframe:
City Hall Mural project, the City of Santa Monica created a preliminary online survey about place and belonging in March 2022. This survey, directed to residents of Santa Monica, received 110 responses. The same survey was distributed to Santa Monica employees and received 13 responses. This survey was intended to begin a public conversation around the mural and to create a foundation for the Meztli Projects team to design their programming.
In the summer of 2022, artist Glenna Avila engaged local youth as a way to lay the groundwork for the Reframe process and to generate a temporary lobby display.
Avila is an artist and educator dedicated to the intersection of art, community and youth. For 28 years, Avila was the Director of the California Institute of the Arts Community Arts Partnership program, creating murals in Los Angeles County elementary schools while incorporating children and the community.
For the Reframe project, Avila prompted youth with questions around belonging in Santa Monica. The youth’s artwork was collected and showcased in a City Hall lobby display from August 2022 to January 2023.19
18 Ashley Gallagos, interviewed in “Striving Toward a World of Belonging Without Othering,” Independent Sector (blog), March 17, 2022.
19 For more information on this display, see https://www.santamonica.gov/blog/reframe-s-youth-art-display-in-the-historic-city-hall-lobby.
Preliminary work
Belonging
Belonging continues to be an important concept that surfaced throughout the Reframe project. In this context, belonging is the idea that communities need and deserve more than just access to resources; they also deserve a voice and decision-making power in political and social structures. Understanding the pre-colonial history of places, critical racial theory and politics alongside the impacts of spatial planning (visible and invisible markers and boundaries) helps us identify why and when people feel they don’t belong.18 Photo: City of Santa Monica
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 547 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 18
About Our Process
In line with the stated goals of the Acknowledge and Reframe initiative, our team created a process that proposed to flatten hierarchies and uplift the lived experience of community members who are experts of their own realities and who have systematically been excluded from building narratives of Santa Monica’s history, value systems and societal norms.
We designed this process to open up the discussion about the mural to include voices and perspectives far beyond who is typically considered an “expert” in murals or history.
We considered what perspectives are traditionally centered and worked to radically expand that field. For instance, our work aimed to consider information about WPA murals (which as a whole are presented by white experts for white audiences) but also decenter and place this information within the context of a much broader field of lived experiences, perspectives and histories.
Our approach consisted of the following four parts:
• A “Working Circle” composed of 13 individuals with strong ties to very different parts of Santa Monica that committed to attend public programs as well as meet as a cohort to act as an advisory body and think tank for six months. At the end of this process, the Working Circle discussed actions that could be taken in response to the mural. Their discussions have informed our recommendations to the City Council.
• A series of Public Programs on relevant themes including a bus tour of sites of memory; virtual and in-person panel discussions about art, civic memory and alternate histories of Santa Monica; a virtual tour of relevant educational resources; a reflective listening workshop and a screening of the documentary Town Destroyer. Additionally, we created programming through the perspective of First Peoples as a starting point to engage issues of equity and inclusion.
• The creation and installation of Lobby Displays in Historic City Hall that explained the project and presented updates to City Hall visitors. A Feedback Activity to survey members of the public about their perceptions of the mural and spark ideas for new public artworks.
• Interviews and Small Group Engagements with a broad spectrum of individuals who have a stake in the mural conversation or vocal opinions about it, subject matter experts, and local content experts. We also visited existing meetings and had one-on-one conversations with targeted constituencies.
These four strategies allowed us to touch a broad cross-section of Santa Monica, engage in deep qualitative discussions, support Santa Monica residents with tools to think about the mural in new ways as well as connect with one another, and pursue a transformative, deliberative process to reach new understandings.
Public Programs Working Circle
Convenes
Lobby Display &
Feedback Activity
Interviews &
Small Groups
Report
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 548 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 19
Frameworks
In our design of the project, we drew on our experience and expertise in facilitating public engagement processes through a non-hierarchical, trauma-informed lens. Here are some specific frameworks that informed our approach.
• Centering First Peoples
The decision by Santa Monica to launch the Acknowledge and Reframe Together initiative was in response to harms committed towards First Peoples and other communities. A clear deduction is that the harms to First Peoples must be understood and acknowledged and that they must help shape the space in which a portion of this work is done. This means that language, phrasing and worldviews that are central to their lifeways and interrupted by colonization should be normalized within the Reframe: City Hall Mural project considerations. One way that we did this was through a workshop for Working Circle members and City staff to understand the differences between terminologies such as Indigenous, Native American and First Peoples and when each term is best used to empower and prevent exclusion. • Trauma-Informed Practices
Trauma-informed practice is an approach that asks, “What happened to you?” rather than “What is wrong with you?” This shifts the tone from victim-blaming to recognizing the person as a survivor. Traumainformed practices are not a specific or technique-heavy modality, rather it includes a set of guiding principles that recognizes that trauma has significant effects on people and is often under-recognized, under-reported and addressed. A reflective listening session for the Working Circle was one way to model these practices that helped expand the understanding of how each respective member was experiencing the mural and how those feelings were connected to systems of power. • Survivor Centered Approach
A survivor-centered approach means establishing a relationship with the survivor that promotes their emotional and physical safety, builds trust and helps them to restore some control over their life. This approach informed how the team established a baseline of acknowledgments on the impact of colonization so that First Peoples did not have to retell the trauma they experienced. • Healing Informed Practices
We hope that the recommendations in this report can open the door to First Peoples directing a series of reparative actions in Santa Monica. A healing centered approach requires a different question that moves beyond “What happened to you?” to “What’s right with you?” and views those exposed to trauma as agents in the creation of their own well-being rather than victims of traumatic events. • Monument Lab’s Approach
Our team has been engaged in a long dialogue with colleagues at Monument Lab, and we have been inspired by their approach based on deep research, broad public engagement and experimental prototypes for participation.19 We have re-mixed this approach to fit the Reframe: City Hall Mural project and its particular engagement needs.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 549 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 20
Public Programs Working Circle
Convenes
Interviews &
Small Groups
Lobby Display &
Feedback Activity
Town Destroyer
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 550 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 21
At the heart of our process was the creation of a Working Circle. This group was based on a “citizens’ assembly” model.20 A citizens’ assembly is an increasingly popular form of policy-making that uses elements of a jury process. Its members form a representative cross-section of the public and are provided with time, resources and a broad range of viewpoints to learn deeply about an issue.
They are then asked to work together and create policy recommendations.
This model is premised on the belief that community members themselves have expertise and when given time and resources will come to their own sophisticated analysis and just solutions. Instead of using so-called experts to generate recommendations privately OR engage in a process that attempts to put a series of questions up for general referendum-style voting, our process emphasized discussion, group-learning and the wisdom of everyday people to make decisions that impact their communities.
We believed that if individuals from different communities in Santa Monica met with one another with open minds they would learn from each other and reach new understandings rather than simply asking individuals to “vote” or debate one another in a town hall. So, in addition to the citizens’ assembly model we also often brought in strategies from talking circles and story circles. A talking circle is an Indigenous way of gathering and being in community, characterized by allowing each person to speak without interruption in a circular format with an emphasis on intention, listening with attention and self-monitoring the impact of one’s contributions to the discussion. Examples of these forms are recounted in the book The Gatherings: Reimagining Indigenous-Settler Relations, which chronicles a decades-long series of discussions that took place between Indigenous and settler communities in the Northeast of North America.21 Another approach that inspired the way we resourced the Working Circle and community members who participated in this process was Metro’s work in Boyle Heights in the mid-2010s. Los Angeles County Metro’s Review Design Advisory Committee (RDAC) is responsible for building housing along transportation corridors as part of their Joint Development program. They utilized a meaningful and different approach to community engagement. Metro, along with community organizers, empowered RDAC community members and resourced them with a knowledge base of architects, city officials and other decision-makers so that RDAC members could make critical recommendations informed by their lived experience rather than selecting from predetermined outcomes. For example, at previous meetings, Metro would present proposed building plans to the RDAC and one Elder would respond that the building was ugly (communicating in Spanish). At the next meeting, Metro presented the same design but painted bright colors to reflect a more “Latin” flavor. Still, the RDAC member insisted the building was ugly. Following the knowledgebuilding sessions, the RDAC member was able to articulate the deficiencies in the proposed building design in architectural language. This resourcing of RDAC members led to approximately 4-5 new affordable housing buildings with designs that better served the needs of the community.
Selection and composition
To select Working Circle members, we held an open call for applicants, sending out the call via email newsletters, to individuals who had filled out the earlier City survey and to leaders of communities invested in this conversation. We tried to recruit as diverse a group as possible. We aimed for the group to be committed 20 For more information on citizen assemblies, see https://citizensassemblies.org/. 21 Mawopiyane and Shirley N. Hager, The Gatherings: Reimagining Indigenous-Settler Relations (Toronto:
University of Toronto Press, 2021).
The Working
Circle
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 551 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 22
and consistent in order to build accountability to the process and to each other.
We also wanted this group to be connected to communities that felt they had a strong stake in the questions that the mural brought up. Eligible participants were offered a $1000 honorarium.
We received 32 applications and selected 13 members with an additional two appointed by the City of Santa Monica to serve as liaisons to the Landmarks Commission and Arts Commission. The City later determined that these two members should recuse themselves from the final stages of the process when we were developing recommendations in order to retain their voting responsibilities for future commission work related to the mural or the Reframe process. Staff members from Cultural Affairs, Planning, and the Office of Equity and Inclusion attended Working Circle meetings as observers and to provide information when appropriate.
The Working Circle brought together engaged individuals with diverse perspectives, histories and ties to Santa Monica communities. These communities include local First Peoples, Marquez family descendants, Pico Youth and Family Center, other local nonprofits and activists, Santa Monica Conservancy, Santa Monica College students and young adults, Santa MonicaMalibu Unified School District, City of Santa Monica employees and others who work and live in Santa Monica. Members included Tafari Alan, Brock Ramon Alvarado, Kathleen Benjamin (Santa Monica Arts Commission), Miguel Bravo, Roger Genser (Santa Monica Landmarks Commission), Lizette Hernandez, Bob Knight, Ruthann Lehrer, Kimberly Marshall, Mona Morales Recalde, Sharon Reyes, Emily Silver, Cathy Taylor, Paolo Velasco, and Zora Zajicek.
The Working Circle composition was intended to reflect not only the demographic nature of Santa Monica but also balance out the level of representation of folks who have been historically excluded from decisionmaking processes. Applicants who were not selected for this cohort were invited to participate in other forums—as panelists and in interviews, etc. We intentionally attempted to demystify the idea of the cohort as a set of experts with titles and clout; instead, they were a group of community representatives.
The diagram on the next page of the Working Circle offers some insight into the spectrum of communities they are connected to.
Working Circle journey
The Working Circle met a total of 13 times as a group – 4 of these were in person, with the rest taking place on Zoom. Working Circle members also attended the public programs when possible. Our team facilitated the meetings and attempted to create an environment that would allow trust to grow, make sure that all members felt that they had space to speak, and create a “brave” space where members ask difficult questions and bring their authentic perspective.
We prioritized small group breakout discussions, as well as a “circle” format intended to make sure everyone had equal opportunity to speak.
We also sought to resource the Working Circle with tools, knowledge, and perspectives that could expand their frames of reference and allow them to work together. The Working Circle members were taught techniques of reflective listening to allow them to try to take in what each other said and slow their need to respond. They used these techniques to describe the mural to one another and reflect what they heard.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 23
Tribal First
People LA Native
American
Indian
Commission
Volunteer
Equity
development
subcommittee
Community
Corporation
Chrysalis of SM
The People
Concern
St. John’s
Growing
Hope
Gardens
Pico
Neighborhood
Virginia
Avenue
Community
SM
Resident
SMMUSD
SMMUSD
Preservation
Architect
City Fire
Dept
Generational
West LA
Resident
Indigenous
activism and
education
Combating
Anti
Blackness
Training
Pico Youth
and Family
Center
SMC Art
Department
SMC Pride
Center
SMC
Racial
Justice
Center
SMC
Student
government
Broad Stage
SM Resident
Art historian
CADRE
community
organizer Quilombos
Capacity
Builders
SM
Conservancy
Rancho Boca
Santa Monica
descendant
SM History
Museum
SM
Conservancy
Bandini
Foundation
City
Office of
Equity and
Inclusion
AWARE-LA
SM
Northeast
Neighbors
Lizette
Ruthann
Ramon
Tafari
Mona
Cathy
Kimberly
Bob
Sharon
Paolo
Zora
Emily
Mike
Santa
Monica
College
Barrett
Gallery @
SMC
West
LA-Sawtelle
Neighborhood
Council
Working
Circle
Network
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 553 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 24
The Working Circle attended public programs about civic memory, local history and public art and debriefed about them together. They met with art historian and Stanton Macdonald-Wright expert, Will South, viewed the film Town Destroyer about a similar controversy around a WPA mural in San Francisco, attended a photography exhibition by Swinomish and Tulalip artist Matika Wilbur at Santa Monica College and heard from members of Gabrieleno/ Tongva and Kizh tribes. They also had several general discussions about the mural, public art and the Reframe process. Our intent was to create a learning environment where we all could gain perspectives without having to move toward deliberation or recommendations immediately.
Understanding that the Working Circle process would be somewhat fluid given the situations of each member, we built in strategies to balance out positionalities, privileges and other power skewing factors. Our team facilitated individual check-ins with Working Circle members and did regular check-ins as a team to make sure we responded to both individual needs as well as collective feedback and ideas on how to move forward. Working Circle members also provided a throughline throughout the process and were a touchpoint for communities to engage in the nuanced and complex conversations that emerged.
Towards the end of their time together, the Working Circle was tasked with discussing recommendations for actions in response to the mural. First, they were asked to brainstorm a long list of possible actions and then given a series of anonymous surveys about priorities and perspectives on the mural (roughly based on the Delphi survey technique). Through this process, the group was able to come to agreements on values and statements about the mural and, finally, create a ranked and prioritized list of recommended actions. These final meetings emphasized in-person engagement and dialog, and we were able to gain additional nuance and direction from these heartfelt conversations.
More detail about the exact process used to create these statements of values, perceptions and recommendations, including survey results and questions, can be found in Appendix B.
At times, the Working Circle process proved difficult. Frequently it was uncomfortable, especially when habits of leadership and expertise were challenged. Some Working Circle members had difficulty letting others speak and were impatient about letting the process unfold. Many underwent profound shifts in the way they related to the topics and to each other. In the end, we feel confident that all Working Circle members encountered and listened deeply to perspectives that were not their own and were also able to speak to their experience and knowledge.
Specifics of Language
As an example of the ways we tried to resource the Working Circle, we can look at some specifics of language.
At the start of this Reframe process, many Working Circle members would use the term Native or Native American to refer to the two Brown persons depicted in the City Hall mural. These terms create a really broad and therefore ineffective narrative to respond to. Those bodies depicted reference Santa Monica’s First Peoples, and it is this specific group of “Native Americans’’ that are most impacted by these issues. We encouraged the Working Circle to reflect on these differences and refine their language. This language shift has also created efficiency in building partnerships between Santa Monica and the Gabrieleno/Tongva community. This is important because settler colonialism prefers to deal with abstract issues, so that the most accessible “Native Americans’’ are invited into these conversations. This creates instances where “First Peoples’’ can become excluded.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 25
Step Prompt
Final Recommendations
Recommendation Development Process
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 26
Our team produced programs that created connection and education for the public and provided crucial tools and resources to the Working Circle. We brought together guest presenters with connections to the topic from the region and beyond. The events were designed to draw out perspectives and approaches to thinking about public space, local history, public art, Indigenous representation, sites of civic memory and related controversies. We tried to balance local, national and international perspectives on these issues.
Initially, we intentionally left the schedule of the latter half of the public programs open so that we could adapt our programming to be responsive to community needs and conversations. We also organized an “open house” at City Hall to answer questions and foster open dialog with anyone interested in the project. On average we had 30-40 people at each event. The documentation from these events is available at santamonica.gov/city-hall-mural.
Prisms of Indigeneity (in-person)
In this first event, we focused on conversations about the expansiveness of Native and Indigenous identities across North America and the importance of uplifting the First Peoples of the communities we live in. The event took place at Matika Wilbur’s “Project 562: Changing the way we see Native America” exhibition which reflected on the diversity of Tribal Nations across the country. This event quickly surfaced the tensions that would demand response throughout this project and highlighted how much work there was to come.
It was an excellent demonstration of the complexity of Native and Indigenous identities even within the Santa Monica region.
Lunch and Learn - Reframe: City Hall Mural Project
This event followed up on some of the themes brought up in the Prisms of Indigeneity event and provided an overview of the Reframe project and ways to get involved for City employees. The goal of this event was to refocus the lens of City Hall staff, learn new language, and use the preferred terms by First Peoples to better address their current needs and arising issues related to the City Hall mural.
Sites of Memory Tour (in-person)
This public tour explored three significant places in Santa Monica history and how they express remembrance in public space: Kuruvungna Village Springs, Historic Santa Monica City Hall (with the Stanton Macdonald-Wright mural in the lobby) and Historic Belmar Park. This tour allowed Working Circle members to connect with members of the public, explore diverse approaches to creating and preserving civic memory in Santa Monica and the work involved in creating and maintaining these sites.
What Do You See Here? - An educational resources and Feedback Activity workshop
This Zoom event served as an introduction to our feedback activity and an overview of teacher and library resources for using the activity in an educational setting. These resources covered the history of the WPA, the artist, Santa Monica First Peoples, and recreation and segregation in Santa Monica, as well as resources for analyzing and contextualizing historical visual culture.
Memory Work Today - New approaches to telling stories about the places we live This Zoom event highlighted the work of contemporary artists, designers, technologists and historians thinking about ways of interpreting and presenting history in public. The event featured idris brewster and Christine Wong Yap.
This event inspired much discussion of ways that innovative storytelling could be brought to bear on Historic City Hall.
Public programs
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
Photo: Kinfolk
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 556 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 27
Community Listening Workshop with Anu Yadav (in-person) This event focused on the wide diversity of thought around the mural at historic Santa Monica City Hall. The workshop was designed to develop participants’ empathetic listening skills. Critically acclaimed actress, writer, and theaterbased educator Anu Yadav led this workshop using a variety of large and small group exercises to surface values, questions, challenges, and hopes and dreams about the mural. The group began to develop a long-list of possible actions regarding the mural and the issues presented by the mural. A summary of the responses gathered at this workshop can be found in Appendix C.
City Hall Mural Open House (in-person)
This event was designed to create a casual environment for the public to discuss the Reframe project with members of the facilitation team at City Hall.
Conversations here included ways that Santa Monica’s art commissioning process could be made more inclusive, details about the production of the mural, and further exploration of public interpretations of the piece.
Other Histories of Santa Monica and the Bay District (in-person) This event, co-hosted with the Santa Monica History Museum (SMHM), featured the work of local historians, archivists and tradition bearers looking at Indigenous, Latinx and African American stories. Members gained inspiration from local models of history, archiving, and storytelling. Speakers included Mona Recalde, Jaime Cruz, and Carolyne Edwards, with an SMHM gallery tour by Anne Wallentine. The event conversation highlighted ways that communities can better document their stories and ways that non-Native people can support the work of Native groups like the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians.
Screening of Town Destroyer mural documentary (in-person) This event was a screening of the compelling film Town Destroyer that offers histories and commentary of a relevant case study—the Life of Washington mural in San Francisco. This film frames numerous key perspectives around the controversial mural, its role in public space, censorship and community control.
Our team facilitated a discussion of the film as a way to broaden conversations about contested public artworks and possible interventions and responses.
Three things were echoed by those in attendance: continue having these difficult conversations with the support of a facilitation team, focus on the reparative work needed to address past harms towards First Peoples, and develop more tools to address similar issues involving public art, public space and representation.
In order to engage more people in this process, we designed a feedback activity containing a three-page worksheet that individuals could fill out online or complete on paper and return to City Hall or the Santa Monica Public Library.
Overall, we hoped to engage people in reflecting on the mural and to go deeper than a survey listing options for or against the mural. One of the goals of the feedback activity was to have people engage directly with the mural images and to understand not just how they interpreted the images, but also their emotional responses and attachments to the mural. Therefore, the first two pages of the activity provided reproductions of the two mural panels and asked participants what they saw in each panel, what they felt was missing, and how the images made them feel about being in City Hall or Santa Monica. We also wanted to understand what participants felt would be essential in depictions of Santa Monica to get a fuller sense of the values and perspectives that shaped their interpretations of the existing mural. So, the last page asked participants what they would include if they were creating or commissioning an artwork that would represent the history of Santa Monica. These responses would also be useful if the process generated recommendations around commissioning new Feedback activity
engagement
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
Photo: Fatosh Arabacioglu, courtesy of Snitow-Kaufman Productions
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 557 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 28
artwork. Finally, we asked participants to tell us about themselves, provide their zip code and optionally, offer their email addresses to receive updates on the project.
We collected feedback activity responses from February 6, 2023, through May 10, 2023. We initially intended to stop collecting responses on April 1st but chose to extend the deadline to make sure that all the core constituencies had a chance to respond.
The feedback activity was shared intentionally with Santa Monica residents and key stakeholders in the process inside and outside of Santa Monica. Additionally, Working Circle members circulated it in their networks so that the diverse scope of Santa Monica community members and voices were included. We sent out the link to the activity widely, via City of Santa Monica email and social media channels and throughout our networks. The paper worksheets were available in the Historic City Hall lobby, City Hall East and at the Main, Pico and Montana branches of the Santa Monica Public Library. We installed a poster display in the Historic City Hall lobby describing the project, which included a QR code link to the activity.
We featured the feedback activity along with resources for educators in our “What Do You See Here?” virtual event, and we promoted the activity during all of our public events. We also staffed a booth at the Art and Literacy Festival in Virginia Avenue Park, engaging children and parents who attended the festival.
To make sure that the perspectives of Spanish-speaking Santa Monicans were captured, the feedback activity was also available in Spanish. The facilitation team also visited the Familias Latinas Unidas, a Spanish-speaking parents group at Virginia Avenue Park to talk about the project and collect feedback activity responses. A summary of the responses to the feedback activity is in the “Feedback Activity Responses” section of this report and fuller details about the responses are available in Appendix C.
We conducted individual interviews to explore certain perspectives in depth and connect at length with people who were highly invested in the issue but not part of the Working Circle, willing or able to engage in other events. Our team conducted interviews with key Santa Monica stakeholders, including Santa Monica First Peoples; the larger Indigenous community; members of the Pico Youth and Family Center; Latinx, African American/Black, Asian American and Pacific Islander stakeholders who have a relationship to public art or the Reframe process; City of Santa Monica employees; the descendants of the Marquez family who are mentioned in the City Hall mural; historians and preservationists; and art students and educators.
Overall, we conducted 15 interviews and asked questions about perceptions and feelings related to the mural, what is missing from the mural, potential interventions, the mural’s location, alternative representations of Santa Monica, new art commissions and who should be involved. What became evident through the interviews was that responses revealed a great deal about interviewees’ own subjectivities in relationship to the depictions showcased in the mural. In that sense, responses illuminated the mural’s varied levels of impact. We drew heavily on these interviews for the “Feedback from Particular Constituencies” section of this report. Relevant interviews are also woven through this report and shed light on diverse entry points into the conversation.
Interview and
small group
engagements
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 558 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 29
Interviewees:
• Tafari Alan, student, Santa Monica College
• Alex Aldana, Executive Director, Pico Youth & Family Center • Margaret Bach, local historian, former member of the Santa Monica Landmarks Commission
• Angie Behrns-Dorame (Gabrieleno/Tongva), Kuruvungna Springs Foundation • Kathleen Benjamin, Belmar History + Art advisory group member, Arts Commissioner
• Jamie Cruz, educator, historian
• Gina DeBaca, artist, cultural worker
• Mary (Terri) de la Pena, author, Marquez family descendant • Bill Deverell, American West historian, USC professor & Director of the Huntington-USC Institute on California and the West
• Nina Fresco, board member, Santa Monica Conservancy; former chair of the Santa Monica Planning Commission
• Jeremy Gonzalez (Gabrielino Kizh Nation), community member • Paulina Sahagun, educator, artist
• Elias Serna, Ph.D., M.F.A., artist, educator, professor, and board member, Pico Youth & Family Center
• Will South, artist, art historian, Stanton Macdonald-Wright specialist • Angel Villaseñor, former City of Santa Monica employee, community member We supplemented the interviews with targeted outreach events for specific communities and many informal conversations. The facilitation team put special effort into connecting with Santa Monica First Peoples and the larger Los Angeles Indigenous community. We distributed the feedback activity at the CSU Puvungna (Long Beach) Pow Wow, the Annual Native Voices Short Play Festival at the Autry and a clean-up event exploring Native land starting in Tongva Park. We reached out to many community leaders and community members, ultimately receiving a letter from the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians and from Nick Rocha, Chairman of the Gabrielino-Shoshone Nation of Southern California (both letters are reproduced in Appendix D). The letter from Chairman Rocha was also read aloud at the mural during the Sites of Memory tour.
As part of these more targeted engagement efforts, we hosted another Lunch and Learn with City of Santa Monica staff, who have a particular relationship to the mural as part of their workplace. This event was an opportunity for a staff member on the Working Circle to share their experience with the process and to collect feedback about the mural from City staff more broadly.
Working Circle members took the lead on organizing events in their own communities such as
• workshops for K-5 elementary school teachers and administrators at Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD)
• a presentation to a Working Circle member’s church
• a town hall at the Pico Youth and Family Center
• a feedback activity session with the Santa Monica Conservancy members at City Hall
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 559 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 30
• a teach-in with Community Corporation of Santa Monica staff and residents • a field trip for a Santa Monica College art class.
Working Circle members also connected us with and invited us to existing meetings in their communities, including the Santa Monica Area Interfaith Council, Human Resource Council, Santa Monica Conservancy, and the Puente parents’ group at SMMUSD. In this way, the Working Circle connected the process to a wider network of Santa Monica residents and relevant community events and conversations. While the feedback activity acted as a tool to record individual reactions, it was also a conversational tool and often promoted complex conversations that could not be captured in the activity. Those conversations helped shape our programs and the Working Circle agenda and added nuance to the recommendations detailed in this report.
Lunch and Learn I Lunch and Learn II
Distribute the
feedback
activity at the
CSU Puvungna
(Long Beach)
Pow Wow
at the Annual Native
Voices Short Play
Festival at the Autry
Receive a letter from
the Gabrieleno/
Tongva San Gabriel
Band of Mission
Indians
Receive a letter
from Nick Rocha,
the chief of the
Gabrielino
Shoshone
at a clean-up event
exploring Native
land starting in
Tongva Park
Reach out to many
community leaders
and community
members
Workshops for
SMMUSD K-5
school teachers and
administrators
Presentation to a
Working Circle
member’s church
Town hall at the
Pico Youth and
Family Center
Booth at Arts and
Literacy Festival,
visit to Familias
Latinas Unidas
at park
Feedback
activity session
with the Santa
Monica
Conservancy
members at
City Hall
Visits to Human
Resource Council,
Santa Monica
Area Interfaith
Council, Puente
meeting
Teach-in with
Community
Corporation of
Santa Monica staff
and residents
Field trip for a
Santa Monica
College art class
Additional
outreach to specific
constituencies
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 560 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 31
History of Santa Monica and the Bay District is a “petrachrome” mural installed on the interior walls of the lobby of Santa Monica’s City Hall building. The mural was designed by Stanton Macdonald-Wright, an American artist who spent his early years in Santa Monica. It was commissioned through the Works Progress Administration’s Federal Art Project—a government program designed to employ artists during the Great Depression, bolster the economy, and restore national pride. Macdonald-Wright also acted as the administrator of the WPA project’s Southern California division, supervising numerous other artists and their projects. This mural was completed in 1939 along with the building itself.
The City of Santa Monica owns the mural and it is part of the City’s public art collection. Santa Monica City Hall was landmarked in 1979 and the mural was mentioned in the designation. In 2011, the exterior of City Hall was given a supplemental landmark designation.
The mural was created using a process invented by Macdonald-Wright called “petrachrome,” which is very similar to terrazzo.22 Blocks of colored liquid cement material (including crushed tile, marble, and granite) are poured in place to create the image. A flexible frame is used to block off each colored section and the material hardens when it dries. The images are created in panels that are roughly three feet by three feet. These panels are then installed as an architectural facing to a wall surface and polished. This technique was employed in several other murals in the Federal Art Project and WPA program in Southern California that were directed by Macdonald-Wright.
In 2003, the City’s Cultural Affairs Division, as part of a comprehensive project to survey and restore thirteen murals in the city, commissioned Rainer, Stavroudis & Zebala to perform a conservation and restoration project on the lobby mural.
In a follow up assessment of Santa Monica’s public art collection in 2015, the mural was noted to be in good condition.
22 Charles Epting, “The New Deal’s Forgotten Art Form,” Living New Deal, June 19, 2015, https://livingnewdeal.org/tag/petrachrome/.
The History of the Mural
City Hall mural being prepared in FAP workshop.
Photo: Public domain, FDR Library Collection
Photograph of man working on a floor mural, circa 1940.
Photographs relating to the WPA Southern California Art Project, circa 1937-1941. Photo: Archives of American
Art, Smithsonian Institution
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 561 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 32
Prior to his work with the WPA, Macdonald-Wright came to some prominence as one of the first proponents and practitioners of abstract, non-figurative art in America. With artist Morgan Russell, he developed a style called Synchromism, meaning “with color.” In his later career, after returning to the West Coast, Macdonald-Wright returned to figurative work. Particularly in his public mural work, like the City Hall mural, Macdonald-Wright used historical figures.
In 1934, Macdonald-Wright volunteered to paint a 200-foot mural at the Santa Monica Library entitled Technical and Imaginative Pursuits of Early Man or Man’s Two-fold Development. This mural included 160 figures represented in a fantastical tableau together including such figures as Edgar Allen Poe, Bach, Confucius, Lao Tsu, Copernicus and Newton, as well as individuals from Santa Monica, including himself, Gloria Stuart, Leo Carillo, Judge Carillo and film director Frank Tuttle.
He also included several “hidden portraits,” including notable Santa Monicans cast as anonymous figures—nephews of Senator John Percival Jones (co-founder of Santa Monica) in Renaissance costume, Mayor William H. Carter working in a machine shop and a self-portrait as a flute player.23
This library commission led to Macdonald-Wright’s appointment as lead administrator of the Southern California division of the WPA in 1935, a position that he held for seven years. During his tenure, Macdonald-Wright produced nine murals. These murals, in mosaic tile and petrachrome often showcased innovative, durable techniques and dealt with themes relating to California history, depictions of recreation and technological advances. Macdonald-Wright was admired as an energetic and ingenious administrator but also criticized for altering and censoring the work of other artists and his highly unconventional choice to award a disproportionate number of mural commissions to himself.
In contrast to Macdonald-Wright’s nine murals, five other artists had three each, twelve artists had two and the remaining 32 artists had one each, according to a public complaint letter written by Edward Bilberman of the Artists’ Congress.24 23 This mural was eventually reinstalled in the current Main Library in 2006. For more information about the Santa Monica Public Library mural, see https://smpl.org/mural/index.htm. 24 Marlene Park, “A Romantic in a Frenzied Office: Macdonald-Wright and the Federal Art Projects, 1934- 1943,” in Color, Myth, and Music: Stanton Macdonald-Wright and Synchromism (Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Museum of Art, 2001), p. 127.
Stanton
MacdonaldWright as WPA
administrator
Detail of Macdonald-Wright mural at Santa Monica
Public Library. Photo: City of Santa Monica
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 562 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 33
To the best of our knowledge, Macdonald-Wright had no outside guidance or oversight over the content of the City Hall mural. The foremost historian of Macdonald-Wright’s life, Will South, agrees with this, pointing to the complete absence of archival materials relating to this mural.25 Because FAP/WPA murals were government-commissioned works, most of them have extensive documentation in government archives. Typically, mural artists would be asked to submit drawings and sketches before being permitted to produce and install public projects. The City Hall mural has almost no paper trail, suggesting that Macdonald-Wright, because he was both artist and commissioner, did not submit any concepts, written descriptions, drawings or plans to any oversight body. This arrangement, as noted by the Artists’ Congress in their complaint letter, was highly unusual.
The WPA in Southern California is distinct from the majority of other WPA divisions because of the leadership of Macdonald-Wright. Whereas much of WPA art is known for its social realist approach and content, MacdonaldWright was actively averse to this style and worked to eliminate it. MacdonaldWright believed social realist content was “political” and viewed this approach as anathema to “true” artistic content. This was a personal perspective that Macdonald-Wright admits was not held by his employer, the federal government.
According to his oral history interview with Betty Hoag, he actively colluded with other anti-socialist members of the art world to identify and censor artistic content without bringing it to the attention of his employers.26 His approach to this censorship was by his own description, covert. He knew the Federal government did not share his views so he worked to personally paint over and alter other artists’ work without due process.
Macdonald-Wright was, at the end of his life, openly critical of the Federal Art Project, the art that it produced and the artists that it fostered and supported, believing that it “set back art all over the United States a hundred and fifty years… it was absolutely the worst thing that could possibly have happened.”27 There are a few misconceptions about the mural that we feel are beyond interpretation and deserve to be clarified.
“The mural is painted directly on the wall.”
The mural is not a painting. It was created through a terrazzo-style process called petrachrome, assembled in panels off-site, and then installed as a facing on top of the structural wall.
“The mural could not be moved because it is part of the building.” Petrachrome is a durable stone composite material that has been successfully moved several times. At least two of the known petrachrome murals have been relocated and restored (Helen Lundgren’s History of Transportation and Macdonald-Wright’s Typical Activities of a Beach and Harbor City/Recreations of Long Beach). The petrachrome process was deliberately designed as a material that can be assembled off-site and attached to an existing wall. “The mural is landmarked.”
The mural is not itself landmarked but is mentioned in the description of City Hall in the initial 1979 landmark designation.
25 Will South, “Q&A with Reframe Working Circle,” April 26, 2023. 26 Betty Hoag, Oral History: Stanton Macdonald-Wright, September 13, 1964, Archives of the American Art New Deal and the Arts Project, https://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/interviews/oral-history-interview-stanton-macdonaldwright-11673. 27 Hoag, Oral History: Stanton Macdonald-Wright, September 13, 1964.
Some common
misconceptions
Helen Lundgren’s “History of Transportation,” one of
several petrachrome murals that have been relocated.
Photo: Andrew Laverdiere, Living New Deal
Macdonald-Wright “Landing of the Vikings in Vinland” at Santa Monica High School. Photo: Richard A. Walker, Living New Deal
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 563 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 34
Detail of southwest panel of “History of Santa Monica and the Bay District” without the list of dates. Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 564 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 35
Detail of northwest panel of “History of Santa Monica and the Bay District” without the list of dates. Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 565 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 36
The City of Santa Monica describes the mural this way in the Public Art Archive entry:
The section in the northwest corner depicts a group of five figures meeting on a beach rimmed by mountains, with rocks in the waves at the shoreline. A Spanish conquistador stands with a padre in a Franciscan robe holding a walking stick. They face two Native Americans, kneeling and sitting at a stream, drinking with their hands. Behind them is a standing, bearded figure who wears a blue hat and cloak, and behind him are two bridled horses. A waterfall is seen in the middle distance, the source of the stream. A bird soars in the sky.
A timeline accompanying the mural indicates dates of historic significance for both the city and the state.
The section in the southwest corner of the lobby portrays a Santa Monica of the 1930’s: the cliff-side coastal landscape, with people engaged in recreational pursuits evocative of the locale. A road race, sailboats and airplanes are seen behind large foreground figures, including two polo players (one mounted), a boy kneeling with a model airplane, a pair of tennis players, and a chow dog, modeled on Macdonald Wright’s own pet.
While Macdonald-Wright speaks at length about the specific figures in the southwest side of the mural, there is no further discussion about his intentions regarding the overall theme or intention of the mural as a whole. In this part of the report, we’ll address common ideas about who and what is depicted in the mural, whether those depictions are accurate, and highlight some key differing interpretations.
Interpretations of the Mural
It’s important to note that the mural is a constructed image, not a factual event or a photograph. There are many possible interpretations of what is in the mural. Some are more plausible than others, but fundamentally an image is open to interpretation, and no interpretation can be said to be definitively true or untrue. Because of the nature of the mural and the depth of feelings that the mural evokes, we have found that interpretations of what is depicted, how it is depicted, and what ideas, worldviews and sentiments that depiction evokes vary greatly. Many interpretations of the mural that we imagined to be uncontroversial have turned out to be hotly debated.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 37
What we know about the artist’s intentions for the images in the mural is via an interview with the artist conducted in 1964 by Betty Hoag, for the Archives of American Art New Deal and the Arts Project.28 In this oral history, MacdonaldWright speaks explicitly about the objects, places and figures in the southwest (second) panel, sometimes known as “recreation.” He talks about Will Rogers and his polo field, automobile racing on San Vicente or Wilshire Blvd, the Douglas Building, Harry M. Gorham, tennis players May Sutton and Tom Bundy, as well as the dog, modeled after his own two dogs named Min Wong and Yung Wevay.
This image touches on some of the most renowned features of Santa Monica at that time, highlighting automobile racing, aviation, tennis and film stars. Will Rogers was one of Santa Monica’s most well-known residents in the 1920s and had a famed polo field. While it is not evident in the depiction in this mural, Will Rogers was Cherokee and grew up in Indian Territory, now part of Oklahoma. 28 Hoag, Oral History: Stanton Macdonald-Wright, September 13, 1964.
The southwest or
“recreation” side
of the mural
Detail of southwest panel of “History of Santa Monica
and the Bay District” without the list of dates. Photo:
Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 38
The dates that appear on the right side of this panel refer to significant moments relevant to City of Santa Monica government, which emphasizes the location of the mural in City Hall. The 1924 round the world flight of Douglas planes is the only date listed that does not pertain to City of Santa Monica government.
An airplane in flight and a toy airplane depicted in the mural seem to be visual references to this date.
Many interviewees, Working Circle members and feedback activity respondents have noted all of the figures in the recreation scene are portrayed as white.
Certainly, this speaks to who had power and standing in 1939 Santa Monica, but is not an accurate portrayal of either Santa Monica or even the scope of leisure in Santa Monica at the time. As was made explicit by the Belmar History + Art29 project, there was a thriving Black residential and leisure community in Santa Monica at the time–prior to the urban renewal that destroyed the neighborhood in the 1950s. Nina Fresco notes that there were Black polo clubs and famous African American pilots in the 1930s.30 Kathleen Benjamin notes that we know there were Black surf clubs and famed Black surfers like Nick Gabaldon.31 As historian Bill Deverell notes, it’s all a matter of where you point your camera. “Predominantly white, sure. 100% white, no. It’s all a question of where you point your camera, right? So you put your camera at the tennis club, 1939…It’s going to be racially segregated.”32
29 https://www.santamonica.gov/belmar-history-art)
30 Nina Fresco, Interview with Meztli Projects, June 6, 2023. 31 Kathleen Benjamin, Interview with Meztli Projects, June 28, 2023. 32 Bill Deverell, Interview with Meztli Projects, May 3, 2023.
Southwest panel dates
1875 - Senator John P. Jones
Founds Santa Monica
1907 - City Charter Approved
by State Legislature
1914 - Commission Form of
Government
1924 - Round the World Flight
of Douglas Planes
1939 - New City Hall Completed
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 39
There are no recorded descriptions of who or what Macdonald-Wright was intending to render on the northwest side of the mural. We can only speculate about even who or what is depicted, outside of the mural’s general title, History of Santa Monica and the Bay District. Nonetheless, we have surfaced numerous valuable interpretations and present them here, with some evaluation of competing claims.
The northwest
side of the mural
Detail of northwest panel of “History of Santa Monica
and the Bay District” without the list of dates.
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 569 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 40
List of dates
The dates in the northwest panel receive a great deal more focus than the dates on the southwest panel, both in their content and how they relate to the images in the mural. Overall, the list focuses on European political structures and moments, though it contains more names than actual descriptions of events.
Notably, the list does not begin with any mention of Native history or First Peoples of the area. The first date, 1769, references the Portolá expedition into what the Spanish referred to as Alta California and includes Junipero Serra, but not Juan Crespi, even though both priests accompanied parts of the expedition.
The Portolá expedition seems to be the context for the image, because of the inclusion of the particular figures as we discuss below. Another significant date in the contemporary discussion of the mural is the 1838 land grant to Francisco Marquez and Ysidro Reyes that became Rancho Boca de Santa Mónica. The inclusion of these names is a point of great pride for the descendents of these families, many of whom have lived in Santa Monica since then and are active in preserving the history of the Rancho period. Some observers have also noted the lack of women in this list, especially Arcadia Bandini de Stearns Baker, Colonel Robert Symington Baker’s wife. Bandini was an early benefactor of Santa Monica and had arguably more influence in shaping early Santa Monica than her husband.
The leftmost figure
This figure is a Franciscan monk. We think almost everyone agrees on at least this much based on the commonly told histories of the area and the distinctive style of dress. However, there are two interpretations about which Franciscan monk this is in particular: Father Juan Crespi or Father Junipero Serra.
Father Juan Crespi. This interpretation is based on the fact that Father Crespi’s diary describes a scene of water discovery and contact with Indigenous people by the shore at a place Crespi calls the “Pools of Santa Monica” and also describes another encounter in an area that could be nearby Kuruvungna Springs. There is also another legend that the Springs are the source of the name “Santa Monica,” which is recorded and combined with references to Father Crespi’s diary in a book titled History of Santa Monica and the Bay District. 33 However, it is unknown, as we discuss below, whether Macdonald-Wright used any of these sources. Aside from the general dress of a Franciscan monk, there are no other indications in the mural itself that this is Crespi.
Father Junipero Serra. This interpretation is very compelling based on three factors. First, Serra is almost always depicted with an extremely distinct and iconic baldness pattern that is unique from a generic tonsure. This pattern creates three distinct tufts of hair above the monk’s face. Second, the figure’s left foot is stepped forward and the figure is holding a cane; the injured foot and use of a cane are also iconic components of Serra’s depictions. Third, Serra’s name is written on the mural to the left of the scene. In addition, it should be noted that Serra is an extremely common, almost stock figure in historical depictions of early California, particularly those made in the early and mid 20th Century. 33 Charles S. Warren, History of the Santa Monica Bay Region: In Two Parts Narrative and Biographical (Santa Monica, CA: A. H. Cawston, 1934).
Debated figures
and features
Northwest panel dates
1769 - Gaspar de Portolá,
Junipero Serra
1822 - Mexican Territory
1827 - Xavier Alvarado, Antonio
Machado
1838 - Francisco Marques,
Ysidro Reyes
1848 - U.S. Territory
1872 - Col. R.S. Baker
Detail of northwest panel. Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 41
The figure with a helmet standing next to the Franciscan monk Many interpret this figure as Gaspar de Portolá. This also appears to us to be the most likely explanation given the style of military dress and the name Gaspar de Portolá that appears on the mural. This identity is assumed by many observers of the mural. There is some disagreement as to whether this figure’s shirt is made of metal or cloth or leather. Depending on the interpretation of what the shirt is made of, there is also some disagreement about whether this style of dress is appropriate to the kind of outfit Portolá would have worn, which would have most likely been leather. Some interpreters, like Nina Fresco, believe that this figure is dressed more like Juan Cabrillo than Portolá.34 However, Cabrillo is not named on the wall and did not travel with Serra or Crespi. This figure also has no other identifying markers to connect it to Cabrillo.
The waterfall
Some, especially those who believe that Crespi’s diary was a source for the mural, interpret the waterfall as Kuruvungna Springs. This is an intriguing and coherent interpretation. There is no formal evidence that this is true but also nothing to dispute it.
The figure on horseback
There are two common interpretations of this figure. One reads this image as representing an extension of the Portolá expedition. Another reads the mural as a historical tableau in which the figures represent different time periods, rather than one historical moment. In this interpretation, the figure on horseback represents the later Spanish period after colonization.
The two Native figures
The two figures on the lower right of the panel are intended to be First Peoples of the area. This is not widely disputed; however, much of the rest of what we can say about them is highly disputed and different constituencies are highly invested in their interpretations of the scene. Ultimately the image is just that, an image, and open to interpretation. The following statements are difficult to prove decisively, and different viewers have each suggested the below with great conviction.
They are showing the water to the standing figures.
They are drinking the water.
They are drinking water that the horse is standing in.
They are kneeling in subservience to the standing figures.
They are enslaved.
They are or are not kneeling. One of the figures is on their knees and the other is seated cross-legged. Both are positioned on the lower right, lower than the other figures. On the one hand, it seems almost impossible to argue that one of these figures is not kneeling, but we have heard from people who dispute this claim. Some use the word “sitting” to describe their posture, potentially to avoid the connotation of “kneeling before someone” in the word “kneeling.” Their lowered position and orientation toward the central figure, the Franciscan monk, adds to the interpretation of these figures in a subservient position and not just lower for access to the water.
34 Nina Fresco, Interview with Meztli Projects, June 6, 2023.
Details of northwest panel. Photos: Kenneth Lopez,
Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 42
Debated figures in the northwest panel
This character in
the mural strongly
resembles iconic
depictions of Father
Serra due to the
unique baldness
pattern as well as the
cane and pronounced
left foot.
This figure is unlikely to
be Father Crespi, with a
more traditional monk
tonsure.
This character could
be either Gaspar de
Portolá or Juan Rodriguez
Cabrillo. Portolá seems
likely, because his name
is on the adjacent wall.
The rider on
horseback is
ambiguous but
seems to be dressed
consistently with
the way that Spanish
soldiers from the
Portolá expedition are
depicted.
The lowered, kneeling position of
the Native bodies is consistent with
many depictions from this time
period, including this one from a
mural by Macdonald-Wright entitled
Landing of the Vikings in Vinland at
Santa Monica High School.
Gaspar De Portolá:
Father Serra:
Juan Rodriguez
Cabrillo:
Spanish soldier:
Native figures:
Father Crespi:
All images under public domain
except where noted.
Detail of northwest panel
of “History of Santa
Monica and the Bay
District” without the list
of dates. Photo: Kenneth
Lopez, Meztli Projects
Photo: Richard A. Walker, Living New Deal
Photo: Wally Gobetz
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 43
We believe that the discussion of whether the figures are kneeling or not is particularly charged because of the widespread existence of kneeling Indians as a visual trope in American art, commercial graphics and advertising. While it is true that perhaps the intent of the artist was to associate the Native bodies with the springs and water, which would lead to positioning the Native bodies as stooped towards the water, this image exists within a landscape of many other popular representations of Native Americans in a kneeling or lowered posture before white bodies. This array of images includes another work, Landing of the Vikings in Vinland (1939) by Macdonald-Wright, other WPA murals in California and nationally and many other examples.35
They are or are not dressed in a historically accurate way. The figures are wearing very little clothing. One wears a headband and a dark colored loincloth.
The other wears a white loin cloth. Both have shoulder-length hair. It’s difficult to say what would be a truly accurate representation of First Peoples’ dress at this time. Their clothing is also so generally and vaguely portrayed that it’s hard to say much about its accuracy. The people are dressed in a way that could plausibly be worn by an Indigenous person in the area during a warm season, but not in a way that is specifically readable as belonging to a particular group.
The contrast between the Europeans and the Native figures is notable, in that the Europeans are heavily clothed in outfits that would be appropriate for cold weather and that communicate distinctive roles and identities.
Illustrative renderings available at the time when the mural was created depict Gabrielenos wearing different attire, particularly feather headdresses and skirts. A five-volume study of the Missions and Missionaries of California (1929), commissioned by Franciscan scholar Zephryrin Engelhardt and illustrated by Alexander Harmer, was available at the time and was widely popular.36 Father Juan Crespi’s diary was also available and contained various descriptions of encounters with First Peoples, sometimes noting their clothing. The mural’s depiction is not egregiously incorrect or geographically incongruent, as in the case of something like the Early Days monument in San Francisco that includes an Indigenous figure dressed in clearly incorrect clothing (discussed under Case Studies below). Nor is the mural specifically correct or clearly a representation of any tribe. This lack of specificity is a common issue raised about representations of colonization.37
They have no faces or eyes. Interestingly, the figures do in fact have faces. The eyes are turned away from the viewer and the contrast in the petrachrome material is so low that many people looking directly at the mural fail to register the facial features. It is clear that their faces are not given much visual focus in the mural. 35 “Santa Monica High School: Macdonald-Wright Murals-Santa Monica, CA,” Living New Deal, n.d., https:// livingnewdeal.org/sites/santa-monica-high-school-macdonald-wright-murals-santa-monica-ca; “Alameda County Courthouse: Exploration,” New Deal Art Registry, n.d., https://www.newdealartregistry. org/rendersite/AlamedaCountyCourthouse/Oakland/CA/.
36 “Alexander Harmer - Colorized,” California Missions: Keeping the Past Present, n.d., https://www.missionscalifornia.com/galleries/alexander-harmer-colorized/. 37 Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2014).
Drawing by Alexander Harmer depicting the first
baptism in California taking place at Mission San
Juan Capistrano (1929). Photo: University of Southern
California Libraries and California Historical Society
Detail of northwest panel. Photo: Joel Garcia, Meztli
Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 44
As mentioned above, there is no known statement from the artist about what or who he intended to portray or why for the northwest panel. So the following is speculation based on interviews with scholars whose work focuses on the artist, the time period, and the program that facilitated the mural: Will South, Bill Deverell and Natalie McDonald of the Living New Deal project.38 Missions, Junipero Serra and the origin story of California. The mural seems to reflect a romanticized depiction of the origin story of the State of California, which was very commonly told for most of the 20th century. Father Serra and the Mission System he designed were very much at the center of this history.
Serra founded 8 of the 21 Spanish Missions in California, from San Diego to San Francisco. These structures were restored and presented as tourist attractions by the National Park Service in the 1930s as part of a project to create a unified narrative about the history of California.
The Mission Play (1912) by John Steven McGroarty was also widely popular in the years leading up to the mural; it was performed hundreds of times and even led to the construction of its own ballroom. The three-act play celebrates the Missions, Serra and the conversion of First Peoples to Christianity, and it bemoans the loss of the Spanish Missions to Mexico.”
The Mission Play was a popular transmitter of a mythic narrative regarding the origins of California and the encounter between Spanish priests, soldiers and the Gabrieleno people. As early as 1946, as shown in Carey McWilliams’ essay “The Indian in the Closet,” countervailing treatments of this historical period that emphasized the rape, murder, slavery and forced conversion were readily available, and these histories were based on primary sources, such as Serra and Crespi’s journals.39 Nonetheless, the romantic narrative about California’s founding was heavily promoted by the State through mandatory curricula, the restoration of the Missions as tourist attractions by the National Park Service, and through popular media like The Mission Play. Until 2017, all 4th Graders in California were assigned a Mission curriculum and asked to create a diorama of a Mission.
Father Crespi’s diary, Kuruvungna Springs and the origin story of Santa Monica. Some observers feel that Father Crespi’s diary is the source material for Macdonald-Wright’s mural. Published in 1927, the diary remarks on several encounters between the Spanish and groups of First Peoples. In the entry of May 4, Crespi notes that the group traveled along the shore until they reached a hill that juts out into the sea containing several pools of fresh water, which they name the “Pools of Santa Monica.” Crespi records a report from a second division of explorers about a large village of First Peoples in this place:
The reverend father says in his diary that they were with them all day; that they were Indians of good appearance, affable and cheerful; and that they were much in love with these good-looking heathen [unbaptized]. They gave the Spaniards fish and mussels, for which they went to fish in their little canoes; and they danced for them in their fashion to entertain them, and begged them to remain there a second night…The men all go about naked, with quivers on their shoulders, while on their heads they wear a kind of crown made of skins of beaver and other animals. They wear their hair cut like perukes and daubed with white and green with some taste. The women go modestly covered with woven fibers and skins.40
38 Will South, Bill Deverell, Natalie McDonald, Personal Communication with Meztli Projects, 2023. 39 Carey McWilliams, “The Indian in the Closet,” in Southern California: An Island on the Land (New York:
Duell, Sloan & Pearce, 1946).
40 Herbert Eugene Bolton, Fray Juan Crespi: Missionary Explorer on the Pacific Coast 1769-1774 (Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press, 1927), p.100-101.
Historical
context and
potential sources
Pamphlet from 1920. Photo: Public domain
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 45
In another entry recorded for August 4, the group traveled from tar pits (likely La Brea) about two hours northwest to come to a site of two springs at the foot of a higher mesa and village of First Peoples. The site of that encounter is thought to be Kuruvungna Springs, a sacred site near University High School in West Los Angeles that is accessible and maintained today by the Kuruvungna Springs Foundation.
After two hours’ travel, during which we must have covered two leagues, we stopped at the watering place, which consists of two little springs that rise at the foot of a higher mesa. From each of the two springs runs a small stream of water which is soon absorbed; they are both full of watercress and innumerable bushes of Castilian roses. We made camp near the springs, where we found a good village of very friendly and docile heathens [unbaptized] who, as soon as we arrived, came to visit us, bringing their present of baskets of sage and other seeds, small, round nuts with a hard shell, and large and very sweet acorns. . .
They made me a present of some strings of beads of white and red shells which resemble coral, though not very fine. I understood they were asking us whether we were going to stay, and I said “No,” that we were going further on.” I called this place San Gregorio, but to the soldiers the spot is known as the Springs of El Berrendo, because they caught a deer alive there. . . 41 Another source, a book published in 1934 with a similar title to the mural–History of the Santa Monica Bay Region by Charles S. Warren, locates the naming of Santa Monica at Kuruvungna Springs. In this story, Spanish soldiers traveling from the Pueblo of Los Angeles associated the Springs with the tears of Saint Monica for her son Augustine. Warren recounts this story specifically as a “legend” originating in 1769 with no factual basis:
Soldiers were given furloughs now and then to explore the territory in all this section. Even then they must have seen that the best growth would be toward the ocean. The travels of these soldiers brought them one day, weary and thirsty, to a point on what is now the grounds of the University High School in West Los Angeles. There their eyes were gladdened with the sight of water from bubbling springs. They sank to their knees in gratitude. After drinking of the dancing waters, they lay down to rest, and in gratitude for their refreshment, bethought themselves of a fitting name for the place. “We will call it Santa Monica,” said the one with the quick imagination, “for the springs resemble the tears of the good Santa Monica, shed for her erring son.42
Confusingly, Warren then conflates this legend associated with the Springs with the encounter at the “Pools of Santa Monica” by the shore recorded in Crespi’s May 4 diary entry, saying that May 4 is the feast day of Saint Monica. He then quotes and paraphrases at length from the description of the encounter with the First Peoples recorded on May 4 in Crespi’s diary.
It’s impossible to know what sources of inspiration the artist used, especially given the lack of documentation around his designs. It is plausible that Macdonald-Wright knew of the legend about the origin story of Santa Monica and may have included the waterfall as a reference to this story. If he used Father Crespi’s diary or Warren’s History of Santa Monica and the Bay Region, he does not seem to have drawn from either source’s description of the “Native inhabitants.” Also, the mural does not include gifts of any kind from the Native figures or any other representations of Indigenous civilization recorded in Crespi’s diary, such as canoes or structures. These inconsistencies are a reminder that the mural is not itself a recording of history, but an artist’s creation that references historical events through constructed images.
41 Bolton, Fray Juan Crespi: Missionary Explorer on the Pacific Coast 1769-1774, p.149-150. There are later translations, notably from 2001, that have different translations of this entry and slightly differing details.
We have chosen the edition that would have been available to the artist. 42 Charles S. Warren, History of the Santa Monica Bay Region: In Two Parts Narrative and Biographical, p. 15.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 46
Obviously, the largest point of interpretive contention is whether the overall scene presented is objectionable. While it is clear that some viewers feel no offense at seeing these images, it seems to us beyond debate that many other viewers do. Throughout our process, we have encountered three different major kinds of objections and three major defenses.
Objections
• The Native figures are showing deference or subservience to the conquerors.
This portrayal is traumatic to survivors of generational violence because it depicts a triumphant moment of subjugation.
• The Native figures are showing collaboration and goodwill towards their soon-to-be oppressors. This portrayal is traumatic not only because it erases a history of extreme violence and cruelty but suggests that Native people welcomed it.
• The Native figures are generally shown as less than the other white/ Spanish figures and whether or not they are revered or vilified, they are not portrayed as real humans or on the same level as one another.
Defenses
• The Native figures are shown in a way that honors Native people, because they relate to the earth, look strong, or their posture might reference East Asian figures such as bodhisattvas.
• The Native figures are helpful because they acknowledge that people lived here before European invasion.
• The Native figures are neutral and just happen to be in the higher and lower positions they are in because it makes a dynamic composition. The figures may or may not even be having an interaction.
These interpretations cannot be resolved definitively, but we offer here some further considerations around the objections. In alignment with our commitment to centering First Peoples and to a trauma-informed, survivorcentered approach, we need to take seriously the objections that First Peoples have shared, particularly around how these images cause harm.
Representations of the Mission System and Junipero Serra. Regardless of whether the scene in the mural depicts a moment of deference or a moment of collaboration, the images in the mural are associated with colonization and the Mission System for many Indigenous viewers. While the mural does not contain images of explicit violence (in contrast to Victor Arnatauff’s Life of Washington mural, which we discuss below), for First Peoples and other Indigenous Peoples, images of Junipero Serra and other references to forced conversion or colonization are reminders of the violence of the history of the Mission System.
In fact, romanticized or “whitewashed” images can be all the more galling and traumatic, as they reinforce romanticized narratives of this history and make it easy to pretend that real violence did not happen.
As we noted before, the State of California actively promoted an origin story for the state with the Missions at the center. The Missions remain popular tourist sites, but they are deeply ambivalent sites for Indigenous Peoples. In her An Indigenous People’s History of the United States, Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz highlights how the Mission sites and the celebration of Serra are perceived and reinscribe generational trauma:
Are the
representations
in the mural
objectionable?
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 47
Very few visitors notice, however, that in the middle of the plaza of each Mission is a whipping post. The history symbolized by that artifact is not dead and buried with the generations of Indigenous bodies buried under the California crust. The scars and trauma have been passed on from generation to generation.
Putting salt in the wound, as it were, Pope John Paul II in 1998 beatified Junipero Serra, the first step toward sainthood. California Indigenous peoples were insulted by this act and organized to prevent the sanctification of a person they consider having been an exponent of rape, torture, death, starvation, and humiliation of their ancestors and the attempted destruction of their cultures. Serra would take soldiers with him, randomly kidnapping Indigenous individuals and families, recording these captures in his diaries, as in this instance: “[When] one fled from between their [the soldiers’] hands, they caught the other. They tied him, and it was all necessary, for, even bound, he defended himself that they should not bring him, and flung himself on the ground with such violence that he scraped and bruised his thighs and knees. But at last, they brought him. . . He was frightened and very disturbed.’ In 1878, a old Kamia man named Janitin told an interviewer of his experience as a child: “When we arrived at the Mission, they locked me in a room for a week. . . Every day they lashed me unjustly because I did not finish what I did not know how to do, and thus I existed for many days until I found a way to escape; but I was tracked, and they caught me like a fox.” He was fastened to the stage and beaten to unconsciousness.43
Not just a memory, the impacts of the Mission System are very much still present with Indigenous People today, as noted by Deborah A. Miranda, an enrolled member of the Ohlone-Costanoan Esselen Nation of California. In her widely acclaimed book, Bad Indians: A Tribal Memoir, she shares a compilation of documents, photos and memoir that recounts the establishment of Missions in California and the impact on Indigenous people—then and today.44 One of the ongoing impacts of the Mission System is shame. For example, “That is, in fact, the case with psychological research on the subject of shame; it creates a situation that naturally inhibits people from opening up and sharing their experiences with others.”45 Shame and other feelings associated with it make it difficult for First Peoples to engage, which is a repeated and ongoing harm that anyone who descends from the original inhabitants of Santa Monica can rightfully claim. It is this historical lineage of both the Mission System and representations of colonization that leads to objections about the Native figures showing either deference or goodwill to a Franciscan monk and a soldier.
The impact of dehumanizing or romanticized representations. The comparative lack of detail for the Native figures, including their faces, and their lowered position both in design and how their bodies are placed on the ground, whether intended to depict subservience or not, raises a variety of issues when viewed from the perspective of Indigenous Peoples. These elements of the image contribute to the interpretation of this as a portrayal of Indigenous Peoples as less human and lower than the other figures, who, in contrast, merit a detailed portrayal as individuals with distinctive styles of dress that suggest their identities, active postures that communicate power, and full detailed facial expressions that indicate personhood.
43 Dunbar-Ortiz, Roxanne. An Indigenous Peoples’ History of the United States. Boston, Beacon Press, 2015. p. 128-129.
44 Deborah A. Miranda, Bad Indians: A Tribal Memoir (Berkeley, CA: Heyday, 2013). 45 Scot N. DuFour, “Shame, Anger, and Guilt: The Hierarchy of Emotions in Restorative Justice,” Inquiries Journal 8, no. 04 (2016).
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 48
This image must be taken in light of the many, many images from this time period that portray Native figures kneeling or in subservient positions before white figures and the many other images in popular culture that include romanticized or negative representations of Indigenous Peoples. According to the Reclaiming Native Truth project, this kind of representation “reinforces negative stereotypes among the dominant culture and can harm the self-esteem and aspirations of our own people, and especially our children.”47
Even if intended to be or interpreted as heroic, a romanticized “historical” image without any particularity reinforces the idea that all Indigenous Peoples are the same and that they are in the past. The Reclaiming Native Truth Project research confirmed that “contemporary Native Americans are, for the most part, invisible in the United States.”48 The lack of visibility and sense of relevance in modern culture is particularly dangerous in the way that it can undermine support for Native issues and can lead to dehumanizing policies. Secretary Deb Haaland, when speaking at Sherman Indian High School, the oldest Indian boarding school in Riverside, California, stated, “There are current impacts [of the Indian boarding schools] in drug addiction and poverty and the lack of economic development, and health disparities. When people are invisible, you don’t have to pay attention. We should care about every single community in this country. So bringing all of these things to light; it will make us become a better country.”49
Racialized representations in a place of power like City Hall. It’s important to consider the physical context of the mural when considering the objections to the mural and its potential impact. It’s not in an educational or leisure space, but in a space of government where decisions are made that affect all of Santa Monica. In other words, it’s a place where power is exercised, and the imagery displayed both reinforces that power and is imbued with power by being displayed in this place.
Taking this context into account, the fact that the majority of the figures in both the mural panels are represented as white and the only people of color in either panel seem to many to be subservient is significant. During this process, we did not encounter any interpretations that called into question the whiteness of the other figures. The central figures in both panels—Will Rogers in the southwest and (likely) Junipero Serra in the northwest—appear to be white men and are celebrated by being the focal point in the composition. The relative positioning of the Native figures below the Franciscan friar effectively “others” and alienates Indigenous Peoples, other Brown people and also women, since there is only one female figure in the mural. In this context, what the artist, the mural and the WPA program ended up doing, whether intentional or not, is exercising “soft power” by communicating who is “other” and who, by extension, belongs in this space and who does not.
This mural is in an unavoidable location within a civic building that is a place of work for many and must be entered to conduct certain kinds of business with the City. In this process, some community members remarked that it is difficult to be confronted with the mural without their consent every time they enter the space. This lack of consent can feel violent, especially when the harm of othering and shaming is experienced repetitively. When entering this space, Indigenous People, people of color and women are more likely to take the images in the mural as a cue to who belongs in the space of City Hall. In these instances, the representations in the mural matter as a symbol of power, and its location not only amplifies the content of the mural, it also authenticates the potentially harmful representations it contains. 46 Kendra Cherry, “How Othering Contributes to Discrimination and Prejudice,” Very Well Mind (website), May 1, 2023, https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-othering-5084425. 47 Maria Elena Campisteguy, Jennifer Messenger Heilbronner, and Corrinne Nakamura-Rybak, “Research Findings: Compilation of All Research: Reclaiming Native Truth, a Project to Dispel America’s Myths and Misconceptions” (Echo Hawk Consulting & First Nations Development Institute, June 2018). 48 Ibid.
49 “Haaland Seeks Healing for Native American Boarding School Survivors,” All Things Considered, May 22, 2022.
Othering is a phenomenon
in which some individuals or
groups are defined and labeled
as not fitting within the norms
of a social group. It is an effect
that influences how people
perceive and treat those who
are viewed as being part of
the in-group versus those who
are seen as being part of the
out-group.46
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 578 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 49
Two approaches to removing harmful iconography from public space have been employed in Los Angeles County. The City Hall mural differs from these cases in that it is not explicitly a monument to an individual, as was the Columbus statue in Grand Park or the Serra statue at Yaangna Park (unofficially called Serra Park until 2022). Still, these cases speak to the concerns about the likely depiction of Father Serra in the City Hall mural and about depictions of similarly controversial figures in public space. The Columbus statue was removed by Los Angeles County officials through the advocacy and creative action of community members; while the Serra statue was toppled by community members. Although they took different paths, these approaches opened opportunities to support First Peoples and their efforts to seek recognition, justice and equity across many sectors, including opportunities to heal past and current harms.
The Columbus statue was dedicated in 1973 and was a gift to Los Angeles County by the United Lodges of Southern California, Order Sons of Italy in America.
Community members have protested for the statue’s removal since at least 1995.
The statue was covered when the County first celebrated Indigenous Peoples Day on October 9, 2018.50 The Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission (LANAIC) also formally requested removal and deaccession in October 2018.51The statue was removed from Grand Park on November 10, 2018. 50 Pamela Avila, “Christopher Columbus Disappears from View in L.A. on Indigenous Peoples Day,” Los Angeles Magazine, October 8, 2018.
51 Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission, “Statement on the Removal of the Columbus Statue at Grand Park,” October 18, 2018.
Current Conversations and Case Studies in the Field
This mural controversy is part of a global reckoning with monuments and memorialized space, which has intensified in the last decade. To situate the Reframe project, we explore here artworks that have provoked similar questions and controversies, and we look at how communities have worked to resolve them. We will touch on a few that directly relate to this situation: monuments to controversial historical figures, artworks depicting a relationship between colonizers and Indigenous Peoples, and some also produced in the early part of the 20th Century. Throughout, we note the actions that have been taken, if any, in response to these controversies, including removal, covering and interpretive efforts.
Monument
removals and
historical
revisions:
Los Angeles
Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects Photo: palewire
Columbus Statue (1973)
Grand Park, Los Angeles
2018: Statue removed
2021: LACDAC commissions
temporary artwork by
Tongva artists
2021: Board of Supervisors
issues apology and
commissions report
2023: “We Are Still Here”
report released
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 579 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 50
LANAIC Vice-Chair Chrissy Castro shared her experience of the removal, That day was one that I will always hold in my memory, as far as the at-large Indigenous community in LA coming together and claiming a small victory, a much needed victory. After decades of demonstration, protests and dialogue, it was very emotional when the statue finally came down. You know, we had singers. Folks were clapping and yelling. And it was just a sense of release, of finally being heard. And we know that there’s a lot more work to do, but it was an important step towards really telling the true history of the place that we now call Los Angeles.52
In July 2020, the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture put out a call for artists, in collaboration with LANAIC, to create a temporary artwork or program in response to the removal. Two projects were selected: a virtual engagement program by the Puvungna Collective and a temporary art installation by Mercedes Dorame.53
Following the removal of the Columbus statue, the George Washington statue in Grand Park was toppled on August 13, 2020.54 The George Washington statue now remains part of the civic art collection but was relocated to Bob Hope Patriotic Hall, a decision that also has been protested. In June 2021, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors apologized to First Peoples and commissioned “‘We Are Still Here.’ A Report on Past, Present, and Ongoing Harms Against Local Tribes.”55
The Junipero Serra statue, a replica of the original done by sculptor Ettore Cardin for the U.S. Capitol’s National Statuary Hall (1930), was initially installed at the intersection of Spring Street and Sunset Boulevard (now Cesar Chavez 52 Paul Farber and Chrissie Castro, Taking Down the Columbus Statue in Downtown L.A. with Organizer Chrissie Castro, vol. Episode 8, Monument Lab Podcast, n.d.
53 For more information on these projects, see https://www.lacountyarts.org/experiences/civic-art/memory-and-futurity-yaangna 54 Colleen Shalby, “7 Arrested in Vandalism of George Washington Statue near L.A. City Hall,” Los Angeles Times, August 14, 2020.
55 Ashley Dobson, Tremayne Nez, and Representatives from the Local Tribes, “‘We Are Still Here.’ A Report on Past, Present, and Ongoing Harms Against Local Tribes” (Los Angeles City/County Native American Indian Commission & Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture, January 2023).
Father Serra statue (1930)
El Pueblo de Los Angeles
Historic Monument /
“Serra Park,” Los Angeles
2015: Serra canonized amid
protests
2020: Statue toppled
2021: City of LA issues
formal apology and
announces renaming and
cultural easement initiative Photo: Kenneth Lopez, Meztli Projects
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 51
Avenue) on August 26, 1934 by the Knights of Columbus. It was later relocated to El Pueblo de Los Angeles historical monument, a department of the City of Los Angeles. The statue was donated to and is part of the City of Los Angeles’ public art collection. The statue is an “idealized” portrait of Father Serra. He holds a small replica of Mission San Carlos Borromeo del Rio Carmelo in his proper left hand and a cross aloft in his proper right hand.
The statue had been protested for decades, especially leading up to Serra’s canonization in 2015.56 The statue was toppled by community members on June 20, 2020, at the Olvera site where it had stood since at least the 1960s. Following its toppling, the Los Angeles City Council deemed the removal an act of civil disobedience.
On June 30, 2020, City Council members introduced a motion to address controversial statues, plaques and other symbolic honorifics. Among the actions following this motion, the park has been renamed by the Board of Recreation and Parks Commissioners in collaboration with local tribal communities.57 On October 11, 2021, Mayor Eric Garcetti along with Councilman Mitch O’Farrell, a member of the Wyandotte Nation, formally apologized to First Peoples at Olvera where the Serra statue was toppled.58 O’Farrell introduced other proposals, such as updating the City’s seal and flag to include Indigenous representation, the City issuing a formal apology to Native American tribes, and plans to introduce a resolution that calls on federal and state governments to rename the Christopher Columbus Transcontinental Highway, as part of the 10 Freeway is labeled.
Additionally, the City established an Indigenous Cultural Easement in the area where the statue was toppled so that the Tongva community could use the site in ways that increase their visibility.59 This easement, initially recommended by the Civic Memory Working Group in April 2021, is an example of how a City can take concrete actions to support the efforts of First Peoples to seek recognition and justice.
These local examples are mirrored in many national cases, but we have selected a few particularly relevant cases to discuss here. Some of these cases, like the Pioneer Monument in San Francisco’s Civic Center, the Equestrian Statue of Theodore Roosevelt by James Earle Frasier outside the American Museum of Natural History, and the Old New York diorama inside the same museum, feature similar concerns about representations of Native figures in relationship to colonizers as in the City Hall mural. We have also included two cases of New Deal era interior murals that represent Native figures within historical tableaus.
The City Hall mural differs from these cases in that it does not depict explicit violence, as do Victor Arnautoff’s Life of Washington and Frank Mechau’s Dangers of the Mail. However, these cases illustrate similar questions about artistic representations of historical narratives and their impact. These national cases also represent a wider range of responses, including and beyond removal. 56 Joe Mozingo, Matt Hamilton, and Jeff Gottlieb, “Decision to Canonize Father Junipero Serra Draws Divided Reaction,” Los Angeles Times, January 16, 2015. 57 Mitch O’Farrell and Curren D. Price, Jr, “Citywide Policy / Acceptance and Placement / Removal and Renaming / Statues, Monuments, Honorifics, and Naming Rights / City-Owned Land, Property, and Public Right-of-Way” (Los Angeles City Council, June 30, 2020). 58 Julia Wick, ““We’re Sorry’: L.A. Moves to Make Amends for Wrongs Committed against Indigenous People,” Los Angeles Times, October 11, 2021. 59 City News Service, “LA Officials Announce ‘Indigenous LAnd Initiative’ to Address Past Wrongdoings,” Spectrum News, October 11, 2021.
National
monuments and
artwork case
studies
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 581 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 52
The Pioneer Monument was erected in 1894 by Frank Happersberger and financed by the estate of James Lick, who made a trust for bronze statuary representing the history of California.60The monument was originally located in front of the Old City Hall in San Francisco, which was destroyed in the earthquake of 1906.
In 1996, the monument was relocated to Fulton Street between Hyde and Larkin Streets next to the San Francisco Public Library. The monument consists of a central column bearing statuary, bronze reliefs and plaques, surrounded by four smaller plinths bearing statuary facing the cardinal directions. The plinth titled Early Days depicts a Catholic monk converting an “Indian” on the ground who appears to be from an entirely different part of the continent, wearing attire appropriate to Indigenous People of the North American Plains. A Spanish vaquero stands with his hand raised triumphantly next to them.
Complaints from Indigenous Peoples about the Early Days sculpture arose at least as early as 1995, during the plans for the relocation. A 1995 letter from the American Indian Movement Confederation called Early Days “a symbol of the humiliation, degradation, genocide, and sorrow inflicted upon this country’s indigenous people by a foreign invader through religious persecution and ethnic prejudice.”61 Upon its relocation in 1996, a small plaque was added linking the fate of Native Americans to “whites’ diseases, armed attacks, and mistreatment,” which was quickly deemed insufficient.62
This statue was eventually removed on September 14, 2018. The San Francisco Arts Commission had voted to take down the statue in April 2018, but the Board of Appeals, catering to opposition, overturned them, blocking the statue’s removal. The Board of Appeals then reversed itself, and the statue was removed and placed in a storage facility. In 2019, projects were commissioned to reclaim the space that the monument took up, including a portrait series in which 150 members of the Bay Area Indigenous community were photographed standing on the plinth where Early Days stood.63 In 2023, the San Francisco Arts Commission, Human Rights Commission and Recreation and Parks Department released the “Final Report of the Monuments and Memorials Advisory Committee”, with recommendations from the community and amendments to their public art policies and guidelines.64
60 Smithsonian American Art Museum, “The Pioneers Monument, (Sculpture),” Art Inventories Catalog, Smithsonian Institution Research Information System, n.d., accessed October 19, 2023. 61 Daniela Blei, “San Francisco’s ‘Early Days’ Statue Is Gone. Now Comes the Work of Activating Real History,” Smithsonian Magazine, October 4, 2018. 62 Ibid.
63 San Francisco Arts Commission, “Bay Area’s Indigenous Community Takes Center Stage in New Exhibition and Temporary Light-Art Installation,” Press Release, August 2, 2019. 64 “San Francisco Monuments and Memorials Advisory Committee Final Report” (San Francisco Arts Commission, Human Rights Commission, Recreation and Parks Department, May 2023).
Early Days within the
Pioneer Monument
(1894)
Civic Center, San Francisco
1996: Protests result in
addition of plaque
2018: Statue removed
2019: New projects
commissioned
2023: Final Report of the
Monuments and Memorials
Advisory Committee
Photo: Beyond My Ken
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 53
The Equestrian Statue of Theodore Roosevelt by James Earle Frasier was commissioned in 1925 to stand on the steps of the American Museum of Natural History, a city-owned property in Central Park West in New York City. It was unveiled to the public in 1940 as part of a memorial to Roosevelt also at the museum, which has a long association with the Roosevelt family. People have protested the statue for decades because of the way it presents a racial hierarchy through the placement of the figures with a clearly elevated white man with an identity (Roosevelt) on horseback, flanked by anonymous Native American and African figures. It was addressed in a 2017-2018 Mayoral Advisory Commission to consider controversial monuments and the commission was unable to reach consensus on what to do with it.65 The mayor decided at that time to retain the statue in place with additional context, and in 2019, an exhibit opened at the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) called “Addressing the Statue.” The exhibition highlighted many different viewpoints on the statue.66 In June 2020, in response to the widening movement for racial justice after the murder of George Floyd, the museum requested that the City remove the statue. In 2021, the New York City Public Design Commission approved the relocation, and the Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library Foundation and City of New York agreed to a long-term loan of the statue. In January 2022, the Equestrian Statue of Theodore Roosevelt was removed from the front steps of the Museum.67 65 Mayoral Advisory Commission on City Art, Monuments, and Markers, “Report to the city of New York,” January 2018.
66 American Museum of Natural History, “Addressing the Statue,” n.d., https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/ addressing-the-statue.
67 American Museum of Natural History, “Statement about the Relocation of the Equestrian Statue,” June 21, 2020, https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/addressing-the-statue.
Equestrian Statue of
Theodore Roosevelt (1940)
and Old New York (1939)
Diorama
American Museum of
Natural History, NYC
2017-2018: NYC Mayor’s
commission unable to reach
consensus. Mayor decides
to retain the statue in place
with interpretive signage
2019: “Addressing the Statue”
exhibit opens
2022: Statue relocated
2020: Museum requests that
the City remove the statue
Photo: Edward H. Blake
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 583 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 54
Also at the American Museum of Natural History, this 1939 diorama in the Old New York exhibition depicts Dutch leader Peter Stuyvesant receiving a delegation of Lenape. The museum acknowledges that this depiction of the Lenape reflects common clichés and a fictional view of the past that ignores how complex and violent colonization was for Native people.68 In 2018, very large labels were added to the glass front of the diorama with context and commentary. Bradley Pecore, a visual historian who is Menominee and Stockbridge Munsee from northeastern Wisconsin, offered an Indigenous perspective on the diorama for the labels. In a short video that the museum produced about the updates, Pecore comments:
If the diorama was simply covered up and blacked out, all it would do is put that history in a cupboard, in a box that we don’t have to look at. Is it somewhat shameful? Sure. But we need to talk about that.69
The labels are unmissable and clearly condemn the stereotypical representations and the colonial violence that the depiction masks. They also provide information about Lenape people now to counter the idea that the diorama depicts people who were once in this place but are now gone. The museum also developed curricula for teaching the Old New York diorama for grades 3-5 and 6-12.
68 American Museum of Natural History, “Old New York Diorama,” n.d., https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/ permanent/theodore-roosevelt-memorial/hall/old-new-york-diorama#:~:text=This%201939%20diorama%20 depicts%20Dutch,colonization%20was%20for%20Native%20people. 69 Behind the Updates to Old New York Diorama, n.d., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndj59hGuSSY&t=2s.
Photo: American Museum of Natural History
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 584 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 55
This painting by Frank Mechau depicts, quite graphically, a massacre by stereotypical “Indians,” who are killing white men and scalping naked white women at the scene of an overturned stagecoach. The painting was one of several commissioned in 1935 by the New Deal Section of Painting and Sculpture as “Romantic Subject Matter in History of Post” for the Post Office Department Building. Completed in 1937, it was controversial even before it was unveiled, primarily for the depictions of violence against and nudity of the white female figures.70
The painting is in what is now the William Jefferson Clinton Federal Building, home to the Environmental Protection Agency since 1996. The building is not open to the public, but for many years, EPA employees communicated their concern that its presence created a hostile work environment and harmed relationships with Tribal leaders who visited the EPA for collaborative work.71 EPA employees attempted to resolve the issue internally, and a temporary display was placed in front of it to partially obscure it from view as early as 2000. In 2003, employees enlisted the help of the Society of American Indian Government Employees (SAIGE), and the National Congress of American Indians passed a resolution objecting to the work. After the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law argued that the images created a hostile work environment on behalf of Native EPA employees, the EPA passed the issue over to the General Services Administration (GSA). The GSA responded in 2005 with a historic preservation review of the painting under the National Historic Preservation Act 106.72 They held two public consultations, in 2006 and 2007, before issuing a decision in 2007 on a mitigation plan for the painting, including installing a new screen and revised interpretive materials as part of a comprehensive interpretive program for all 22 New Deal paintings in the building.
After an additional lengthy review process, a permanent metal mesh curtain was installed as well as interpretive panels in 2018.73 The curtains remain closed, but can be opened by viewers if they wish to see the painting, and members of the public can view the painting by appointment.
70 U.S. General Services Administration, “Frank Mechau,” William Jefferson Clinton Federal Building, n.d., https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/gsa-properties/visiting-public-buildings/william-jefferson-clinton-federal-building/whats-inside/wheres-the-art/frank-mechau. 71 Barbara Leigh Smith, “Whose Story Should Be Told,” Enduring Legacies Native Cases Project (The Evergreen State College, 2014), https://nativecases.evergreen.edu/. 72 Sandra Starr, “Indians in the Post Office: Artworks Offer Mixed Messages,” National Museum of the American Indian, Fall 2010, p. 41.
73 Jessy J. Ohl and Jennifer E. Potter, “Traumatic Encounters with Frank Mechau’s Dangers of the Mail,” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 16, no. 1 (January 2, 2019): 26–42.
Dangers of the Mail
(1937), William Jefferson
Clinton Federal Building,
Washington, DC
1937: Protested before
unveiled
2000: Temporary display
placed in front of mural
1996: EPA employees raise
concerns
2005: Native employees file
hostile work environment
complaint
2008: GSA conducts historic
preservation reviews
2018: Permanent mesh
curtain and interpretive
panels installed
Photo: Public domain
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 585 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 56
Life of Washington is a mural cycle in San Francisco’s George Washington High School. It was painted by Victor Arnautoff, a Russian-born social realist artist, for the WPA in 1936. Composed of 13 panels and spanning 1600 square feet, the work was painted directly on the wall in wet plaster as a fresco. In this mural, depictions of atrocities and murder are intended as social commentary on America’s origin myths. As part of this commentary, the mural includes several disturbing images including enslaved people and the dead body of a Native person at the feet of pioneers. While this is also a WPA-funded mural, this work is distinct from the City Hall mural because of the artist’s social realist approach to depicting George Washington as someone who enslaved people and led a violently colonizing nation.
In 1968 and 1969, Black students raised objections to the mural, not because of the violence of the images, but because of the “one-sidedness of the presentation.”74 Students wanted depictions of the contributions of Black people to the U.S. in sciences or in fighting for the nation’s independence. After some debate, the students withdrew their demand for the mural’s removal, proposing that plaques explaining its deficiencies be placed alongside the mural and a new mural be commissioned. The response mural Multi-Ethnic Heritage was completed in 1974 by the young artist Dewey Crumpler, after studying muralism in Mexico. It does not appear that explanatory plaques were ever installed.
More recently, the mural cycle has been at the center of a protracted public controversy that gained national attention. In 2018, a proposal by San Francisco Heritage to designate George Washington High School as a city landmark was opposed by San Francisco Unified School District (SFUSD) Board of Education because it could complicate the potential removal of the mural.75 In 2019, the SFUSD Board voted to paint over the mural, then decided to cover it with curtains or panels.76 In response, George Washington High School Alumni Association filed a lawsuit against the SFUSD Board. In 2021, the Court ruled that the school board’s original decision violated state law by deciding on covering before undergoing a CA Environmental Quality Assessment (for historical preservation) process.77 Finally, in 2022, the Board, with new members, voted to rescind the previous decision to cover up the mural and to abandon their appeal.78 The controversy has attracted many high-profile critics and defenders, many of whom are documented in the film Town Destroyer. 79 74 Robin D. G. Kelley, “We’re Getting These Murals All Wrong,” The Nation, September 10, 2019. 75 Laura Waxman, “Education Leaders Oppose Landmark Designations for Three SF Schools over Controversial Mural,” San Francisco Examiner, March 8, 2018. 76 Sam Lefebvre, “‘This Is Reparations:’ S.F. School Board Votes to Paint Over Controversial High School Mural,” KQED, June 25, 2019.
77 Carol Pogash, “Murals at San Francisco School Should Stay for Now, Judge Says,” The New York Times, July 29, 2021.
78 Jill Tucker, “Post-Recall S.F. School Board Rescinds Vote to Cover Controversial Washington High Mural,” San Francisco Chronicle, June 22, 2022.
79 Alan Snitow and Deborah Kaufman, Town Destroyer (Bullfrog Films, 2022).
Life of George Washington
(1936), George Washington
High School, San Francisco
1968–69: Black students protests
1974: Response mural produced
by Dewey Crumpler
2019: SFUSD Board votes to
paint over the mural, then
decides to cover it with
curtains or panels. Alumni
Association files a lawsuit
against the School Board.
2021: Court rules that the
SFUSD Board’s original
decision violated state law
2022: SFUSD Board votes to
rescind the previous decision
to cover up the mural
Photo: Richard Evans, Living New Deal
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 57
Each example we have discussed contains its own unique mix of factors—the origin of the artwork, the holding institution, the degree to which the work is available to the public, as well as the mode and content of the representation.
The impact of the work varies significantly based on location and therefore the immediate audience for the work. Outdoor sculptures have a wide-ranging impact on the general public, but indoor artworks tend to have a narrower and more specific audience and impact–museum attendees such as children on school field trips, federal government employees and visitors meeting about environmental policy, or high school students on their way to class everyday. The City Hall mural is in this second category of indoor artworks, but its audience and impact are still wide ranging given that it is located in a government building where employees and residents attend to the day to day business of running the City of Santa Monica and which is also open to the public most of the time.
Additionally, the interventions around these controversial public artworks vary depending on location, context, community desires and the willingness of agencies to respond. There is no one-size-fits-all solution. There are many voices and perspectives that were involved and considered in each case, and often government agencies were responding to long-standing protests. In each example, there was a long series of steps that led to the current status, with the eventual interventions reaching different levels of compromise, with the exception of the recent controversy around Life of Washington, in which no action has been taken. Still no situation was resolved definitely and forever, because the conversation continues.
Themes in the
case studies
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 587 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 58
We received 337 responses to the feedback activity. Of the 337 responses, 276 or (82%) of the respondents gave a valid zip code. The majority (74%) gave a Santa Monica zip code, and most of the rest (22%) gave a zip code in Los Angeles County.
Is there a way to add 1-the
earlier lunch and learn with
the City (even though its
listed under public
programs) 2-the events listed
in the feedback activity
section: Art and Literacy
Event, visiting Families
Latinas Unidas 3-something
about the interviews 4-visits
to Human Resource Council,
Santa Monica Area Interfaith Council, Puente meeting? Also, or alternatively, we could organize it by
constituency. Label as
additional outreach to
specific constituencies. . .
remove categorizations
Rather than ask multiple demographic survey questions, we asked one openended question where we asked respondents to tell us about themselves and what perspectives might have shaped their responses to the activity. About 30% of respondents (N=100) chose to share some aspect of their racial or ethnic identity. For more demographic information about respondents and the full dataset of responses, see Appendix C.
Overall, we hoped to engage people in reflecting on the mural and to go deeper than a survey listing options for or against the mural. One of the goals of the feedback activity was to have people engage directly with the mural images and to understand not just how they interpreted the images, but also their emotional responses and attachments to the mural. We grouped the responses we received into a handful of larger themes that we discuss below. Since people can and do have multiple emotional responses to an image, some responses were grouped into multiple themes. Therefore, the percentages are offered to give a general sense of the size of the groups and do not add up to 100. Also, in the feedback activity, we presented the northwest side as the first panel and the southwest or “recreation” side of the mural as the second panel, so we have referred to them as “first (northwest)” and “second (southwest)” below.
The mural images are offensive, disturbing or exclusionary. A majority of the respondents (59%) found one or both of the mural panels to be offensive, disturbing or exclusionary. Overall, these respondents felt that the mural represented the hierarchies inherent in settler colonialism and white supremacy.
In the first (northwest) panel, they noted the lower position of the Native figures Feedback Activity Responses
In order to engage more people in this process, we designed a feedback activity containing a three-page worksheet that individuals could fill out online or complete on paper and return to City Hall or the Santa Monica Public Library. We collected feedback activity responses from February 6, 2023, through May 10, 2023. The feedback activity was shared intentionally with Santa Monica residents and key stakeholders in the process inside and outside of Santa Monica.
Sentiments about
the mural in the
feedback activity
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 59
and the difference in detail in facial expressions and clothing between the European and Native figures. They reacted to the fact that the colonizing figures are shown facing the viewer in active positions (mid-stride). Many people read the images as representing the Native figures in a subservient position and noted that they appear to be faceless or turned away from the viewer.
In relation to the second (southwest) panel, these individuals overwhelmingly responded to the fact that all the figures represented appear to be white and upper class. Many respondents noted that there is only one woman represented in either panel, and she also does not have facial detail. Children felt they were not adequately represented either. Many respondents found the second (southwest) panel to be the more problematic image in its representation of white elitism in Santa Monica of the 1930s or present day. Especially paired with the first (northwest) panel, it appears to suggest an erasure of the Indigenous people and anyone non-white in contemporary Santa Monica.
There was a range in this group of responses in terms of whether these images contain an accurate representation of the history of Santa Monica.
Some respondents felt that the hierarchies of the time periods in the panels are captured and told through the images. Others felt that the images are romanticizations that misrepresent the violence of settler colonialism. Others felt that the images left out important aspects of the history and representations of Indigenous peoples, colonization, Black and Asian Santa Monicans and working-class Santa Monicans.
The mural images are beautiful or valuable, but also contain troubling aspects that need addressing. Another, smaller group of respondents (15%) appreciated the mural for its artistic or historical significance, but also recognized that the images have significant flaws that require a response. Many of these respondents found the images beautiful, particularly the natural landscape depicted and how the images coordinate with the tile work and other architectural elements of the City Hall lobby. These respondents often placed a value on historic preservation, and some were aware of the New Deal origins of the artwork or other pieces by the artist. However, the concerns articulated by these respondents mirrored the concerns of the larger group of respondents who found the images particularly lacking in terms of Native representation and missing large groups of Santa Monicans. This group generally holds artwork and artists in high esteem and feels that new artworks could ameliorate the problems with this mural.
The mural images are beautiful and there is nothing wrong with them.
A roughly similarly sized group of respondents (16%) felt that the mural panels are perfect, and nothing needs to be done to address them. Many of these respondents provided less detail in their responses, but they have mostly positive or neutral interpretations of what is depicted in both panels. A few have negative interpretations but feel strongly that the images are still beautiful or valuable because of their historic significance. This group might have some minor suggestions about what is missing or how the images could be improved, but these suggestions, if they have them, are in the realm of “quibbles.” They are not offended by the mural. Quite the contrary, overall, the artwork makes these respondents feel happy or proud, and some have very strong attachments to the mural.
The mural images are neutral or negative, but as historical artifacts, they have little bearing on the present. Another roughly similarly sized group of respondents (12%) was somewhat indifferent about the artworks. Some of them interpreted the images as having negative or exclusionary elements, but they were not particularly concerned about the images. As historic images that were created in the past, some felt that these images are either unrelatable or have little import for today. Some felt that because they are historic images, they cannot or should not be changed.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 60
The discussion about the mural is a distraction from other pressing issues in Santa Monica. A small number of respondents (4%) felt that the process of engagement around the mural was a waste of time and resources. They would have preferred that Santa Monica spent those resources addressing qualityof-life concerns and development pressures. Some of these respondents also expressed their strong attachment to the mural. Others were more indifferent or felt the mural had no bearing on the present. Some had a very negative view of Santa Monica government and proposed new artworks that represented Santa Monica as corrupt or overrun by development.
We did not design the feedback response activity to gather feedback on what the City of Santa Monica should do about the mural. Rather, we were focused on having respondents engage directly with the images and gathering their emotional responses. However, in this open-ended format, many respondents chose to share their ideas and suggestions about actions to take in response to the mural. Since we asked respondents to imagine an artwork to represent the history of Santa Monica, many respondents may have been primed to make suggestions related to commissioning new work. (We provide the list of proposed locations and the themes in the imagined artworks in Appendix C.) Also notably, some respondents (about 15%) answered the question about where they would place an artwork in Santa Monica as if we had asked about where they would place the existing mural. It’s important to remember that this was not a survey, and the open-ended questions did not present any options to the respondents, therefore many more individuals could be in support of or against these actions than it appears. So, we have not provided numbers or percentages of respondents attached to each particular action.
Suggested actions:
• Commission new artwork with more updated, positive or accurate images • Commission new artwork visually near the existing mural to address it • Replace the existing mural with new artwork
• Preserve the existing mural
• Create interpretive panels and other educational materials related to the existing mural
• Relocate the existing mural to another location
• Destroy or cover the existing mural permanently
• Create interpretative materials that would partially obscure the existing mural
• Modify the existing mural
Except for actions that would move, alter, obscure or destroy the mural, which were not suggested by people who thought there is nothing wrong with the mural, all of these actions were suggested by people who had a range of opinions and responses to the mural. Notably, there were respondents who found the mural deeply offensive and disturbing and who also argued that the mural should remain in place. They felt that removing or covering the mural permanently could erase the troubling history of white supremacy and settler colonialism that it represents without addressing that history or the harm caused by the images. For these respondents, keeping the mural in place can offer a springboard for truth-telling, education and repair. In addition, people who found the mural offensive and those who found it beautiful both argued Suggested actions
in response
to the mural in
feedback activity
responses
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 61
that the image could benefit from interpretation, such as interpretive signage or programming. Some felt that a museum or another location besides City Hall would be a more appropriate location to offer the necessary context and interpretive support. Ultimately, all these possible actions and more were discussed and considered by the Working Circle.
From the beginning of our process, we thought carefully about the constituencies that have been particularly impacted by the mural’s depictions and absences, as well as those who have been significantly invested in the outcomes of the Reframe process. In addition to recruiting members of these groups for the Working Circle, we also reached out for individual interviews and smaller engagements when possible. This section compiles the feedback we collected from these groups from all the different engagement methods we used, especially where constituents self-identified themselves in the feedback activity responses and from our interviews, where possible.
Santa Monica First Peoples
The individuals who filled out the feedback activity and identified themselves as Santa Monica First Peoples (Gabrieleno, Tongva, Chumash, Tataviam, Acjachamen) almost all found the mural images offensive. They felt the first (northwest) panel communicated disrespect for Indigenous people and clear hierarchy of the European figures, noting that the Native men (1) did not have eyes–symbolizing that they are soulless, (2) are kneeling while the white men are standing over them, and (3) are drinking from the stream that also had a horse’s hoof in it.
Some saw the image as depicting the Native men as subservient or bowing.
Several felt that this image depicted an invasion and the beginning of colonization and subjugation of Native people. These feedback activity respondents felt that the first image was missing women and accurate or respectful historical and present-day representation of Native people, flora and fauna.
A few Santa Monica First Peoples did not have as strongly negative reactions to this first (northwest) panel. One of the feedback activity respondents noticed the dominant position of the priest and felt the images represented only one side of the historical narrative, but they did not feel personally offended by the images.
In our interview with her, Angie Behrns-Dorame (Gabrieleno/Tongva) had some critiques of how key aspects of Santa Monica’s history seemed to be missing from the mural but did not find the representation of Native figures demeaning.
Overall, she was against changing artwork and removing a piece of Santa Monica history but was enthusiastic about new opportunities for Tongva artists.80 In response to the second (southwest) panel, the feedback activity respondents noted the whiteness of the image and the privileged leisure activities like many other respondents did, but they also felt that this image represented the erasure of the Native figures in the first panel. This echoes what Jeremy Gonzalez stated in our interview with him, “It looks like a bunch of colonizers enjoying the fruits of my land.”81 Feedback activity respondents again felt that women were missing, but they also noted that the “rest of society,” including other people of color and middle-class or working-class people, was missing. They also noted the lack of contemporary or present-day Native representation, as if all the Indigenous people had become extinct.
80 Angie Behrns-Dorame, Interview with Meztli Projects, May 6, 2023. 81 Jeremy Gonzalez, Interview with Meztli Projects, December 20, 2022. 82 Nicholas Rocha, Chairman, Gabrielino-Shoshone Nation of Southern California, “Letter to City of Santa Monica,” February 25, 2023.
Feedback from
Particular
Constituencies
So let us tell you how it is
perceived and interpreted
by those descendants whose
ancestors were held in captivity
at the supposed era this image
depicts. While you may see my
ancestors drinking water, we
see slaves granted a drink while
under guard. We see slaves being
used for a water contamination
test while the sword of the
mounted conquistador pointed
directly at the neck of the native
as he condescendingly sits
above, for it was those swords
that struck down many of my
ancestors who were unwilling
to worship a foreign religion.80
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 591 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 62
These images made these feedback activity respondents feel unwelcome in civic participation, demeaned or belittled and angry. They felt like at best, the images made Santa Monica seem “way behind the times” and at worst, like Santa Monica is a place that supports white supremacy. They questioned the values of the City and whether it uplifts or supports white people only. One felt the artwork should be removed because it is not the type of positive representation Native people need. One person, who was more indifferent about the images, felt that the artwork should be preserved because it represents “a period of time and how we perceived history.” Overall, their imagined new artworks of Santa Monica history (via the feedback activity exercise) focused on representation of Native history, land, culture and dress pre-colonization, as well as present-day Native representation and visions of a multicultural society with everyone on an “equal playing field.”
Additionally, Santa Monica First Peoples we spoke to directly linked the mural to issues of land access and Land Back83 as well as other important issues Native communities in Santa Monica face. For example, the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians state in their letter to the City of Santa Monica, stated, “rather than focus on the mural itself we view this as an opportunity to discuss additional education that can assist in promoting the awareness of our Tribe, history, and culture.”84 They urged the City to engage in a series of actions oriented to land acknowledgments, Land Back, affordability and historical representation, etc.
Their full list of recommendations can be found in Appendix D.
Larger Indigenous community
We also collected feedback from the larger Indigenous community largely by attending Indigenous Los Angeles cultural events like the CSU Puvungna Pow Wow and soliciting responses through the Los Angeles City and County Native American Indian Commission. This group of respondents to the feedback activity identified as Indigenous, Native, Native American Indian, from Zia Pueblo and Laguna Pueblo, Mayan, Mayo, Quechua, Quechuan or Yaqui. A third of this group of respondents gave a Santa Monica zip code and described a close connection to Santa Monica. The rest identified as living in Los Angeles County. Unsurprisingly considering the wider range of backgrounds, this group’s responses to the mural were more varied, but still three quarters of them had similar responses to the mural as the Santa Monica First Peoples respondents.
Several of them centered Santa Monica First Peoples in their responses and explicitly called for Santa Monica First Peoples to be consulted in any next steps. Of those who recommended a course of action, several recommended that the existing mural be replaced with new artwork or that the existing mural be relocated to a museum. One of the respondents who felt there was nothing wrong with the mural felt it should remain in City Hall where everyone can enjoy it and draw lessons from it.
African American or Black, Asian American, and Latine/x Santa Monicans The team collected feedback activity responses from other Santa Monica community members who have been historically excluded from civic processes and specifically excluded from representation in the mural. Of those who responded to the feedback activity, a number self-identified as African, African American, Black, Asian, Asian American, Cambodian American, Chinese American, Filipino or Japanese American. A few other respondents identified as a Person of Color or Brown. Notably, almost all of these respondents felt 83 Often referred to with the shorthard “Land Back,” the movement to return land to First Peoples has been a decentralized effort across North America to reestablish Indigenous sovereignty, with political and economic control of their ancestral lands. These same efforts have also been replicated in New Zealand and Fiji. 84 San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians (Gabrieleno/Tongva), “Letter to City of Santa Monica,” May 12, 2023.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 63
the mural was offensive and exclusionary. They noted the representation of colonization and the racial hierarchy in the northwest panel and felt that the image communicated how the City would likely treat them or other marginalized populations. In response to the southwest panel, several felt the exclusion of people of color personally, again noting that the image communicates that they don’t belong in Santa Monica. In terms of new artwork, these respondents suggested a fuller representation of Native history, the contributions of people of color in building Santa Monica and the multicultural society of present-day Santa Monica. A Japanese American respondent noted how the legacy of the Japanese American concentration camps shaped their response. They noted that “reframing the truth of our past is important given the desires of some in this country wanting to try and erase the truth of historical facts.” We also made the feedback activity form available in Spanish and visited Familias Latinas Unidas, a Spanish-speaking parent group at Virginia Avenue Park, to collect responses. We also received responses from people selfidentifying as Chicana, Chicano, Cuban, Hispanic, Latina, Latino, having parents from Mexico, from Mexico City, Mexican American, of Mexican descent or submitted their response in Spanish. About three-quarters of these respondents found the mural offensive, and the remaining quarter were either indifferent about the mural or felt there was nothing wrong with it.
Like other groups of respondents, many who identified as Latine/x felt this mural reflected poorly on the City of Santa Monica. In our interview with her, local resident and artist Paulina Sahagun stated:
I grew up seeing this. I grew up, you know, seeing our people always being treated like we don’t belong. I mean, the 1930s was when a lot of people, a lot of my people, were deported. This is when it was painted. I mean, it really goes back to the whole thing of the doctrine of discovery.85 From this perspective, the mural itself reveals the history and view that Santa Monica institutional power structures historically had during the period. This group of Latine/x responses contains suggestions that run the whole gamut of possible actions around the mural, from asserting that the mural doesn’t belong anywhere until the true history of what happened is acknowledged and represented to suggesting that the mural could be relocated outside City Hall with lighting so that more people would be able to see it.
Pico Youth and Family Center
Organizers of the Pico Youth and Family Center (PYFC) have been at the forefront of getting the City to address the mural. Rooted in the predominantly Latine/x Pico neighborhood in Santa Monica, some members of the PYFC community identify as Chicana/o and some as part of the larger Indigenous community. Their concerns about the mural are rooted in the depictions of Brown bodies and how they are perceived as subservient or less human than the white figures in the mural. For the PYFC community, these depictions are connected to larger issues that they want addressed in their community, particularly youth issues, affordable housing, homelessness and gentrification.
It was important for us to continue to engage the PYFC community, even as we decided to center Santa Monica First Peoples and as we sought to bring others into the conversation. Members of the Working Circle have deep ties to the community there and helped facilitate meetings in conversation with community members to gather feedback along the way. We also conducted interviews with PYFC leaders.
85 Paulina Sahagun, Interview with Meztli Projects, June 5, 2023. 86 Reframe: City Hall Mural Feedback activity response gathered by Meztli Projects, 2023.
It reminds me not only how
unwelcome my history is in the
story this place wants to talk
about itself, but also how the real
experiences of my family and
friends need to be made invisible
to make this story make sense.
It reminds me that City Hall is
not accountable to me at all,
which I think is a relatively true
fact about the way that Santa
Monica city governance behaves.
Unfortunately, this mural’s
revisionist histories tell some
actual truths about it.85
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 593 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 64
Many PYFC community members wanted the mural to come down, while others were interested in programming and other art commissions to offset the settler colonial narrative perceived as coming through the mural. Elias Serna, an organizer with PYFC, suggested that bolts be drilled into the mural as a way to retain it, but disrupt it at the same time.87 Other community members at the Pico Youth and Family Center had similarly creative ideas including moving the mural to the Museum of Tolerance, creating alternative narratives to honor Indigenous Veterans, adding additional context to the history of Santa Monica that details various oppressions, and creating a documentary to talk about Santa Monica history from a people’s perspective.
Santa Monica historic preservation community
The Santa Monica historic preservation community has been a vocal part of the discussion of the mural since before the Reframe: City Hall Mural process began.
We continued to engage these communities through interviews, a visit to a Santa Monica Conservancy board meeting and through the feedback activity. One of the Working Circle members affiliated with the Santa Monica Conservancy held a viewing and feedback activity collection session at the mural. While there are likely more members of this community who filled out the activity but just didn’t identify this way, some respondents self-identified as interested in history or historic preservation, connected to the Santa Monica Conservancy or indicated that they were former Landmarks Commission members. This group had fewer responses that found the mural offensive and more responses that found the mural beautiful without flaw. There were also a significant number of responses that found the mural beautiful but acknowledged important pieces missing and responses that seemed to evaluate the images from an aesthetic or historical lens. Some of these both appreciative and critical responses indicated significant knowledge of local history, which was included in both what they liked about the mural and what they saw to be missing.
Marquez family descendants
A few feedback activity respondents identified themselves as Marquez family descendants. Marquez family descendants shared how proud they are that their ancestor is named in the mural, along with their knowledge of the history of the Rancho period. For example, in her interview with us, Terri de la Pena states:
Francisco Marquez came to Alta California in 1825, but his father-in-law Jose Manuel Valenzuela was a soldier in the 1781 expedition that brought Los Pobladores to found El Pueblo de Los Angeles. Thus, the Valenzuela side of the family has been in California for 242 years; the Marquez side for 198 years.
Estéban de la Peña, my grandfather, arrived here from Parras, Coahuila, Mexico in 1894, and married my grandmother Amelia who was one of the Márquez grandchildren. In contrast, my maternal grandmother and mother came to Santa Monica from Chihuahua during the 1920s. So one side of my immediate family has been in the Santa Monica area for over 200 years, and the other side for almost 100 years.89
For the Marquez family descendants, the mural represents a sense of pride and acknowledgment of the history of the land grant families whose time in the US predates contemporary immigration from the Americas. For them, the mural anchors their history in the region. The Marquez family descendants we spoke to were opposed to removing, covering or altering the mural, but were also 87 Elias Serna, Interview with Meztli Projects, April 7, 2023. 88 Reframe: City Hall Mural Feedback Activity response gathered by Meztli Projects, 2023. 89 Terri de la Pena, Interview with Meztli Projects, December 16, 2022.
The beauty of Santa Monica’s
coastline shows through time,
connecting us to this place and to
people who have come before us.
I am intrigued to learn more
about the water portrayed in
different ways - the rivers, the
waterfalls, and the engagement
of the birds, horses and people
with water. Technically I am
intrigued by the tile formations
of the mural itself - the horizontal
and vertical lines - I’ve read
about petrachrome and would
like to know more about how the
artist created this.88
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 65
strongly in favor of telling the fuller history of Santa Monica that includes the stories of people of color, such as a nuanced picture of the Rancho period, the removal of Japanese Americans during WWII, waves of Mexican immigration after the Mexican Revolution, and African Americans who came to Santa Monica to work in the aerospace industry as part of the Great Migration.
City of Santa Monica employees
A handful of feedback activity respondents identified as current or former City of Santa Monica employees. Of these respondents, most felt that the mural is offensive or exclusionary; the remaining respondents felt the mural was beautiful but also missing important representations, that there was nothing wrong with the mural, or were indifferent. Those who found the mural offensive were embarrassed by it and were concerned about the message the mural communicates to those who come to City Hall. There was some concern that the mural will make some feel unwelcome and that feeling will contribute to a mistrust of government workers or an “us vs them” mentality (“us” being the public and “them” being the government workers). One respondent felt that the elitism of the second panel made them feel unseen as a government worker.
Angel Villasenor, for example, states:
I would have to walk by that mural going to my office. The Native Americans don’t have eyes. It’s just a reminder of colonialism, and you know the deep oppression suffered by Indigenous communities. I think that has no place in the city. The fact that the city is using this whole historical landmark conversation to keep it, is an excuse. I think it’s institutional racism. I remember walking in, and how I felt every single day going to my office. Aside from that, the framed headshots of prior leadership that hang in the second floor hallway were all white men. You know what I’m saying. I think the city must do a better job of understanding what kind of message these things send.90 For many City workers having to see the mural on a daily basis was traumatizing and a reminder of the racist history of the institution.
In addition to collecting feedback activity responses from City of Santa Monica employees, we held a lunchtime Zoom session where attendees were invited to share their thoughts and feedback about the mural. During the session, those who shared felt that the mural should be preserved to serve as a jumping-off point for discussion of difficult historical events and also that contemporary artwork should be commissioned to offer a better and full representation of history. One participant shared examples of how Dachau was preserved to tell the story of the Nazi concentration camps and how the Whitney Plantation has been preserved to tell the full story of U.S. slavery. One participant noted that if you get rid of the mural, “you deny that this is how we perceived our past for so long and that it infiltrates the way that we see our present.” Another participant was concerned with the fact that the only two people of color, in either panel, are depicted in an implied subservient position. They suggested, “If any of these murals are to be kept, they need to be adjusted to a manner that is for teaching, remembering, and including, instead of a celebration of conquest.” 90 Angel Villasenor, Interview with Meztli Projects, April 11, 2023.
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 66
Recommendations
These recommendations were developed through a collaborative process that unfolded over seven months as the Reframe Phase I Facilitation Team received input from the Working Circle, the feedback activity responses, one-on-one interviews and other engagements with Santa Monica community members and groups.
The recommendations development process was supported by and marked by its breadth through outreach to and connection with a cross-section of people from markedly diverse perspectives, the quality and the depth of discussion and deliberation, and the degree of agreement found amongst these very diverse viewpoints. For instance, the Working Circle was selected to bring together individuals with diverse perspectives, histories and ties to Santa Monica communities. The people who engaged through the feedback activity, interviews, small group engagements and public programs widened the discussion even more. Everyone who engaged with us through all these methods brought deep feeling, knowledge and thoughtfulness to the issue. The following recommendations are infused with the learnings from the Working Circle’s journey and all of the voices of those who engaged in the Reframe:
City Hall Mural process. For more detail on the Working Circle’s discussion of recommended actions and the results of the Delphi surveying process, see Appendix B.
These values-based recommendations center on reparative work that can advance the ideas of justice and healing that many cities and communities are moving towards. The recommended actions are paired with implementation recommendations developed by the Meztli team and informed by ongoing initiatives and efforts in Santa Monica.
We felt it was important to ground the recommendations in a collectively articulated set of values. The lengthy Working Circle process allowed us to consider values after the group was able to get to know each other and begin to have deeper conversations with each other. While no group of such diverse people will ever agree on everything, we were pleased to find substantial agreement around values. These values helped frame the Working Circle discussions around possible actions in response to the mural.
The Working Circle members were unanimous in their belief that Santa Monica should:
• Center Santa Monica First Peoples in the City’s response to the mural. • Do something concrete, not just words.
Nearly unanimously, the group felt it was important to:
• Center working-class people and other people of color in the City’s response to the mural.
• Make sure visitors to City Hall know that the City understands the issues that people have with the mural.
• Make sure visitors to City Hall know that the City condemns the white supremacy worldview depicted in the mural.
• Make sure everyone who visits the Historic City Hall lobby feels welcome/ like they belong.
Values
supporting the
recommendations
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 67
And about three-quarters of the group felt it was important to:
• Attend to the people who feel harmed by the mural.
• Address the material consequences of colonialism and provide considerations including financial considerations to Santa Monica First Peoples. • Protect future visitors to City Hall from the harm of seeing demeaning images. • Create new opportunities for artists.
• Have the City response deal with other things in addition to the mural. • Generate meaningful public discussion and engagement around the mural.
As you read through the recommendations in this report, you will see these values woven throughout and as recurring themes. Ultimately, these values undergird the recommendations and helped to prioritize which actions in response to the mural were the most important to pursue. The actions recommended are presented here in the order of importance, not necessarily in the order of how they might be implemented. For instance, commissioning new permanent artwork can be a lengthy process, but some actions like creating interpretive panels might be able to be more quickly implemented.
The conversation around not removing the mural is multi-faceted. The harm that this mural has caused is important and considerable, and removing or covering the mural would guard against continuing this harm. However, removal or covering does not address the harm that has already been done. Therefore, the immediate and urgent focus should be on actions that move towards repair for the communities harmed, such as those we have laid out in these recommendations.
Our Working Circle discussions supported this direction, even though some in the Working Circle would still like to see the mural removed. Several Working Circle members reflected at the end of the process that they believed, knowing more about the histories represented in the mural and the history of the mural, that simply removing the mural would be letting the City “off the hook” for tacitly endorsing the image by letting it remain unaddressed for so long (over 80 years since installed and at least 10 years of protest). This was a concern that was echoed by some throughout our engagement process, including City of Santa Monica employees, feedback activity respondents and interviewees. As Pete Galindo, former staff member of Social and Public Art Resource Center states in the Town Destroyer documentary, “the trick of white supremacy is the ability to make itself invisible,” and removing the mural obscures the systems that made the mural possible. Leaving it there, for now, is a reminder of the historical injustices that many of our municipal agencies are built on and continue to operate through.
Just as the Council reversed their decision to cover the mural so that the mural would be visible during the process of public engagement, continuing to leave the mural up and uncovered can provide further opportunities to engage and address the harm that mural has caused. However, leaving it up does create an ongoing risk of continued harm if no other actions are taken. As a result, the Working Circle members were in strong agreement that the City should NOT “do nothing” with the mural panels, or sell them or cover them at this time.
In addition, Santa Monica First Peoples are clearly among the most impacted by this artwork, but the process to remove or cover the mural was not initiated by them. When advocacy efforts such as these are not rooted in the community that faces the biggest impacts by any issue (in this case First Peoples), they are burdened with uncompensated emotional, cultural and intellectual labor that responds to the issue raised within a frame that First Peoples did not help Why we are not
talking about
removing or
covering the
mural
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 68
construct. Not removing the mural offers an opportunity for First Peoples to uplift these issues from their perspective so that the outcomes and futurity of their reflections are driven by them. Many of the recommendations in this report speak to the reparative actions community members signaled were of utmost importance and were possible while keeping the mural in place for the time being.
The recommendations below provide longer-term pathways toward meaningfully including First Peoples and other impacted communities in Santa Monica’s equity work. Therefore, the Council should make clear commitments to addressing the mural through the recommended actions in this report, including their reasons for leaving the mural up. Reasons could include taking full accountability for the mural, using limited funds to work on issues that are of greater value and importance to the impacted communities, and making the lobby a space to publicly and clearly condemn the attitudes made manifest by the mural.
Recommendation 1:
Commission new artwork in City Hall lobby
The City should commission new additional work in the City Hall lobby. New artwork should present history from different perspectives and celebrate and reframe what is traditionally presented as “historically significant.” City Hall is a center of power and the new work needs to balance or redress the hierarchies created by the existing mural. The new work should address the exclusions in the “recreation” mural as well—Black, Brown, Asian, working-class people, unemployed people and poor people who were in Santa Monica in 1939 and deal with themes of ongoing Indigenous presence in Santa Monica. The new work should create a welcoming environment for Indigenous people, working-class people and people of color.
This recommendation emerged clearly as the highest priority recommendation from the Working Circle process and indeed echoes the initial directive from the Arts Commission and its Public Art Committee. During the deliberations, several Working Circle members felt that a focus on the reparative opportunities that this process has offered, such as potential land return, should be a priority rather than simply addressing the harm by covering the mural or adding a plaque.
There was also a collective feeling that simply recommending removing the mural would disrupt the potential for larger cultural and economic shifts that are needed to make Santa Monica the equity-oriented community it aspires to be.
Further implementation recommendations:
• Include Santa Monica First Peoples in the commissioning process, such as the RFP development, community engagement, design review and approval process, etc. A preference to commission an artist from Santa Monica First Peoples was noted by the Working Circle.
• The commission should be scoped with a great deal of clarity to avoid creating future conflict and miring the project in new controversy once an artist or artists is selected and begins their process. • The artwork should not further highlight horrors or injustices experienced by BIPOC people. The interpretive panels can work to explain and condemn those activities. This new artwork should not force people to confront more potentially traumatizing imagery while conducting business with the City. • The new work should be produced at a scale that visually balances MacDonald-Wright’s mural to offset the message of that work, both the historical inaccuracies and the misrepresentations in the northwest panel as well as the exclusions of people of color in the southwest panel. The overall Recommendations
concerning the
mural and new
artwork
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 598 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 69
goal is to create an overwhelmingly inclusive statement at this particular location that has great symbolic importance and functional significance for all residents of Santa Monica.
• The work should not be ONLY digital or Augmented Reality. The Working Circle and several community responses affirmed this recommendation.
The concern was that the work would be easily missed by people who visit City Hall or eventually disappear when the technology is not functioning or outdated.
• While the spaces to create a new artwork at the necessary scale in the City Hall lobby are limited, there are multiple options available, including the 2nd floor balcony frontage (the strip of horizontal upper wall space that is facing the main entrance), available walls of the 1st floor, the walls of the 2nd floor, and potentially the ceiling or the space below the ceiling (for a suspended artwork). Other site opportunities may also arise or be developed in Phase II.
Recommendation 2:
Commission new interpretive panels
The City should also create interpretive panels that offer context, but make clear statements against the misrepresentations in the mural. The panels should give basic information about the mural but must also clearly condemn the depiction of Native people, the Mission System and white supremacy in general. The interpretation of the southwest panel should clearly indicate the communities excluded from the mural’s depictions, namely African Americans and the descendants of the Santa Monica First Peoples along with other Indigenous groups who were stolen by Spanish colonizers and brought to Santa Monica.
The new interpretive panels should be written by an advisory group that includes at least one Indigenous person and Black, Latine/x, Asian American, people and others who are excluded from the southwest mural panel. The final interpretive panels should be reviewed by the Gabrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians along with the various Gabrieleno Tribal Councils connected to Santa Monica.
The panels should be unavoidable when looking at the mural–it should not be minor or a small plaque. The interpretive overlay on the Old New York diorama at the American Natural History Museum is a good precedent. They could include deeper audio or QR/AR/VR content but should not require digital devices to access the basic information.
Potential area for interpretive
signage/new artwork
Potential area for new artwork
11.A.a
Packet Pg. 599 Attachment: Full Meztli Report with Recommendations - Final Report [Revision 1] (5982 : Report and Recommendation for City Hall Murals) Reframe: City Hall Mural Phase I Report 70
Recommendation 3:
Ensure that Santa Monica’s public art and commemorative landscape centers equity and belonging
Santa Monica’s public art and commemorative landscape needs to foster a greater sense of inclusion and belonging. The Belmar Art + History project and future new artwork in the City Hall lobby are much needed correctives, but there is much still to address as part of the larger Reframe initiative.
The Reframe: City Hall Mural process should be the beginning of a series of steps taken by the City of Santa Monica to revisit the policies and processes that govern public artwork and civic memory. These steps should begin with developing a set of equity and inclusion principles to govern decisions about existing works and how they might be addressed or deaccessioned, as well as future works and how they are commissioned. Then, the City should review the rest of the artworks, monuments and forms of civic memory (such as street names) in the City of Santa Monica using the criteria established. The Chicago Monuments Project report provides examples of criteria for review (e.g. artworks that promote white supremacy) and examples of how such artworks might be addressed. Other recent examples for this kind of both policies and collection review have included the San Francisco Monuments & Memorials Advisory Committee and the City of Los Angeles’ Civic Memory project. All new and existing policies should be accessible and include how members of the Santa Monica community can engage with these processes.