5.D.e
Packet Pg. 485 Attachment: Sourcewell 060920 - Battle Motors (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader) City of Santa Monica Levine Act Disclosure Form
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CALIFORNIA LEVINE ACT DISCLOSURE
In 2022, California’s SB1439 extended requirements under Government Code Section 84308, also known as the "Levine Act", to prohibit City “Officers” from participating in any action related to a contract, license, permit, or entitlement if such Officer received campaign contributions totaling more than $250 within the previous twelve months, and for twelve months following the date of a final decision, from a party or participant to the proceeding, or their agent.
Section 84308(a)(4) of the Levine Act defines an "Officer" as follows: “Officer” means any elected or appointed officer of an agency, any alternate to an elected or appointed officer of an agency, and any candidate for elective office in an agency. The term “Officer” is further defined 2 Cal. Code Regs. Section 18438.1, which states:
An officer of an agency includes only those persons who make, participate in making, or in any way attempt to use their official position to influence a decision in the license, permit, or entitlement for use proceeding, or who exercise authority or budgetary control over the agency or officers who may do so, and:
(1) Serve in an elected position, including an official appointed to an elected position due to an interim vacancy or an election otherwise canceled because the official was the sole candidate for the position;
(2) Serve as a member of a board or commission;
(3) Serve as the chief executive of a state agency, or county, city or district of any kind; or
(4) Have decision making authority with respect to the proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use and is also a candidate for elected office or has been a candidate for elective office in the 12 months prior to the proceeding.
A list of Santa Monica Elected Officials and members of boards and commissions can be found at the following links. The party making this certification is responsible for determining whether a recipient of a political contribution is a City Officer prior to completing this form.
https://www.smgov.net/departments/council/
https://www.santamonica.gov/departments/rent-control
https://www.smgov.net/boards
Have you, your company, or any agent on behalf of you or your company, made any political contributions of more than $250 to any City Officer in the twelve months preceding the date of the submission of your application or proposal? ____YES ____ NO
Name of Councilmember or City Officer: _________________________________
5.D.f
Packet Pg. 486 Attachment: Levine Act - Municipal Maintenance Equipment - MME (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader) City of Santa Monica Levine Act Disclosure Form
Name of Contributor: _________________________________________________ Date(s) of Contribution(s): ____________________________________________ Amount(s) ________________________________________________________ Please specify below and/or add additional sheet(s) to identify additional Councilmembers or City Officers to whom you and/or your agents made campaign contributions.
Answering YES does not preclude the City of Santa Monica from awarding a contract, license, permit, or entitlement or taking any subsequent action related to the item. It does, however, preclude the identified City Officer from participating in any actions related to such item.
By signing below, you certify you also agree to disclose to the City any future contributions made to Councilmembers or other City Officers by you or your agent(s) after the date of signing this disclosure form, and within 12 months following the approval, renewal, or extension of the requested contract, license, permit, or entitlement.
I HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.
Signed: ____________________________ Date: ____________________ Print Name: _________________________ Title: _____________________ Company: __________________________
Additional Disclosures:
Please note this form is a public record and subject to a California Public Records Act request.
5.D.f
Packet Pg. 487 Attachment: Levine Act - Municipal Maintenance Equipment - MME (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader) SANTA MONICA CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
TO: Public
FROM: City Attorney’s Office
RE: Levine Act Disclosure Form
DATE: January 25, 2024
The Levine Act (Government Code 84308) is a California law aimed at preventing “pay to play” practices by prohibiting parties, participants, and their agents in a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement from contributing more than $250 to an officer of the City during a 12-month period. The prohibition applies to any 12-month period while the proceeding is pending and for 12 months following the date a final decision is rendered in the proceeding.
State law requires a party to a proceeding to disclose any contributions exceeding an aggregate $250 that the party and their agents have made to an officer of the City within the preceding 12 months. The Disclosure Form is intended to assist City officials with recognizing when they have an obligation to disclose and recuse themselves, and to aid parties with their disclosure obligations.
1. To what sort of proceedings is the disclosure form applicable? The Levine Act applies to all discretionary entitlements and contracts, with the exception of labor contracts, personal employment contracts, and contracts that must be awarded to the lowest responsive/responsible bidder. It does not apply to ministerial approvals.
For instance, the Levine Act applies to the following:
• Building and development permits
• Conditional use permits
• Contracts generally (unless an exception applies):
o Contracts for goods, services, professional services
o Real property contracts for purchase, sale, lease
o Contract amendments
o Settlement agreements
o Small contracts, including purchase orders, and zero dollar contracts (no de minimis exception)
• Public street abandonments
• Private development plans
• Professional license revocations
• Rezoning of specific real estate parcels
• Event permits
• Rulemaking procedures affecting a particular industry where only a small number of businesses are affected
5.D.f
Packet Pg. 488 Attachment: Levine Act - Municipal Maintenance Equipment - MME (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader)
• Special district formation proceedings involving the creation of a special use or benefit to the person in the district
• Tentative subdivision and parcel maps
• Zoning variances
• Vacation of a public easement across private property • Pre-applications, such as for General Plan Amendment, considered by the legislative body prior to filing of formal application
• Contracts entered under the City Manager’s Authority
• Closed session items that may result in a contract/settlement agreement approved by Council (real estate or litigation)
It does not apply to:
• Purely ministerial decisions
• General policy decisions or rules where the interests affected are many and diverse
• Ordinances and resolutions (except items like development agreements adopted by ordinance)
• Ballot measures
• Departmental policies
• Council rules
• Contracts awarded to the lowest responsive/responsible bidder (not applicable in Santa Monica)
• Labor contracts and project labor agreements
• Personal employment contracts
• Allocation of resources in the City budget
2. Who is required to disclose?
A “party” to a proceeding is any person who files an application for, or is the subject of, a proceeding. In general, a person or company who applies for a permit, license, or right to use property in a particular way, which requires the City’s discretionary approval, will qualify as a party.
Parties are also required to disclose contributions by their agents. An “agent” is someone who (1) represents a party to a proceeding for compensation; and (2) appears before or otherwise communicates with the City for the purpose of influencing the pending proceeding. This can include law firms, architects, engineers, consultants, and similar entities. Both the individual and their employer or firm are considered “agents.” A party should also disclose contributions of other entities majority owned by the party, as well as contributions of any other entity whose contributions it directs or controls.
3. What must be disclosed?
A party must disclose campaign contributions over $250 made in the prior twelve months.
A “contribution” is anything of value for which the party has not received full consideration, including money, nonmonetary items, payments made for advertising or
5.D.f
Packet Pg. 489 Attachment: Levine Act - Municipal Maintenance Equipment - MME (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader)
other expenses coordinated with a candidate or committee, loans, tickets to political fundraisers, etc.
4. Who is considered an officer of the City?
An “officer” is anyone who may make, participate in making, or attempt to influence a decision in the proceeding or who exercises authority over officers who may do so. This includes elected officials, members of appointed boards and commissions, the City Manager, and any individual who is a candidate for elected office or who has been a candidate in the twelve months prior to the decision. This definition is included on the Disclosure Form.
5. When should the disclosure occur?
The Disclosure Form must be completed (1) by a party to a contract with the City (or that party’s agent) at the time the party submits a response to a Request for Proposal or other competitive solicitation, enters into contract negotiations with the City, or executes a contract with the City, whichever is earliest; or (2) by a party to a license, permit, or other entitlement proceeding before the City at the time the party (or their agent) submits the license, permit, or entitlement application to the City. The party (or their agent) must submit a supplemental form if they make any new reportable contributions while the same contract, license, permit, or other entitlement is being considered. The party (or their agent) must also use the form if they need to correct any previously submitted form.
Parties are solely responsible for completing the form accurately, and could face penalties for failure to do so. The California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) is the body who enforces violations of the Levine Act. If a party is uncertain about whether they are required to report or combine a contribution, they should consult with their attorney.
Nothing herein constitutes legal advice and individuals are urged to consult with their own attorney regarding the requirements of the law. To the extent there is any inconsistency, the language of the Levine Act and FPPC Regulations govern over this notice. Resources for officers, parties, participants, and agents, are available on the FPPC’s website at https://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/pay-to-play-limits-and-prohibitions.html
5.D.f
Packet Pg. 490 Attachment: Levine Act - Municipal Maintenance Equipment - MME (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader)
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
OAKS INITIATIVE NOTICE
NOTICE TO APPLICANTS, BIDDERS, PROPOSERS
AND OTHERS SEEKING DISCRETIONARY PERMITS, CONTRACTS,
OR OTHER BENEFITS FROM THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
Santa Monica’s voters adopted a City Charter amendment commonly known as the Oaks Initiative. The Oaks Initiative requires the City to provide this notice and information about the Initiative’s requirements. You may obtain a full copy of the Initiative’s text from the City Clerk.
This information is required by City Charter Article XXII—Taxpayer Protection.
It prohibits a public official from receiving, and a person or entity from conferring, specified personal benefits or campaign advantages from a person or entity after theofficial votes, or otherwise takes official action, to award a “public benefit” to that person or entity. The prohibition applies within and outside of the geographical boundaries of SantaMonica.
All persons or entities applying or receiving public benefits from the City of Santa Monica shall provide the names of trustees, directors, partners, and officers, and names of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation or revenue interest. An exception exists for persons serving in those capacities as volunteers, without compensation, for organizations exempt from income taxes under Section 501(c)(3), (4), or (6), of the Internal Revenue Code. However, this exception does not apply if the organization is a political committee or controls political committees.
Examples of a “public benefit” include public contracts to provide goods or services worth more than $25,000 or a land use approval worth more than $25,000 over a 12- month period.
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, theCity compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any personorpersons whois seeking a “publicbenefit.” If the“public benefit” is sought by an entity, ratherthan an individual person, the information includes the nameof everyperson who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity. Therefore, if you are seeking a “public benefit” covered by the Oaks Initiative, you must supply that information on the Oaks Initiative Disclosure Form. This information must be updated and supplied every 12 months.
5.D.g
Packet Pg. 491 Attachment: Oaks Form - Municipal Maintenance Equipment - MME (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader)
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
OAKS INITIATIVE DISCLOSURE FORM
In order to facilitate compliance with the requirements of the Oaks Initiative, the City compiles and maintains certain information. That information includes the name of any person or persons who is seeking a “public benefit.” If the “public benefit” is sought by an entity, rather than an individual person, the information includes the name of every person who is: (a) trustee, (b) director, (c) partner, (d) officer, or has (e) more than a ten percent interest in the entity.
Public benefits include:
1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-monthperiod;
2. Sale of material, equipment or supplies to the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;
3. Purchase, sale or lease of real property to or from the City in excess of $25,000 over a 12- month period;
4. Non-competitive franchise awards with gross revenue of $50,000 or more inany 12-month period;
5. Land use variance, special use permit, or other exception to an established land use plan, where the decision has a value in excess of $25,000;
6. Tax “abatement, exception, or benefit” of a value in excess of $5,000 in any 12- month period; or
7. Payment of “cash or specie” of a net value to the recipient of $10,000 in any 12- month period.
Name(s) of persons or entities receiving public benefit:
Name(s) of trustees, directors, partners, and officers:
Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:
Prepared by: Title:
Signature: Date:
Email: Phone:
Permit #
FOR CITY USE ONLY:
Bid/PO/Contract #
5.D.g
Packet Pg. 492 Attachment: Oaks Form - Municipal Maintenance Equipment - MME (6620 : Purchase of Beach Sweeper and EV Rear Loader) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 5.E
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David White, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Approval of Implementation of Phase 2 of the Digital Wayfinding and Out-ofHome Advertising Kiosk Program Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) and 15311 (Accessory Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines in accordance with the Environmental Review section of this report; and
2. Authorize deployment of Phase 2 of the digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising kiosk network.
Summary
The City launched the Digital Wayfinding and Out-of-Home Advertising Kiosk Program to provide interactive information, enhance public safety, share community messages, and generate revenue through advertising. The program operates under a franchise agreement with BIG Outdoor, selected in February 2023 as the exclusive media partner.
The agreement, which incurs no direct cost to the City, includes a $4 million signing bonus and a 50% revenue share model. The first 25 kiosks, known as Phase 1, were approved for deployment following community outreach and approval from the California Coastal Commission in February 2024. Installation began in April 2024 and is nearly complete.
BIG Outdoor is scheduled to make the first revenue share payment in November 2024, with a guaranteed minimum of $5 million annually effective after the installation of the 25th kiosk. This revenue has already been factored into the General Fund five-year
5.E
Packet Pg. 493
2 of 6
forecast to support existing City operations. The kiosks have been well-received by the public, with strong advertising demand and impressive initial sales. Timely approval of Phase 2 is essential for a seamless project continuation.
Staff recommends the City Council approve Phase 2, which involves installing an additional 25 kiosks. Location and final placement of the kiosks in Phase 2 will be informed by community engagement and determined by safety assessments conducted by subject matter experts in the Transportation, Public Works, and Community Development departments. California Coastal Commission approval would be required for any kiosks within the Coastal Zone.
The financial benefits to the City associated with the Phase 2 expansion of the kiosk network is contingent on the City maintaining its current advertising restrictions, as additional offsite advertising could dilute the market and impact revenues. Given the success of Phase 1 and the importance of continuing the project to potentially generate additional revenues for the City, staff recommends that the City Council authorize Phase 2.
Background
The City initiated the Digital Wayfinding and Out-of-Home Advertising Kiosk Program to provide interactive information to residents and visitors, enhance public safety via emergency capabilities, deliver community messaging, and generate revenues through advertising sales. Deployment of the kiosk network is structured as a franchise agreement with an exclusive media partner that requires no direct costs incurred or investment made by the City, with the franchisee required to install, operate, and maintain the kiosks. Compensation for the City and the franchisee is realized through profit-share of advertising revenues.
In February 2023, the Santa Monica City Council awarded the exclusive franchise agreement to BIG Outdoor. Under the agreement, BIG Outdoor agreed to cover all expenses, ensuring no upfront investment from the City. BIG Outdoor offered the City a $4 million signing bonus, which it paid to the City in March 2023, and a 50% share of
5.E
Packet Pg. 494
3 of 6
adjusted gross revenues. Once all 25 kiosks in the first phase are fully operational, a minimum annual guarantee of $5 million becomes effective and will be paid to the City in quarterly payments. It is worth noting that this minimum guaranteed annual revenue has already been factored into the General Fund five-year forecast to support existing City operations.
Following the franchise award, City staff and BIG Outdoor conducted extensive community outreach to finalize the locations of the Phase 1 kiosks. In February 2024, the California Coastal Commission approved a waiver for the kiosks in the Coastal Zone. Installation of Phase 1 kiosks commenced in April 2024, and the final few kiosks are now being installed, with all 25 kiosks anticipated to be installed by November 2024.
BIG Outdoor has proven to be a valuable franchise partner by meeting all its current obligations to the City, forging positive relationships with community stakeholders, and being responsive to community concerns. To date, the kiosks have been well-received by both residents and businesses, with no safety incidents reported. Additionally, advertising demand has been robust, with sales meeting expectations thus far.
Discussion
With Phase 1 nearing completion, staff recommends the Council authorize the deployment of Phase 2, which provides for the installation of an additional 25 kiosks.
While Phase 1 deployment was primarily concentrated in the downtown, Pier, and Beach, the rollout of Phase 2 would feature more comprehensive coverage of the City, with final locations to be determined based on community input, power availability, and a safety assessment from Public Works engineering staff and the City Traffic Engineer.
An evaluation of the appropriateness of these locations would also be conducted in consultation with the City’s urban planner.
Council approval of Phase 2 is crucial to ensuring the seamless continuation of the project. Approval would enable City staff and BIG Outdoor to finalize Phase 2 kiosk locations, complete design, and submit construction plans, thereby ensuring that installation can begin promptly within a year of Phase 1’s completion. This timeline
5.E
Packet Pg. 495
4 of 6
aligns with commitments made by staff and BIG Outdoor to Council when the franchise was awarded.
As mentioned earlier, BIG Outdoor provides the City a 50% share of adjusted gross revenues, with a minimum annual guarantee of $5 million paid in quarterly payments once the first 25 kiosks in Phase 1 are fully deployed. Assuming a total of 50 kiosks are installed, it is possible that the City’s 50% revenue share could be significantly higher than the $5 million minimum annual guarantee.
It is important to note, however, the potential for kiosk revenues to significantly exceed the minimum annual guarantee is contingent on the City maintaining its current advertising restrictions. If the City were to allow additional offsite advertising in Santa Monica, it would compete with the digital kiosks and dilute the advertising market to the detriment of the City's kiosk revenue share. By maintaining the current restrictions on offsite advertising, the City would ensure that kiosk sales remain robust, which also secures the City’s financial benefits from the franchise agreement.
Given the initial success of Phase 1 and the critical importance of Phase 2 to enhance the profitability and continued success of the kiosk network, staff recommends that the City Council proceed with the authorization of Phase 2 deployment.
Environmental Review
Phase 2 of this project would install and operate up to 25 digital wayfinding/advertising kiosks in various locations throughout the city in the public right of way and other Cityowned property. Phase 1 is nearing completion and also consisted of 25 kiosks, for a project total of up to 50 kiosks to be installed. The kiosks are 108" in height, 51.25" in width, and 13.5” in depth. The kiosks provide interactive information and enhance public safety and would be maintained by the franchisee.
The project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections 15303 and 15311 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 provides exemption for a class of projects (Class 3) consisting of the construction of limited numbers of new, small facilities or
5.E
Packet Pg. 496
5 of 6
structures. Section 15311 provides exemption for a class of projects (Class 11) consisting of the construction of minor structures accessory to existing commercial, industrial, or institutional facilities, including small parking lots. In addition, none of the exceptions specified in Section 15300.2 of CEQA Guidelines would apply that would preclude the use of this CEQA exemption - the project site is not located in a sensitive environment, the project would not have a significant effect on the environment, the project would not damage scenic resources, the project would not be located on a hazardous waste site; and the project would not cause a change to a historical resource.
Minor excavation would be required to construct the kiosks, and therefore no significant construction impacts would occur. Furthermore, the kiosks would not be large enough to obstruct views of scenic resources, the installation of kiosks would not occur on hazardous or sensitive properties, and the kiosks would not damage historic or scenic resources. Therefore, this project is a Class 3 and 11 project that is categorically exempt per Section 15303 and 15311 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
01/10/2023
(Attachment A)
Council conducted a second reading and adopted an ordinance to award a franchise to BIG Outdoor for the installation, operation, and maintenance of a digital wayfinding and out-of-home advertising kiosk network for a 20-year term.
12/13/2022
(Attachment B)
Council held a public hearing and introduced for first reading an ordinance to award a franchise to BIG Outdoor for the installation, operation, and maintenance of a digital wayfinding and out-ofhome advertising kiosk network for a 20-year term.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Installing the additional 25 kiosks under Phase 2 would require no direct costs on the part of the City since the franchisee is required to install, operate,
5.E
Packet Pg. 497
6 of 6
and maintain the kiosks, but could result in revenues exceeding the $5 million annual guarantee. It should be noted that this is not new revenue. The annual guarantee revenue from this program has already been factored into the General Fund five-year forecast to support existing City operations.
Prepared By: Melissa Spagnuolo, Community Partnerships Manager Approved Forwarded to Council
5.E
Packet Pg. 498
1 October 8, 2024
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 8, 2024
A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Brock at 4:33 p.m., on Tuesday, October 8, 2024, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA.
Roll Call: Present: Mayor Phil Brock
Mayor Pro Tem Lana Negrete
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre
Councilmember Christine Parra (Absent)
Councilmember Caroline Torosis (Absent)
Councilmember Jesse Zwick (Arrived at 5:24 p.m.)
Also Present: City Manager David White
City Attorney Douglas Sloan
City Clerk Nikima S. Newsome
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 4:34 p.m., with all members present except Councilmembers Zwick, Parra, and Torosis.
PUBLIC INPUT FOR
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS ONLY:
No members of the public commented on Special Agenda items.
PROCLAMATIONS/
COMMENDATIONS/
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS
(Councilmember Zwick
arrived at 5:24 p.m.)
3.A. Commendation: Margie Petersen Breast Center, was presented.
3.B. Commendation: The Acorn Store, was presented.
3.C. Proclamation: Fire Prevention Week, was presented.
3.D. Proclamation: Code Enforcement Officer Week, was presented.
3.E. Proclamation: Disability Employment Awareness Month, was presented.
3.F. Proclamation: Domestic Violence Awareness Month, was presented.
3.G. State Legislative Update by Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, was presented.
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.F
Packet Pg. 499 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 4:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 October 8, 2024
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 5:31 p.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Nikima S. Newsome Phil Brock
City Clerk Mayor
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.F
Packet Pg. 500 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 4:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 1 October 8, 2024
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 8, 2024
A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Brock at 5:32 p.m., on Tuesday, October 8, 2024, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA.
Roll Call: Present: Mayor Phil Brock
Mayor Pro Tem Lana Negrete
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre
Councilmember Christine Parra
Councilmember Caroline Torosis (Arrived at 5:37 p.m.)
Councilmember Jesse Zwick
Also Present: City Manager David White
City Attorney Douglas Sloan
City Clerk Nikima S. Newsome
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:32 p.m., with all members present except Councilmember Torosis. Councilmember Zwick led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.
LEVINE ACT
DISCLOSURE
Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is required to disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 made by the party or the party's agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official.
Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well.
The disclosure must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution; the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made.
GENERAL PUBLIC
INPUT:
(Councilmember Torosis
arrived at 5:37 p.m.)
Members of the public Speaker: Adam Magdaleno, Jerry Rubin, Wade Kelley, and Johnathan Foster commented on various local issues.
PUBLIC INPUT FOR
CLOSED SESSION,
SPECIAL AGENDA
No members of the public commented on Closed Session items.
No members of the public commented on Special Agenda items.
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 501 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 October 8, 2024
ITEMS AND CONSENT
CALENDAR ONLY:
Members of the public Peter Borresen and Marc Verville commented on Consent Calendar items.
PROCLAMATIONS/
COMMENDATIONS/
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS
3.A. City Manager Report, was presented.
CLOSED SESSIONS
(Councilmember de la Torre
recused at 5:56 p.m.)
(Councilmember de la Torre
returned at 7:31 p.m.)
On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 5:56 p.m., to consider Closed Sessions and returned at 7:31 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:
4.A. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1): John U.N.B. Doe v. City, LASC 23STCV12746; Hector Orozco v. John Doe: Does 1-2, LASC 23SMCV03120; John Doe 1 v.
City, LASC 23STCV15009; John Doe (A.G.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, LASC 23SMCV06066; John JPC Doe v. Doe City, LASC 23STCV22020; John AD Doe v. City, LASC 23STCV26548; John CW Doe v. City, LASC 23STCV29623; John Doe 15 v. City, LASC 24STCV07647; John GA Doe v. Doe City, LASC 24STCV06484; John ULW Doe v. City, LASC 24STCV06768; Joseph Garcia v.
SMPAL, LASC 24SMCV01368; John Doe 18 v. City, LASC
24STCV08239; John RR Doe v. City, LASC 24STCV09398; John Doe 33 v. Roe 1, LASC 24STCV15580; John Doe 48 v. City, LASC 24STCV15420; John Doe 49 v. Roe 1, LASC 24STCV19296; Jane EB Doe v. City, LASC 24STCV24146; Jane DD Doe v. City, LASC 24SMCV04421; Jane Doe 1 v. City, LASC 24STCV06207
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): City of Santa Monica v. ICSOP, et al.; OCSC Case No. 30-2022-01261243
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.
CONSENT CALENDAR: All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.
At the request of Mayor Brock, Item 5.C. was removed from the Consent Calendar.
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 502 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 October 8, 2024
Motion by Mayor Brock, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Item 5.C., reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. 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
ANNUAL FIRE
INSPECTION REPORT
5.A. Annual Fire Inspection Report per SB1205, was adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 11619 (CCS) acknowledging receipt of a report on the status of state mandated annual fire inspections in the City of Santa Monica pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 13146.4; 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.
STORMWATER
INFRASTRUCTURE
5.B. Award Contract No. 11631 (CCS) for Inspection and
Maintenance of City’s Stormwater Infrastructure, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt findings of Categorical Exemptions pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15308 (Actions for Protection of the City of Santa Monica Generated: 10/3/2024 5:07 PM Page
5Environment), of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Award RFP# SP2708 to United Storm Water, Inc., a California-based company, to provide inspection and maintenance services for the City’s stormwater infrastructure;
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11631 (CCS) with United Storm Water, Inc, in an amount not to exceed $2,626,457 (including a 10% contingency) for five (5) years, with one renewal option of up to two (2) years in the amount of $1,164,203(including 10% contingency) for a total amount not to exceed $3,790,660 over a 7 year period, with the future year funding contingent on council budget approval.
ENTERPRISE
RESOURCE PLANNING
SYSTEM
5.D. Approval of First Modification to Tyler Technologies Agreement for the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System, was approved.
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 503 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 October 8, 2024
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 first modification to agreement No. 10062 (CCS) in the amount of $1,851,000 (including a $10,000 contingency) with Tyler Technologies, Inc. (Tyler Tech.), to provide maintenance and support for Tyler’s Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software system for the Finance Department. This will result in a 5-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $6,211,000, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
SURPLUS PROPERTIES 5.E. Adoption of Resolution No. 11622 (CCS) Declaring Surplus Properties, was adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 11622 (CCS) declaring the seven City-owned parcels at Assessor Parcel Numbers (APNs) 4290-011-906 (“Apple Building”); 4290-011-903, 4290-011-904, 4290-011-905 (“Parking Lot 29”); and, APN 4290-011-901, 4290-011-902, 4290-011-909 (“Expo Lot”) as surplus lands to comply with the Surplus Land Act.
2. 2. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15312 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and a finding of no possibility of significant effect on the environment pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
LIFECYCLE 2025 FINISH
LINE FESTIVAL
5.F. Accept Proposal and Enter into Agreement No. 11632 (CCS) with the San Francisco AIDS Foundation for the AIDS/LifeCycle 2025 Finish Line Festival, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to 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 License Agreement No. 11632 (CCS) with the San Francisco AIDS
Foundation for use of the 4 South Beach Parking Lot from June 7-8, 2025 for the “AIDS/LifeCycle 2025 Finish Line Event.”
COUNCIL MEETING 5.G. Approval of Cancellation of Regular City Council Meetings for Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 504 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 October 8, 2024
CANCELLATION November 12 and 26 and Amending 2024 Council Meeting Resolution, was approved and adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council vote to cancel the regular meetings scheduled for November 12 and November 26, 2024, due to a lack of a quorum, and adopt attached Resolution No. 11623 (CCS) amending the 2024 Council regular meeting calendar.
6 TH CYCLE HOUSING
ELEMENT
5.H. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2792 (CCS) Amending the Text of the Zoning Ordinance for Consistency with the Goals, Policies, and Programs Set forth in the 6th Cycle (2021-2029) Housing Element; to Allow for the Separate Conveyances of Accessory Dwelling Units in accordance with AB 1033; Incorporate Interim Zoning Regulations Authorizing the Establishment of Objective Design Standards for Housing Projects that Qualify for the Streamlined Ministerial Approval Established by SB35; Integrate Development Standards and Land Use Regulations for the Bergamot Area Plan, with Amendments for Consistency with the Goals, Policies and Programs Set Forth in the 6th Cycle Housing Element, Updates to Development Standards for Non-Housing Projects, and Other Minor Amendments for Consistency with the Zoning Ordinance; for Consistency with Recent Updates to State Housing Law; and Making Other Minor Changes, Corrections, and Clarifications, was adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.
MINUTES 5.I. Minutes of the City Council - Regular Meeting - Dec 19, 2023, were approved.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PRODUCTION
PROGRAM
5.C. Adoption of Affordable Housing Production Program Fee Resolutions, was adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt attached Resolution No. 11620 (CCS) increasing the Affordable Housing Unit Base Fee by 6.1 percent for new marketrate apartments and condominiums (Attachment A).
2. Adopt attached Resolution No. 11621 (CCS) increasing the Affordable Housing Unit Development Cost by 6.1 percent (Attachment B).
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
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 505 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 October 8, 2024
Questions asked and answered of staff included: why are condo fees and apartment fees not equal; could they or should they be equalized; are the annual adjustments calculated around inflation and costs of construction, thus impacting feasibility; what is the nexus between market rate and affordable housing; and was a higher annual fee adjustment or is the highest it can be raised based on current policy.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Mayor Brock, to approve the staff recommendation and give direction to staff to provide the underlying information to Council to determine if this item should be brought back for consideration. 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
PUBLIC INPUT ON
REMAINING AGENDA
ITEMS:
Members of the public David Newberg, Gigi Droesch, Rob Bailis, Susan Jain, Adam Smith, Jan Williamson, Alex Brown, Zoe Muntaner, Priscilla Cheng, John C. Smith and Austin Cyr commented on Item 7.A.
Members of the public Denise Barton, Zoe Muntaner, Dustin Shahan, Paula Cizek, Caro Vilain, and Phoebe Garfinkel commented on Item 7.B.
Members of the public Johnathan Foster, Adam Smith, and Caro Vilain commented on Item 16.B.
Member of the public Johnathan Foster commented on Item 16.F.
STUDY SESSION:
2028 OLYMPICS
(Councilmember de la Torre
excused at 9:55 p.m.)
(Councilmember de la Torre
returned at 9:59 p.m.)
7.A. Study Session on the City of Santa Monica's Proposed Games Agreement with the LA28 Olympic and Paralympic Games Organizing Committee, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15272 (Olympic Games) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Hold a study session on the Games Agreement and options and alternatives to host beach volleyball for the LA28 Olympics, weighing the potential benefits of direct involvement against the potential long-term financial and legal risks to the City;
3. Receive public comment; and
4. Provide direction to staff on how to proceed.
Questions asked and answered of staff included: what are the unknowns Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 506 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 7 October 8, 2024
that have changed over time concerning impacts to the Pier; if the City approves the first agreement what negotiation power would the City have regarding the other terms; what would happen if the City moves forward with the first agreement and then determine they do not want to proceed; would the reimbursement be for both the venue and the games footprint; what opportunities exist if the City does not proceed with hosting; who would be responsible for monitoring access to the Pier; would the City have some obligation to the businesses should the Pier need to be closed; would businesses outside the vicinity of the Pier be prohibited from hosting events; would the beach parking lots be impacted; is there any agreement to begin marketing Olympic merchandise prior to the Olympics; do we know anything about the relationship between Paris and Versailles during the Olympic planning process; are federal subsidies anticipated; any conversations about cultural events related to the Olympics; is there a guarantee that sales tax revenue will come back to the City; is it possible that LA28 will engage in public conversation or answer questions from Council; has the City ever entered into an agreement in which they stood to lose money; is it clear that the Pier will be shutdown; would enhanced safety for the Pier come out of the City’s budget; has LA28 shared their plans for community benefits regionally; have ADA accommodations been discussed; will the City be responsible for providing additional enhancements to ensure locations are ADA compliant; is there a plan for a mobility infrastructure and is that in the financial analysis; has increased maintenance for parks been accounted for; is there a timeline for reimbursement; will costs require payment prior or in 2028; what is the monthly revenue for beach north parking lot 1; how can the City ensure that businesses on the Pier can remain operational during the games; and will breakdancing or skateboarding be planned.
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to impacts on Pier operations; impacts on residents in the surrounding area; available community benefits or lack thereof; financial impacts to the City; Homeland Security concerns; various uncertainties and unknowns still to be addressed in the agreement(s); transparency in the negotiations; engaging with the business community; finding ways to generate income; working with LA28 to negotiate tailored needs of the City that will leave a legacy for the City.
PUBLIC SAFETY AND
ADRESSING
HOMELESSNESS
(Mayor Brock excused at
10:18 p.m.)
(Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
7.B. Budget Study Session on Enhancing Public Safety and Addressing Homelessness, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 507 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 8 October 8, 2024
excused at 10:20 p.m.)
(Mayor Brock retuned at
10:25 p.m.)
(Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
retuned at 10:27 p.m.)
(Councilmember Torosis
excused at 11:39 p.m.)
(Councilmember Torosis
returned at 11:42 p.m.)
2. Provide direction on making investments to enhance public safety and address homelessness in connection with Measures K and PSK on the November 2024 ballot.
Questions asked and answered of staff included: is there a set number of officers required to respond to calls; is there a legal agreement; what happens if that level is not met; how would the requested police staff be used; what is the impact of the drone program; how many officers are operating drones at this time; how would the requested therapeutic van be used; why was the downtown area selected for the proposed outreach team when there is already a lot of engagement in that area during the early hours; how does issuing citations to an unhoused person serve a purpose; what types of citations are issued; why wouldn’t the fire department start with the Community Response Unit (CRU) and work up to the Advanced Provider Unit (APU); what happened with the Local Emergency Medical Services Agency (LEMSA) and why did the CRU pilot end; is the funding for SaMo Bridge coming from Prop 47; is there a partnership between the APU and the therapeutic van; would the downtown outreach team be used in other areas if services are not needed downtown; when is it anticipated that the police department will be staffed at 232 officers; how are officers assigned to special units/teams managed; should the traffic services unit be increased due to the number of vehicular incidents that are occurring in the City; what has made it possible for the police department to be more proactive in their engagement in the community; what’s happening with the reporting/records management in the police department and being able to provide that data to the public; what’s the difference between the APU and the therapeutic transport van; what is necessary to staff the APU; what would the schedule be; when will the funding for the therapeutic transport van run out; will the downtown outreach van address relieve the police department to handle higher level calls; how will the special investigations unit be staffed; will new staff be hired or will staff be diverted from other assignments; what happens when events cascade in the City under the current staffing level of the police department; what is the data relating to the therapeutic transport van since it has been implemented in February; how many of the traffic deaths that have occurred in the past two years involved someone who was unhoused; how is the therapeutic van funded; can more funds be provided by the County to keep it funded; is the expectation that the City can continue to keep it funded; is there any data relating to STEP Court; does the City provide for resources for reunification of unhoused people who choose to return to their homes/family; do uniformed officers have to control the drones; would it be more beneficial to hire contractors to operate the drones; why can’t funding from the advisory measure be used for more motorcycle officers; wasn’t there a short term CRU in the past that did not work; what is the current disposition for SAMOSHEL; and how many beds are available at SAMOSHEL on any given day.
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 508 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 9 October 8, 2024
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to the constraints on various departments; hiring process and practices for the police department; effectiveness of the special teams created by the police department; violent crimes that have been occurring throughout the City as of late; the need and desire for residents to have more officers patrolling the streets; ways to increase police department capacity by diverting certain calls other teams equipped to handle them; success of the therapeutic van in the City as opposed to other cities; and selecting scenarios from the presented options that will make the best impact for the City.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, seconded by Mayor Brock, to give direction to staff to proceed with implementation of the visibility option (scenario 1) of the staff report, including the Special Investigations Unit, Drone Program Expansion, Security Monitoring Solution, and revising the Downtown Outreach funding to one outreach team only and adding one Lead Dispatcher and one Police Officer to the HLP Team, and rolling out the CRU until the APU can be established. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Parra, de la Torre,
Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: Councilmembers Zwick, Davis, Torosis
ABSENT: None
Councilmember Davis explained her no vote stating that the motion simply adds an additional police officer to a list of already unfillable police officer positions and increasing positions isn’t the most efficient way to address the issues facing the streets of the City, while expansion of the therapeutic transport van would make more of an impact.
CONTINUE MEETING
PAST 11:00 P.M.
Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to continue past 11:00 p.m. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Torosis, Davis, Parra, Zwick,
Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
NOES: Councilmember de la Torre and Mayor Brock
ABSENT: None
STAFF
ADMINISTRATIVE
ITEMS:
DEVELOPMENT AND
DISPOSITION
AGREEMENT
11.A. Approve Deal Terms and Authorize Development and
Disposition Agreement (DDA) and Ground Lease for 1318 4th Street, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 509 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 10 October 8, 2024
(Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
excused at 1:54 a.m.)
(Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
retuned at 1:59 a.m.)
(Councilmember Davis
excused at 2:33 a.m.)
(Councilmember Davis
retuned at 2:33 a.m.)
(Councilmember Torosis
excused at 2:36 a.m.)
(Councilmember Torosis
retuned at 2:40 a.m.)
1. Adopt a finding that the actions to approve the Ground Lease and DDA for the Project (as described in the staff recommendation, below) are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15182 and a finding that the Project has been previously analyzed in the Downtown Community Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2013091056) and the 6th Cycle Housing Element
Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2020100575).
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a Ground Lease with a ninety-nine (99) year term and a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA), with EAH Inc for development and operation of affordable and permanent supportive housing on City-owned property located at 1318 4th Street (the “Project”).
3. Authorize the City Manager to award a grant in an amount not to exceed $2,000,000, to be used for pre-development costs for the Project, as negotiated in the DDA.
4. Adopt a finding that the actions to approve the Ground Lease and DDA for the Project (as described in the staff recommendation, below) are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15182 and a finding that the Project has been previously analyzed in the Downtown Community Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2013091056) and the 6th Cycle Housing Element
Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2020100575).
5. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute all necessary documents to make a Housing Trust Fund loan to EAH, Inc. in an amount consistent with the Housing Trust Fund Guidelines loan limits.
Questions asked and answered of staff included how will the allocated funds to the People Concern be used; how will the project remain financially viable despite the funding gap and ensure that the funding gap won’t increase; what was the community feedback received; will there be two levels of underground funding; who will provide security after the first year; are residents required to sober; could the City require testing; could a resident be held accountable for a crime committed off premise; what is the background check process; what crimes would make someone ineligible for housing; does The Laurel operate under the same rules as this development will; is it known as to what is in the harm reduction kits provided by The Laurel; is there local preference for those who live and or work in the City; are domestic abuse victims given priority; why is this project expensive and is there a way to control the cost; why is this project going to take so much time to build; could this property be sold and built in another location; is there still a plan for a grocery store to be included; and what is the language in the agreement for The Laurel concerning security.
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to general house rules; ramifications for criminal activity by a resident; merits Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 510 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 11 October 8, 2024
for supportive housing; sober housing model; below market wait list and priority; statistics for drug use; and security concerns.
Motion by Councilmember Zwick, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to adopt the staff recommendation. 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
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
ISSUANCE OF REVENUE
BONDS
12.A. Public Hearing and Adoption of Resolution No. 11624 (CCS) Approving the California Municipal Finance Authority (“CMFA”) to Issue Revenue Bonds for the Benefit of 1634 20th Street, LP, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Hold a public hearing under the requirements of the Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act (“TEFRA”) and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended;
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; and
3. Adopt Resolution No. 11624 (CCS) approving the issuance of California Municipal Finance Authority bonds in an amount not-toexceed $45,000,000 for the benefit of 1634 20th Street LP or a related or successor entity for the purpose of financing or refinancing the acquisition, construction, improvement, and equipping of a multifamily rental housing project located at 1634 20th Street, Santa Monica.
Member of the public Harvey Edder, spoke to the recommended action.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to adopt the staff recommendation. 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
CONTINUE REMAINING
AGENDA ITEMS
Motion by Mayor Brock, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to continue the remaining agenda items to the October 22, 2024, Council meeting. The Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 511 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 12 October 8, 2024
motion was approved unanimously by voice vote with all Councilmembers present.
RESOLUTIONS:
COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS
14.A. Adoption of a Resolution Amending the Council Rules of Procedure Regarding Councilmember Discussion Items (16 items), was continued to the October 22, 2024 Council meeting.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends the City Council:
1. Adopt the resolution amending the Council Rules of Procedure regarding Councilmember Discussion Items (16 items); 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
COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
CLEAN BEACHES &
OCEAN PARCEL TAX
CITIZENS OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE
16.A. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Clean Beaches & Ocean Parcel Tax Citizens Oversight Committee for a term ending on June 30, 2025, was continued to the October 22, 2024 Council meeting.
PROPOSITION 36 16.B. Request by Mayor Phil Brock, Vice-Mayor Lana Negrete, and Councilmember Oscar de la Torre that the City Council endorse Proposition 36 on the November 2024 statewide ballot. Proposition 36 makes several key changes related to punishments for theft and drug crimes. First, it increases punishment for some of these crimes. Second, it creates a new treatment-focused court process for some drug possession crimes. Third, it requires courts to warn people convicted of selling or providing illegal drugs to others they can be charged with murder if they keep doing so and someone dies. (Attachments include the full text of the ballot measure and an analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office-The CA Legislature’s Nonpartisan Fiscal and Policy Advisor), was continued to the October 22, 2024 Council meeting.
PROHIBITION OF GIFTS
TO COUNCILMEMBERS
16.C. Request by Councilmember Davis to direct the City Attorney to prepare and return at the next meeting with an ordinance that would prohibit gifts to Councilmembers, using definitions of gifts and exceptions in the California Political Reform Act, and adding an exception for entry and meals when attending events in an official City capacity, was continued to the October 22, 2024 Council meeting.
ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS
16.D. Request of Mayor Brock that the City Attorney and City Manager begin the process to amend the Zoning Ordinance to increase the maximum square footage of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,200 sq. ft, which is allowable pursuant to state Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 512 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 13 October 8, 2024
law, was continued to the October 22, 2024 Council meeting. 4 TH ANNUAL WESTSIDE
UNITY CLASSIC CAR
SHOW
16.E. Request by Councilmember Christine Parra and Vice Mayor Lana Negrete that the City Council consider providing additional support for the 4th Annual Westside Unity Classic Car Show presented by Pico Youth & Family Center (PYFC) that took place on the pier on September 14, 2024 by directing the City Manager to retroactively waive the City’s portion of fees for use of the pier parking lot for PYFC. Waived City fees related to the Westside Unity Classic Car Show include the parking lot buy-out fee in an amount up to $11,880, was continued to the October 22, 2024 Council meeting.
SB 969 16.F. Request of Councilmembers Davis and Zwick that the City Attorney and City Manager review and analyze SB 969, which recently was signed by Governor Newsom, and with due speed take all necessary steps and draft all necessary ordinances and policies that would allow the establishment of an entertainment zone (as that term is defined in SB 969) on the Third Street Promenade in Downtown Santa Monica, was continued to the October 22, 2024 Council meeting.
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 2:56 a.m. in memory of Ray Carriere.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Nikima S. Newsome Phil Brock
City Clerk Mayor
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.G
Packet Pg. 513 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Oct 8, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 1 March 19, 2024
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MARCH 19, 2024
A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Brock at 5:32 p.m., on Tuesday, March 19, 2024, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA and 7575 E.
Princess Dr., Scottsdale, AZ.
Roll Call: Present: Mayor Phil Brock
Mayor Pro Tem Lana Negrete (via teleconference)
Councilmember Gleam Davis
Councilmember Oscar de la Torre
Councilmember Christine Parra
Councilmember Caroline Torosis (Arrived at 5:37 p.m.)
Councilmember Jesse Zwick (Arrived at 5:37 p.m.)
Also Present: City Manager David White
City Attorney Douglas Sloan
Interim City Clerk Nikima S. Newsome
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:32 p.m., with all members present except Councilmembers Zwick and Torosis.
Councilmember Davis led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.
LEVINE ACT
DISCLOSURE
Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is required to disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 made by the party or the party's agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official.
Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well.
The disclosure must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution; the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made.
No Councilmembers recused themselves from any items pursuant to the Levine Act.
AGENDA
MANAGEMENT
(Councilmembers Torosis and
Zwick arrived at 5:37 p.m.)
Motion by Councilmember de la Torre, seconded by Councilmember Parra, to continue items 8.A. and 16.C. to a meeting to be determined and to hear items 16.J., 16.L., and 16.M. immediately after item 6, Public Input on Remaining Agenda Items, and to hear items 16.L. and 16.M. concurrently.
The motion passed by a vote of 4 to 3 with Councilmembers de la Torre, Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 514 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 March 19, 2024
Parra, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, and Mayor Brock voting in the affirmative and Councilmembers Torosis, Davis, and Zwick voting against the motion.
GENERAL PUBLIC
INPUT:
Members of the public Jerry Rubin, Laurence Cohen, Jacqueline Martin, Maritza Villeda, Dora Hernandez, Patricia Ibanez, Anahi Ortiz, Gregorio Hernandez, Jose Torres, Ellis Raskin, Irv Hershenbaum, Kathleen Yasuda, Caroline Luce, Michael Pitkin, Dillon Foster, Mike Royce, Julie Serlin, Rev Khan, Andy Moss, Cathie Gentile, Louis Watenabe, Rabbi Comess Daniels, Danielle Jones, Johnathan Foster, Simret Habte, Liam Karl, Carlos Rodarte, Ilse Escobar, Denise Barton, Zoe Muntaner, John Medlin, and Ericka Lesley commented on various local issues.
PUBLIC INPUT FOR
CLOSED SESSION,
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS AND CONSENT
CALENDAR ONLY:
No members of the public commented on Closed Session items.
No members of the public commented on Special Agenda items.
No members of the public commented on Consent Calendar items.
PROCLAMATIONS/
COMMENDATIONS/
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS
3.A. Proclamation: Red Cross Month, was presented.
3.B. City Manager Report, was presented.
CLOSED SESSIONS
(Mayor Pro Tem Negrete left
the meeting at 6:58 p.m.)
On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 6:58 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 7:36 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:
4.A. Conference with legal counsel, existing litigation; Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): Murcia v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; U.S. Dist. Court, Central District of California, Case No. 22-cv-05253-FLA-MAR The City Attorney advised this matter was heard and Settlement Agreement No. 11616 (CCS) was approved in the amount of $475,000.00 by a vote of 6-0 with Mayor Pro Tem Negrete absent.
4.B. Conference with legal counsel, significant exposure to litigation; Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(2),(4): Sovereign Restoration Partners, Ltd., 205 Washington Ave.
This item was removed at the request of the opposing counsel.
REPORT ON COUNCIL
TRAVEL
(Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
returned at 7:45 p.m.)
Mayor Brock, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Councilmember Parra and de la Torre attended the National League of Cities Congressional City Conference in Washington D.C.
Councilmember Zwick attended the YIMBYtown conference in Austin, Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 515 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 March 19, 2024
Texas.
CONSENT CALENDAR: All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to approve the Consent Calendar, except Item 5.B., reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. 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
2800 AIRPORT AVENUE
RENOVATION PROJECT
5.A. Approval of First Modification to Agreement No. 11449 (CCS) with Olympos Construction Inc. for 2800 Airport Avenue Renovation Project, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities), of the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Agreement No. 11449 (CCS) in the amount of $1,746,250 (including contingency) with Olympos Construction Inc. (Olympos) for costs associated with additional scope related to the multiple buildings at 2800 Airport Avenue for the Public Works Department. This will result in an amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $5,058,350, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval;
3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue any necessary change orders to complete additional work within contract authority; and
4. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget Actions section of this report.
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
VACATION
5.B. Adoption of Resolution to Vacate Public Right-of-Way on 1717 19th Street Parcel, was not heard.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 516 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 March 19, 2024
2. Adopt the attached resolution to vacate public right-of-way on the 1717 19th Street parcel.
FACILITIES SECURITY
ANALYSIS
5.C. Award Professional Services Contract No. 11545 (CCS) to Arcadis U.S. for Site Security Analysis & Updates to the City's Water, Wastewater, & Recycled Water Facilities, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15262 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Award RFP #381 to Arcadis U.S., Inc. to analyze and design updates to the City’s current water, wastewater, and recycled water facilities’ physical security systems; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11545 (CCS) with Arcadis U.S., Inc. in the amount not to exceed $845,000 over a 3-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
CITYWIDE PARKING
STUDY
5.D. Award Contract No. 11546 (CCS) Walker Parking Consultants Engineers, Inc. for Comprehensive Citywide Parking Supply, Demand, and Rate Analysis Study, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Award RFP# 386 to Walker Parking Consultants Engineers, Inc., a California-based company, for consulting services to prepare a citywide comprehensive parking supply, demand, and rate analysis for the Department of Transportation, Parking Division.
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11546 (CCS) with Walker Parking Consultants Engineers, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $280,000 (including a $50,225 contingency) over a five-year period.
3200 AIRPORT AVENUE
RENOVATION PROJECT
5.E. Approval of First Modification to Agreement No. 11365 (CCS) with Swinerton Builders for 3200 Airport Avenue Renovation Project, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 517 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 March 19, 2024
(Replacement/Reconstruction), of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Agreement No. 11365 (CCS) in the amount of $500,000 (including a $50,000 contingency) with Swinerton Builders Corporation for the additional costs related to unforeseen conditions and electrical upgrades, for the Public Works Department. This will result in an amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $9,584,792, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and
3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to issue any necessary change orders to complete additional work within contract authority.
CLAIM MANAGEMENT
SOFTWARE
5.F. Approval of Fourth Modification to Agreement No. 10275 (CCS) with Origami Risk, Inc. for Claims Management Software Subscription Services, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a fourth modification to Agreement No. 10275 (CCS) in the amount of $810,525 with Origami Risk, Inc., an Illinois-based company, for Risk Management Information System software subscription services for the Finance Department. This will result in a thirteenyear amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $1,764,278 with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and
2. Adopt a finding of no significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
WATER AND SANITARY
SEWER MASTER PLANS
5.G. Approval of First Modification to Agreement No. 11295 (CCS) with Arcadis U.S., Inc. for Updating the City's Water and Sanitary Sewer Master Plans, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Agreement No. 11295 (CCS) in the amount of $105,550 with Arcadis U.S., Inc and extend the agreement to June 30, 2026, for updating the City’s Domestic Water and Wastewater Master Plans. This will result in a four-year amended agreement with Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 518 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 March 19, 2024
a new total amount not to exceed $910,710, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
CANNABIS EQUITY
GRANT
5.H. Adoption of Resolution No. 11578 (CCS) Authorizing Receipt of State of California Cannabis Equity Grant Funding for $40,000 for Preparation of a Cannabis Equity Assessment and Authorization for City Manager to Execute All Necessary Associated Documents, was approved and adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Adopt attached Resolution No. 11578 (CCS) authorizing the acceptance of a grant awarded in the amount of $40,000 from the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development for the Cannabis Equity Grants Program for Local Jurisdictions.
3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant and all grant renewals.
4. Authorize budget changes as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report.
SMPD VIDEO
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
5.I. Award Bid and Enter into Agreement No. 11547 (CCS) with Convergint Technologies LLC. for a Video Management System, 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 Bid #387 to Convergint Technologies, LLC, a Californiabased company for installation and maintenance of a Video Management System.
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11547 (CCS) with Convergint Technologies, LLC for installation of a Video Management System in an amount not to exceed $424,318 (including a 20% contingency for adding potential cameras in the future). This sum includes installation, programming, and maintenance for a total of 5 years of service, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
LAAFCA MAPPING
SOLUTION
5.J. Award Bid to Intterra for Los Angeles Area Fire Chief’s Association (LAAFCA) Mapping Solution, was approved.
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 519 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 7 March 19, 2024
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# 383 to Intterra, LLC to provide a cloud-based common operating platform to share data across multiple computer-aided dispatch systems across the region for the Los Angeles Area Fire Chief’s Association; and
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11548 (CCS) with Intterra, LLC, in an amount not to exceed $789,251 (including a $60,000 contingency) for 2 years, with one additional 3-year renewal option in the amount of $1,346,479 (including a 15% contingency), for a total amount not to exceed $2,135,730 over a 5-year period, with future year funding contingent on grant funding and Council budget approval.
PUBLIC INPUT ON
REMAINING AGENDA
ITEMS:
Members of the public Michael Pitkin, Caro Vilain, Denise Barton, Michael Soloff, John Medlin commented on Item 11.A.
Member of the public Albin Gielicz spoke on Item 16.F.
Members of the public Nicole Blaine and Albin Gielicz spoke on Item 16.H.
Members of the public Ellis Raskins, Caro Vilain, Emily Hsiung, Connor Webb, Varum Bhatnagar, Dustin Shahan and Albin Gielicz on Item 16.I.
Members of the public Ellis Raskins, Michael Pitkin, Kay Ambriz, Steven Johnson, Jon Katz, Denise Barton, Lynn Cervini, John Medlin, Sonya Fox Sultan, John C. Smith and Jonathan Foster commented on Item 16.J.
Members of the public Khansa Jones Muhammad, Ellis Raskin, Ericka Lesley, Kay Ambriz, Nicole Faries, Eliza Jane Franklin Leggett, Blaine Pope, Hajar, Tara B., Chance Davis, Kavon Ward, Autumn Breon, Milana Davis, Mykael Cammorto, Robbie Jones, Caro Vilain, Connor Webb, Jon Katz, Allen Kwab, Justin Brick Howze, Xavier Howze, Joanne Berlin, Antrell George, Khat Smith, Michael Soloff, John Medlin, Vienna Hayes, Varum Bhatnagar, Nichelle Monroe, Sonya Fox Sultan, Giavanni Glover, Joette Reid Marks, John M. Forbes, Jonathan Gregory, April Anderson, Janet Gollery McKeithen, Andrina Seals, Gina Frazier, Danielle Borgia and Jonathan Foster commented on Item 16.L.
Members of the public Ellis Raskin, Kay Ambriz, Kavon Ward, Milana Davis, Connor Webb and Justin Brick Howze commented on Item 16.M.
STUDY SESSION:
CANNABIS SOCIAL
7.A. Cannabis Social Equity Study Session, was continued to a future meeting.
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 520 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 8 March 19, 2024
EQUITY
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Review and discuss the presentation on cannabis social equity programs from other cities;
2. Provide direction on two potential policy options for approach to a cannabis social equity program within the City of Santa Monica which will determine the expansiveness of a social equity program and timeline by which staff returns with an ordinance; and
3. Discuss options and provide direction to staff on locational restrictions for the adult-use cannabis ordinance.
CONTINUED ITEMS:
DISABILITIES
COMMISSION
8.A. Appointment to two unscheduled vacancies on the Disabilities Commission for both terms ending on June 30, 2025 (Continued from 1/23/2024), was continued to a future meeting.
STAFF
ADMINISTRATIVE
ITEMS:
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
11.A. Award Request for Proposal and enter into Agreement with Hollywood Community Housing Corporation (HCHC) as the Selected Development Team for Affordable Housing on Three City-owned Sites Adjacent to Wilshire Boulevard, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Award RFP #365 to Hollywood Community Housing Corporation (HCHC) for the future development of affordable housing on Cityowned property at 1217 Euclid Street, 1211-1217 Fourteenth Street and 1146 Sixteenth Street; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Exclusive Negotiating Agreement No. 11549 (CCS) with HCHC; and
3. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect on the environment for selection of a development team pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and find that future development of affordable housing on the City-owned properties at 1217 Euclid Street, 1211-1217 Fourteenth Street, and 1146 Sixteenth Street is consistent with the certified 6th Cycle Housing Element Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No.
2020100575).
Questions asked and answered of staff included: what target population will be prioritized for new housing; apart from The People Concern, is the City partnering with any other non-profits to provide services; will the City be providing any funding; how much public parking will be lost as a result of this project and have surrounding businesses been contacted regarding the impact to parking; what funds would the City use to cover the $5 million dollar cost for the potential additional parking; legally, how can housing trust Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 521 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 9 March 19, 2024
funds be used to pay for new parking; how was the building height determined and how substantial are the costs imposed to build above a certain height; how will this project be financed; is site control necessary to apply for proposed financing options and were any other supportive housing providers considered.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Zwick, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers de la Torre, Torosis, Davis, Parra, Zwick, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
ARTS COMMISSION
16.A. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Arts Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2027, was continued to the April 9, 2024 Council meeting.
HOUSING COMMISSION 16.B. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Housing Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2025, was continued to the April 9, 2024 Council meeting.
DISABILITIES
COMMISSION
16.C. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Disabilities Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2026, was continued to a future meeting.
TRANSIENT
OCCUPANCY TAX
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
16.D. Recommendation to accept Sam Jagger's resignation from the Transient Occupancy Tax Advisory Committee and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy, was presented.
Motion by Mayor Brock, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to accept the resignation with regret.
The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, with all members present, except for Mayor Pro Tem Negrete.
SUSTAINABILITY,
ENVIRONMENTAL
JUSTICE, AND THE
ENVIRONMENT
16.E. Recommendation to accept Alexandra Sokol's resignation from the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and the Environment and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to accept the resignation with regret.
The motion was approved unanimously by voice vote, with all members Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 522 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 10 March 19, 2024
present, except for Mayor Pro Tem Negrete.
DISCRETIONARY FUNDS 16.F. Request of Council Members Davis, Torosis, and Zwick that the City Council allocate a total of $22,500 out of its Discretionary Fund to Pico Improvement Organization, Montana Merchants, and Main Street Business Improvement Association, with each organization receiving $7,500. The money shall be used for programs and events that promote local businesses and build community, was presented.
Motion by Mayor Brock, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to allocate $5,000 to each bid, for a total of $15,000. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Parra, Torosis, de la Torre, Mayor Brock
NOES: Councilmember Davis
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
SCAG VOTING
DELEGATE AND
ALTERNATE
16.G. Designation of City’s voting delegate and alternate to Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) 59th Annual Regional Conference and General Assembly Business Meeting from May 2-3, 2024 at the JW Marriott Desert Springs Resort & Spa in Palm Desert, CA, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember de la Torre, seconded by Mayor Brock, to select Mayor Brock the voting delegate and Councilmember Zwick as the alternate.
The motion was approved by voice vote with all members present except Mayor Pro Tem Negrete.
LGBT+ PRIDE ON THE
PIER EVENT
16.H. Request of Councilmembers Davis, Torosis, and Zwick that the City Council approve City Sponsorship of the LGBTQ+ Pride on the Pier Event taking place on June 15, 2024 on the Santa Monica Pier by directing the City Manager to waive half of all associated permit and security fees associated with getting their required event permit and promote the event via city communications and social media as well as allocate up to $10,000 to Crow Comedy, Inc., a Santa Monica-based non-profit, to produce an LGBTQ+-focused storytelling class & showcase as part of Santa Monica Pride, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to approve the item. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Parra, Davis, Torosis, de la Torre, Mayor Brock
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 523 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 11 March 19, 2024
NOES: None
ABSENT: Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
CYCLIST ANTIHARRASSMENT 16.I. Request of Councilmembers Zwick, Torosis, and Davis that the City Council direct the City Attorney to draft an ordinance to prohibit the harassment of cyclists. In drafting, the City Attorney’s Office should consider the prohibited activities and remedies within Los Angeles’ cyclist anti-harassment statute (LAMC 45.96 et seq.), as well as consult additional available legislation and best practices, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember Zwick, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to approve the item.
The motion was approved by voice vote with all members present except Mayor Pro Tem Negrete.
NEEDLE EXCHANGE
PROGRAM
16.J. Request by Mayor Brock, Vice Mayor Negrete, and
Councilmember Parra to direct the City Manager and City Attorney to prepare and return for Council approval within 30 days a resolution expressing the City’s disapproval of the County’s implementation of the “Harm Reduction Services” program, or “needle exchange program,” in the City of Santa Monica. The resolution should reflect the City’s opposition to the program in Santa Monica, as it is misguided and does not achieve the goal of reducing harm. The program encourages continued use of illegal and dangerous drugs, and people are dying as a result. Residents should not have to see people shooting up in our neighborhood parks, nor the behavior that results from illegal drug use. Drug use and needles simply do not belong in our parks and other public spaces, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember de la Torre, seconded by Mayor Brock, to approve the item, with direction to express that “the City supports a harm reduction needle exchange program within health clinics and other facilities, not in City parks or around public or private schools.” The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Parra, de la Torre,
Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: Councilmembers Zwick, Davis, Torosis
ABSENT: None
CONTINUE MEETING
PAST 11:00 P.M.
Motion by Councilmember de la Torre, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. The motion was approved by the following vote:
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 524 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 12 March 19, 2024
AYES: Councilmembers de la Torre, Torosis, Davis, Parra, Zwick, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
EXCESSIVE NOISE 16.K. Request by Mayor Brock and Councilmember Parra to direct the City Manager and City Attorney to prepare and return for Council approval amendments to existing ordinances to prohibit excessive noise as it may affect City residents in their homes; the ordinance should include time restrictions, reasonableness limits, and objective decibel limit standards, was withdrawn.
EBONY BEACH CLUB
(Mayor Brock left the meeting
at 11:13 p.m.)
(Mayor Brock returned to the
meeting at 11:17 p.m.)
16.L. Request of Councilmembers Torosis, Zwick and Davis to direct the City Manager and City Attorney, in consultation with relevant departments, to report back to the Council in 90 days with:
1)Historical records documenting Silas White’s interest in the Ebony Beach Club Property at 1811 Ocean Avenue including chain of title and a record of any lease-to-purchase agreements that may exist, as well as the record of actions taken by the City of Santa Monica to seize this property by eminent domain. 2)Contemporaneous public writings, government communications, court documents, and other evidence that indicates the City of Santa Monica exercised racial animus in its decision to seize the property at 1811 Ocean Avenue.
3)Recommendations that include, at a minimum, steps the City of Santa Monica should take to repair past harm that the City perpetuated against Silas White and his descendants related to the Ebony Beach Club property at 1811 Ocean Avenue. Recommendations could include, as appropriate: a. Options for financial compensation for the closest living descendant(s) of Silas White inclusive of wealth lost since the property was seized by the City of Santa Monica; and b.
An outline of steps that may be required to transfer the parcel(s) of land referred to as “Ebony Beach Club” at 1811 Ocean Avenue or equivalent parcels in the portion of land within the area currently occupied all or in part by the Viceroy Hotel. Priority factors to be analyzed as part of the next steps should include: i. Any needs to amend the deed to the property to allow for such a transaction; ii.
Identifying and addressing land and zoning restrictions; iii.
Performing due diligence to determine the rightful legal heirs; iv.
Understanding the tax implications upon the heirs in the event of transfer; and v. Assessing the operational and fiscal impact to the City and the Viceroy hotel, if any, was presented and heard with Item 16.M.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Parra, to approve the item. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Parra, Davis, Torosis, de la Torre, Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 525 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 13 March 19, 2024
Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
EMINENT DOMAIN 16.M. Request of Vice Mayor Negrete, Councilmember Parra, and Councilmember de la Torre that the City Attorney and City Manager should evaluate the use of eminent domain by the City to acquire property where Silas White intended to open the Ebony Beach Club and report back to the City Council. This analysis should include a review of historical ownership of the property, a review of City Council actions, and a review of court proceedings on the matter, was presented and heard with Item 16.L.
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Parra, to approve the item. 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
PARK SIGNAGE
PROGRAM
(Mayor Pro Tem Negrete
excused at 11:40 a.m.)
16.N. Request of Mayor Brock that the City Council direct the City Manager to develop a park signage program that celebrates the history of the City’s parks that includes elements such as: (1) City of Santa Monica’s name and logo (2) Park name and (3) Narrative of Park History. The signs that are designed for each park pursuant to this program shall enliven the experience of residents and visitors to our parks modeled after the attached photo, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember Zwick, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to approve the item.
The motion was approved by voice vote with all members present except Mayor Pro Tem Negrete.
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 1:06 a.m.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Nikima S. Newsome Phil Brock
Interim City Clerk Mayor
Docusign Envelope ID: CC8DBE4F-953D-4247-AB90-AE759F3F6762
5.H
Packet Pg. 526 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Mar 19, 2024 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 5.I
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office, Administration Subject: Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Receipt of State of California Proposition 47 Grant Funds and Authorization of City Manager to Execute All Necessary Associated Documents
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) and 15303 (New Construction and Conversion of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit an application to the State of California, Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) in the amount of $7,926,172 for the SaMo Bridge diversion program; and authorizing the City Manager to accept the grant, execute the grant agreement, and execute other necessary documents.
3. Authorize budget amendment as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report. (requires 5 votes)
Summary
On June 5, 2024, the City Attorney’s Office, after consulting with partners in the Santa Monica Police Department (SMPD) and Housing and Human Services (HHS), submitted an application for Proposition 47 grant funding in an amount equal to $7,926,172 for SaMo Bridge, a diversion program that addresses the behavioral health, substance abuse, and housing needs of justice-involved adults in the Santa Monica community.
Specifically, SaMo Bridge will create a no-barrier 24/7 respite hub where SMPD can divert individuals so that they may address basic needs and enroll in 90-day care coordination plans to secure housing and treatment services. Upon program graduation, the City Attorney’s Office will dismiss citations and cases.
5.I
Packet Pg. 527
2 of 5
On October 3, 2024, the BSCC awarded grant funding to the City of Santa Monica for the full amount requested. The City Attorney recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the City Manager to submit an application and accept the Proposition 47 grant award for SaMo Bridge from the State of California, Board of State and Community Corrections in an amount equal to $7,926,172 and further authorize the City Manager to execute the grant agreement and other necessary documents.
Background
Proposition 47 codified Government Code sections 7599-7599.2 in a 2014 voterapproved initiative. Its purpose, as stated in the ballot initiative, is as follows:
The people enact the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act to ensure that prison spending is focused on violent and serious offenses, to maximize alternatives for nonserious, nonviolent crime, and to invest the savings generated from this act into prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, victim services, and mental health and drug treatment.
As stated in the proposition, California’s Board of State and Community Corrections’ responsibilities are to:
Administer a grant program to public agencies aimed at supporting mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment, and diversion programs for people in the criminal justice system, with an emphasis on programs that reduce recidivism of people convicted of less serious crimes, such as those covered by this measure, and those who have substance abuse and mental health problems. (Gov. Code,§ 7599.2, subd. (a)(3).) Assembly Bill 1056 (Chapter 438, Statutes of 2015) added legislative priorities for this grant program, including housing-related assistance and other community-based supportive services, job-skills training, case management, and civil legal services.
Grants may fund programs that serve both adults and juveniles.
5.I
Packet Pg. 528
3 of 5
On April 11, 2024, BSCC approved release of the Cohort 4 Proposition 47 Request for Proposals, which made funding available competitively to public agencies located in the State of California. On June 5, 2024, the City Attorney’s Office, after consulting with SMPD and HHS, submitted an application for Proposition 47 grant funding in an amount of $7,926,172.
On October 3, 2024, the BSCC awarded grant funding for 27 proposals, totaling approximately $167 million. As part of that award, the City of Santa Monica was awarded the full amount requested.
Discussion
The Proposition 47 grant funds will be used to establish SaMo Bridge, a diversion program that addresses the behavioral health, substance abuse, and housing needs of justice-involved adults in the Santa Monica community by providing individuals who are stuck at the intersection of criminal justice involvement, addiction, unmet behavioral health needs, and homelessness a bridge to services to reduce recidivism.
Specifically, SaMo Bridge will create a no-barrier 24/7 respite hub where SMPD can divert individuals during the pre-arrest, post-arrest, and pre-filing stages of law enforcement contact. At the respite hub, individuals may address basic needs and enroll in 90-day care coordination plans to secure housing and treatment services. Upon program graduation, the City Attorney’s Office will dismiss citations and cases. The full project description is set forth in the City’s application, attached as Attachment B.
SaMo Bridge will be implemented in partnership with Exodus Recovery, Inc., a California based nonprofit, that will be primarily responsible for operating SaMo Bridge, specifically by providing Care Managers, who conduct outreach in the community, meet participants at the SaMo Bridge, and provide ongoing case management, and Community Navigators, who support the 24/7 operations of the SaMo Bridge respite hub, making it feasible for SMPD officers to make round-the-clock diversion referrals.
The City Attorney’s Office further anticipates contracting with a grant administrator using grant funds to ensure proper implementation and compliance.
5.I
Packet Pg. 529
4 of 5
The respite hub will operate from leased trailers located on City property. It is anticipated that participants will stay at the hub for approximately 24 to 48 hours as their Exodus Case Manager finds temporary housing and treatment services. The City Attorney’s Office is currently coordinating with various City departments to determine the best location for the trailers and the SaMo Bridge operations. The City Attorney’s Office will return to the Council with necessary approvals for these, and additional aspects, of implementation of the SaMo Bridge program, all of which will be fully funded through the Proposition 47 grant.
The City Attorney recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, required by BSCC, authorizing the submittal of the application, acceptance of the grant, and execution of the grant agreement and other necessary documents.
Environmental Review
Acceptance of the grant funding for operation of the SaMo Bridge program would have no possibility of significant effect on the environment, and therefore, is exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. If awarded, the use of grant funding would provide administrative services to participants, and therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the agreement would not result in adverse physical impacts on the environment.
Additionally, operation of the program within small, leased trailers would be exempt pursuant to Section 15301 (New Construction and Conversion of Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15303 exempts limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures; installation of small new equipment and facilities in small structures; and the conversion of existing small structures from one use to another. Therefore, use of the leased trailers would be exempt pursuant to Section 15303 CEQA.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to accept a grant from the State of California, Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) for the SaMo Bridge diversion program. Approval of the recommended actions require the following budget amendment:
5.I
Packet Pg. 530
5 of 5
FY 2024-25 Grant Budget Amendment
Establish Revenue Budget Appropriate Funds
Account Number(s) Amount Account Number(s) Amount
20120001.4xxxxx $3,301,850 20120001.5xxxxx $3,301,850
Total $3,301,850 Total $3,301,850
The grant was awarded for a three-year period, ending in 2028. However, the grant could be cancelled by BSCC during that time if insufficient funds are not available through the Proposition 47 grant program, which is funded by the annual transfer of savings generated by Proposition 47. On or before July 31 of each fiscal year, the California Department of Finance will calculate the State savings associated with Proposition 47, which will determine whether sufficient funds are available for funding SaMo Bridge during the three-year period.
Budget changes beyond June 30, 2024 will be included in subsequent year budgets, contingent on Council budget approval. Should future funding not be available through the BSCC grant, staff would seek alternate funding to continue the program.
Prepared By: Heidi Von Tongeln, Deputy City Attorney
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. A-Proposed Resolution
B. B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47
5.I
Packet Pg. 531
1 City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA
AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, BOARD OF STATE AND COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS, FOR PROPOSITION 47 GRANT FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,926,172 FOR THE SAMO BRIDGE DIVERSION PROGRAM; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO ACCEPT THE GRANT, EXECUTE THE GRANT AGREEMENT, AND EXECUTE
OTHER NECESSARY DOCUMENTS
WHEREAS, on November 4, 2014, the voters of the State of California approved Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, codified as Government Code sections 7599 et seq.; and
WHEREAS, as stated in Proposition 47, the State of California, Board of State and Community Corrections (“BSCC”) is responsible for administering a grant program to public agencies aimed at supporting mental health treatment, substance abuse treatment, and diversion programs for people in the criminal justice system, with an emphasis on programs that reduce recidivism of people convicted of less serious crimes and those who have substance abuse and mental health problems (the “Proposition 47 Grant”); and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2024, BSCC approved release of the Cohort 4 Proposition 47 Request for Proposals, which made funding available competitively to public agencies located in the State of California; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica, through the City Attorney’s Office, desires to participate in the Proposition 47 Grant administered by the BSCC; and
5.I.a
Packet Pg. 532 Attachment: A-Proposed Resolution (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) 2 WHEREAS, on October 3, 2024, the BSCC awarded grant funding to the City of Santa Monica in an amount equal to Seven Million, Nine Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand, One Hundred Seventy-Two Dollars ($7,926,172).
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Manager, or his or her designee, is authorized on behalf of the City Council to submit the grant proposal for this funding in an amount equal to Seven Million, Nine Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand, One Hundred Seventy-Two Dollars ($7,926,172) and to sign the Grant Agreement with the BSCC, including any amendments thereof, and any and all other documents deemed necessary or appropriate to evidence and secure the Proposition 47 Grant and any documents required to implement the City’s obligations related thereto.
SECTION 2. Grant funds received hereunder shall not be used to supplant expenditures controlled by the City Council.
SECTION 3. The City agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the Grant Agreement as set forth by the BSCC.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney
5.I.a
Packet Pg. 533 Attachment: A-Proposed Resolution (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) Note - below is the final content submitted on Submittable June 5, 2024\ Section 1 Project Need..................................................................................................................1 Section 2 Community Engagement.............................................................................................4 Section 3 Project Description.......................................................................................................6 Section 4 - Project Evaluation and Monitoring ....................................................................... 10 Section 1 Project Need
Section 1.1: The Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office (CAO), in partnership with Exodus Recovery, Inc. (Exodus), seeks Proposition 47 grant funding to create SaMo Bridge, a diversion program that addresses the behavioral health, substance abuse issues and housing needs of justice-involved adults in the Santa Monica community to reduce recidivism.
SaMo Bridge will provide people who are stuck at the intersection of criminal justice involvement, unmet behavioral health needs and homelessness, a bridge into services. SaMo Bridge will create a no-barrier 24/7 respite hub where the Santa Monica Police Department (SMPD) can divert people to immediate and long-term treatment and housing services during law enforcement contacts at the pre-arrest, post-arrest and pre-filing stages of law enforcement involvement.
Multiple data points underscore the need in Santa Monica for more resources that provide a pre-arrest, post-arrest and pre-filing diversion option for SMPD to route people into supportive services.
- There is a high degree of contact between law enforcement and people experiencing homelessness (PEH). PEH are approximately 1% of the Santa Monica population, but represented 18% of total SMPD calls for service in 2023. - PEH are arrested more often than people with housing. From 2019-2023, SMPD documented that 66% of 12,147 arrestees were experiencing homeless. - The number of PEH in Santa Monica remains consistent, suggesting that even increased local and regional investments are insufficient. Over the past five years, Santa Monica's homeless count fluctuated from 1,002 people in 2018 to 926 in 2023. - According to the annual US Department of Housing and Urban Development Point-in-Time Count administered by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, the LA region continues to see increasing numbers of PEH, putting more pressure on local resources. - From 2019 to 2023, the regional homeless count increased 35% from 52,765 to 71,320 people. Pressure on the westside of Los Angeles, where Santa Monica is located, is increasing rapidly - recording a 45% increase in the homeless count between 2022 and 2023. - A substantial portion of PEH are impacted by mental health needs and/or substance use disorder. A 2019 report by the California Policy Lab, found that 78% of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness reported mental health conditions and 75% had substance abuse conditions. (California Policy Lab, Health Conditions Among Unsheltered Adults in the U.S.)
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 534 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) Gaps in Services that Contribute to the Need: The City of Santa Monica has a long history of investing in social services and embracing the movement toward social justice reform. The City is especially focused on the behavioral health needs of community members experiencing homelessness and reducing the frequency this population interacts with law enforcement and the criminal justice system. However, community needs outpace available resources and gaps in the local service delivery system enable recidivism to continue. Through Prop 47 program funding, SaMo Bridge is poised to make significant inroads in addressing this gap in services.
The gap in diversion services is connected to three issues: (1) Social service business hours are limited compared to law enforcement round-the-clock operations. For example, the City’s multiple mental health co-response resources are only in service Monday – Thursday 5:00 am – 5:30 pm and Friday 9:00 am – 5:30 pm. (2) When SMPD’s mental health co-responders are engaged in a client interaction, writing holds or transporting to acute mental health services, they are unable to respond to other calls for service from SMPD which prevents diversion until the resource is freed up again. (3) There are program eligibility barriers that prevent SMPD from diverting people to available programs. For example, the LA County Alternatives to Incarceration program in the SMPD jail has a number of exclusionary criteria related to past criminal history and is limited to enrolling people at the pre-filing stage of the criminal justice system.
The described limitations create gaps that perpetuate people becoming involved in the criminal justice system in Santa Monica. When there are no options for diversion, SMPD Officers proceed with standard arrest and booking protocols. These system gaps highlight the need for a 24/7/365 low barrier “place to connect” where SMPD can divert more people during the prearrest, post-arrest and pre-booking contact phases to help people track into behavioral health and housing services. SaMo Bridge will be that place to connect.
Section 1.2: The SaMo Bridge program target population is homeless adults engaged by SMPD who have been arrested, charged with, or convicted of a criminal offense, and have a history of mental health or substance use disorders (“Target Population”).
Based on analysis of 2023 Homeless Count Data from Los Angeles Continuum of Care Service Planning Area 5 (includes Santa Monica) in combination with SMPD arrest data from the past five years, SaMo Bridge client demographics are likely to be:
- Male (87%)
- Ages 18-59 years old (77%), a large portion ages 28-39 years old; - People of color (60%)
- Straight (92%)
The SaMo Bridge program Target Population is measurable through a number of different strategies, described as follows:
SMPD Data: SMPD measures the frequency of law enforcement interactions with people experiencing homelessness across its system: 911 calls, field engagements, citations, arrests and court involvement. This is all collected in SMPD's Computer Aided Dispatch System and
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 535 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) Records Management System which will be available as a data source for SaMo Bridge process and outcome measures.
Screening: SMPD officers will screen for potential program candidates by verifying (A) a qualifying criminal offense is either occurring or has occurred in the past, (B) behavioral health history is observed by the officer or endorsed by the program candidate, or (C) candidate is experiencing homelessness. SMPD will provide voluntary transportation to the SaMo Bridge location within Santa Monica and assist the candidate in processing with the Exodus team member as needed.
Program Referral: Exodus will track incoming referrals from SMPD, including SMPD verification that the candidate is justice system connected.
Assessment: Exodus will conduct a brief needs assessment for each individual referred to SaMo Bridge, building on the SMPD referral with documentation of behavioral health history and social service needs. To support case management planning, Exodus will determine if the individual qualifies for City or County-funded social service programs.
Engagement in Services & Documentation: Exodus will collect demographics on people who engage in SaMo Bridge services and maintain client files in its electronic records system. Data from client files will inform program process and outcome measurement.
Section 1.3: People who qualify for SaMo Bridge are facing otherwise insurmountable barriers to getting out of the cycle of criminal justice system involvement and back into stable daily living.
The program’s clientele constitute some of the most underserved populations in the community.
They face the daily challenge of living with untreated behavioral health needs, intergenerational trauma, violence, and poverty; in addition, they live under systemic barriers to stability stemming from institutional racism, criminal history, immigration status, homophobia and other issues that are barriers to accessing education, jobs, healthcare, and housing.
SaMo Bridge staff will start by addressing basic needs - food, water, rest - to help people reset in order to engage in conversations about their immediate, short, and long-term behavioral health and housing needs. Through calming, trauma-informed conversations, Exodus staff will help people begin the process of connecting to social safety net systems and resources that can address unmet needs and prevent recurring law enforcement contact.
Additionally, Santa Monica's Prop 47 Local Advisory Committee will be regularly briefed on demographics of the population served and presenting needs, creating opportunities for stakeholders to provide direction and recommendations on continual process improvement to best meet the needs of the Target Population through SaMo Bridge.
Section 1.4: The needs to be addressed and population to be served through SaMo Bridge carry forward the intent of Proposition 47 to the letter. SaMo Bridge is designed to reduce recidivism of people convicted of less serious crimes who are living with substance abuse and mental health problems and also experiencing homelessness. Santa Monica’s program will
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 536 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) directly serve this population by focusing on connecting people to behavioral health treatment and housing resources.
Section 2 Community Engagement
Section 2.2: Santa Monica’s Proposition 47 Local Advisory Committee (LAC) includes a broad list of stakeholders representing a range of departments at City Hall, community-based organizations and community stakeholders. All these stakeholders bring expertise and experience in serving the SaMo Bridge Target Population.
To select LAC members, the City Attorney’s Office (CAO) worked with the City’s Human Services Division (HSD) to conduct a landscape analysis of the City’s internal and external stakeholders whose roles, services and scopes intersect with the community need and Target Population. CAO staff leveraged their insights on stakeholders needed for successful diversion programs and HSD leveraged its multi-decade history working with local nonprofit organizations to ensure the representatives considered for LAC membership were selected through a fair, inclusive and comprehensive process.
LAC members helped to identify and prioritize the most pressing needs to be addressed through Proposition 47 grant funding. Members provided quantitative and qualitative data sets to define the community need and the SaMo Bridge Target Population. LAC members helped identify the strategies, program design and services, and contributed significantly to the development of the grant project. LAC members look forward to continued work together to support SaMo Bridge implementation and ongoing service delivery.
The following City departments are designating representatives to serve as members of the LAC because their work intersects with the design, siting, operations and success of the program: City Manager’s Office, Santa Monica Police Department, Public Works, Office of Emergency Management, Community Development Department, and the Housing & Human Services Department.
The following community partners were selected for the LAC:
Exodus: Currently a City-funded partner and collaborator and the organization selected to operate SaMo Bridge if awarded this Proposition 47 grant; Exodus Recovery, Inc. is a California-based nonprofit organization. Established in 1989, Exodus began with the management of hospital-based inpatient and outpatient programs before expanding into operating mental health intensive outpatient clinics as a contractor with both the Los Angeles and San Diego County Departments of Mental Health. For the LA County Department of Mental Health, Exodus has developed and implemented an Integrated Service Agency Program (PARTNERS), an Adult Targeted Case Management Service Program, a Sidekicks CoOccurring Disorders Program, and an Alcohol and Drug Medi-Cal Contracted Program. Exodus currently provides case management services to criminal defendants participating in the Los Angeles Superior Court’s Rapid Diversion Program and to arrestees referred to treatment as a
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 537 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) means of avoiding the filing of criminal charges, as part of the Santa Monica site of the LA County Alternatives to Incarceration program.
CLARE|Matrix: A long-time City-funded partner organization that brings 50 years of expertise delivering an extensive continuum of residential treatment services, and with the recent merger with the Matrix Institute on Addictions, also has 35+ years of experience in outpatient treatment, training and research, and worldwide recognition for its evidence-based Matrix Model.
Clare|Matrix will be a recovery program resource to SaMo Bridge clients.
The People Concern (TPC): A long-time City-funded partner organization that brings 60 years of experience providing a fully integrated system of care – including outreach, interim housing, mental and medical health care, substance abuse services, domestic violence services, life skills & wellness programs, and permanent supportive housing – tailored to the unique needs of homeless individuals, survivors of domestic violence, challenged youth, and others who have nowhere else to turn. TPC operates SAMOSHEL 24/7 Shelter program in Santa Monica and will be a temporary housing resource to SaMo Bridge clients.
Venice Family Clinic (VFC): A long-time City-funded partner organization that brings 50 years of experience providing comprehensive, high-quality health care, free food, health insurance enrollment assistance and harm reduction services. VFC will be a healthcare resource to SaMo Bridge clients.
Salvation Army: A long-time collaborative partner to the City of Santa Monica, Salvation Army brings a combination of perspectives around faith, recovery, inclusion, and community for people across the housing and income spectrum. The City currently contracts with Salvation Army to support the City’s homeless outreach efforts and provide street team assistance to SMPD’s Homeless Liaison Program. Salvation Army will be a resource to SaMo Bridge clients who agree to participate in their programs.
Community Stakeholders: To bring in perspectives from the general public, the CAO invited Santa Monica residents Joseph Antognini and Dr. Luis Barrera Castañón to join the LAC given their leadership in the community. Combined, they bring expertise in public policy and integrated delivery models for social supportive services including school-to-prison pipeline issues, disability rights advocacy and understanding of City and County systems in place to address the needs of vulnerable populations.
The City will continue to broaden the membership of the Prop 47 Local Advisory Committee with plans to prioritize invitations to local hospitals; UCLA Santa Monica and St. John’s are long-time collaborators with the Santa Monica’s Police and Fire Departments.
Section 2.3: The CAO is well trained in the City’s public meeting management protocols which follow the requirements set by City policy as well as applicable State law. The CAO has experience noticing, agenda posting, and conducting in-person and/or virtual meetings and methods to facilitate public participation in decision making.
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 538 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) The CAO will use these standard protocols and best practices to inform how it manages committee affairs and engagement with the public at-large. If awarded the Proposition 47 Grant funding, the CAO will engage in a multi-step outreach and education process to promote awareness of the City’s grant award, the program that will be implemented, how the LAC collaborates with the CAO and the plan for community meetings to report out on program impact and receive public feedback. Additionally, the City’s Office of Communications is a member of the Prop 47 LAC, and will provide communications support and recommendations on public outreach and engagement.
Section 3 Project Description
Section 3.1 The goal of SaMo Bridge is to connect justice-involved adults experiencing homelessness and behavioral health needs to housing and treatment services in order reduce recidivism. The program’s impact directly aligns with and advances the intent of the Prop 47 program.
Goal 1: Divert adults experiencing homelessness and behavioral health needs to care coordination services during pre-arrest, post-arrest and pre-filing stages of engagement with SMPD Officers.
Obj. A: SMPD officers will screen 90% of adults contacted who appear to be experiencing homelessness, substance abuse issues, or behavioral health concerns for program eligibility during pre-arrest, post-arrest and pre-filing stages of contact.
Obj. B: Within 30 days of program referral, 20% of those experiencing homelessness will accept services and enroll in a 90-day case management program.
Obj. C: 20% of enrolled adults will graduate from the 90-day case management program and have their citation(s) dismissed.
Goal 2: Reduce recidivism among adults experiencing homelessness in Santa Monica via receipt of treatment and/or improved housing status.
Obj. A: Within 30 days of program enrollment, 50% of participants will establish temporary housing.
Obj. B: Within 30 days of program enrollment, 50% of participants will attend a behavioral health treatment service.
Obj. C: 75% of participants who graduate the 90-day program will not reoffend within 12 months of graduation.
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 539 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) Section 3.2: The SaMo Bridge target population will be identified according to the following criteria:
Referral Sources: SMPD will the primary referral source to SaMo Bridge. SMPD will screen program candidates to verify (A) a qualifying criminal offense (arrest, charge, or conviction) is either occurring or has occurred in the past, AND either: (B) symptoms of a mental health condition or substance use disorder are observed; OR (C) individual contacted is experiencing homelessness (given likelihood of behavioral health needs).
Risk & Needs Assessment: Exodus staff will conduct a brief needs screening aligned with LA County standard screening protocols in order to:
- Identify clients’ basic and/or urgent transitional services and support needs (e.g., shelter, food, clothing, and transportation; etc.)
- Identify clients with current or historical mental health conditions. - Identify clients who may be eligible for and interested in receiving substance use disorder care.
Section 3.3: The SaMo Bridge respite hub will be a new “place to connect” in city limits, open 24/7 by referral from SMPD. The hub will operate from several leased trailers on City property.
Participants will stay at the hub 24-48 hours as their Exodus Care Manager finds temporary housing and treatment services. SaMo Bridge Care Coordination will last 90-days minimum to qualify for citation dismissal by the City Attorney’s Office. If a participant qualifies for SaMo Bridge services based on justice-system involvement with a different Los Angeles-based jurisdiction, the CAO will collaborate with that jurisdiction.
Exodus staff roles for the SaMo Bridge program include:
- Care Managers, who conduct outreach in the community, meet participants at SaMo Bridge and provide ongoing case management (described below)
- Community Navigators, who support the 24/7 operations of the SaMo Bridge respite hub, making it feasible for SMPD Officers to make round-the-clock diversion referrals.
The participant experience upon arrival at the SaMo Bridge respite hub will include:
- Prioritizing basic needs, e.g., food, showers, clothing, and a place to sit or lie down. - Completing the initial needs screening; if enrolled, designing a 90-day care plan to address mental health, substance use and housing needs.
- Ongoing case management is provided in the community to help the client achieve 90-day care plan goals. To secure housing and treatment, care plans will focus on public benefits enrollment - General Relief, MediCal, CalFresh, Social Security income (when eligible) accessing health services and medication; transportation to court, doctors, and other necessary appointments; getting government issued identification from the DMV and Social Security Administration to ensure participants are document-ready for permanent housing. - Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office will facilitate citation dismissal via coordination with Exodus Care Managers after SaMo Bridge clients graduate the 90-day program.
The projected number of people to be served, meaning they enroll in the SaMo Bridge 90-day care management program, is 260 people annually, 780 by the end of the grant period. The
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 540 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) CAO is providing this conservative estimate of program participation based on historical SMPD referral data and participant enrollment in the LA County Alternatives to Incarceration pre-filing diversion program. There is potential for SMPD to refer a much larger cohort of people to SaMo Bridge because it will offer expanded participant eligibility criteria and can receive SMPD referrals at pre-arrest, post-arrest and pre-filing stages of contact compared to ATI, which limits referrals to those booked into the Santa Monica jail. CAO anticipates SMPD may be able to screen and refer double the number of people to SaMo Bridge, compared to the referral rates to the ATI program, which would result in higher participant enrollment numbers than the 780 estimate. To monitor for racial or ethnic disparities in program participation, Exodus and CAO staff will monitor available data from SMPD for insights on demographics among general calls for service, program referrals and enrollment.
Exodus and the CAO are committed to fostering collaboration with community partners to ensure participant success in the program. Exodus staff have established relationships with LA County medical clinics, Mental Health Urgent Care Centers and outpatient programs, and substance use disorder outpatient services. Additionally, City-funded agencies offering temporary housing and SUD treatment will partner with Exodus via a formalized collaboration on the SaMo Bridge program.
Section 3.4: SaMo Bridge advances the principles of Restorative Justice in its focus on diverting people to services as a preventive intervention to decrease antisocial behavior and support a healthier community.
The SaMo Bridge service delivery approach is guided by Exodus’ understanding that many justice-involved individuals with mental illness, substance use, and medical comorbidities do not successfully transition from incarceration to services in the community. To achieve positive results, Exodus staff utilize evidenced-based practices such as Housing First; Low Barrier Practices; Harm Reduction; Overdose Prevention and Intervention; Trauma Informed Care, including Secondary Trauma; Mental Health First Aid; Ethics and Boundaries; Non-Violent Crisis Intervention; Stages of Change/Motivational Interviewing; Risk, Needs, Responsivity Model; and Equal Access Gender Identity.
All Exodus staff are client focused and culturally and linguistically competent when providing services to this diverse and complex population. The organization’s educational and training practices are modeled after the National Standards for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services. Along with using the clients preferred language, staff recognizes cultural inclusion, including individuals in recovery; LGBTQ+ community; veterans; persons living with disabilities; Transition Age Youth, Older Adults; immigrants and refugees. In addition to language and cultural, the SaMo Bridge respite hub includes accessible design.
Section 3.5: The CAO is partnering with Exodus to operate SaMo Bridge given the organization’s existing work with the CAO and vast experience in serving the Target Population.
The Exodus model, practices and system of care is designed to promote a full array of in-person services to the Target Population based on their needs and interests.
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 541 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) Exodus’ employment and hiring practices focus on social equity and workforce diversity and target candidates with lived experience and/or justice-involved qualifications. Exodus actively recruits and hires individuals who live in the community in order to support local enterprise and provide expanded opportunities to Santa Monica residents.
Section 3.6: The CAO will minimize start-up time so that SaMo Bridge services can be delivered as soon as possible upon award. This is in large part the result of City Council’s May 2024 Proclamation Declaring a Local Emergency on Homelessness. The proclamation enables the City to expedite processes and approvals concerning development, deployment of resources, employment, contracting, grant approvals, receipt, budgeting, and community activities.
Additionally, Exodus operates similar programs and will be able to draw on that expertise to quickly ramp up SaMo Bridge.
Section 3.7: The SaMo Bridge program advances the spirit and intent behind the Proposition 47 statute and Guiding Principles of the grant program as follows:
Expands and improves the City’s efforts to divert people away from criminal justice involvement by creating a new 24/7 “place to connect” that serves as an always-open, low barrier pathway to services via law enforcement diversion.
Fosters community engagement, partnerships and collaborations through the Local Advisory Committee; via contracting with Exodus; by supporting collaboration between SaMo Bridge and City-funded social providers and with regional partners who can serve the Target Population.
Encourages culturally competent services and approaches that foster the principles of restorative justice and trauma-informed care. Exodus provides high-quality, empathetic, and person-centered service, utilizing peer staff with lived experience of justice involvement throughout the program.
Serves the Proposition 47 target population by connecting them to treatment and housing services to reduce recidivism.
Section 3.8. Proposition 47 grant funding will support all SaMo Bridge expenditures during the three-year grant period. Due to a number of economic constraints the City is currently managing, the City does not have unallocated reserves to source as program leverage.
The CAO will ensure that the BSCC-funded SaMo Bridge program will integrate seamlessly with the City’s existing investments in criminal justice diversion, addressing homelessness and connecting people to treatment. City-funded programs include multidisciplinary outreach teams, shelter services, SUD treatment, physical and behavioral health, supportive care coordination services, eviction prevention, below market housing and other upstream interventions that in 2022 totaled over $15.3 million from the City Budget. These programs are delivered through a highly coordinated collaborative of contracted social service organizations in partnership with City Departments.
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 542 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) Section 4 - Project Evaluation and Monitoring
Section 4.1: The Santa Monica City Attorney’s Office will leverage the City’s Emergency Proclamation on Homelessness to expedite contracting with a consulting team to evaluate the program. The City has an existing contract with Moss Adams and has done prior evaluations and strategy development with RDA Consulting and RAND Corporation, which are two firms already working on Local Evaluation Plans for other Proposition 47 Grant Program recipients.
The CAO and Exodus will collaborate and employ a systematic approach for improving the program’s performance by monitoring existing processes. Based upon observation and data collection, stakeholders involved in the review of performance activity, including the Local Advisory Committee, will make decisions on what improvements are indicated. Examples of monitoring activities include tracking: the number of SMPD staff trained on diversion options (start-up); the number of SMPD referrals to the program (implementation); the number of clients accessing services at the respite hub; the number of clients enrolled and successfully completing 90-day service plans (service delivery); collecting client satisfaction surveys and collaborative partner surveys (service delivery).
Quality Assurance and Quality Control activities ensure that the program meets its responsibilities to clients, staff, and the community. The method for conducting QA/QI measures will consist of planned, systematic and ongoing processes to thoroughly and consistently maintain and improve the overall quality of care and services provided. Data will be reviewed, quarterly, throughout the year for consistent quality of care and to identify patterns and/or trends. Goals and Indicators will be routinely established to monitor specific criteria with each aspect of care. The results of data collection and recommendations for actions will inform program adaptations or realignment.
Section 4.2: CAO staff have identified a number of process and outcomes measures to quantify SaMo Bridge program stakeholder activities, service delivery, program utilization, participant changes in housing status and behavioral health treatment access, and recidivism.
Recidivism by program participants will be tracked by an SMPD Crime Analyst who manages statistics pertaining to individuals offending more than once within the City of Santa Monica.
Recidivism will be monitored by utilizing a system-generated Master Name ID that is created by factors such as the name(s) and date of birth of the candidate. Hereby providing a unique identifier per person. This identifier is then used in a report that pulls data for that named candidate with the cases attached to the Master Name ID.
Process and outcome measures are identified as follows for each project goal:
Goal #1: Divert adults experiencing homelessness and behavioral health needs to care coordination services during pre-arrest, post-arrest and pre-filing stages of engagement with SMPD Officers.
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 543 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) #1 Process Measures: # SMPD Officers trained on SaMo Bridge diversion eligibility; # of SMPD screenings, # SMPD pre-arrest, #post-arrest and pre-filing referrals, # confirmed qualified for services.
#1 Outcome Measures: # of people assessed, # people enrolled in 90-day program, # people graduated 90-day program, # SMPD repeat contacts with Target Population.
Goal 2: Reduce recidivism among adults experiencing homelessness in Santa Monica via receipt of treatment and/or improved housing status.
#2 Process Measures: # participants placed in temporary housing in 30 days, 60 days, 90 days; # participants document-ready for permanent housing in 90 days; # participants on permanent housing waitlists in 6 months; # participants placed in permanent housing in 12 months; # participants enrolled in behavioral health treatment services. #2 Outcome Measures: # participants in housing 12 months after placement, # participants in behavioral health treatment services at 90 days, # participants graduated from 90-day program; # enrolled participants re-arrested/booked in SMPD jail, # program graduates rearrested/booked in SMPD jail at 6mo, 12mo and up to 36 months depending on date of program enrollment.
Section 4.3: To assess the implementation and impact of SaMo Bridge, the CAO’s evaluation team will conduct a mixed-method process and outcome evaluation. The CAO’s evaluation team will gather qualitative and quantitative data from a range of program partners and stakeholders. Quantitative data findings, overlayed with qualitative data, will be analyzed and presented in the program evaluation reports to assess the program’s impact over the 36-month grant period.
The outcome evaluation will examine the effect of program participation on anticipated outcomes, including increased diversion, reduced recidivism, and improved access and use of behavioral health and housing services.
The CAO and SMPD will be the primary source for baseline and outcome data on diversion and recidivism. SMPD is highly invested in the success of the program and is already prepared to furnish any needed reports on law enforcement contact with the Target Population. Exodus and affiliated partners will provide data about participant access and use of stabilizing services, 90- day care coordination enrollment, housing placement, participation in SUD and mental health treatment and graduations. MOUs for data sharing across social service partners will be executed as needed.
5.I.b
Packet Pg. 544 Attachment: B-Combined Program Proposal_Prop 47 (6715 : Acceptance of Proposition 47 Grant) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.A
1 of 2
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Amending the Council Rules of Procedure Regarding Councilmember Discussion Items (16 items) - CONTINUED FROM 10/08/24
Recommended Action
Staff recommends the City Council:
1. Adopt the resolution amending the Council Rules of Procedure regarding Councilmember Discussion Items (16 items); 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.
Executive Summary
Pursuant to direction given at the Council meeting on September 10, 2024, the amended rules would require proposed Councilmember discussion items (16 items) to be reviewed by the City Attorney and City Manager before being placed on the Agenda.
The City Attorney would review to ensure the item requests a policy direction or action that is lawful, and the City Manager would review to ensure the policy direction or action is feasible, or reasonably possible given available resources. The City Attorney and City Manager may suggest changes to the item to bring it into compliance. The amended rules would also state that once a particular 16 item is heard and considered, the same or substantially similar item may not be placed on a subsequent Agenda for reconsideration for 12 months, unless sponsored by one of the Councilmembers on the prevailing side previously.
8.A
Packet Pg. 545
2 of 2
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action.
Prepared By: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Reso-Council Rules
B. Written Comments
8.A
Packet Pg. 546
1 City Council Meeting: October 8, 2024 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NO. ____________(CCS)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA
MONICA AMENDING THE RULES OF ORDER AND PROCEDURE FOR
THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND REPEALING
RESOLUTION NUMBER 11585 (CCS)
WHEREAS, the Council desires to clarify and amend some procedural Rules for the preparation for and conduct of Council meetings.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council Rules of Order and Procedure are hereby amended to read as follows:
RULES FOR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
RULE 1. RULES OF ORDER.
These Rules of Order shall govern the conduct of all City Council meetings, unless superseded or prohibited by federal, state, or local law. To the extent a matter is not covered by these Rules, the procedures of the City Council shall be governed by the latest revised edition of Robert’s Rules of Order. Robert’s Rules shall be subordinate to all applicable laws and these rules to the extent they are inconsistent. These rules also apply to the Council sitting as or in combination with another body, such as the Housing Authority Board, Successor Agency, or Financing Authority, and to all boards and commissions.
The City Council rules, or any one thereof, may be suspended by a vote of twothirds of the Councilmembers present.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 547 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 2 RULE 2. TIME AND PLACE FOR HOLDING REGULAR MEETINGS.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 611 of the Santa Monica City Charter, the City Council establishes the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month as the days for holding regular meetings of the City Council. The Council may amend the meeting calendar to add or delete a regular Council meeting. The regular meeting shall commence at 5:30 p.m. It is the intention of the City Council that all other Agenda public action items shall commence no earlier than 7:00 p.m., following the Closed Session, unless noticed otherwise on the Agenda. If any such Tuesday falls on any day designated by law by the City Council as a day for public feast, Thanksgiving or holiday, such regular meeting shall be held on the date of the regular meeting next following said Tuesday at the hour heretofore fixed or at such other day as may be fixed. The City Council Chamber in City Hall is established as the place for holding the City Council’s regular meetings.
RULE 3. QUORUM AND ACTION
In accordance with Section 614 of the Santa Monica City Charter, 4 Councilmembers shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Except as otherwise provided in the Charter, or other law or these rules, action shall be taken by a majority vote of the entire membership of the City Council, that is, at least 4 votes, unless a higher number is required. However, in the case of a quasi-judicial hearing, if only 4 Councilmembers are participating, the applicant or appellant shall be entitled to request and receive a continuance of the hearing, until such time as 5 Councilmembers are participating.
Whenever any Councilmember questions the presence of a quorum, the presiding officer shall forthwith direct the City Clerk to call the roll, each Councilmember shall respond when that Councilmember’s name is called, and the Clerk shall announce the
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 548 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 3 result. Such proceedings shall be without debate, but no Councilmember who is speaking may be interrupted by a question as to the presence of a quorum.
The City Council may also establish standing committees and subcommittees of its members to address designated areas of City business on the Council's behalf and may establish ad hoc committees to formulate reports or recommendations on particular matters. Ad hoc committees must provide quarterly updates to Council, which shall be included on the Agenda by the City Clerk.
RULE 4. MEETINGS TO BE PUBLIC - EXCEPTION FOR CLOSED SESSIONS.
As required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (the “Brown Act”), California Government Code Sections 54950, et seq., all regular, adjourned regular, and special meetings of the City Council shall be public, provided, however, the City Council may meet in a Closed Session from which the public is excluded, for those purposes authorized by the Brown Act.
No Councilmember, employee of the City, or any other person present during a Closed Session of the City Council shall disclose to any person the content or substance of any communication that took place during the Closed Session unless the City Council specifically authorizes the disclosure by majority vote or unless the disclosure is required by law.
Any required public announcements following closed session shall be made by the City Attorney immediately upon the Council convening in open session following closed session. Council direction to provide authority to settle a claim or lawsuit shall not be reported out until the settlement is signed and final.
RULE 5. AGENDA.
The City Clerk shall prepare the Agenda under the direction of the City Manager
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 549 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 4 as follows:
(a) The City Manager shall consult with the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore in the preparation of the Agenda.
(b) Other than the City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney (and/or their designees), Mayor, and Mayor Pro Tem, no person shall attend an Agenda preparation meeting without invitation of the City Manager.
(c) The Agenda and all available supporting documents shall be delivered to Councilmembers on the Tuesday preceding the Tuesday City Council meeting to which it pertains or as soon thereafter as possible.
(d) The City Manager may direct that any matter within the City Council’s jurisdiction be placed upon the Agenda. The City Attorney may place items on the Agenda affecting the City Attorney’s Office or litigation closed session. Any Councilmember requested substantive or discussion open session Agenda item shall be initiated as a “16 item” first to obtain Council direction (see Rule 6(x)). Councilmembers shall submit Councilmember Agenda items to the City Manager as follows: (1) for regular meetings, by noon on Monday, 8 days prior to the Council meeting, to ensure matters will be agendized for the following Tuesday; and (2) for special meetings, by 3:00 p.m. on the day at least 2 days before the day of the special meeting. Subject to Brown Act requirements, items submitted after 3:00 p.m. on the specified day will be agendized for the next regular meeting, unless the Councilmember has identified an urgency requiring that the matter be added to the current Agenda. The City Manager shall be responsible for submission of real estate, labor (except for City Attorney and City Clerk evaluations), security, and emergency closed sessions; the City Attorney shall be responsible for submission of litigation closed session items, including amicus participation items. The
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 550 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 5 City Attorney shall verify whether the requested closed session is a proper topic for closed session pursuant to the Brown Act before the item is published on an Agenda, and if not, it shall be omitted.
Proposed 16 Items shall be reviewed by the City Attorney and then the language modified, if necessary, to ensure the Item requests a policy direction or action that is lawful before being placed on the Agenda, and by the City Manager, and then the language modified, if necessary, to ensure the Item requests policy direction or action that is feasible, that is, reasonably possible given available resources. In the event there are concerns that the request is potentially unlawful or infeasible, then the City Attorney and City Manager shall work with the sponsor(s) to frame the request so that it is lawful and feasible, and still as closely as possible reflects the desired outcome of the sponsor(s).
Once a particular 16 Item is heard and considered, the same or substantially similar item may not be placed on a subsequent Agenda for reconsideration for 12 months, unless it is sponsored by one of the Councilmembers on the prevailing side previously. (See also Rule 12(g) – Motion to Reconsider.) Councilmember items placed on the Agenda may be removed or amended by the sponsor(s), with the City Manager’s approval, no later than noon on Thursday, 5 days prior to the Council meeting. Staff sponsored items may be removed from the Agenda (or postponed) by the City Manager at any time prior to the start of the applicable Council meeting and shall be announced by the City Clerk following Roll Call. The City Attorney may also remove items the City Attorney placed on the Agenda at any time prior to the start of the applicable Council meeting and shall be announced by the City Clerk following Roll Call.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 551 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 6 Councilmember items may only be combined with other items on the Agenda by a vote of the Council. A Councilmember who wishes to combine the Councilmember’s item with another item on the Agenda may direct that the following language be included with the Agenda item: “This item may be considered with Item __.” The City Manager may combine staff items on the Agenda to ensure the public’s business is handled efficiently and conveniently.
Proposed alternatives, other than minor variations, to items or portions of items on the Agenda shall be submitted in writing to the City Clerk for distribution no later than noon the day prior to the Council meeting; any alternatives submitted after the deadline may be considered by the Council only by unanimous consent, provided they are Brown Act compliant; otherwise, the amendment along with the main item may be considered at a subsequent meeting pursuant to an approved motion to continue. (e) The City Clerk shall post the Agenda as required by the Brown Act. Copies of the Agenda shall be posted on the windows of the Santa Monica Institute room, located at 330 Olympic Drive, Santa Monica, California 90401. The City Clerk shall maintain on file in the Clerk’s office declarations establishing compliance with the posting requirements.
(f) No action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the posted Agenda unless the item is added to the Agenda in the manner required by the Brown Act. (g) Matters directed to be placed on the Agenda at the direction of Councilmembers shall be listed on the Agenda in the order of receipt by the City Clerk. (h) Written requests to the City Council shall be received and opened by the City Clerk and referred to the City Manager or the Manager’s designee and either shall be transmitted to the appropriate board, commission, or staff member, or shall be placed
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 552 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 7 on the Agenda if City Council consideration is deemed appropriate by the Mayor or City Manager. Written requests being agendized shall be scheduled for City Council consideration at the earliest convenient meeting, taking into consideration the length and content of meeting Agendas. Members of the public submitting written requests shall be advised of how their request is being handled. Councilmembers shall receive copies of those written requests that are not agendized. Agendized communications shall be listed on the Agenda in order of receipt. No communication shall be placed on an Agenda if it contains material that:
(1) Is profane.
(2) Is potentially slanderous or libelous.
(3) Advocates or opposes the candidacy of any person or party for any elective office.
(4) Is primarily an advertisement or promotion or has as a substantial purpose the advancement of any cause the major benefit of which is private and not public.
Members of the public submitting written requests to the City Council are encouraged to limit their submissions to one per meeting. (i) All electronic presentation materials intended for use at a City Council meeting, including PowerPoint presentations, videos, audio, electronic images, and electronic portable document formats (PDFs), but excluding any hardcopy document projected by an overhead projector, must be received by the City Clerk no later than noon on the day of a City Council meeting. For clarity, this rule shall not apply to a current member of a board or commission speaking on a matter within the purview of the board or commission on which the member sits.
(j) Any Councilmember or the City Manager may place an item on the Council
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 553 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 8 Agenda to present a report from a board or commission that is within the board or commission’s subject matter authority that was duly approved by the board or commission. The request and the written or electronic materials to be distributed or displayed at the meeting must be provided to the City Clerk, the City Manager’s Office, and the sponsoring Department Staff Liaison by 3 p.m. Friday, 11 days before the Council meeting. When heard, the speaker for the board or commission shall be permitted up to 10 minutes to present, unless the Council by majority vote allows for a different time. The Council may question the speaker concerning the report and presentation. The speaker shall have an opportunity to respond to comments by the City Manager and Staff. The City Manager and Staff may also provide information concerning the presentation. The presentation will not be considered an action item, but the City Manager may combine it with an action item on the Agenda, and the Council may provide direction concerning the matters raised in the presentation. Action may be taken on matters raised in the presentation, subject to Brown Act compliance.
(k) Any Councilmember planning on being absent from a Council meeting or a portion of a meeting may submit written statements on a topic on the Agenda to the City Clerk at least by noon the day of the Council meeting. The City Clerk shall publish the written statement prior to the beginning of the meeting, and the City Clerk shall read the statement into the record at the meeting. This procedure shall not apply to quasi-judicial matters, wherein Councilmembers ordinarily shall not communicate about the matter prior to conclusion of a public hearing.
RULE 6. CATEGORIES AND ORDER OF BUSINESS.
The business of the City Council shall be conducted in the order and manner specified below. The order may be changed by a majority vote of those present. The
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 554 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 9 following is the order of business:
(a) Call to Order.
(b) Salute to the Flag.
(c) Roll Call.
(d) Levine Act disclosures.
(e) City Clerk Agenda announcements and Agenda Procedural motions. (f) General Public Input. Allows members of the public to address the City Council on matters not otherwise on the Agenda that are within the City Council’s subject matter jurisdiction. State law prohibits the City Council from taking any action on items not listed on the Agenda. As a result, no formal action may be taken on any matter under this item.
(g) Public Comment for Special Agenda, Closed Session, and Consent Calendar Items Only.
(h) Special Agenda Items. This item includes the City Manager’s Report, proclamations, commendations, introductions of special guests, special meetings, appointments to the City Council and presentations and reports by other non-City public entities or legislative bodies. A Councilmember may place a proclamation or commendation on the agenda by submitting a request to the City Manager or the City Manager’s designee.
(i) Closed Session.
(j) Reports and any Additional Public Actions from Closed Session. (k) Councilmember Travel Announcements.
(l) Mayor’s highlight.
(m) Consent Calendar. The consent calendar shall consist of the approval of
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 555 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 10 minutes of previous meetings and those other items such as contracts and routine resolutions that do not necessitate a separate public hearing and which are determined in the Agenda preparation process to be relatively non-controversial. Ordinances for second reading and adoption may be placed on the consent calendar if all members of the City Council were present when the vote for first reading and introduction took place and this vote was unanimous. The consent calendar shall be considered as one item regardless of the number of matters appearing on it and may be approved by a single vote. The title to the individual consent items need not be read unless a request to do so is made by any Councilmember. Members of the public shall have no more than one opportunity to address the City Council concerning any and all items on the consent calendar. Members of the public shall be heard prior to City Council consideration of the consent calendar. Councilmembers may request to have individual matters removed from the consent calendar so that they may be heard on those matters. All matters remaining on the consent calendar may be approved by a single vote. Any items removed from the consent calendar shall be considered separately in the order of their appearance on the Agenda. Removed items may be heard immediately following the consent calendar or may be heard after the City Council concludes Closed Session or Study Session.
Councilmembers are encouraged to notify the City Manager by noon the day before the meeting that an item may be pulled for discussion or questions to Staff and request a presentation of an item on the Consent Calendar. When the Clerk calls the Consent Calendar, the Clerk shall identify those items that Councilmembers have indicated they wanted to pull (by noon the day before) and which Councilmembers have made the requests. Only those items shall be pulled for discussion, unless a Councilmember makes an additional request following the Clerk’s announcement.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 556 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 11 (n) Public Comment on Remaining Agenda Items. Allows members of the public to have the opportunity to speak on items on the Agenda before or during the City Council’s Consideration of the item, except where a public hearing is required by law. (o) Study Session. During Study Sessions staff will present information regarding a complex matter that will be subject to Council deliberation and decisions in the future. No City Council action will be recommended or taken as part of the Study Session, other than to give direction to prepare and return with Agenda items in the future. (p) Continued Items. This item includes agendized items of a previous City Council meeting not considered at such meeting. The City Council may vote by a majority of its members to have a carry-over item placed on a subsequent Agenda as a continued item. If public comment on a continued item was concluded at the initial meeting, it shall not be repeated.
(q) Administrative Proceedings. This item includes proceedings requiring the City Council to make a quasi-judicial decision concerning an individual application or appeal.
(r) Ordinances.
(1) Second Reading and Adoption. No public comment is permitted on second readings.
(2) Introduction and First Reading.
(s) Staff Administrative Items. This category will include policy matters to be considered by the City Council or at joint meetings of the City Council, Parking Authority, Housing Authority, the Public Financing Authority and/or Redevelopment Successor Agency.
(t) Public Hearings. This item consists of public hearings required by specific
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 557 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 12 provisions of law. Public comment on a Public Hearing item shall be taken at the time the item is heard.
(u) Reports of Boards and Commissions. Boards and commissions that may present reports under this item and pursuant to rule 5(i) include, but are not limited to, all City boards, commissions, and task forces. Reports may also be provided by the Santa Monica Pier Corporation, Downtown Santa Monica, Inc., and Santa Monica Travel and Tourism. Note this subsection provides for the location or timing of these items if placed on the Agenda, not the authority to place items on the Agenda, which is addressed elsewhere in these rules.
(v) Resolutions. A resolution will be considered under this item only if its substance makes extensive public input advisable, or if it should be considered after another item on the Agenda, otherwise the resolution will be considered on the Consent Calendar.
(w) Written Communication. This item allows the City Council to consider issues raised by written submissions from the public.
(x) Councilmember Requests for Discussion (16 items) and Closed Session Items. This category consists of Councilmember requested Agenda items to provide policy direction. Action and direction may occur on these items to the extent specified in the Agenda item. Councilmembers shall submit proposed Agenda items to the City Manager, who shall consult Councilmember sponsors, the City Attorney, City Clerk, and Staff as needed. No Councilmember requested resolutions or ordinances should be developed or drafted until a majority of the Council gives direction to the City Manager and/or the City Attorney. The City Manager will work with the Councilmember to decide if the item will be placed on the Agenda or address them in other ways.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 558 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 13 Resolutions for advocacy would be an exception.
Councilmember requests for real estate and labor closed session items shall be submitted to the City Manager, and for litigation, including amicus participation, to the City Attorney.
The City Manager and City Attorney shall notify one another when Agenda item requests are made by Councilmembers.
With the exception of appointments to boards, commissions, and other bodies, all Councilmember discussion “16 items” on the Agenda shall be considered as one item, similar to the consent calendar, regardless of the number of matters and may be approved by a single vote. The title to the individual items need not be read unless a request to do so is made by any Councilmember. When the 16 items are called, Councilmembers may request to have individual matters removed for separate consideration. All remaining matters may be approved by a single vote. Any items removed shall be considered separately in the order of their appearance on the Agenda.
RULE 7. PREPARATION OF MINUTES.
The City Clerk shall have exclusive responsibility for preparation of the Minutes, and any directions for corrections in the Minutes shall be made only by majority vote of the City Council.
RULE 8. APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
Minutes of a City Council meeting may be approved on the Consent Calendar without reading if the City Clerk has previously furnished each Councilmember with a copy and unless a reading is ordered by a majority vote of the City Council.
RULE 9. PRESIDING OFFICER.
(a) The Mayor shall be the Presiding Officer at all meetings of the City Council.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 559 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 14 In the absence of the Mayor, the Mayor Pro Tempore shall preside. In the absence of both the Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore, the City Clerk shall call the City Council to order and a temporary Presiding Officer shall be elected by the Councilmembers present to serve until the arrival of the Mayor or Mayor Pro Tempore or until adjournment. (b) Selection of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore. As required by Charter section 604, the Mayor shall be selected by the Council. The procedure for selection shall be as follows: Beginning in December 2022, the Council shall select the longest continuously serving Councilmember, whether initially elected or appointed, to serve as Mayor for a 1 year term. Each subsequent December the next longest continuously serving Councilmember shall be selected as Mayor for a 1 year term, then rotating each December to select the Mayor in order of the next longest serving Councilmember. If two or more Councilmembers were elected at the same election, the Councilmember receiving the higher number of votes shall be considered as having served longer for purposes of this provision. If two or more Councilmembers were initially appointed to serve at the same time, then when they each may first become eligible to be selected as Mayor, a coin flip shall decide who shall be considered as having served longer for purposes of this provision. The Mayor Pro Tempore may be selected by simple majority vote without regard to this provision. This provision shall not be subject to a suspension of the Council Rules, and shall be implemented until duly repealed or amended by the Council.
RULE 10. POWERS AND DUTIES OF PRESIDING OFFICER.
(a) Participation. The Presiding Officer may move, second, and debate from the chair, subject only to such limitations of debate as are imposed upon Councilmembers by these rules, and shall not be deprived of any of the rights or privileges of a
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 560 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 15 Councilmember by reason of acting as the Presiding Officer. (b) Duties. The Presiding Officer shall:
(1) preserve order at all meetings of the City Council; (2) state (or cause to be stated) each question coming before the City Council;
(3) announce the decisions of the City Council on all subjects; (4) decide all questions of order subject to the right to appeal rulings on questions of order to the entire City Council in accordance with Rule 12(d) below; and
(5) encourage all persons present at the meeting to conform their conduct to the City's Civility Policy.
RULE 11. SWORN TESTIMONY AND SUBPOENA POWER.
Any Councilmember may request that anyone appearing before the City Council on any matter shall be sworn. On receipt of such a request, all proceedings shall be suspended, and the City Council will immediately vote on whether the individual should be sworn. A majority vote of the Councilmembers present shall determine whether the speaker shall be placed under oath. All oaths will be administered by the City Clerk.
The City Council shall have the power to issue subpoenas as provided in City Charter Section 614.
RULE 12. RULES OF DEBATE.
(a) Getting the Floor. A Councilmember desiring to speak shall gain recognition by the Presiding Officer.
(b) Questions to Staff. Councilmembers desiring to question City staff shall address their questions to the City Manager, the City Attorney, the City Clerk, or
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 561 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 16 designated staff. Members of the City staff, after recognition by the Presiding Officer, shall hold the floor until completion of their remarks or until recognition is withdrawn by the Presiding Officer.
(c) Interruptions. A Councilmember who has the floor shall not be interrupted when speaking unless the Councilmember called to order by the Presiding Officer, a point of order or a personal privilege is raised by another Councilmember, or the speaker chooses to yield to a question by another Councilmember. If a Councilmember is called to order, that Councilmember shall cease speaking until the question of order is determined. Whenever any person is called to order while speaking, such person shall be in possession of the floor after the question of order is decided, and may proceed with the matter under the discussion within the ruling made on the question of order. (d) Points of Order. The Presiding Officer shall determine all points of order subject to the right of any Councilmember to appeal to the City Council. A speaker having the floor may be interrupted, when recognized by the Presiding Officer, to raise a point of order. Questions concerning procedures or other legal issues may be directed to the City Attorney for legal advice. If an appeal is taken, the question shall be: “Shall the decision of the Presiding Officer be overruled?” The Presiding Officer's decision may be overruled by a two-thirds vote of the Councilmembers then present. The City Attorney may also raise a point of order to provide advice to the Council should there be a concern about procedures, due process, or other legal issues.
(e) Point of Personal Privilege. The right of a Councilmember to address the City Council on a question of personal privilege shall be limited to cases in which the Councilmember’s integrity, character, or motives are questioned, or where the safety or welfare of the City Council is concerned. A speaker having the floor may be interrupted,
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 562 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 17 when recognized by the Presiding Officer, to raise a point of personal privilege. (f) Privilege of Final Comment. The Councilmember moving the introduction or adoption of an ordinance, resolution, or motion, shall have the privilege of speaking last on the matter after all other Councilmembers have been given an opportunity to speak.
(g) Motion to Reconsider Legislative Actions. A motion to reconsider any legislative action taken by the City Council may be made only by one of the Councilmembers on the prevailing side and may be seconded by any Councilmember.
Such motion may be made at any time and shall be debatable. A motion by a nonprevailing Councilmember or a request by a member of the public for reconsideration may be made only if one year has passed since the action was taken. (h) Calling for the Question. A question may be called by majority vote of those present. However, neither the moving party nor the party seconding any motion may call for the question, each Councilmember shall be afforded one opportunity to speak on each item before the question is called, and a question may not be called to interrupt or cut off a particular speaker.
(i) Limitation of Debate. Councilmembers shall limit their remarks to the subject under debate. Except for questions raised by another Councilmember to a Councilmember, no Councilmember shall be allowed to speak more than once upon any particular subject until every other Councilmember desiring to do so has spoken. Prior to beginning deliberation, the Council may, by a two-thirds vote of those present, limit the amount of time that each Councilmember may spend stating the Councilmember’s views on a particular Agenda item.
RULE 13. PROTEST AGAINST CITY COUNCIL ACTION.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 563 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 18 Any Councilmember shall have the right to have the reasons for the Councilmember’s opposition to any action of the City Council entered in the Minutes.
Such opposition shall be made in the following manner: “I would like the Minutes to reflect that I opposed this action for the following reasons…” A written submission may be provided to the City Clerk to be included in the record.
RULE 14. DISCLOSURE FOR QUASI JUDICIAL MATTERS.
On quasi-judicial matters, Councilmembers shall verbally disclose off-the-record contacts relating to the item, after the item is called and before City Council consideration of the matter. Disclosure shall include the identity of any individual(s) with whom the Councilmember had contact, and the nature of the contact.
RULE 15. PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
(a) Permitted. Pursuant to the Brown Act, public testimony is permitted on all Agenda items, except ordinances for second reading or as otherwise provided in these rules, and the public shall have an opportunity to comment on any matter that is not on the Agenda but is within the City Council’s jurisdiction. However, members of the public do not have the right to give testimony outside the scope of or unrelated to the Agenda item under consideration. Additionally, members of the public should strive to avoid unduly reiterating their own or others’ testimony.
(b) Registration. Any member of the public wishing to address the City Council regarding any item on the Agenda for public discussion shall register with the City Clerk staff prior to the start of the meeting, if possible. No registrations for public input will be accepted on an item after the input period is closed.
(c) Manner of Addressing the City Council. After being recognized by the Presiding Officer, members of the public addressing the City Council shall go to the
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 564 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 19 podium, state their name and whom they represent, if they represent an organization or other person. Members of the public are encouraged, but not required, to also state their address, neighborhood, or city of residence. All remarks shall be addressed to the City Council as a whole and not to any individual member thereof. After a public hearing has been closed, no member of the public shall address the City Council on the matter under consideration without first securing City Council approval. (d) Written Public Comment. Those wishing to provide public comment are encouraged to submit it in writing via email to be viewed online. For written comments received by noon on the day of the Council meeting, best efforts shall be made to have them posted on the Council’s online Agenda. All written comments shall be made part of the public record.
(e) Time Limits. Except on Written Communication, members of the public shall limit their remarks to 2 minutes per comment section unless the City Council grants additional time by majority vote or the City Council reduces this time limit because of the large number of speakers for public comment on the particular item. The order in which members of the public provide remarks will be determined by the City Clerk, to the extent possible giving priority to K-12 students speaking on their own behalf, those limiting their time to 1 minute on an item, while members of the public using the full 2 minutes will speak afterwards. Persons speaking on another’s written communication and persons submitting late speaker requests, who receive permission to speak shall be limited to 1 minute. On Written Communication, those speaking on another’s item may speak only if the person raising the matter appears and testifies. If the person who raises the item does not appear and testify, the matter shall be received and filed and persons wishing to speak on the matter may give their testimony during Public Input. Members of the public wishing
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 565 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 20 to speak on more than one item shall limit their remarks to a total of 6 minutes per meeting unless the City Council grants additional time by majority vote. A member of the public may allocate time between items in one-minute increments up to 2 minutes. Testimony given as an applicant or appellant does not count toward the 6 minute maximum. A Board or Commission member reporting to the City Council on behalf of a Board or Commission who was duly authorized to speak for the Board or Commission shall be limited to maximum of 5 minutes to speak.
(f) Special Time Limits for Applicants and Appellants. Applicants and appellants on administrative items and public hearings shall limit their remarks to 10 minutes and may reserve some of their time for use for rebuttal at the conclusion of the public hearing. The appellant shall have the opportunity to address the City Council first and last.
(g) Special Time Limits for Special Agenda Items. Public testimony is permitted on the City Manager’s Report and Appointments to the City Council.
Proclamations, commendations, and appearances by special guests are ceremonial items. To ensure adequate time for the Council’s regular business, groups of honorees or guests, who wish to speak, should appoint one or two representatives to speak for them.
(h) Special Assistance for Those Who Cannot Wait to Speak. Members of the public, including those with special needs, who cannot wait to speak on an Agenda item may request assistance from the City Clerk, and a member of the Clerk's office will provide assistance in preparing a written statement of testimony for distribution to the City Council.
(i) Extended Time Limits for Speakers Who Require Interpreter. A member
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 566 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 21 of the public who utilizes an interpreter to provide English language translation shall receive twice the time otherwise allotted under these rules. (j) Donating Time to Another Speaker. Donations of time to other speakers may be made only if both the person donating time and the other speaker are physically present at the Council meeting. Except on Public Input, a member of the public, speaking on their own behalf, may donate 2 minutes per Agenda item to another speaker, speaking on their own behalf, and a speaker may accept one such donation from another per Agenda item. The speaker and the person donating time shall turn in their chits together, notify the Clerk of the donation, and go to the podium together. The speaker shall state both of their names and state that the speaker is speaking for both. Donated time shall not increase an individual speaker’s total time limit of 6 minutes per meeting. Any request received after the start of the hearing shall be considered late and the donor will not be permitted to donate the donor’s time.
(k) Any electronic presentation materials presented as attachments to written public comment submitted by email for viewing online must be submitted in accordance with the time deadline set forth in Section 15(d) above. Electronic presentation materials will not be accepted in connection with public comment being provided by calling in to the Council meeting. For speakers who will be physically present to provide public comment at the Council meeting, all electronic presentation materials intended for use in connection with the public comment, including PowerPoint presentations, videos, audio, electronic images, and electronic portable document formats (PDFs), but excluding any hardcopy document projected by the overhead projector, must be received by the City Clerk no later than noon on the day of a City Council meeting. All such electronic presentation materials must be emailed to the City Clerk’s Office and include the City Council meeting
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 567 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 22 date, Agenda item number, and name of the public speaker who, as noted above, will need to be present at the meeting. See also Rule 5(i).
(l) Requests for Accommodation. Requests for a disability accommodation to provide public testimony at a Council meeting should be submitted in writing to the City Clerk’s office via email at [email protected] or via telephone at (310) 458- 8211 at least 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. Best efforts shall be used to accommodate requests received after the 72 hour deadline. In the case of special meetings, requests should be submitted as early as possible, but no later than noon the day of the Council special meeting.
RULE 16. RULES OF CONDUCT AND SAFETY.
When the City Council is in session, all persons present, whether in person or speaking by phone, must preserve safety and order and should strive to conform their conduct to the City's Civility Policy. Members of the public who are physically present at the Council meeting should sit in the audience seating area, unless addressing the City Council or entering or leaving the Council Chambers, should not block the aisles with personal belongings and should not bring audible equipment into the Council Chambers including cellular telephones or pagers. Members of the public may not, except when testifying on or participating in an Agenda item, enter the well area, which is the open area directly in front of the dais and extending outward from it to a line running between the points on the Clerk's desk and the podium nearest to the audience. Applause, vocally or clapping, is prohibited, except for ceremonial items, or as may be invited by the Presiding Officer.
Any person who disrupts the meeting shall be called to order by the Presiding Officer. Disruption shall include but not be limited to, blocking the audience or camera
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 568 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 23 view of the proceedings. If such conduct continues, the Presiding Officer may request the Sergeant at Arms to remove the person from Council Chambers.
The Chief of Police or such member or members of the Police Department as the Chief may designate, shall be Sergeant At Arms of the City Council and shall carry out all orders given by the Presiding Officer through the City Manager for the purpose of maintaining order at City Council meetings. Any Councilmember may move to require the Presiding Officer to enforce the rules, and the affirmative vote of a majority of the City Council shall require the Presiding Officer to do so.
RULE 17. SEATING ORDER.
After each municipal election, the City Clerk shall determine City Council member seating order by drawing lots, with the exception of the Mayor Pro Tem, who shall be seated next to the Mayor. Changes in seating may be allowed by the Mayor, without requiring a vote, for good cause when those changing seats consent.
RULE 18. ENTITLEMENT TO VOTE AND FAILURE TO VOTE.
Every Councilmember is entitled to vote unless disqualified by reason of a conflict of interest. A Councilmember who abstains from voting consents to the decision made by the voting Councilmembers.
RULE 19. VOTING PROCEDURE.
Any vote of the City Council, including a roll call vote, may be registered by the members answering “Yes” for an affirmative vote or “No” for a negative vote upon the member’s name being called by the City Clerk. Voting order shall be based on seating order with each roll call vote beginning at alternating ends of the dais and the Mayor voting last.
Unless any Councilmember calls for separate votes in advance, any item on the
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 569 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 24 Agenda with related sub-parts shall be treated as one Agenda item and voted on in one motion. If the item and sub-parts receive sufficient votes for approval of some, but not all sub-parts, at the immediate request of any Councilmember, the first vote shall be nullified and Council shall then immediately, without discussion, vote on each item separately.
When the Council is making appointments to any committee, board, commission, or equivalent, the Clerk shall ask for nominations, also reciting nominations received through an application process. If applicable, nominations may include one or more positions, such as chair and vice chair, or equivalent. The Council may split the vote on combined nominations by an approved motion. After all nominations are received, the Clerk shall recite the list of all nominees. The Clerk shall then call the roll, and each member shall identify the individual or individuals for whom they are voting. After all votes are cast, the Clerk shall recite the vote. If no nominee(s) receives a majority vote, then the two nominees receiving the highest number of votes shall then be voted upon in the same manner, until a nominee(s) receives a majority vote. If no nominee(s) receives a majority vote, the Clerk shall call for additional nominations and then repeat the process.
RULE 20. DISQUALIFICATION FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
Any Councilmember who is disqualified from voting on a particular matter by reason of a conflict of interest shall publicly state or have the Presiding Officer state the nature of such disqualification and shall leave the dais prior to Council consideration of the matter. A Councilmember stating or having the Presiding Officer state such disqualification shall not be counted as part of a quorum and shall be considered absent for the purpose of determining the outcome of any vote on such matter.
RULE 21. TYPES OF MOTIONS.
(a) Only Councilmembers, or duly appointed members of boards sitting with the
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 570 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 25 Council, may make Motions. The City Clerk shall record all motions and read them back when requested. Upon request, the City Attorney shall assist in the formation of motions.
A Councilmember must have the floor to make a motion.
(b) Any motion that does not receive a second shall not move forward, and then another motion may be made.
(c) For noticed public hearings and quasi-judicial matters, a main motion shall not be made until public comment on the item is complete. (d) There are three motions that are most common and are usually subject to debate:
(1) The main motion. This motion puts forward a substantive decision, most frequently an Agenda item, for Council consideration. A main motion may include changes to the item as stated on the Agenda or supplemental materials.
Only one main motion may be on the floor at one time.
(2) The motion to amend. This motion seeks to modify the main motion before the Council. A motion to amend cannot be made until there is a main motion on the floor. A motion to substitute a main motion with another motion shall be treated as a motion to amend. Only one motion to amend may be on the floor at one time. All motions to amend shall be resolved prior to voting on the main motion. (3) The procedural motion. This motion is to address a rule of procedure, postpone, or take some other action. Procedural motions take priority over main motions and motions to amend. Only one procedural motion may be on the floor at one time. A “point of order” may be raised at any time, interrupting a speaker when recognized by the Presiding Officer, to make a procedural motion.
Procedural motions are debatable but not subject to public comment.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 571 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 26 (e) The following common procedural motions shall be handled as follows:
(1) Motion to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the Council to immediately adjourn to its next regularly scheduled meeting. It is not subject to debate and requires a majority vote. It is the highest priority motion. (2) Motion to recess. This motion, if passed, requires the Council to immediately recess. The Presiding Officer determines the length of the recess. It is not subject to debate and requires a majority vote.
(3) Motion to fix the time to adjourn. This motion, if passed, requires the Council to adjourn the meeting at a specific time set in the motion. It is not subject to debate and requires a majority vote.
(4) Motion to table. This motion, if passed, requires the discussion of the Agenda item to be halted and the Agenda item placed on hold. The motion can contain a specific time in which the item can come back to Council. If the motion does not contain a specific time for the return of the item, a motion to take the item off the table will have to be taken at a future meeting to bring it back to the Council.
A motion to table or to bring it back to the Council requires a simple majority vote. (5) Motion to continue. This motion, if passed, requires the item to be withdrawn from the Agenda at that time and postponed either indefinitely or to a certain time and/or date, or to a time later in that meeting, as stated in the motion.
A motion to continue is debatable and requires a simple majority vote. (6) “Friendly Amendment.” This is a “request,” rather than a formal motion. The speaker asks whether the maker of the main motion would agree to amend the motion, as suggested. If agreed, and if the member providing the second also agrees, or another second is offered, then the main motion is replaced
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 572 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 27 with the amended motion. If an offer for a “friendly amendment” is rejected, then a formal motion to amend may be made.
RULE 22. CHANGING VOTE.
The vote of a Councilmember may be changed only if the Councilmember makes a timely request to do so immediately following the announcement of the vote by the City Clerk or the Presiding Officer and prior to the time that the next item in the order of business is taken up.
RULE 23. AGENDA MANAGEMENT.
At any time after roll call, the Presiding Officer may call for a motion for Agenda management to reorder or combine Agenda items or to determine when public comment may be taken on one or more items. However, public comment may be taken later, but not earlier, than the time or position shown on the Agenda. Noticed public hearings scheduled for a time certain may be heard later, but not earlier, than the time scheduled.
Such a motion shall require the votes of a majority of the Councilmembers present to pass. If such a motion is passed, the City Clerk shall call Agenda items or comment opportunity in accordance with the Agenda as modified by the motion.
RULE 24. PROCEDURE ON AGENDA ITEMS REQUIRING A MOTION.
The following procedure shall be followed in connection with any Agenda item requiring a motion:
(a) City Clerk reads the title.
(b) Presiding Officer calls for a staff report.
(c) Councilmembers question City staff.
(d) City Council conducts Public hearing.
(e) City Council deliberates.
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 573 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 28 (f) A Councilmember makes a motion, another Councilmember seconds the motion, and the Council debates it, with the maker of the motion having the opportunity to speak last.
(g) The Presiding Officer or City Clerk restates the motion. (h) The City Council votes on the motion.
(i) The Presiding Officer or City Clerk announces result.
RULE 25. PRESENCE OF CITY STAFF AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS.
The City Manager, City Clerk, and City Attorney, or, in their absence, their authorized representatives, shall attend and be present during all City Council meetings and give necessary service and advice.
RULE 26. RECORD OF MEETINGS.
All public meetings of the City Council shall be recorded. The recording shall be made by City TV and retained in accordance with the City’s record retention schedule.
The use of other recording or television equipment is permitted so long as it is not disruptive of the meeting.
RULE 27. USE OF TECHNOLOGY TO COMMUNICATE DURING MEETINGS During City Council meetings, Councilmembers shall not use electronic communications of any type, including texts and emails, to communicate among themselves.
RULE 28. ADJOURNMENT
No new item shall be considered after 11:00 p.m. unless consideration is approved by a two-thirds vote of the Councilmembers present.
RULE 29. CHARTER SECTION 615
In accordance with Charter Section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 574 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 29 resolutions shall be by reading of title only unless a Councilmember present at the meeting objects.
RULE 30. INTERPRETATION AND MODIFICATION OF THESE RULES.
These rules shall be interpreted liberally to provide for the optimum in the free interchange of information and public debate without an unnecessary waste of time or duplication of effort. These rules may be amended by resolution.
RULE 31. FAILURE TO OBSERVE RULES OF ORDER.
These rules of order and procedures govern the conduct of City Council meetings.
These rules are intended to expedite the transaction of the business of the City Council in an orderly fashion and are deemed to be procedural only. Failure to strictly observe these rules shall not affect the jurisdiction of the City Council or invalidate any action taken at a meeting that otherwise conforms to law.
RULE 32. COUNCIL BRIEFINGS.
The City Manager and/or City Attorney may meet with Councilmembers to provide briefings. Briefings shall be conducted in compliance with the Brown Act. No person shall attend these meetings other than the Councilmembers invited without invitation of the City Manager and/or City Attorney. No Councilmember shall authorize or permit any person who is not a City of Santa Monica employee or duly appointed agent of the City (for example, outside counsel, contractor, or consultant) acting within the scope of that person’s job duties, to represent them as a Councilmember, or represent the Council, or the City, at any meeting, function, or event.
SECTION 2. Resolution Number 11585 (CCS) and all other resolutions adopting, amending, or relating to City Council Rules of Order, are hereby repealed in their entirety.
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 575 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 30 thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney
8.A.a
Packet Pg. 576 Attachment: Reso-Council Rules (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) 1 David Yakobson
From: Peter DiChellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2024 2:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Item 14 - Oppose
EXTERNAL
Oppose. As written, gives far too much power to the unelected City Manager.
Who works for whom here?
Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica 90403
Item 14-A
October 8, 2024
Item 14-A
October 8, 2024
8.A.b
Packet Pg. 577 Attachment: Written Comments (6731 : Council Rules Resolution) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Request by Mayor Phil Brock, Vice-Mayor Lana Negrete, and Councilmember Oscar de la Torre that the City Council endorse Proposition 36 on the November 2024 statewide ballot. Proposition 36 makes several key changes related to punishments for theft and drug crimes. First, it increases punishment for some of these crimes. Second, it creates a new treatmentfocused court process for some drug possession crimes. Third, it requires courts to warn people convicted of selling or providing illegal drugs to others they can be charged with murder if they keep doing so and someone dies. (Attachments include the full text of the ballot measure and an analysis by the Legislative Analyst’s Office-The CA Legislature’s Nonpartisan Fiscal and Policy Advisor) - CONTINUED FROM 10/08/24
Prepared By: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. prop36-text-proposed-laws
B. Prop 36 - LAO Analysis
C. Written Comments
8.B
Packet Pg. 578
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 35 CONTINUED
(c) Statutory References. Unless otherwise stated, all
references contained in this chapter to statutes codified outside of this chapter refer to those statutes as they existed on July 1, 2023.
(d) Effective Date. This chapter shall take effect on the next January 1 following its approval by the voters of
California.
14199.136. Standing to Defend Chapter
Notwithstanding any other law, if the State of California or any of its officers or officials fail to defend the
constitutionality of this chapter, following its approval by the voters, any other state or local government
agency of this state shall have the authority to intervene on behalf of the State of California or the department in a court action challenging the constitutionality of this chapter for the purpose of defending its
constitutionality, whether that action is in state or
federal trial court, on appeal, or on discretionary review by the Supreme Court of California or the Supreme
Court of the United States. The reasonable fees and
costs of defending the action by the other state or local government agency shall be a charge on funds
appropriated to the Department of Justice, which shall
be satisfied promptly.
SEC. 2. Appropriations Limit.
(a) Commencing with the 2025–26 fiscal year,
pursuant to Section 4 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, the electors of the State of California
hereby adopt an increase in the appropriations limit for the State of California equal to the amount of the
revenues generated by the taxes contained in Article 6
(commencing with Section 14199.123) of this act and
Article 7.1 (commencing with Section 14199.80) of
Chapter 7 of Part 3 of the Welfare and Institutions
Code.
(b) The duration of the increase in the State of
California’s appropriations limit adopted pursuant to
this section shall be for the maximum amount of time
permitted under Section 4 of Article XIIIB of the
California Constitution.
35 36
SEC. 3. Conflicting Initiative Measures.
The people of the State of California hereby find and
declare:
(a) If this initiative measure and another initiative
measure or measures that raises or extends a managed
care organization provider tax to fund Medi-Cal
services, benefits, and coverage appear on the same
statewide election ballot, the other initiative measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conflict with this measure. If this initiative measure receives a greater
number of affirmative votes, the provisions of this
measure shall prevail in their entirety, and the
provisions of the other initiative measure or measures
shall be void.
(b) This act continues an existing tax on managed care
organization providers, a type of health care service
plan, that is used for the purpose of increasing
reimbursement rates or payments under the Medi-Cal
126 | Text of Proposed Laws
program. Initiative No. 21-0042 Amendment #1
exempts from the definition of “tax” a levy, charge, or exaction collected from local units of government,
health care providers, or health care service plans that is primarily used by the State of California for the
purposes of increasing reimbursement rates or
payments under the Medi-Cal program. Therefore, no
conflict exists between this act and Initiative
No. 21-0042 Amendment #1.
(c) This act does not alter, apply to, or address the
matters contained in Initiative No. 23-0021
Amendment #1. Therefore, no conflict exists between
this act and Initiative No. 23-0021 Amendment #1.
PROPOSITION 36
This initiative measure is submitted to the people in
accordance with the provisions of Section 8 of Article II of the California Constitution.
This initiative measure amends and adds sections to
the Health and Safety Code and the Penal Code, and
adds a section to the Government Code; therefore,
existing provisions proposed to be deleted are printed
in strikeout type and new provisions proposed to be
added are printed in italic type to indicate that they are new.
PROPOSED LAW
THE HOMELESSNESS, DRUG ADDICTION, AND
THEFT REDUCTION ACT
SECTION 1. Title.
This act shall be known as The Homelessness, Drug
Addiction, and Theft Reduction Act.
SEC. 2. Purposes and Intent.
This measure will reform laws that have dramatically
increased homelessness, drug addiction, and theft
throughout California.
This measure will:
(a) Provide drug and mental health treatment for
people who are addicted to hard drugs, including
fentanyl, cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine.
(b) Add fentanyl to existing laws that prohibit the
possession of hard drugs while armed with a loaded
firearm.
(c) Add fentanyl to existing laws that prohibit the
trafficking of large quantities of hard drugs.
(d) Permit judges to use their discretion to sentence
drug dealers to state prison instead of county jail when they are convicted of trafficking hard drugs in large
quantities or are armed with a firearm while engaging in drug trafficking.
(e) Warn convicted hard drug dealers and
manufacturers that they can be charged with murder if
they continue to traffic in hard drugs and someone dies as a result.
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 579
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
(f) Reinstate penalties for hard drug dealers whose
trafficking kills or seriously injures a drug user.
(g) Increase penalties for people who repeatedly
engage in theft.
(h) Add new laws to address the increasing problem of
“smash and grab” thefts that result in significant losses and damage, or that are committed by multiple thieves
working together.
SEC. 3. Findings and Declarations.
The people of the State of California find and declare as follows:
(a) Reducing Homelessness Through Drug and Mental
Health Treatment
(1) California has reached a tipping point in its
homelessness, drug, mental health, and theft crises.
Our state has the highest rate of homelessness per
capita of any state in the country. And drug overdoses
now kill two to three times the number of people in
California as car accidents.
(2) Since the passage of Proposition 47 in 2014,
homelessness in California has increased by
51 percent, while during the same time period in the
rest of the country, it has declined by 11 percent.
Proposition 47 reduced the legal consequences of both
possession of hard drugs (fentanyl, cocaine, heroin,
methamphetamine, and phencyclidine), and theft. The
result has been massive increases in drug addiction,
mental illness, and property crimes, including retail
theft, committed by addicts to support their addiction.
At the same time, California has seen a dramatic
decrease in mental health and drug treatment for
homeless people due to reduced incentives to
participate in treatment. Our homelessness problem is
directly connected to these unintended consequences
of Proposition 47, which the voters now desire to
correct.
(3) Progressive states, including New Jersey,
Maryland, Illinois, and Michigan, have significantly
stronger hard drug laws than California, and their
homeless rate is 4 to 5 times lower than California’s.
(4) This proposal takes a modest step in the direction
of these states by enacting a new class of crime called a “treatment-mandated felony.” Under this new
“treatment-mandated felony,” prosecutors would have
the discretion to charge a felony for hard drug
possession after two previous drug convictions. If
charged with this “treatment-mandated felony” for a
third or subsequent drug offense, the offender would
be given the option of participating in drug and mental health treatment. If the offender successfully
completes drug and mental health treatment, the
charge would be fully expunged, and the offender
would receive no jail time. If the offender refuses drug and mental health treatment, they would serve jail time for hard drug possession. For a second conviction of
the treatment-mandated felony (the fourth total
conviction for hard drug possession), a judge would
have the option of imposing time in jail or state prison.
Along with hard drug and mental health treatment,
offenders charged with a treatment-mandated felony
would be offered shelter, job training, and other
services designed to break the cycle of addiction and
homelessness.
(b) Cracking Down on Hard Drug Dealers
(1) Fentanyl is the most dangerous drug that our
nation has ever seen. Because it is largely produced
synthetically, fentanyl is typically cheaper than other hard drugs. As a result, drug dealers now regularly
include fentanyl in other drugs, including diet, anxiety, and sleeping pills, cocaine, and heroin. Further,
fentanyl is up to 50 times stronger than heroin.
Therefore, a very tiny amount of fentanyl can prove
deadly. One kilogram (2.2 pounds) of fentanyl provides
enough of the drug to manufacture four to ten million
doses, or enough to kill 500,000 people. Finally,
because such a small amount of fentanyl is necessary
to create addiction, it is easier to smuggle across the border in smaller, yet much more deadly quantities.
(2) This act would authorize greater consequences for
hard drug dealers whose trafficking kills or seriously
injures a person who uses those drugs, and it would
provide a mechanism to warn convicted hard drug
dealers and manufacturers that they can be charged
with murder if they continue to traffic in hard drugs and someone dies as a result.
(3) This act would add nonprescription fentanyl to an
existing list of hard drugs, including heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine, for which it is illegal to possess the drug while armed with a loaded firearm.
(4) This act would also add nonprescription fentanyl to an existing list of hard drugs, including heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine, that authorizes greater
consequences for drug dealers who sell large quantities of hard drugs.
(5) This act also permits judges to sentence drug
dealers who traffic in large quantities of hard drugs or who are armed with a firearm while trafficking in hard
drugs to state prison instead of local county jails. Only our state prisons are equipped to manage security for
hardened drug dealers and to provide them the
rehabilitation services they need to safely reenter
society.
(c) Accountability for Repeat Theft and Smash and
Grab Thefts
(1) Prior to Proposition 47, individuals who repeatedly engaged in theft could be charged with a felony.
Prop. 47 eliminated this repeat offender felony and
instead provided that any theft up to $950 in value is
now a misdemeanor—regardless of how many times
the offender has committed theft. In practice, this
means that an offender who repeatedly steals up to
$950 in value faces virtually no legal consequences.
(2) The result has been an explosion in retail and cargo theft causing stores throughout California to close to
protect employees and customers from criminal activity
that disrupts the efficient delivery of products directly to consumers and creates billions of dollars in
economic losses to our local communities and state.
Text of Proposed Laws | 127
36 8.B.a
Packet Pg. 580 Attachment: prop36-text-proposed-laws (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot)
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
36 This rapid increase in retail and cargo theft has also contributed to rising inflation, as businesses have been forced to raise prices to account for their economic
losses. This retail and cargo theft explosion has collided with the fentanyl epidemic, as hard drug users have
engaged in brazen theft to support their drug habits,
knowing that there will be no consequences for either
their theft or their hard drug use.
(3) Under this act, an offender with two prior
convictions for theft can be charged with a felony,
regardless of the value of the stolen property. Diversion programs will continue to exist, meaning that judges
will retain discretion not to incarcerate an offender
even for more than two theft convictions. But
prosecutors will have the ability to bring felony charges against hardened, repeat offenders who continue to
engage in theft. Judges will have the discretion to
sentence a repeat offender to jail in appropriate cases, or to state prison if an offender is convicted four or
more times of theft.
(4) This act also authorizes judges to exercise their
discretion to impose an enhanced penalty when an
offender steals, damages, or destroys property by
acting together with two or more offenders or by
causing losses of $50,000 or more. By permitting
discretion in these scenarios, judges will be able to
fashion sentences that are appropriate for the crime
committed, including so-called “smash and grabs”
committed by mobs or large groups of people working
together.
(5) The value of property stolen in multiple thefts will be permitted to be added together so that in
appropriate cases an offender may be charged with
felony theft instead of petty theft. This provision
addresses the problem of offenders who commit a
series of thefts in which the property stolen during each theft has a value under the $950 felony theft threshold, in order to insulate themselves from felony charges.
(6) Along with the hard drug provisions in this act,
these theft law changes will stop the vicious cycle of
hard drug users stealing to support their habits without legal consequences for their actions.
SEC. 4. Section 11369 is added to the Health and
Safety Code, to read:
11369. (a) This section shall be known, and may be
cited, as Alexandra’s Law.
(b) The court shall advise a person who is convicted of, or who pleads guilty or no contest to, a violation of
Section 11351, 11351.5, 11352, 11378, 11378.5,
11379, 11379.5, or 11379.6 involving a hard drug, of
the following:
“You are hereby advised that it is extremely dangerous
and deadly to human life to illicitly manufacture,
distribute, sell, furnish, administer, or give away any drugs in any form, including real or counterfeit drugs or pills. You can kill someone by engaging in this conduct.
All drugs and counterfeit pills are dangerous to human
life. These substances alone, or mixed, kill human
beings in very small doses. If you illicitly manufacture, distribute, sell, furnish, administer, or give away any real or counterfeit drugs or pills, and that conduct
results in the death of a human being, you could be
charged with homicide, up to and including the crime of murder, within the meaning of Section 187 of the Penal
Code.”
(c) The advisory statement shall be provided to the
defendant in writing, either on a plea form, if used, as an addendum to a plea form, or at sentencing, and the
fact that the advisory was given shall be specified on
the record and recorded in the abstract of the
conviction.
(d) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), as used in this section, “hard drug” means a substance listed in
Section 11054 or 11055, including a substance
containing fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, cocaine base,
methamphetamine, or phencyclidine, and the analogs
of any of these substances as defined in Sections 11400 and 11401.
(2) As used in this section, “hard drug” does not include cannabis, cannabis products, peyote, lysergic acid
diethylamide (LSD), other psychedelic drugs, including
mescaline and psilocybin (mushrooms), any other
substance listed in subdivisions (d) and (e) of Section 11054, or, with the exception of methamphetamine,
any other substance listed in subdivision (d) of Section 11055.
SEC. 5. Section 11370.1 of the Health and Safety
Code is amended to read:
11370.1. (a) Notwithstanding Section 11350 or
11377 or any other provision of law, every person who
unlawfully possesses any amount of a substance
containing cocaine base, a substance containing
cocaine, a substance containing heroin, a substance
containing methamphetamine, a substance containing
fentanyl, a crystalline substance containing
phencyclidine, a liquid substance containing
phencyclidine, plant material containing phencyclidine, or a hand-rolled cigarette treated with phencyclidine
while armed with a loaded, operable firearm is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years.
(b) Subdivision (a) does not apply to any person lawfully possessing fentanyl, including with a valid prescription. (c) As used in this subdivision (a), “armed with” means having available for immediate offensive or defensive
use.
(b) (d) Any person who is convicted under this section
shall be ineligible for diversion or deferred entry of
judgment under Chapter 2.5 (commencing with
Section 1000) of Title 6 of Part 2 of the Penal Code.
SEC. 6. Section 11370.4 of the Health and Safety
Code is amended to read:
11370.4. (a) (1) A person convicted of a violation of,
or of a conspiracy to violate, Section 11351, 11351.5,
or 11352 with respect to a substance containing
heroin, fentanyl, cocaine base as specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (f) of Section 11054, or cocaine as
128 | Text of Proposed Laws
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 581
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
specified in paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 11055, when the person knew of the substance’s
nature or character as a controlled substance, shall
receive an additional state prison term as follows:
(A) If the substance exceeds one kilogram by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of three
years.
(B) If the substance exceeds four kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of five years. (C) If the substance exceeds 10 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 10 years. (D) If the substance exceeds 20 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 15 years. (E) If the substance exceeds 40 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 20 years. (F) If the substance exceeds 80 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 25 years. (2) The conspiracy enhancements provided for in this
subdivision shall not be imposed unless the trier of fact finds that the defendant conspirator was substantially
involved in the planning, direction, execution, or
financing of the underlying offense.
(b) (1) A person convicted of a violation of, or of
conspiracy to violate, Section 11378, 11378.5, 11379,
or 11379.5 with respect to a substance containing
methamphetamine, amphetamine, phencyclidine
(PCP) and its analogs shall receive an additional state prison term as follows:
(A) If the substance exceeds one kilogram by weight,
or 30 liters by liquid volume, the person shall receive an additional term of three years.
(B) If the substance exceeds four kilograms by weight,
or 100 liters by liquid volume, the person shall receive an additional term of five years.
(C) If the substance exceeds 10 kilograms by weight,
or 200 liters by liquid volume, the person shall receive an additional term of 10 years.
(D) If the substance exceeds 20 kilograms by weight,
or 400 liters by liquid volume, the person shall receive an additional term of 15 years.
(2) In computing the quantities involved in this
subdivision, plant or vegetable material seized shall not be included.
(3) The conspiracy enhancements provided for in this
subdivision shall not be imposed unless the trier of fact finds that the defendant conspirator was substantially
involved in the planning, direction, execution, or
financing of the underlying offense.
(c) (1) A person convicted of a violation of, or of a
conspiracy to violate, Section 11351 or 11352 with
respect to a substance containing fentanyl shall receive an additional state prison term as follows:
(A) If the substance exceeds 28.35 grams (one ounce)
by weight, the person shall receive an additional term of three years.
(B) If the substance exceeds 100 grams by weight, the
person shall receive an additional term of five years.
(C) If the substance exceeds 500 grams by weight, the
person shall receive an additional term of seven years. (D) If the substance exceeds one kilogram by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 10 years. (E) If the substance exceeds four kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 13 years. (F) If the substance exceeds 10 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 16 years. (G) If the substance exceeds 20 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 19 years. (H) If the substance exceeds 40 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 22 years. (I) If the substance exceeds 80 kilograms by weight,
the person shall receive an additional term of 25 years. (2) The conspiracy enhancements provided for in this
subdivision shall not be imposed unless the trier of fact finds that the defendant conspirator was substantially
involved in the planning, direction, execution, or
financing of the underlying offense.
(c) (d) The additional terms provided in this section
shall not be imposed unless the allegation that the
weight of the substance containing heroin, fentanyl,
cocaine base as specified in paragraph (1) of
subdivision (f) of Section 11054, cocaine as specified
in paragraph (6) of subdivision (b) of Section 11055,
methamphetamine, amphetamine, or phencyclidine
(PCP) and its analogs exceeds the amounts provided in
this section is charged in the accusatory pleading and
admitted or found to be true by the trier of fact.
(e) Notwithstanding paragraph (9) of subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code, a defendant convicted
of an underlying violation specified in this section who admits an enhancement pursuant to this section or for
whom an enhancement pursuant to this section is
found true, is punishable by imprisonment in the state
prison and not pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section
1170 of the Penal Code.
(d) (f) The additional terms provided in this section
shall be in addition to any other punishment provided
by law.
(e) (g) Notwithstanding any other law, the court may
strike the additional punishment for the enhancements
provided in this section if the court determines that
there are circumstances in mitigation of the additional punishment and states on the record its reasons for
striking the additional punishment.
36 SEC. 7. Article 8 (commencing with Section 11395)
is added to Chapter 6 of Division 10 of the Health and
Safety Code, to read:
Article 8. Treatment-Mandated Felony
11395. (a) This article shall be known and cited as
the Treatment-Mandated Felony Act.
(b) (1) Notwithstanding any other law, and except as
provided in subdivision (d), a person described in
Text of Proposed Laws | 129
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 582 Attachment: prop36-text-proposed-laws (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot)
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
36 subdivision (c) who possesses a hard drug, unless upon the written prescription of a physician, dentist,
podiatrist, or veterinarian licensed to practice in this state, shall be punished by imprisonment in a county
jail for not more than one year or pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code. A second or
subsequent conviction of this section, is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year
or by imprisonment in the state prison.
(2) A person shall not be sentenced to jail or prison
pursuant to this section unless a court determines that the person is not eligible or suitable for treatment or that any other circumstance described in paragraph (4)
of subdivision (d) applies to that person.
(c) Subdivision (b) applies to a person who has two or
more prior convictions for a felony or misdemeanor
violation of Section 11350, 11351, 11351.5, 11352,
11353, 11353.5, 11353.7, 11370.1, 11377, 11378,
11378.5, 11379, 11379.5, 11379.6, 11380, or 11395,
including a conviction that occurred before the effective date of this section. Prior convictions shall be alleged in the accusatory pleading, and either admitted by the
defendant in open court or found to be true by the trier of fact.
(d) (1) (A) In lieu of a jail or prison sentence, or a grant of probation with jail as a condition of probation, a
defendant charged with a violation of this section may
elect treatment by pleading guilty or no contest to a
violation of this section and admitting the alleged prior convictions, waiving time for sentencing and the
pronouncement of judgment, and agreeing to
participate in, and complete, a detailed treatment
program developed by a drug addiction expert and
approved by the court. A defendant’s plea of guilty or no contest shall not constitute a conviction for any purpose unless judgment is entered pursuant to paragraph (4)
for a violation of this section.
(B) Upon or subsequent to arraignment for a violation
of this section, and at the request or with the consent of the defendant or their attorney, the court shall order a drug addiction expert to conduct a substance abuse
and mental health evaluation of the defendant. The
expert shall submit a report of the evaluation to the
court and parties. The evaluation may be based on an
interview of the defendant or other individuals with
relevant knowledge and review of records the expert
deems appropriate, including medical records, criminal
history, prior treatment history, and records pertaining to the current offense. If the defendant participates in the interview, neither the defendant’s interview nor
evidence derived from the interview may be used
against the defendant at any subsequent trial for the
instant offense except for the purposes of impeachment
should the defendant testify inconsistently. The
evaluation shall detail the defendant’s drug abuse or
mental health issues, if any, so the court and parties
may better determine appropriate handling of the
defendant’s case.
(C) Concurrent with the order for a substance abuse
and mental health evaluation of the defendant, and with the defendant’s consent, the court shall also order that a case worker or other qualified individual determine
whether the defendant is eligible to receive Medi-Cal,
Medicare, or any other relevant benefits for any
programs or evaluations under this section. If the
defendant did not previously consent to an eligibility
determination at arraignment, the court shall order the eligibility determination upon and as a condition of the defendant’s agreement to participate in and complete a
treatment program as described in this subdivision.
(2) A treatment program may include, but is not limited to, drug treatment, mental health treatment, job
training, and any other conditions related to treatment or a successful outcome for the defendant that the
court finds appropriate. The court must hold regular
hearings to review the progress of the defendant. The
court shall make referrals to programs that provide
services at no cost to the participant and have been
deemed by the court, the drug addiction expert, and the parties to be credible and effective. A defendant may
also choose to pay for a program that is approved by the court.
(3) Upon the defendant’s successful completion of the
treatment program as specified in paragraph (2), the
positive recommendation of the treatment program,
and the motion of the defendant, prosecuting attorney,
the court, or the probation department, the court shall dismiss this charge against the defendant and the
provisions of Section 1000.4 of the Penal Code, as it
read on the effective date of this section, shall apply, including the provision that the arrest upon which the
defendant was deferred shall be deemed to have never
occurred. A dismissal based on the successful
completion of treatment shall not count as a conviction for any purpose, including for determining punishment
pursuant to subdivision (b).
(4) If at any time it appears that the defendant is
performing unsatisfactorily in the program, is not
benefiting from treatment, is not amenable to
treatment, has refused treatment, or has been
convicted of a crime that was committed since starting
treatment, the prosecuting attorney, the court on its
own, or the probation department may make a motion
for entry of judgment and sentencing. After notice to the defendant, the court shall hold a hearing to determine
whether judgment should be entered and the defendant
sentenced. Judgment shall be imposed and the
defendant sentenced if the court finds true one or more of the foregoing circumstances. However, except when
the defendant has been found to have been convicted
of a crime that was committed since starting treatment, the court may rerefer the defendant to treatment if the court finds that it is in the interest of justice to do so, that the defendant is currently amenable to treatment,
and if the defendant agrees to participate in, and
complete, a treatment program as described in this
section.
(5) For time spent in residential treatment, a defendant may earn only actual credits pursuant to Section 2900.5 of the Penal Code and shall not earn conduct credits
pursuant to Section 4019 of the Penal Code or any
130 | Text of Proposed Laws
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 583
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
other provision. Time spent in any other type of program or counseling is not eligible for any credits.
(e) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), as used in this section, “hard drug” means a substance listed in
Section 11054 or 11055, including a substance
containing fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, cocaine base,
methamphetamine, or phencyclidine, and the analogs
of any of these substances as defined in Sections 11400 and 11401.
(2) As used in this section, “hard drug” does not include cannabis, cannabis products, peyote, lysergic acid
diethylamide (LSD), other psychedelic drugs, including
mescaline and psilocybin (mushrooms), any other
substance listed in subdivisions (d) and (e) of Section 11054, or, with the exception of methamphetamine,
any other substance listed in subdivision (d) of Section 11055.
(f) Upon an arrest for a violation of this section, the court shall require judicial review prior to release to make an individualized determination of risk to public
safety and likelihood to return to court.
(g) This section shall not be construed to preclude
prosecution or punishment pursuant to any other law.
SEC. 8. Section 490.3 is added to the Penal Code, to
read:
490.3. Notwithstanding any other law, in any case
involving one or more acts of theft or shoplifting,
including, but not limited to, violations of Sections
459.5, 484, 488, and 490.2, the value of property or
merchandise stolen may be aggregated into a single
count or charge, with the sum of the value of all property or merchandise being the values considered in
determining the degree of theft.
SEC. 9. Section 666.1 is added to the Penal Code, to
read:
666.1. (a) (1) Notwithstanding any other law, a
person who has two or more prior convictions for any of the offenses listed in paragraph (2), and who is
convicted of petty theft or shoplifting, is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year
or pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170. A second or subsequent conviction of this section is punishable
by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one
year or by imprisonment in the state prison.
(2) This section applies to the following offenses,
including a conviction that occurred before the effective date of this section:
(A) Petty theft, as described in Section 488 or 490.2.
(B) Grand theft, as described in Sections 487, 487h,
and in Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 484) of
Title 13 of Part 1.
(C) Theft from an elder or dependent adult, as
described in Section 368.
(D) The theft or unauthorized use of a vehicle, as
described in Section 10851 of the Vehicle Code.
(E) Burglary, as described in Section 459.
(F) Carjacking, as described in Section 215.
(G) Robbery, as described in Section 211.
(H) Receiving stolen property, as described in Section
496.
(I) Shoplifting, as described in Section 459.5.
(J) Identity theft and mail theft, as described in Section 530.5.
(b) A person subject to charging under this section or
actually charged with this section may be referred by a prosecuting attorney’s office or by a county probation
department to a theft diversion or deferred entry of
judgment program pursuant to Section 1001.81. lf
appropriate, a person admitted to such a program may
also be referred to a substance abuse treatment
program.
(c) Upon an arrest for a violation of this section, the court shall require judicial review prior to release to make an individualized determination of risk to public
safety and likelihood to return to court.
(d) This section shall not be construed to preclude
prosecution or punishment pursuant to any other law.
SEC. 10. Section 12022 of the Penal Code is
amended to read:
12022. (a) (1) Except as provided in subdivisions (c)
and (d), a person who is armed with a firearm in the
commission of a felony or attempted felony shall be
punished by an additional and consecutive term of
imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section
1170 for one year, unless the arming is an element of
that offense. This additional term shall apply to a
person who is a principal in the commission of a felony or attempted felony if one or more of the principals is armed with a firearm, whether or not the person is
personally armed with a firearm.
(2) Except as provided in subdivision (c), and
notwithstanding subdivision (d), if the firearm is an
assault weapon, as defined in Section 30510 or 30515,
or a machinegun, as defined in Section 16880, or a .50
BMG rifle, as defined in Section 30530, the additional
and consecutive term described in this subdivision
shall be three years imprisonment pursuant to
subdivision (h) of Section 1170 whether or not the
arming is an element of the offense of which the person was convicted. The additional term provided in this
paragraph shall apply to any person who is a principal
in the commission of a felony or attempted felony if one or more of the principals is armed with an assault
weapon, machinegun, or a .50 BMG rifle, whether or
not the person is personally armed with an assault
weapon, machinegun, or a .50 BMG rifle.
36 (b) (1) A person who personally uses a deadly or
dangerous weapon in the commission of a felony or
attempted felony shall be punished by an additional
and consecutive term of imprisonment in the state
prison for one year, unless use of a deadly or dangerous weapon is an element of that offense.
(2) If the person described in paragraph (1) has been
convicted of carjacking or attempted carjacking, the
Text of Proposed Laws | 131
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 584 Attachment: prop36-text-proposed-laws (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot)
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
36 additional term shall be in the state prison for one, two, or three years.
(3) When a person is found to have personally used a
deadly or dangerous weapon in the commission of a
felony or attempted felony as provided in this
subdivision and the weapon is owned by that person,
the court shall order that the weapon be deemed a
nuisance and disposed of in the manner provided in
Sections 18000 and 18005.
(c) (1) Notwithstanding the enhancement set forth in
subdivision (a), a person who is personally armed with a firearm in the commission of a violation or attempted
violation of Section 11351, 11351.5, 11352, 11366.5,
11366.6, 11378, 11378.5, 11379, 11379.5, or
11379.6 of the Health and Safety Code shall be
punished by an additional and consecutive term of
imprisonment in the state prison pursuant to
subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for three, four, or five years.
(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (9) of subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code, a defendant convicted
of an underlying violation specified in this subdivision who admits an enhancement pursuant to this
subdivision or for whom an enhancement pursuant to
this subdivision is found true, is punishable by
imprisonment in the state prison and not pursuant to
subdivision (h) of Section 1170 of the Penal Code.
(d) Notwithstanding the enhancement set forth in
subdivision (a), a person who is not personally armed
with a firearm who, knowing that another principal is
personally armed with a firearm, is a principal in the
commission of an offense or attempted offense
specified in subdivision (c), shall be punished by an
additional and consecutive term of imprisonment
pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 for one,
two, or three years.
(e) For purposes of imposing an enhancement under
Section 1170.1, the enhancements under this section
shall count as a single enhancement.
(f) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
court may strike the additional punishment for the
enhancements provided in subdivision (c) or (d) in an
unusual case where the interests of justice would best
be served, if the court specifies on the record and
enters into the minutes the circumstances indicating
that the interests of justice would best be served by
that disposition.
SEC. 11. Section 12022.6 is added to the Penal
Code, to read:
12022.6. (a) When any person takes, damages, or
destroys any property in the commission or attempted
commission of a felony, or commits a felony violation of Section 496, the court shall impose a term in addition
and consecutive to the punishment prescribed for the
felony or attempted felony of which the defendant has
been convicted, as follows:
(1) If the loss or property value exceeds fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), the court shall impose an additional term of one year.
(2) If the loss or property value exceeds two hundred
thousand dollars ($200,000), the court shall impose an
additional term of two years.
(3) If the loss or property value exceeds one million
dollars ($1,000,000), the court shall impose an
additional term of three years.
(4) If the loss or property value exceeds three million dollars ($3,000,000), the court shall impose an
additional term of four years.
(5) For every additional loss or property value of three million dollars ($3,000,000), the court shall impose a
term of one year in addition to the term specified in
paragraph (4).
(b) In any accusatory pleading involving multiple
charges of taking, damage, or destruction, or multiple
violations of Section 496, the additional terms provided in this section may be imposed if the aggregate losses
to the victims or aggregate property values from all
felonies exceed the amounts specified in this section
and arise from a common scheme or plan. All pleadings
under this section shall remain subject to the rules of joinder and severance stated in Section 954.
(c) The additional terms provided in this section shall not be imposed unless the facts relating to the amounts provided in this section are charged in the accusatory
pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be
true by the trier of fact.
(d) Notwithstanding any other law, the court may
impose an enhancement pursuant to this section and
another section on a single count, including an
enhancement pursuant to Section 12022.65.
SEC. 12. Section 12022.65 is added to the Penal
Code, to read:
12022.65. (a) Any person who acts in concert with
two or more persons to take, attempt to take, damage,
or destroy any property, in the commission or attempted commission of a felony shall be punished by an
additional and consecutive term of imprisonment of
one, two, or three years.
(b) The additional term provided in this section shall
not be imposed unless the existence of the facts
required in subdivision (a) are charged in the accusatory pleading and admitted by the defendant or found to be
true by the trier of fact.
(c) Notwithstanding any other law, the court may
impose an enhancement pursuant to this section and
another section on a single count, including an
enhancement pursuant to Section 12022.6.
SEC. 13. Section 12022.7 of the Penal Code is
amended to read:
12022.7. (a) Any person who personally inflicts great
bodily injury on any person other than an accomplice in the commission of a felony or attempted felony shall be punished by an additional and consecutive term of
imprisonment in the state prison for three years.
(b) Any person who personally inflicts great bodily
injury on any person other than an accomplice in the
132 | Text of Proposed Laws
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 585
TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
commission of a felony or attempted felony which
causes the victim to become comatose due to brain
injury or to suffer paralysis of a permanent nature shall be punished by an additional and consecutive term of
imprisonment in the state prison for five years. As used in this subdivision, “paralysis” means a major or
complete loss of motor function resulting from injury to the nervous system or to a muscular mechanism.
(c) Any person who personally inflicts great bodily
injury on a person who is 70 years of age or older, other than an accomplice, in the commission of a felony or
attempted felony shall be punished by an additional
and consecutive term of imprisonment in the state
prison for five years.
(d) Any person who personally inflicts great bodily
injury on a child under the age of five years in the
commission of a felony or attempted felony shall be
punished by an additional and consecutive term of
imprisonment in the state prison for four, five, or six years.
(e) Any person who personally inflicts great bodily
injury under circumstances involving domestic violence
in the commission of a felony or attempted felony shall be punished by an additional and consecutive term of
imprisonment in the state prison for three, four, or five years. As used in this subdivision, “domestic violence” has the meaning provided in subdivision (b) of Section
13700.
(f) (1) As used in this section, “great bodily injury”
means a significant or substantial physical injury.
(2) As used in this section, a person who sells,
furnishes, administers, or gives away a controlled
substance is deemed to have personally inflicted great
bodily injury when the person to whom the substance
was sold, furnished, administered, or given suffers a
significant or substantial physical injury from using the substance.
(g) This section shall not apply to murder or
manslaughter or a violation of Section 451 or 452.
Subdivisions (a), (b), (c), and (d) shall not apply if
infliction of great bodily injury is an element of the
offense.
(h) The court shall impose the additional terms of
imprisonment under either subdivision (a), (b), (c), or (d), but may not impose more than one of those terms
for the same offense.
SEC. 14. Chapter 36 (commencing with Section
7599.200) is added to Division 7 of Title 1 of the
Government Code, to read:
CHAPTER 36. FUNDING FOR THE HOMELESSNESS,
DRUG ADDICTION, AND THEFT REDUCTION ACT
7599.200. (a) This chapter shall be known as the
Funding for the Homelessness, Drug Addiction, and
Theft Reduction Act.
(b) From moneys disbursed to the Board of State and
Community Corrections pursuant to paragraph (3) of
subdivision (a) of Section 7599.2 and Section 6046.2 of the Penal Code, the Board of State and Community
Corrections may allocate appropriate funds to counties
and local governments for programs specified in Section 11395 of the Health and Safety Code. This provision
shall not preclude funding for this act from any other
source, including, but not limited to, the Local Revenue Fund 2011 established under Section 30025 and other
funds designated for substance abuse and mental
health treatment.
(c) A defendant charged with a treatment-mandated
felony is eligible for any appropriate Medi-Cal or
Medicare programs or services, including, but not
limited to, those described in clauses (iii) to (v),
inclusive, of subparagraph (B) of paragraph (16) of
subdivision (f) of Section 30025, for the defendant’s
programs specified in Section 11395 of the Health and
Safety Code. A county or local government may contract
directly with the State Department of Health Care
Services or any other applicable state agency to provide for the provision or administration of any applicable
Medi-Cal or Medicare treatment programs.
SEC. 15. Amendments.
(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), this act shall not be amended by the Legislature except by a statute
that furthers the purposes, intent, findings, and
declarations of the act and is passed in each house by
rollcall vote entered in the journal, two-thirds of the membership of each house concurring, or by a statute
that becomes effective only when approved by the
voters.
(b) The Legislature may, by majority vote, amend
Section 11369 of the Health and Safety Code only to
expand the list of drugs that qualify as a “hard drug”
and to expand the list of convictions to which it applies, and may, by majority vote, amend Section 11395 of the
Health and Safety Code only to expand the list of drugs that qualify as a “hard drug” and to expand the list of applicable prior convictions, and may, by majority vote, amend Section 666.1 of the Penal Code only to expand
the list of applicable prior convictions.
SEC. 16. Severability.
If any provision of this act, or any part of any provision, or the application of any provision or part to any person or circumstance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, the remaining provisions and
applications of provisions shall not be affected, but
shall remain in full force and effect, and to this end the provisions of this act are severable.
SEC. 17. Conflicting Initiatives.
(a) This act creates a new drug treatment statute and
changes the penalties for career and serial thieves. In the event that this act and another initiative measure or measures relating to the same subject appear on the
same statewide ballot, the provisions of the other
measure or measures shall be deemed to be in conflict
with this measure. In the event this measure receives a greater number of affirmative votes than a measure
deemed to be in conflict with it, the provisions of this measure shall prevail in their entirety, and the
36 Text of Proposed Laws | 133
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 586 Attachment: prop36-text-proposed-laws (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot) TEXT OF PROPOSED LAWS PROPOSITION 36 CONTINUED
36 provisions of the other measure or measures shall be conflicting ballot measure is later held invalid, this null and void. measure shall be self-executing and given full force and effect. (b) If this measure is approved by the voters but superseded by law by any other conflicting measure
approved by the voters at the same election, and the
134 | Text of Proposed Laws
8.B.a
Packet Pg. 587
November 5, 2024 Ballot
PROPOSITION 36
Allows Felony Charges and Increases Sentences for Certain Drug and Theft Crimes. Initiative Statute.
ANALYSIS OF MEASURE
BACKGROUND
Punishment Depends on Seriousness of Crime and Criminal History Punishment for Felonies. A felony is the most serious type of crime. People can be sentenced to county jail or state prison for felonies, depending on the crime and their criminal history. In some cases, people can be supervised in the community by a county probation officer instead of serving some or all of their sentence in jail or prison. This is called county community supervision. The length of a sentence mostly depends on the crime. For example, murder can be punished by 15 years or more in prison. In contrast, selling drugs can be punished by up to five years in jail or prison, depending on the drug. Sentences can also be lengthened due to details of the crime. For example, sentences for selling certain drugs (such as fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, or methamphetamine) can be lengthened based on the amount sold.
Punishment for Misdemeanors. A misdemeanor is a less serious crime. Examples include assault and drug possession. People can be sentenced to county jail, county community supervision, and/or a fine for misdemeanors. Sentences can be up to one year in jail.
Proposition 47 Reduced Punishments for Some Theft and Drug Crimes In 2014, Proposition 47 changed some theft and drug crimes from felonies to misdemeanors.
For example, shoplifting (stealing items worth $950 or less from a store) and drug possession generally became misdemeanors.
PROPOSAL
Proposition 36 makes several key changes related to punishments for theft and drug crimes. First, it increases punishment for some of these crimes. Second, it creates a new treatment-focused court process for some drug possession crimes. Third, it requires courts to warn people convicted of selling or providing illegal drugs to others that they can be charged with murder if they keep doing so and someone dies.
8.B.b
Packet Pg. 588 Attachment: Prop 36 - LAO Analysis (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot) November 5, 2024 Ballot
Increases Punishment for Some Theft and Drug Crimes
Proposition 36 increases punishment for some theft and drug crimes in three ways:
• Turns Some Misdemeanors Into Felonies. For example, currently, theft of items worth $950 or less is generally a misdemeanor. Proposition 36 makes this crime a felony if the person has two or more past convictions for certain theft crimes (such as shoplifting, burglary, or carjacking). The sentence would be up to three years in county jail or state prison. These changes undo some of the punishment reductions in Proposition 47. • Lengthens Some Felony Sentences. For example, Proposition 36 allows felony sentences for theft or damage of property to be lengthened by up to three years if three or more people committed the crime together.
• Requires Some Felonies Be Served in Prison. For example, as discussed above, sentences for selling certain drugs (such as fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, or methamphetamine) can be lengthened based on the amount sold. Currently, these sentences are served in county jail or state prison depending on the person’s criminal history. Proposition 36 generally requires these sentences be served in prison.
Creates New Court Process for Some Drug Possession Crimes Proposition 36 allows people who possess illegal drugs to be charged with a “treatment-mandated felony,” instead of a misdemeanor, in some cases. Specifically, this applies to people who (1) possess certain drugs (such as fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, or methamphetamine) and (2) have two or more past convictions for some drug crimes (such as possessing or selling drugs). These people would generally get treatment, such as mental health or drug treatment. Those who finish treatment would have their charges dismissed. Those who do not finish treatment could serve up to three years in state prison. This change undoes some of the punishment reductions in Proposition 47.
Requires Warning of Possible Murder Charges for Selling or Providing Drugs Proposition 36 requires courts to warn people that they could be charged with murder if they sell or provide illegal drugs that kill someone. This warning would be given to people convicted of selling or providing certain drugs (such as fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine). This could make it more likely for them to be convicted of murder if they later sell or provide illegal drugs to someone who dies.
FISCAL EFFECTS
Proposition 36 would have various fiscal effects on the state and local governments. The size of these effects would depend on uncertain factors, such as what decisions local prosecutors would make.
Increases State Criminal Justice Costs. Proposition 36 would increase state criminal justice costs in two main ways.
• Increase in State Prison Population. It would require some people who now serve their sentences at the county level to serve them in state prison. Also, it lengthens some prison sentences. In total, the prison population could increase by around a few thousand people. (There are about 90,000 people in prison now.)
8.B.b
Packet Pg. 589 Attachment: Prop 36 - LAO Analysis (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot) November 5, 2024 Ballot
• Increase in State Court Workload. This is because felonies usually take more time to resolve than misdemeanors. Also, treatment-mandated felonies would increase court workload.
In total, Proposition 36 would increase state criminal justice costs, likely ranging from several tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars each year (annually). This amount is less than one-half of 1 percent of the state’s total General Fund budget. (The General Fund is the account the state uses to pay for most public services, including education, health care, and prisons.)
Increases Local Criminal Justice Costs. Proposition 36 would increase local criminal justice costs in two main ways.
• Net Increase in County Jail and Community Supervision Population. In some ways, Proposition 36 would reduce the jail and community supervision population. This is because some people would go to state prison instead of the county level. In other ways, it would increase this population. This is because some people would spend more time in county jail or on community supervision. Overall, Proposition 36 likely would increase the county population. This increase could be around a few thousand people. (There are about 250,000 people at the county level now.) • Increase in Local Court-Related Workload. It would also increase workload for local prosecutors and public defenders. This is because felonies usually take more time to resolve than misdemeanors. Also, treatment-mandated felonies would create workload for some county agencies (such as probation or behavioral health departments).
In total, Proposition 36 would increase local criminal justice costs, likely by tens of millions of dollars annually.
Reduces Amount State Must Spend on Certain Services. Proposition 47 created a process in which the estimated state savings from its punishment reductions must be spent on mental health and drug treatment, school truancy and dropout prevention, and victim services. These estimated savings totaled $95 million last year. By undoing parts of Proposition 47, Proposition 36 reduces the state savings from Proposition 47. This would reduce the amount the state must spend on mental health and drug treatment, school truancy and dropout prevention, and victim services. This reduction likely would be in the low tens of millions of dollars annually.
Other Fiscal Impacts. Proposition 36 could have other fiscal effects on the state and local governments. For example, if the increased punishments or mandated treatment reduce crime, some state and local criminal justice costs could be avoided. However, it is unknown if these or other effects would occur.
8.B.b
Packet Pg. 590 Attachment: Prop 36 - LAO Analysis (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot) November 5, 2024 Ballot
YES/NO STATEMENT
A YES vote on this measure means: People convicted of certain drug or theft crimes could receive increased punishment, such as longer prison sentences. In certain cases, people who possess illegal drugs would be required to complete treatment or serve up to three years in prison.
A NO vote on this measure means: Punishment for drug and theft crimes would remain the same.
SUMMARY OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S ESTIMATE OF NET STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENT FISCAL IMPACT
• Increased state criminal justice costs, likely ranging from several tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars annually, primarily due to an increase in the prison population.
• Increased local criminal justice costs, likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually, primarily due to county jail, community supervision, and court-mandated mental health and drug treatment workload.
BALLOT LABEL
Fiscal Impact: State criminal justice costs likely ranging from several tens of millions of dollars to the low hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Local criminal justice costs likely in the tens of millions of dollars annually.
8.B.b
Packet Pg. 591 Attachment: Prop 36 - LAO Analysis (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot) 1 David Yakobson
From: Peter DiChellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2024 3:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Item 16B - Strongly favor
EXTERNAL
Strongly favor supporting Proposition 36, as do the vast majority of voters (per polling data).
It is past time for voters to be heard on the hot mess criminal-friendly politicians have made. The watered-down alternative reforms recently signed into law, which I’m sure some will attempt to defend, were simply a feeble attempt to prevent voters from weighing in.
And what are the costs of rising crime, both the irreparable human costs as well as the financial ones (medical, insurance, property values, business losses, visitor revenue, etc., etc.)??? Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica 90403
Item 16-B
October 8, 2024
Item 16-B
October 8, 2024
8.B.c
Packet Pg. 592 Attachment: Written Comments (6725 : Support Prop 36 on November 2024 Statewide Ballot) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.C
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Request by Councilmember Davis to direct the City Attorney to prepare and return at the next meeting with an ordinance that would prohibit gifts to Councilmembers, using definitions of gifts and exceptions in the California Political Reform Act, and adding an exception for entry and meals when attending events in an official City capacity. - CONTINUED FROM 10/08/24 Prepared By: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Written Comments
8.C
Packet Pg. 593
1 David Yakobson
From: Cynthia Rose <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Christine Parra Cc: David White; [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item 16C Gratuities - support
Attachments: 2024-10 CC item 16C Gratuities.pdf
EXTERNAL
Please find our letter of support attached
Cynthia Rose and Cris Gutierrez
--
Cynthia Rose
Co-Chair
Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance
SaMoSafeStreets.org
I acknowledge with respect and gratitude the Tongva, Kizh, and Chumash Peoples on whose traditional territory I live and work.
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
8.C.a
Packet Pg. 594 Attachment: Written Comments (6726 : Acceptance of Gifts by Councilmembers)
October 8, 2024
RE: Agenda item16C
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
Following up on our support of the August 27th agenda item in reference to accepting gratuities, the Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance would again like to express support of this common sense, ethical and accountable approach to preventing any appearance of bias, conflict of interest – or dare we say personal benefit or corruption – would there be acceptance of gratuities by our public officials. Trust is the primary currency of public service, and it is essential for the community to embrace public trust in our staff or elected officials.
To foster and nourish public trust and constructive collaborative leadership, those in authority must set and adhere to a high standard and be an example to those served, in particular to our children and youth and to those new to public engagement.
We agree that it is appropriate to use the definitions of gifts and exceptions in the California Political Reform Act, adding an exception for entry and meals when attending events in an official City capacity.
A vibrant and inclusive city, a destination for world-wide visitors, leads with ethics. Local community stakeholders, the region, and the world at-large are paying attention to Santa Monica’s reputation whose leadership, progressive values and influence on many fronts must be embodied in the norms, practices and habits of those in positions of authority.
We look forward to unanimous approval of the 16C Gratuities Ordinance.
Sincerely,
Cynthia Rose Cris Gutierrez
Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Street Alliance Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance SaMoSafeStreets.org
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
8.C.a
Packet Pg. 595 Attachment: Written Comments (6726 : Acceptance of Gifts by Councilmembers) 2 David Yakobson
From: Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 10:16 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Phil Brock; Oscar de la Torre; councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Phil Brock and Oscar de la Torre voted to exempt themselves from ethics as councilmembers--again! (10/8/24 item 1 public comment)
EXTERNAL
They voted to exempt themselves from ethics and now they voted with no explanation to delay imposing gift rules on themselves. Sure seems like you guys should scrutinize candidates more closely if ethics is your number one issue! https://santamonicanext.org/2024/09/brock-negrete-parra-and-de-la-torrevote-to-delay-on-passing-rules-prohibiting-council-from-accepting-tips-for-votes/ On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 10:21 AM Jason Mastbaum <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello, Mayor Phil Brock of Santa Monica recently posted on Facebook that he and his slate have secured the Los Angeles Taxpayers Association's endorsement for their city council election bid this year. According to your website, your organization's number one issue is ethical political leadership, so I assume you were not aware that Mayor Brock and Councilmember de la Torre recently voted to exempt themselves from ethics as city councilmembers. https://santamonicanext.org/2024/07/city-councilpunts-on-passing-ethics-rules-for-itself-until-after-election-ponders-possibly-creating-ethics-forfuture-councils Best regards,
Jason
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
8.C.a
Packet Pg. 596 Attachment: Written Comments (6726 : Acceptance of Gifts by Councilmembers) 1 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, October 7, 2024 8:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Christine Parra; Oscar de la Torre; Gleam Davis
Subject: Re: Opposition to Item 16.C., City Council Meeting 20/8/2024 5:30 p.m
EXTERNAL
Ms. Davis’s proposal is nothing more than a pointless political stunt less than a month before the election of four members to the Council. She hopes that Mr. Brock and Mr. De La Torre will oppose her proposal, and that such opposition may be used by other candidates to help defeat them.
State law - the California Political Reform Act
(https://www.fppc.ca.gov/content/dam/fppc/NSDocuments/LegalDiv/The%20Political%20Reform%20Act/2024-pra/2024_Act.pdf) - already covers each and every rule, standard and exception in the proposed Ordinance and is applicable to City Council members. It is enforceable by the California Attorney General, which is beneficial since the proposed Ordinance would be enforced by the City Attorney (SM City Charter 708(g)) who would have an actual and apparent conflict of interest. Ironically, Ms. Davis over her career has violated the Act more than any member by failing to timely file required Statements and proposing to vote on matters in which her husband (and she by virtue of marriage) have a substantial financial interest.
Rather than playing into Ms. Davis’s hands and voting in opposition to the proposal, the Council should table the matter until the first meeting of the City Council following the election.
The Council should censure Ms. Davis for attempting to use the Council’s legislative powers purely for political purposes without any legitimate purpose.
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
Item 16-C
October 8, 2024
8.C.a
Packet Pg. 597 Attachment: Written Comments (6726 : Acceptance of Gifts by Councilmembers) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.D
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Request of Mayor Brock that the City Attorney and City Manager begin the process to amend the Zoning Ordinance to increase the maximum square footage of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) from 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,200 sq. ft, which is allowable pursuant to state law. - CONTINUED FROM 10/08/24 Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
8.D
Packet Pg. 598
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.E
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Request by Councilmember Christine Parra and Vice Mayor Lana Negrete that the City Council consider providing additional support for the 4th Annual Westside Unity Classic Car Show presented by Pico Youth & Family Center (PYFC) that took place on the pier on September 14, 2024 by directing the City Manager to retroactively waive the City’s portion of fees for use of the pier parking lot for PYFC. Waived City fees related to the Westside Unity Classic Car Show include the parking lot buy-out fee in an amount up to $11,880. - CONTINUED FROM 10/08/24
Prepared By: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
8.E
Packet Pg. 599
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.F
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Request of Councilmembers Davis and Zwick that the City Attorney and City Manager review and analyze SB 969, which recently was signed by Governor Newsom, and with due speed take all necessary steps and draft all necessary ordinances and policies that would allow the establishment of an entertainment zone (as that term is defined in SB 969) on the Third Street Promenade in Downtown Santa Monica. - CONTINUED FROM 10/08/24 Prepared By: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
B. Written Comments
8.F
Packet Pg. 600
SENATE BILL NO. 969
ENROLLED AUGUST 29, 2024
PASSED IN SENATE AUGUST 27, 2024
PASSED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 26, 2024
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 22, 2024
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY AUGUST 19, 2024
CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2023–2024 REGULAR SESSION
Introduced by Senator Wiener
(Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Haney, Lee, and Pellerin) January 25, 2024
An act to amend Sections 23039.5, 23357, 23358, 23396, and 25690 of, and to add Sections 25691 and 25692 to, the Business and Professions Code, relating to alcoholic beverages.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 969, Wiener. Alcoholic beverages: entertainment zones: consumption.
The Alcoholic Beverage Control Act contains various provisions regulating the application for, the issuance of, the suspension of, and the conditions imposed upon alcoholic beverage licenses by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Existing law defines “entertainment zone” for purposes of the act as a zone created by ordinance on or after January 1, 2024, in the City and County of San Francisco, that authorizes consumption of one or more types of alcoholic beverages on public streets, sidewalks, or public rights-of-way adjacent to and during a special event permitted or licensed by the department. Existing law authorizes the City and County of San Francisco to establish an entertainment zone, subject to certain requirements, including providing specified information relating to the entertainment zone to the department and establishing a process or procedure by which persons in possession of alcoholic beverages in the entertainment zone may be readily identifiable as being 21 years of age or older.
This bill would, instead, define “entertainment zone” as a zone created by a city, county, or city and county ordinance on or after January 1, 2025, that authorizes consumption of one or more types of alcoholic beverages on public streets, sidewalks, or public rights-of-way. The bill would additionally authorize any city, county, or city and county to establish an entertainment zone, subject to the above-described requirements. Before enacting an ordinance to establish or modify an entertainment zone, the bill would require a city, county, or city and county to notify local law enforcement and request feedback about specific information, including, among others, the entertainment zone’s proposed boundaries and days and hours of operation. The bill would require a city, county, or city and county that establishes an entertainment zone, or its designated subordinate officer or body, to review the operation of the entertainment zone every 2 years following the adoption of the entertainment zone, as specified, and to make any reports produced during the review available to the department upon request.
Existing law authorizes a licensed beer manufacturer, a licensed winegrower, and any on-sale licensee to permit consumers to leave the premises with open containers of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises 9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 1/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 601 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) within an entertainment zone, subject to certain conditions. Existing law specifies that a licensed beer manufacturer, a licensed winegrower, and any on-sale licensee whose privileges are restricted due to operating conditions or other statutory restrictions may be prohibited from exercising entertainment zone privileges that are contrary to their operating conditions. For this purpose, existing law requires any restrictions on the exercise of off-sale privileges to apply to the removal of alcoholic beverages from the licensed premises for consumption in the entertainment zone.
This bill would, instead, prohibit any restrictions on the exercise of off-sale privileges from applying to the removal of open alcoholic beverages from the licensed premises for consumption in the entertainment zone.
This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 23358 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 2177 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2177 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.
Digest Key
Vote: majority Appropriation: no Fiscal Committee: yes Local Program: no Bill Text
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 23039.5 of the Business and Professions Code is amended to read:
23039.5. “Entertainment zone” means a zone created by a city, county, or city and county ordinance on or after January 1, 2025, that authorizes consumption of one or more types of alcoholic beverages on public streets, sidewalks, or public rights-of-way.
SEC. 2. Section 23357 of the Business and Professions Code is amended to read:
23357. (a) A licensed beer manufacturer may, at the licensed premises of production, sell to consumers for consumption off the premises beer that is produced and bottled by, or produced and packaged for, that manufacturer. Licensed beer manufacturers may also exercise any of the following privileges:
(1) Sell that beer to any person holding a license authorizing the sale of beer. (2) Sell that beer to consumers for consumption on the manufacturer’s licensed premises or on premises owned by the manufacturer that are contiguous to the licensed premises and which are operated by and for the manufacturer.
(3) Sell beer and wine, regardless of source, to consumers for consumption at a bona fide public eating place on the manufacturer’s licensed premises or at a bona fide public eating place on premises owned by the manufacturer which are contiguous to the licensed premises and which are operated by and for the manufacturer.
(4) (A) Permit consumers to leave the premises with open containers of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone if all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The premises is located within the entertainment zone. 9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 2/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 602 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) (ii) Consumption of that type of alcoholic beverage is authorized by the ordinance creating the entertainment zone.
(iii) Open alcohol containers only leave the premises during the hours allowed by the ordinance establishing the entertainment zone.
(iv) Patrons with open containers exit the premises directly into an entertainment zone. (v) All alcoholic beverages in the entertainment zone are purchased only at a licensed premises located within the entertainment zone.
(vi) The premises expressly prohibits open containers or closed containers of alcoholic beverages acquired outside their premises.
(vii) Delivery of alcoholic beverages to consumers within the entertainment zone by the licensee or by any third-party delivery service is expressly prohibited unless the delivery is to a residential building or private business that is not a licensee.
(viii) No alcoholic beverages purchased at the licensed premises may leave the premises in an open glass or metal container for consumption in an entertainment zone. (ix) The licensee annually submits their notice of intent to participate in an open container entertainment zone to the department.
(B) This paragraph does not require a licensee to sell any alcoholic beverage for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone.
(C) Licensees whose privileges are restricted due to operating conditions or other statutory restrictions may be prohibited from exercising entertainment zone privileges that are contrary to their operating conditions. For purposes of this paragraph, any restrictions on the exercise of off-sale privileges shall not apply to the removal of open alcoholic beverages from the licensed premises for consumption in the entertainment zone.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, licensed beer manufacturers and holders of out-of-state beer manufacturer’s certificates may be issued and may hold retail package off-sale beer and wine licenses.
Alcoholic beverage products sold at or from the off-sale premises that are not produced and bottled by, or produced and packaged for, the beer manufacturer shall be purchased by the beer manufacturer only from a licensed wholesaler.
(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this division, a licensed beer manufacturer may manufacture cider or perry at the licensed premises of production and may sell cider or perry to any licensee authorized to sell wine.
For purposes of this subdivision, “cider” and “perry” have the meanings provided in Section 4.21(e)(8) of Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations. This subdivision does not alter or amend the classification of cider or perry as wine for any purpose other than that provided by this section. (d) A beer manufacturer may also have upon the licensed premises, or on premises owned by the manufacturer that are contiguous to the licensed premises and are operated by and for the manufacturer all beers and wines, regardless of source, for sale or service only to guests during private events or private functions not open to the general public. Alcoholic beverage products sold at the premises that are not produced and bottled by, or produced and packaged for, the beer manufacturer shall be purchased by the beer manufacturer only from a licensed wholesaler. All alcoholic beverages sold or served shall be produced by a licensee authorized to manufacture the product.
SEC. 3. Section 23358 of the Business and Professions Code is amended to read:
9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 3/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 603 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) 23358. (a) Licensed winegrowers, notwithstanding any other provisions of this division, may also exercise the following privileges:
(1) Sell wine and brandy to any person holding a license authorizing the sale of wine or brandy. (2) Sell wine and brandy to consumers for consumption off the premises where sold. (3) Sell wine to consumers for consumption on the premises. (4) Sell all beers, wines, and brandies, regardless of source, to consumers for consumption on the premises in a bona fide eating place as defined in Section 23038, which is located on the licensed premises or on premises owned by the licensee that are contiguous to the licensed premises and which is operated by and for the licensee. At such a bona fide public eating place, beer, wine, and brandy may be used in the preparation of food and beverages to be consumed on the premises.
(5) (A) Permit consumers to leave the premises with open containers of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone if all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The premises is located within the entertainment zone. (ii) Consumption of that type of alcoholic beverage is authorized by the ordinance creating the entertainment zone.
(iii) Open alcohol containers only leave the premises during the hours allowed by the ordinance establishing the entertainment zone.
(iv) Patrons with open containers exit the premises directly into an entertainment zone. (v) All alcoholic beverages in the entertainment zone are purchased only at a licensed premises located within the entertainment zone.
(vi) The premises expressly prohibits open containers or closed containers of alcoholic beverages acquired outside their premises.
(vii) Delivery of alcoholic beverages to consumers within the entertainment zone by the licensee or by any third-party delivery service is expressly prohibited unless the delivery is to a residential building or private business that is not a licensee.
(viii) No alcoholic beverages purchased at the licensed premises may leave the premises in an open glass or metal container for consumption in an entertainment zone. (ix) The licensee annually submits their notice of intent to participate in an open container entertainment zone to the department.
(B) This paragraph does not require a licensee to sell any alcoholic beverage for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone.
(C) Licensees whose privileges are restricted due to operating conditions or other statutory restrictions may be prohibited from exercising entertainment zone privileges that are contrary to their operating conditions. For purposes of this paragraph, any restrictions on the exercise of off-sale privileges shall not apply to the removal of open alcoholic beverages from the licensed premises for consumption in the entertainment zone.
(6) Produce spirits of wine and blend those spirits of wine into wine produced by the winegrower or sell those spirits of wine to an industrial alcohol dealer or a distilled spirits manufacturer. 9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 4/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 604 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) (b) A winegrower may also have upon the premises all beers, wines, and brandies, regardless of source, for sale or service only to guests during private events or private functions not open to the general public. Alcoholic beverage products sold at the premises that are not produced and bottled by, or produced and packaged for, the winegrower shall be purchased by the winegrower only from a licensed wholesaler. (c) A winegrower shall actually produce on the winegrower’s licensed premises by conversion of grapes, berries, or other fruit, into wine, not less than 50 percent of all wines sold to consumers on the winegrower’s licensed premises and any licensed branch premises.
(d) The department may, if it shall determine for good cause that the granting of any such privilege would be contrary to public welfare or morals, deny the right to exercise any on-sale privilege authorized by this section in either a bona fide eating place the main entrance to which is within 200 feet of a school or church, or on the licensed winery premises, or both.
(e) Nothing in this section or in Section 23390 is intended to alter, diminish, replace, or eliminate the authority of a county, city, or city and county from exercising land use regulatory authority by law to the extent the authority may restrict, but not eliminate, privileges afforded by these sections.
SEC. 3.5. Section 23358 of the Business and Professions Code is amended to read:
23358. (a) Licensed winegrowers, notwithstanding any other provisions of this division, may also exercise the following privileges:
(1) Sell wine and brandy to any person holding a license authorizing the sale of wine or brandy. (2) Sell wine and brandy to consumers for consumption off the premises where sold. (3) Sell wine to consumers for consumption on the premises. (4) Sell all beers, wines, and brandies, regardless of source, to consumers for consumption on the premises in a bona fide eating place as defined in Section 23038, which is located on the licensed premises or on premises owned by the licensee that are contiguous to the licensed premises and which is operated by and for the licensee. At such a bona fide public eating place, beer, wine, and brandy may be used in the preparation of food and beverages to be consumed on the premises.
(5) (A) Permit consumers to leave the premises with open containers of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone if all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) The premises is located within the entertainment zone. (ii) Consumption of that type of alcoholic beverage is authorized by the ordinance creating the entertainment zone.
(iii) Open alcohol containers only leave the premises during the hours allowed by the ordinance establishing the entertainment zone.
(iv) Patrons with open containers exit the premises directly into an entertainment zone. (v) All alcoholic beverages in the entertainment zone are purchased only at a licensed premises located within the entertainment zone.
(vi) The premises expressly prohibits open containers or closed containers of alcoholic beverages acquired outside their premises.
(vii) Delivery of alcoholic beverages to consumers within the entertainment zone by the licensee or by any third-party delivery service is expressly prohibited unless the delivery is to a residential building or private business that is not a licensee.
9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 5/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 605 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) (viii) No alcoholic beverages purchased at the licensed premises may leave the premises in an open glass or metal container for consumption in an entertainment zone. (ix) The licensee annually submits their notice of intent to participate in an open container entertainment zone to the department.
(B) This paragraph does not require a licensee to sell any alcoholic beverage for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone.
(C) Licensees whose privileges are restricted due to operating conditions or other statutory restrictions may be prohibited from exercising entertainment zone privileges that are contrary to their operating conditions. For purposes of this paragraph, any restrictions on the exercise of off-sale privileges shall not apply to the removal of open alcoholic beverages from the licensed premises for consumption in the entertainment zone.
(6) Produce spirits of wine and blend those spirits of wine into wine produced by the winegrower or sell those spirits of wine to an industrial alcohol dealer or any person holding a license authorizing the manufacture or rectification of distilled spirits.
(b) A winegrower may also have upon the premises all beers, wines, and brandies, regardless of source, for sale or service only to guests during private events or private functions not open to the general public. Alcoholic beverage products sold at the premises that are not produced and bottled by, or produced and packaged for, the winegrower shall be purchased by the winegrower only from a licensed wholesaler. (c) A winegrower shall actually produce on the winegrower’s licensed premises by conversion of grapes, berries, or other fruit, into wine, not less than 50 percent of all wines sold to consumers on the winegrower’s licensed premises and any licensed branch premises.
(d) The department may, if it shall determine for good cause that the granting of any such privilege would be contrary to public welfare or morals, deny the right to exercise any on-sale privilege authorized by this section in either a bona fide eating place the main entrance to which is within 200 feet of a school or church, or on the licensed winery premises, or both.
(e) Nothing in this section or in Section 23390 is intended to alter, diminish, replace, or eliminate the authority of a county, city, or city and county from exercising land use regulatory authority by law to the extent the authority may restrict, but not eliminate, privileges afforded by these sections.
SEC. 4. Section 23396 of the Business and Professions Code is amended to read:
23396. (a) Any on-sale license authorizes the sale of the alcoholic beverage specified in the license for consumption on the premises where sold. No alcoholic beverages, other than beers, may be sold or served in any bona fide public eating place for which an on-sale license has been issued unless the premises comply with the requirements prescribed in Section 23038, 23038.1, 23038.2, or 23038.3. (b) (1) In addition to the privilege in subdivision (a), any on-sale license for a premises located in an entertainment zone authorizes the licensee to permit consumers to leave the licensed premises with open containers of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises within the entertainment zone if all of the following conditions are satisfied:
(A) The alcoholic beverage is specified in both the license and the ordinance creating the entertainment zone.
(B) Open alcohol containers only leave the premises during the hours allowed by the ordinance establishing the entertainment zone.
(C) Patrons with open containers exit the licensed premises directly into an entertainment zone. 9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 6/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 606 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) (D) All alcoholic beverages in the entertainment zone are purchased only at a licensed premises located within the entertainment zone.
(E) The premises expressly prohibits open containers or closed containers of alcoholic beverages acquired outside their premises.
(F) Delivery of alcoholic beverages to consumers within the entertainment zone by the licensee or by any third-party delivery service is expressly prohibited unless the delivery is to a residential building or private business that is not a licensee.
(G) No alcoholic beverages purchased at the licensed premises may leave the premises in an open glass or metal container for consumption in an entertainment zone. (H) The licensee annually submits their notice of intent to participate in an open container entertainment zone to the department.
(2) This subdivision does not require a licensee to sell any alcoholic beverage for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone.
(3) Licensees whose privileges are restricted due to operating conditions or other statutory restrictions may be prohibited from exercising entertainment zone privileges that are contrary to their operating conditions. For purposes of this paragraph, any restrictions on the exercise of off-sale privileges shall not apply to the removal of open alcoholic beverages from the licensed premises for consumption in the entertainment zone.
SEC. 5. Section 25690 of the Business and Professions Code is amended to read:
25690. A city, county, or city and county that establishes an entertainment zone shall do both of the following:
(a) Establish a process or procedure by which persons in possession of alcoholic beverages in the entertainment zone may be readily identifiable as being 21 years of age or older. (b) Upon establishing or modifying the entertainment zone, provide all of the following to the department:
(1) A copy of the ordinance establishing or modifying the entertainment zone. (2) Information as may be necessary to identify the boundaries of the entertainment zone. (3) The days and hours of operation of the entertainment zone. (4) The types of alcoholic beverages permitted within the entertainment zone. (5) The approved nonglass and nonmetal containers in which alcoholic beverages may be authorized.
SEC. 6. Section 25691 is added to the Business and Professions Code, to read:
25691. (a) An ordinance establishing or modifying an entertainment zone shall not authorize consumption of alcoholic beverages during the hours in which sales of alcoholic beverages are prohibited under Section 25631. (b) An ordinance establishing or modifying an entertainment zone may only authorize consumption of alcoholic beverages during the hours in which at least one licensee within the boundaries of the entertainment zone is permitted to sell alcoholic beverages for consumption on the premises.
SEC. 7. Section 25692 is added to the Business and Professions Code, to read:
25692. (a) Before enacting an ordinance to establish or modify an entertainment zone, a city, county, or city and county shall notify local law enforcement and request feedback about both of the following:
9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 7/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 607 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) (1) Potential health and safety impacts that might be generated by the entertainment zone and strategies to mitigate those impacts.
(2) The entertainment zone’s proposed boundaries, days and hours of operation, types of alcoholic beverages permitted, and approved nonglass and nonmetal containers. (b) A city, county, or city and county that establishes an entertainment zone, or its designated subordinate officer or body, shall review the operation of the entertainment zone every two years following the adoption of the entertainment zone to ensure that the entertainment zone is being maintained in a manner that protects the health and safety of the general public. This review shall be conducted in consultation with local law enforcement agencies and any reports produced during the review shall be made available to the department upon request.
SEC. 8. Section 3.5 of this bill incorporates amendments to Section 23358 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by both this bill and Assembly Bill 2177. That section of this bill shall only become operative if (1) both bills are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2025, (2) each bill amends Section 23358 of the Business and Professions Code, and (3) this bill is enacted after Assembly Bill 2177, in which case Section 3 of this bill shall not become operative.
9/30/24, 2:49 PM California-2023-SB969-Enrolled
https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB969/id/3019288/California-2023-SB969-Enrolled.html 8/8
8.F.a
Packet Pg. 608 Attachment: California-2023-SB969-Enrolled (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) 1 David Yakobson
From: Cynthia Rose <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 12:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Gleam Davis; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Oscar de la Torre; Phil Brock; Christine Parra Cc: David White; [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item 16F - support
Attachments: 2024-10 CC agenda item 16F entertainment zones.pdf
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Council
Please find our attached letter in support of taking the necessary steps and drafting the necessary ordinances and required policies that would allow the establishment of an entertainment zone (as that term is defined in SB 969) in Santa Monica.
Cynthia Rose and Cris Gutierrez
--
Cynthia Rose
Co-Chair
Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance
SaMoSafeStreets.org
I acknowledge with respect and gratitude the Tongva, Kizh, and Chumash Peoples on whose traditional territory I live and work.
Item 16-F
October 8, 2024
Item 16-F
October 8, 2024
8.F.b
Packet Pg. 609 Attachment: Written Comments (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts)
October 8, 2024
RE: Agenda item 16F Entertainment Zones Support
Dear Mayor and City Council Members:
The Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance supports taking the necessary steps and drafting the necessary ordinances and required policies that would allow the establishment of an entertainment zone (as that term is defined in SB 969) in Santa Monica. We encourage beginning on but not limiting the zone to the Third Street Promenade in Downtown Santa Monica with the potential to expand to other entertainment zones around the city.
This legislation allows Santa Monica to support local business with vibrant, contained entertainment areas.
Additionally we believe crafting a policy to allow for flexible, easy, temporary or pop-up entertainment zones should also be considered to align with this new law and streamline permitting for events like open street celebrations.
These entertainment zones can add to a fun, socially cohesive Santa Monica community while benefiting our local economy.
Sincerely,
Cynthia Rose Cris Gutierrez
Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Street Alliance Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance SaMoSafeStreets.org
Item 16-F
October 8, 2024
Item 16-F
October 8, 2024
8.F.b
Packet Pg. 610 Attachment: Written Comments (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) 1 David Yakobson
From: Peter DiChellis <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, October 4, 2024 3:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Phil Brock; Christine Parra; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Oscar de la Torre
Subject: Item 16F - Requires more study
EXTERNAL
There is too much open alcohol consumption on the Promenade now, primarily by derelicts.
Before legalizing more of it, make sure Police and Promenade businesses are in agreement re: “Permit consumers to leave the premises with open containers of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises within an entertainment zone”
Sincerely,
Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica 90403
Item 16-F
October 8, 2024
Item 16-F
October 8, 2024
8.F.b
Packet Pg. 611 Attachment: Written Comments (6730 : SB 969 Entertainment Districts) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.G
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Annual Appointments to the following Boards and Commissions: - CONTINUED FROM 7/09/24
Board/Commission Number
of Appts
Term End
Date Requirements
Landmarks Commission 1 6/30/2028 Reside in Santa Monica and Licensed Architect.
Prepared By: Xavier Mota, Staff Assistant III
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Applicant List
8.G
Packet Pg. 612
City of Santa Monica
Boards and Commissions Applicants
Landmarks Commission
Name Application Date
Hillbrand, Jack
Payton, Neal
08/16/2024
08/01/2024
TOTAL APPLICANTS: 2
8.G.b
Packet Pg. 613 Attachment: Applicant List (6687 : 8.G. Annual Appointments Cont. (5 mins)) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 8.H
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Clean Beaches & Ocean Parcel Tax Citizens Oversight Committee for a term ending on June 30, 2025. -CONTINUED FROM 10/8/24
Prepared By: Xavier Mota, Staff Assistant III
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. Applicant List
8.H
Packet Pg. 614
City of Santa Monica
Boards and Commissions Applicants
Clean Beaches & Ocean Parcel Tax
Citizens Oversight Committee
Name Application Date
Melohn, Richard
Shadchina, Larissa
09/15/2024
07/08/2024
TOTAL APPLICANTS: 2
8.H.b
Packet Pg. 615 Attachment: Applicant List (6711 : 8.H. Appointment: Clean Beaches Committee (5 mins)) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 22, 2024
Agenda Item: 9.A
1 of 19
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David Martin, Director, Administration
Subject: Appeal of Landmark Commission Decision to Designate the Compass Rose Located North of and Adjacent to Runway 3 at Santa Monica Airport as a City Landmark
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. Deny Appeal 19ENT-0353 appeal of the Landmark Commission’s decision to designate the Compass Rose located north of and adjacent to Runway 3 at Santa Monica Airport as a City Landmark; and;
3. Approve Designation Application 19ENT-0353 to designate the Compass Rose as a City Landmark based on the findings provided in this staff report; and
4. Adopt the Statement of Official Action.
Executive Summary
This appeal asks the City Council to answer one question: Does the painted Compass Rose located north of and adjacent to Runway 3 at the Santa Monica Airport meet one or more of the criteria for designation as a City Landmark? As explained in more detail in this report, when answering this question, the City Council is limited to the jurisdiction of the Landmarks Commission under the Landmarks and Historic District Ordinance, Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.56. This limited jurisdiction does not include current operations of or the future closure of the Santa Monica Airport. Should the City Council determine that the Compass Rose
9.A
Packet Pg. 616
2 of 19
meets one or more of the criteria for designation as a City Landmark, this will not interfere with the City’s obligations to operate the Airport or close it in the future.
On May 30, 2019, Robert Chattel of Chattel Inc. filed an Application to designate the painted Compass Rose located north of and adjacent to Runway 3 at the Santa Monica Municipal Airport as a City Landmark. The Compass Rose is a diagram of a standard circular magnetic compass painted on the ground adjacent to the airport runway.
Magnetic compasses such as that depicted by the Compass Rose were used as an early aviation navigational tool and are a form of air marking common to airports.
On September 9, 2019, the Landmarks Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the feature’s eligibility as a City Landmark. After considering all evidence presented, including oral and written testimony, an historic assessment submitted by the Applicant, and an historic assessment obtained by the City, the Commission found that the Compass Rose met Criterion 1 (“exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City”), set forth in Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.56.100(A), in that the Compass Rose is a symbolic feature representative of the “ Ninety-Nines”, a social and professional organization whose goals were to encourage and support women in aviation and to enhance opportunities for women seeking careers in the male-dominated field of aviation that was established circa November 1929.
On September 19, 2019, Ben Wang filed a timely appeal of the Landmarks Commission’s decision to designate the feature. Per Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.56.180, an appeal of the Landmark Commission’s decision is heard by the Santa Monica City Council as a de novo hearing.
Upon the review of the information available and applicable portions of the Santa Monica Municipal Code, staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Landmarks Commission’s decision to designate the painted Compass Rose at Santa Monica Municipal Airport as a City Landmark.
9.A
Packet Pg. 617
3 of 19
Background
City of Santa Monica Landmark and Historic District Ordinance (SMMC 9.56) Adopted in 1976, the stated purpose of the City’s Landmark and Historic District Ordinance (the “Ordinance”) is:
[T]o promote the public health, safety and general welfare by establishing such procedures and providing such regulations as are deemed necessary to:
A. Protect improvements and areas which represent elements of the City’s cultural, social, economic, political and architectural history.
B. Safeguard the City’s historic, aesthetic and cultural heritage as embodied and reflected in such improvements and areas.
C. Foster civic pride in the beauty and noble accomplishments of the past.
D. Protect and enhance the City’s aesthetic and historic attractions to residents, tourists, visitors and others, thereby serving as a stimulus and support to business and industry.
E. Promote the use of Landmarks, Structures of Merit and Historic Districts for the education, pleasure and welfare of the people of this City. (SMMC § 9.56.020)
The Ordinance further establishes procedures and standards intended to achieve these purposes. Among these procedures, the SMMC grants the Landmarks Commission the power to designate Landmarks and Structures of Merit. The Commission has the option to designate an improvement as a Landmark or Structure of Merit to allow the City to protect and enhance improvements that are found to meet certain criteria to support either designation. Currently, there are 141 designated City Landmarks, 16 designated Structures of Merit, and 5 Historic Districts within the City.
To guide the exercise of discretion by the Landmarks Commission in designating Landmarks and the Council in approving or disapproving the actions of the Landmarks Commission, the Ordinance sets forth six Landmark Designation Criteria:
9.A
Packet Pg. 618
4 of 19
[T]he Landmarks Commission may approve the landmark designation of a structure, improvement, natural feature, or an object if it finds that it meets one or more of the following criteria:
1. It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.
2. It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
3. It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history.
4. It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study.
5. It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect.
6. It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City.
(SMMC § 9.56.100)
In accordance with the Landmarks Ordinance, upon appeal, the City Council reviews the Commission’s designation of a Landmark, as well as any related decisions de novo.
The Council may review and take action on all determinations, interpretations, decisions, judgments or similar actions taken that were in the purview of the Commission, and the Council may approve, in whole or in part, or disapprove the prior determinations and decisions of the Commission.
Historic Context: Santa Monica Airport
The Santa Monica Airport is located at the southeast portion of the City adjacent to the southwestern boundary line of the City of Los Angeles. The airport is owned by the City of Santa Monica and is operated under a division of the City of Santa Monica Public Works Department. The airport consists of 227 acres that includes non-aviation uses
9.A
Packet Pg. 619
5 of 19
such as a City park, commercial office space, art studios, a museum, event venues, parking, and aircraft hangars.
The subject property was previously used as barley fields dating from 1916. As early as 1917, pilots of World War I biplanes began using the site as an informal landing strip. In the spring of 1923, the U.S. Army Air Corps officially converted the barley field airstrip into an operational military airfield and named it Clover Field. In April 1926, through the use of Park Bond revenue, the City of Santa Monica purchased 158 acres of land comprising the Clover Field site (adjacent to Ocean Park Boulevard) for use as a general aviation public-use airport. By 1929, the Douglas Aircraft Company completed the move of its factory to Clover Field, and by 1933, the Santa Monica Airport area was rectangular in plan with a straight 2,800-foot-long asphalt paved runway with an adjacent open airfield space to the immediate south.
Despite the Great Depression of the 1930s, the Douglas plant at the airport continued to grow, employing many local residents and developing the residential neighborhoods around the airfield. The company constructed large factory assembly structures, massive hangars, and modern administrative offices. During World War II, Douglas manufactured, housed, and transported newly built transport planes and bomber aircraft used extensively during the war. During its peak years, Douglas Aircraft employed up to 44,000 employees leading to the City’s transformation from a beach resort town into a blue-collar community. The Douglas Aircraft Company, which continued to flourish through the 1960s, left Santa Monica in 1975. During the 1950s through the 1970s, there was an increase in civilian aviation activity at the airport. In 1984, the City of Santa Monica adopted a new Airport Master Plan, followed by the City executing an airport operational agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that same year.
In addition to the record-breaking events and flights that occurred at the Santa Monica Airport (aka Clover Field) during its formative years, the first National Women’s Air Derby of 1929 (Powder Puff Derby), which started at the Santa Monica Airport became the turning point for women in aviation. This first major transcontinental sanctioned air
9.A
Packet Pg. 620
6 of 19
race for women proved that women pilots were as competent and determined as male pilots, and attracted women pilots locally, nationally, and abroad. By 1929, there were approximately 60 women pilots in the United States, potentially up to 117 worldwide, in which 20 women pilots participated in the event. The success of the air race encouraged pilot Amelia Earhart and others to form an organization of women pilots, which led to the formation of the Ninety-Nines.
Established in November 1929, the Ninety-Nines was a social and professional organization whose goals were to encourage and support women in aviation and to enhance opportunities for women seeking careers in the male-dominated field of aviation. Women pilots faced significant discrimination. They were discouraged from flying and were often negatively compared to their male counterparts. By the early 1930s, the Ninety-Nines were divided into regional sections with each section sponsoring activities furthering women flying and aviation in general. The organization officially incorporated in 1950 and later renamed The Ninety-Nines International Organization of Women Pilots in an effort to include members from around the world. In total, eight geographic sections that were further divided into chapters were established for its members. Today, there are currently 155 chapters of the Ninety-Nines in 44 countries with over 6,000 members, including the Los Angeles chapter based at the Santa Monica Airport. The Ninety-Nines continue to promote the advancement of aviation through education, scholarships, and mutual support while honoring their unique history and sharing a passion for flying.
The subject Compass Rose is not directly associated with The Ninety-Nines in terms of historic personages or with important events in local, state, or national history in which it memorializes. As described below, the Compass Rose was used as an early aviation navigational tool and form of air marking common to airports. Although the first National Women’s Air Derby of 1929 was an important event in local history which began at the Santa Monica Airport and was the first sanctioned air race for women in the world, the Compass Rose itself is commemorative in nature and not directly associated with the event. Physical evidence of a Compass Rose at its original location at the airport dates to approximately 1947. The subject Compass Rose in its current location was painted
9.A
Packet Pg. 621
7 of 19
as a volunteer effort by members of the local chapter of The Ninety-Nines in 1985 and has been repainted since that time. Therefore, any association with historic personages or important events is merely symbolic.
Santa Monica Compass Rose
Before radio navigation was widely available, pilots of small aircraft depended on natural landmarks, roads, or unusual structures visible from the air. Air marking is known as a program of painting or creating markings on the roofs of buildings or on ground areas to identify the location of airfields for pilots. The Compass Rose was multi-functional in that it was a form of air marking to assist pilots in navigating airfields, and it was also used to calibrate on-board aircraft compasses before departure.
It has been postulated that a navigational compass rose existed at the Santa Monica Airport at some unknown location as far back as 1929. It has also been hypothesized that a compass rose was painted on the tarmac at the northeast side of the airport adjacent the east end of runways 21 and 22 from around 1947 to roughly 1987-1988.
Research indicates that the Santa Monica Airport was known to have a functioning compass rose on its grounds adjacent to the airfield during its early years. It is uncertain if or where a compass rose was located on the airfield at the time of the 1929 Powder Puff Derby and in the years following the event. However, it is assumed that a compass would have existed at the airport for use by pilots and the Douglas Aircraft Company to calibrate the on-board flight compasses.
9.A
Packet Pg. 622
8 of 19
The Compass Rose was removed from the airport or hidden from public view during the war period for security reasons. Photo documentation after the war in 1947 show the Compass Rose located at the northeast corner of the airport adjacent to runways 21 and 22. The Compass Rose is also visible in aerial photographs dating from the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. In November 1974, the Los Angeles Chapter of the NinetyNines’ air marking committee obtained approval to re-mark the compass at the Santa Monica Airport and in 1985 painted its first Compass Rose at the airport. The painting/installation was one of several airport improvement projects completed between 1985 and 1989. In June 1989, the Compass Rose was relocated from the northeast portion of the airport to its current location and was last repainted by the LA 99s in 2010.
9.A
Packet Pg. 623
9 of 19
As such, the Compass Rose painting itself, as recently repainted in 2010, is nonoriginal. Additionally, the current location of the Compass Rose is non-original and, therefore, its location does not appear to be historically significant. However, the Compass Rose has importance to Santa Monica in that it symbolizes the important contributions of women in aviation, which is significant to the City’s cultural history. As such, the Compass Rose appears to be eligible under Criterion 1 as described below.
The character-defining features associated with the Compass Rose include its location near or adjacent to the airfield, runway, taxiway, or other airport associated feature (as its current location is non-original and therefore not historic), its large size and distinct shape as an 12-point Compass Rose, its paint material, color pattern, and blue and white hue, and its block font type of “99” logo and arrangement as two interlocking number “9”s of varying size and shape.
9.A
Packet Pg. 624
10 of 19
Landmarks Commission Action
As part of the Commission’s review, an historic assessment report evaluating the Compass Rose according to the Landmark designation criteria was prepared by one of the City’s historic preservation consultants, Ostashay and Associates Consulting (“OAC”). A copy of OAC’s report is attached as Attachment D. Based on the findings as provided in the report, the consultant finds that the Compass Rose is eligible for Landmark designation under the City of Santa Monica Landmark criteria 9.56.100(A)(1) due to it symbolizing an important chapter in the aviation history of women in Santa Monica.
Based on the Landmark designation findings and upon review of the Compass Rose feature, staff concludes that the feature is eligible for designation. However, the Compass Rose painting itself, as recently repainted in 2010, is non-original.
Additionally, the current location of the Compass Rose is non-original and therefore its location does not appear to be historically significant. However, the Compass Rose has importance to Santa Monica in that it symbolizes the important contributions of women in aviation, which is significant to the City’s cultural history. As such, staff is in agreement with the OAC report, that the feature is eligible for designation under City of Santa Monica Landmark criterion 9.56.100(A)(1) as symbolizing an important chapter in the aviation history of women in Santa Monica as outlined in the September 09, 2019, staff report.
On September 09, 2019, the Landmarks Commission held a public hearing to discuss the feature’s potential eligibility as a City Landmark. The Commission found that the Compass Rose met criterion 1 (“exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City”) in that the Compass Rose is a symbolic feature representative of the “ Ninety-Nines” circa November 1929. The Ninety-Nines were a social and professional organization whose goal was to encourage and support women in aviation. The group was involved with the first National Women’s Air Derby of 1929 which originated at the Santa Monica Airport (Clover Field) and was part of a turning point for women in aviation. The Commission also found that the Compass Rose is a symbolic feature, and while they designated a 3-
9.A
Packet Pg. 625
11 of 19
foot area around the painted Compass Rose as a Landmark Parcel, the Commission noted that it is not a historic location at the airport. (See STOA Attachment F) Based on the Landmark designation findings outlined in the OAC report, evidence received prior to and during the Commission’s public hearing on September 09, 2019, and staff’s review of the appeal statement, staff continues to recommend that the feature is eligible as a City Landmark. Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and support the Landmark Commission Designation based on findings that the improvement appears to meet one of the Landmark Designation criteria.
On November 11, 2019, the Landmarks Commission held a public hearing to discuss the feature’s potential eligibility as a City Landmark. In consideration of all written and oral testimony, staff and historic preservation consultant reports, and materials introduced into the public record, the Commission unanimously designated the Compass Rose and a 3-foot area around the painted Compass Rose under the City of Santa Monica Landmark criteria 9.56.100(A)(1) as symbolizing an important chapter in the aviation history of women in Santa Monica.
During its deliberations, the Commission held a thorough discussion on the Landmarks criteria and whether the feature would be eligible for designation. The Commission determined that the painted Compass Rose was eligible because it symbolizes the history of women in aviation and its relationship to the Santa Monic Airport.
Robert Chattel of Robert Chattel Inc. submitted an independent historic assessment as part of the application for consideration by the Landmarks Commission. The assessment concluded that the feature satisfies the criterion findings as a City Landmark. The report by Chattel Inc. is provided as Attachment C along with the original application materials.
The September 09, 2019, Landmarks Commission staff report (Attachment I) and approved meeting minutes (Attachment J) are provided for reference. The approved Statement of Official Action is provided as Attachment F. The link to the audio recording
9.A
Packet Pg. 626
12 of 19
of the September 09, 2019 meeting is included as Attachment L and posted on the City’s webpage:
http://santamonica.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=9&clip_id=4391 at 1:17.
Appeal
The appellant, Ben Wang, filed a timely appeal on September 19, 2019. The appeal contends that the Compass Rose does not meet the criteria for Landmarks designation because it:
1. Meets only one of the six Landmarks criteria;
2. Is a painted feature that has changed location over time, is non original, and has been repainted; and
3. Is inconsistent in design with the Ninety-Nines trademarked 16-point symbol.
Additionally, the appeal contends a designation may not be appropriate of the Compass Rose given the City’s obligations under the Consent Decree and the City Charter as they relate to the operation of the Airport.
Despite the appeal’s suggestion that the Landmarks Commission cannot designate the Compass Rose as a landmark under the Landmarks Ordinance due to the requirements of Santa Monica Charter Section 640 (Measure LC), such interpretation of the City Charter misunderstands the language of Section 640. Section 640 states that the City Council’s—and by extension the Landmarks Commission’s—authority to designate the Compass Rose a landmark is subject only to the City’s legal obligations covering its operation of the Airport. The City’s primary legal obligation governing Airport operations is the Consent Decree. Staff’s review of the Consent Decree finds that there is no basis in the Consent Decree or in its incorporated grant assurances that limit the City’s ability to designate the Compass Rose as a landmark since such designation does not affect the safe or efficient operation of the Airport as an aviation facility. Neither the Consent Decree nor Charter Section 640 is relevant to the City’s landmarks process as it relates to the Compass Rose.
Analysis
9.A
Packet Pg. 627
13 of 19
Appeal Analysis
1. Appellant states the Compass Rose meets only one of the Landmarks Ordinance Criteria and “failed to meet the other 5 criteria”.
The Landmarks Ordinance states that “the Landmarks Commission may approve the landmark designation of a structure, improvement, natural feature, or an object if it finds that it meets one or more of the (Landmarks Ordinance) criteria. (SMMC § 9.56.100(A)).
As consistent with the Landmarks Ordinance and with the Commission’s typical practice, the Commission found that the painted feature meets Criterion 1 as symbolic of women in aviation history.
2. Appellant states that the Compass Rose is a painted feature that has changed locations over time is non-original and has been repainted.
In their deliberations, the Landmarks Commission recognized that the Compass Rose is a painted feature that has been relocated and repainted over time, and that information is included in the Statement of Official Action. The Commission found that the Compass Rose symbolizes the important aviation history of women in Santa Monica. It is also emblematic of the early air marking program with which the Ninety-Nines were and are still closely associated. Therefore, the Landmarks Commission found that the symbolic nature of the Compass Rose made it worthy of designation as a City Landmark.
3. The Appellant states that the Compass Rose is a 12-pointed symbol and as such is inconsistent in design with the Ninety-Nines trademarked 16-point symbol.
The appellant has observed that the symbol in the trademark image has 16 points while the Compass Rose is a 12-pointed symbol. However, the trademark states that, “the mark is comprised of a compass with the number “99” disposed in the center thereof, and is white and blue.” The symbol was painted by members of the Ninety-Nines, and the organization supported the designation.
Eligibility as Landmark or Structure and Proposed Findings The Ordinance requires the City Council, on appeal, to review the building’s eligibility as a Landmark based on the six criteria discussed below. In order to be designated as a
9.A
Packet Pg. 628
14 of 19
City Landmark, the Council is required to find that the painted feature of the Compass Rose meets one or more of these criteria.
Landmarks Ordinance/Findings
Based on the findings as provided in the Landmark Assessment Report, the consultant finds that the feature appears eligible as a landmark under the City of Santa Monica Landmark criteria 9.56.100(A)(1). Based on research and evaluation, staff agrees with the consultant’s findings that the Compass Rose satisfies Landmark Designation criterion 1. The following draft findings are provided to support this conclusion:
(1) It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political or architectural history of the City.
In addition to the record-breaking events and flights that occurred at the Santa Monica Airport (aka Clover Field) during its formative years, the first National Women’s Air Derby of 1929 (Powder Puff Derby), which started at the Santa Monica Airport (Clover Field), became the turning point for women in aviation. This first major transcontinental sanctioned air race for women proved that women pilots were as competent and determined as male pilots, and attracted women pilots locally, nationally, and abroad.
By 1929, there were approximately 60 women pilots in the United States, potentially up to 117 worldwide, in which 20 women pilots participated in the event. The event led to the formation of the Ninety-Nines in November 1929, a social and professional organization with goals to encourage and support women in aviation and to enhance opportunities for women seeking careers in such a male-dominated field. By the early 1930s, the Ninety-Nines were divided into regional sections with each section sponsoring some activities furthering women flying and aviation in general. The organization officially incorporated in 1950 and later renamed The Ninety-Nines International Organization of Women Pilots in efforts to include members from around the world.
There are references of a Compass Rose utilized at the Santa Monica Airport prior to the standardization of air marking during the 1930s and early 1940s, and prior to the creation of the Ninety-Nine’s distinctive Compass Rose logo (1939) that current exists at
9.A
Packet Pg. 629
15 of 19
the airport. In November 1974, the Los Angeles chapter’s air marking committee obtained approval to re-mark the compass at the Santa Monica Airport and the Compass Rose by Ninety-Nines was first painted in 1985. The painting/installation of the compass rose was one of several airport improvement projects completed between 1985 and 1989. In June 1989, Compass Rose was relocated from the northeast portion of the airport to its current location and was last repainted by the LA Ninety-Nines in 2010. Today, the compass rose is a symbolic feature and is not necessarily in a historic location at the airport.
The subject Santa Monica Airport Compass Rose symbolizes the important aviation history of women in Santa Monica. It is also emblematic of the early air marking program for which the Ninety-Nines were and still are so closely associated with. The Compass Rose symbolizes the important contributions of women in aviation, important to the City’s cultural history. Therefore, the Santa Monica Compass Rose appears to satisfy this criterion.
(2) It has aesthetic or artistic interest or value, or other noteworthy interest or value.
The Compass Rose does not appear to have the aesthetic or artistic interest or value necessary for such recognition under this criterion. Therefore, the subject Compass Rose does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
(3) It is identified with historic personages or with important events in local, state or national history.
Although the Compass Rose symbolizes the importance of women in aviation history in the City, it is not directly associated with historic personages or with important events in local, state, or national history in which it memorializes. Although the first National Women’s Air Derby of 1929 was an important event in local history which began at the Santa Monica Airport and was the first sanctioned air race for women in the world, the Compass Rose itself is commemorative in nature and not directly associated with the event. Physical evidence of a Compass Rose at its original location at the airport dates to approximately 1947. The subject Compass Rose in its current location was painted as a volunteer effort by members of the local chapter of The Ninety-Nines in 1985 and
9.A
Packet Pg. 630
16 of 19
has been repainted since that time. Any association with historic personages or important events is merely referential. Therefore, the subject Compass Rose does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
(4) It embodies distinguishing architectural characteristics valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction, or the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship, or is a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail or historical type valuable to such a study.
The Compass Rose in its current location is considered a functional piece of art painted by the local chapter of the Ninety-Nines (Los Angeles Chapter, The Ninety-Nines International Organization of Women Pilots). As such, it does not possess any distinguishing architectural characteristics or embody the use of indigenous materials that would be valuable to a study of a period, style, method of construction. As it is a symbolic re-creation of the Ninety-Nine’s compass rose, it does not represent a unique or rare example of an architectural design, detail, or historical style valuable to such a study. Therefore, the subject Compass Rose does not appear to satisfy this criterion. (5) It is a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer or architect.
The Compass Rose is not a significant or a representative example of the work or product of a notable builder, designer, or architect. While the design of the Santa Monica Compass Rose in its current location is based on the original scheme created in 1939 by Ninety-Nine member Wilma Fritschey, it was repainted by the Los Angeles chapter of the Ninety-Nines. There is no indication that this local group should be considered a master in the field of design, construction, or architecture. Therefore, the subject Compass Rose does not appear to satisfy this criterion. (6) It has a unique location, a singular physical characteristic, or is an established and familiar visual feature of a neighborhood, community or the City.
The Compass Rose is located adjacent to a runway and based on its siting on the property, is not readily accessible to the public or visible from the public right-of-way.
Therefore, it has not become an established or familiar visual feature of a
9.A
Packet Pg. 631
17 of 19
neighborhood, community, or the City. Therefore, the subject Compass Rose does not appear to satisfy this criterion.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council designate the Compass Rose located at 3223 Donald Douglas Loop as a City Landmark, described as a circular-shaped, twelve-point Compass Rose with a diameter of approximately 50 feet and a circumference of approximately 160 feet, based on the draft findings of designation Criteria 1 contained herein.
The character-defining features associated with the Compass Rose include the following:
• Location near or adjacent to the airfield, runway, taxiway, or other airport associated feature (its current location is non-original and therefore not historic); • Large size and distinct shape as a 12-point Compass Rose; • Material (FAA approved reflective paint) and color pattern and hue (blue and white)
• Block font type of “99” logo and arrangement as two interlocking number “9”s of varying size and shape.
Parcel Designation
The Ordinance grants the City Council on appeal, the power to designate a Landmark Parcel. The Compass Rose is described as a circular-shaped, twelve-point Compass Rose with a diameter of approximately 50 feet and a circumference of approximately 160 feet. Additionally, a three-foot perimeter around the Compass Rose is hereby defined as a Landmark Parcel in order to preserve, maintain, protect and safeguard the Compass Rose, as shown in the attached diagram.
Alternatives
As an alternative to the recommended action, the City Council may consider the following if supported by the full evidentiary record:
9.A
Packet Pg. 632
18 of 19
1. Articulate revised findings resulting in the approval of the subject appeal, thereby denying the Compass Rose as a designated landmark.
Environmental Analysis
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that approving application and designating the Compass Ross and perimeter as a Landmark will result in any significant effect on the environment. This determination is based on the record as a whole, which includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the designation of the property as a Landmark will promote the retention and preservation of a historic resource, the designation would not result in any physical change to the property, and any future physical changes would be subject to subsequent CEQA review.
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action as a result of the recommended action.
Prepared By: Stephanie Reich, Design and Historic Preservation Planner Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) B. Landmark Application 3223 Donald Douglas Loop
C. Landmark Application 3223 Donald Douglas Loop additional materials D. Compass Rose Landmark Assesment Report September 2019 Final E. City Council STOA 19ENT-0213 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop) Compass Rose F. STOA 19ENT-0213 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop) Compass Rose G. Compass Rose Correspondence
H. Airport Commission's Recommendation to Council 2 20191211 I. Landsmarks Commission 9/19/2019 Compass Rose Staff Report
9.A
Packet Pg. 633
19 of 19
J. Landmarks Commission 9/19/2019 Minutes Signed
K. Chattel Levine Act Disclosure Form 20240215
L. Landmarks Commission Minutes September 09 2019 (Web Link) M. Written Comments
9.A
Packet Pg. 634
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 635
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 636
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 637
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 638
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 639
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 640
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 641
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 642
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 643
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 644
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 645
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 646
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 647
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 648
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 649
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 650
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 651
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))
9.A.a
Packet Pg. 652
Attachment: 19ENT-0353 (3223 Donald Douglas Loop ) Appeal Application (1) (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.)) City Planning Division (310) 458-8341
Planning and Community Development Department www.smgov.net 09/18
CITY OF SANTA MONICA – CITY PLANNING DIVISION
DESIGNATION APPLICATION
Landmark Structure of Merit
Applications must be submitted by appointment at the City Planning public counter, Room 111 at City Hall, located at 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401. To schedule an appointment or if you have any questions completing this application please call City Planning at (310) 458-8341. GENERAL INFORMATION PROJECT ADDRESS:
Land Use Element District: Zoning District:
Assessor Parcel: - - Lot Size:
APPLICANT
Name:
Address: Zip:
Phone: Fax:
Email:
CONTACT PERSON (if different) (Note: All correspondence will be sent to the applicant) Name:
Address: Zip:
Phone: Fax:
Email:
Relation to Applicant:
PROPERTY OWNER
Name:
Address: Zip:
Phone: Fax:
Subject improvement is generally known as:
Yes No
Condition: Excellent Good Fair Deteriorated Ruins Unexposed Threats: None Private Development Vandalism
Public Works Project Zoning Other:
This part to be completed by City staff
Received By: Amount Paid: $
Date Submitted: Check No.:
NOTES TO
APPLICANT
Please complete all
applicable sections
of this application
and submit all
required materials.
Incomplete
applications will not
be accepted for
filing.
Landmarks
Commission meets
on the second
Monday of each
month.
The applicant,
representative, or
legal owner familiar
with the project must
be present at the
Landmarks
Commission
meeting.
A decision on
designation is
rendered at the
hearing. All
decisions by the
Landmarks
Commission are
subject to a 10-day
appeal period. An
official appeal form
and fee schedule is
available at the City
Planning Division
Public Counter.
Appealed projects
will be scheduled for
a hearing before the
City Council.
X
3223 Donald Douglas Loop - Santa Monica Airport
Chattel,Inc., LA 99s
13417 Ventura Boulevard, Sherman Oaks, California 91423 818-788-7954
[email protected]
Chattel Inc., Robert Chattel, President; Olivia White, Associate (see attached) 13417 Ventura Boulevard, Sherman Oaks, California 91423 818-788-7954
[email protected]; [email protected]
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California 90401
310-458-8411
Existing use(s) of site: Airport
Rent control status: N/A
Status: X Occupied Unoccupied
Recognized in the Santa Monica Historic Resources Inventory: X X
X
4272 026 902
N/A
Compass Rose
N/A
pavement
removal
9.A.b
Packet Pg. 653 Attachment: Landmark Application 3223 Donald Douglas Loop (3828 : Landmark Appeal - Airport Compass Rose (90 mins.))