Agenda packet, first session — Santa Monica City Council, March 11, 2025 (part 1 of 3)

City of Santa Monica
City Council Meeting
AGENDA

LANA NEGRETE
MAYOR

ELLIS RASKIN CAROLINE TOROSIS

COUNCILMEMBER MAYOR PRO TEM

DAN HALL BARRY SNELL

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

JESSE ZWICK NATALYA ZERNITSKAYA

COUNCILMEMBER COUNCILMEMBER

ELAINE POLACHEK

INTERIM CITY MANAGER

DOUGLAS SLOAN

CITY ATTORNEY

NIKIMA NEWSOME

CITY CLERK

STANDARDS OF BEHAVIOR THAT PROMOTE CIVILITY AT ALL PUBLIC MEETINGS:
• Treat everyone courteously; • Embrace respectful disagreement and dissent as democratic rights, inherent components of an inclusive
public process, and tools for forging sound decisions
• Hate has no place in Santa Monica. The City opposes
abusive or threatening hate speech, intolerance, or
dehumanization, and supports basic civil respect and
human decency.
• Listen to others respectfully;
• Exercise self-control;
• Give open-minded consideration
to all viewpoints;
• Focus on the issues and avoid
personalizing debate;
Regular meetings are broadcast live on CityTV cable channel 16 and on the internet at santamonica.gov. Cable television re-broadcasts air on Thursday and Saturday at 11:30 AM. The agenda will air on CityTV on Saturday and Sunday at 11:00 AM and 6:00 PM, and on Monday and Tuesday at 12:30 PM and 6:00 PM.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 2

RULES OF ORDER FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS (Resolution No.11642(CCS))

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

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

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

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 $500 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. Information regarding the Levine Act can be found here or you can contact the FPPC.

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

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

2. Public Comment for Special Agenda Items, Consent
Calendar and Closed Sessions Only.

3. Special Agenda Items (Commendations and
Proclamations presented).

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

5. Closed Sessions.

6. Public Comment on remaining Agenda Items

7. Study Session.

8. Continued Items.

9. Administrative Proceedings.

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

11. Staff Administrative Item.

12. Public Hearings.

13. Reports of Boards and Commissions.

14. Resolutions.

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

16. Councilmember Discussion Items.

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

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

City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 3

AGENDAS

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

REGULAR MEETING
.CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS.
1685 MAIN STREET, ROOM 250, SANTA

MONICA, CA AND, AT A TELECONFERENCE

SITES IN TEXAS AND DC
TUESDAY, MARCH 11, 2025
MEETING BEGINS AT 5:30 PM (PDT) AND
AT TELECONFERENCE SITES AT 7:30 PM (CDT) AND 8:30 PM (EDT) The Santa Monica City Council Meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 11, 2025, at 5:30 P.M. (Pacific Daylight Time) in the City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California 90401, and at 7:30 P.M. (Central Daylight Time) at a teleconference site located at Omni PGA Frisco Resort, 4341 PGA Parkway, Frisco, Texas 75033, and at 8:30 P.M. (Eastern Daylight Time) at a teleconference site located at Arlo Hotel, 333 G Street NW, Washington, DC 20001, where two of the Councilmembers will be present and will participate via teleconference.

HOW TO PROVIDE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT:

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

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

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE / LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ROLL CALL
City of Santa Monica Statement of Accountability (Land Acknowledgement) The City of Santa Monica is located on the land of Tovangaar. With great respect, the City acknowledges the Gabrieleño/Tongva as the First People of this ancestral and unceded territory of Kuruvungna, a village that we know as Santa Monica. We honor their elders, past and present, and the Gabrieleño descendants who are part of the Gabrieleño /Tongva tribes.

We recognize that these peoples are still here, and as settlers and kuyam (guests), we recognize our responsibility and obligation to care for their land in partnership with them.

The City of Santa Monica commits to work in partnership with the Gabrieleño/Tongva people to uplift their voices and visibility on their ancestral land.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 4

LEVINE ACT DISCLOSURES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS / PROCEDURAL

MOTIONS

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

2. PUBLIC INPUT (ITEMS UNDER SPECIAL AGENDA ITEMS, CONSENT

CALENDAR, CLOSED SESSION ONLY)

3. SPECIAL AGENDA ITEMS

3.A. Commendation: Dr. Lizzy Moore - Santa Monica College Foundation

4. CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items will be considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion. In accordance with Charter section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and resolutions shall be by reading of title only unless a Councilmember present dissents. No public discussion is permitted on ordinances for second reading and adoption.)

4.A. Approval of Department of Transportation's Big Blue Bus Service Design Guidelines Update
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding that the Guidelines updates is not a “project” subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Approve the proposed updates to the Big Blue Bus Transit Service Guidelines, formerly known as the “Big Blue Bus Service Design, Performance, and Evaluation Guidelines”.

4.B. Award Request for Proposal SP2721 and Agreements for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of exemptions pursuant to Section 15262 and Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award RFP #SP2721 On-Call Civil Design to Tetra Tech, Inc., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., and Willdan Engineering to provide on-call civil engineering design services for the Public Works Department; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute agreements with Tetra Tech, Inc., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., and Willdan Engineering, each in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 over a five-year period, with one (1) City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 5 five-year renewal option to extend in the amount of $1,500,000 on the same terms and conditions, for a total amount not to exceed $3,000,000 per agreement and $9,000,000 total for all three agreements over a ten-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

4.C. Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center Project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 (Replacement/Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award contract for Bid #SP2744 to Urban Professional Builders, INC. for the construction of the SMART Center Project for the Public Works Department; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Urban Professional Builders, INC., in an amount not to exceed $1,290,000 (including a $76,000 contingency).

4.D. Award Bid SP2739 and Agreement to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant Roof Replacement Project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemptions pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 (Replacement/Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award Bid #SP2739 to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Roof Replacement Project for the Public Works Department; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Best Contracting Services, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $310,000 (including a 20% contingency).

4.E. Award Bid SP2710 and Construction Agreement to RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. for Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden Project
City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 6 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award Bid #SP2710 to RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. for construction services for Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden Project for the Department of Public Works; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $355,000 (including a 10% contingency).

4.F. Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Receipt of State of California Cannabis Equity Grant Funding for $35,000 for Development of a Cannabis Equity Program and Authorization for 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 Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Adopt the attached resolution authorizing the acceptance of a grant awarded in the amount of $35,000 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 amendment as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report (requires 5 votes).

4.G. Adoption of Salary Resolution to Reflect Title Change for Assistant Building Officer
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15324 and a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15601(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Qua lity Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Adopt a salary resolution changing the classification title of Assistant Building Officer to Assistant Building Official.

4.H. Approval of Corrected Minutes for the City Council Meeting of May 14, 2024 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the corrected minutes of the May 14, 2024 meeting.

City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 7

4.I. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition Against Camping in Public Places
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

4.J. Approval of City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council

1. Adopt a finding that the actions are not a “project” subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15601(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the CEQA Guidelines;

2. Approve the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement with Douglas Sloan for his services as City Attorney; and

3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement on behalf of the City.

4.K. Adoption of Resolution Amending the Council Rules of Procedure Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt resolution amending the Council Rules of Procedure to address technological failure during public comment, and a change to the ranked choice voting process.

4.L. City Council - Regular Meeting - Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM

5. CLOSED SESSIONS

5.A. Public employee appointment - Gov. Code § 54957(b): consider public employee appointment; title: City Manager; Gov. Code § 54957.6: conference with labor negotiator; City negotiator: Mayor/Personnel Director; unrepresented employee: City Manager

5.B. Conference with labor negotiator – Gov. Code § 54957.6: agency designated representatives: Interim City Manager Elaine Polachek, Human Resources Director Dana Brown, and Human Resources Manager Sarah Rebensdorf; bargaining units: Administrative Team Associates (ATA), AFSCME Local 4819- Management Team Association (MTA), California Teamsters Local 911 (IBT), Municipal Employees Association (MEA), Public Attorney’s Legal Support Staff Union (PALSSU), Public Attorney’s Union (PAU), Santa Monica Fire Executive Management Association (FEMA), Santa Monica Firefighters Local 1109 (LOCAL 1109), Police Officers Association (POA), Supervisory Team Association (STA) and SMART TD - International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers - Transportation Division, Local 1785 (SMART TD)
City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 8

5.C. Conference with real estate negotiator pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8: Property: 1855 Main Street, Santa Monica, California (Civic Auditorium) (APN 4290-013-901); City Negotiators: Jennifer Taylor, Economic Development Manager, and Nia Tang, Economic Development Administrator; Owner of Record: City of Santa Monica; Persons to be negotiated with: Tim Sexton, Revitalization Partner Group, LLC; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment for lease

5.D. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1):

Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City; LASC # BC616804

5.E. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1):

Victoria Lobanov v. City; LASC # 22SMCV02779

5.F. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1):

Renee Miller v. City; LASC # 24SMCV00279
The following is the order of business for items to be heard no earlier than 7:00 p.m.

CITY MANAGER REPORT
. Presentation

TRAVEL ANNOUNCEMENT AND MAYOR'S HIGHLIGHT

6. PUBLIC INPUT ON REMAINING AGENDA ITEMS

7. STUDY SESSION
No items

8. CONTINUED ITEMS
No items

9. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
No items

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

11. STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS
City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 9

11.A. Receive Homelessness Strategic Plan and Renters' Protections Program, Approval of Human Services Division Reorganization Plan and Adoption of Classification and Salary Resolution
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Receive the City of Santa Monica Homelessness Strategic Plan 2025-2030. (Attachment A)

2. Receive the Renters’ Protections Program: Analysis, Key Findings, and Recommendations. (Attachment B)

3. Approve the Human Services Division Reorganization Plan.

4. Adopt a Resolution of the City of Santa Monica establishing new classifications and adopting salary rates for various listed positions (Attachment C) and approve the position and classification changes (Attachment D).

5. Adopt the 2025 Proclamation Declaring a Local Emergency on Homelessness through 12/31/2026 (Attachment E), unless repealed or extended by Council, due to the ongoing crisis of homelessness exacerbated by the recent wildfires.

6. Authorize budget amendment as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report (requires 5 votes).

7. 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.

12. PUBLIC HEARINGS
No items

13. REPORTS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
No items

14. RESOLUTIONS
No items

15. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS OTHER THAN REPORTS OF COMMISSION AND

OFFICERS
No items

16. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION ITEMS

16.A. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Recreation and Parks Commission for a term ending on June 30, 2028.

16.B. Appointment to one unscheduled vacancy on the Housing Authority Board for a term ending on June 30, 2026. (Continued from 6/25/2024) City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 10

16.C. Request of Councilmembers Zwick and Snell that the City Council direct the City Manager and City Attorney to advance curbside management measures that would reduce congestion, enhance safety, and mitigate double parking.

These measures should include drafting an ordinance for City Council consideration that would establish a legal framework and fee schedule for a smart loading zone pilot program, exploring a public-private partnership for curb management incorporating available technology, and presenting options and tradeoffs to Council for consideration.

16.D. Request of Mayor Negrete that the City Council approve the use of up to $300 of her allocated travel budget for travel to and from Sacramento on March 3, 2025. The travel occurred as a result of an invitation by Assemblymember Rick Zbur to meet with Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas to discuss the impacts the fires have had on our small businesses and local economy. Mayor Negrete met with other legislators and their staff, including consultants to the Assembly Budget and Assembly Judiciary Committees to discuss both the economic impacts of the fires and also concerns about the financial viability of public agencies facing a rising number of civil claims from decades-old abuse cases.

16.E. Request of Councilmember Zwick and Mayor Negrete that the City Council appoint five of its members to cast votes in the upcoming Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Council Election for District #41 Representative. The election was previously scheduled for February 13th but was postponed to March 19th, 2025. District #41 includes Beverly Hills, Culver City, Santa Monica and West Hollywood, with each City allowed to have 5 Councilmembers cast votes in the election.

16.F. Request of Councilmembers Hall and Zernitskaya that the City Council approve City Sponsorship of the LGBTQ+ SaMo Pride community festival on June 21, 2025 and the Santa Monica Pier Pride Event taking place on June 22, 2025 and using $10,000 in previously allocated Council discretionary funds to sponsor the LGBTQ+ Story-echtomy Writing Workshop and Performance Night produced by Crow Comedy, a Santa Monica non-profit, from the FY2024- 2025 Budget.

16.G. Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, and Councilmembers Raskin and Hall request that the City Attorney, in coordination with the Rent Control Board, draft and present to Council for adoption within 60 days, an ordinance banning the use of algorithmic rental price-fixing software in Santa Monica and which includes enforceable penalties for noncompliance.

16.H. Request of Councilmembers Hall, Zwick, and Mayor Pro Tempore Torosis that in order to examine the City’s historical preservation through the lens of social justice, the Council direct Staff to return with options to implement additional recommendations from the Landmarks Commission report “A Place for Everyone in Santa Monica’s History."
City of Santa Monica Generated: 3/12/2025 10:15 AM Page 11

16.I. Request of Mayor Negrete that the City Council approve City sponsorship of a Community March & Resource Fair organized by Homies Unidos and others.

The march will begin at Santa Monica College to the Pier culminating in a community Resource Fair. The event will take place March 22, 2025, with City Council directing the City Manager to waive the City’s portion of fees for use of the Pier. City fees related to the Community March & Resource Fair include the application, administrative, neighborhood notification, business license, parking, and zero waste plan fees associated with the use of the Pier.

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

Members of the public unable to attend a meeting but wishing to comment on an item(s) listed on the agenda may submit written comments prior to the meeting by meeting by mailing them to: City Clerk, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 or to [email protected]. Written comments received from the public by 12 PM on the day of the City Council meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to the meeting and posted online. Members of the public who submit written public comment on an agenda item may be subject to the Levine Act which requires disclosure of campaign contributions of more than $500 to an officer of the City within the preceding 12 months.

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

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

Santa Monica Blue Bus Lines #1, #2, #3, #5, #9 and the EXPO Line serve City Hall.

Parking is available on Main Street, on Olympic Drive, and in the Civic Center Parking Structure (validation free).

City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item:
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Written Comments
Prepared By: David Yakobson, Staff Assistant III
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comment
Packet Pg. 12
1 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 12:50 PM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition Organizer
Cc: John Alle
Subject: Tuesday March 11, 2025

EXTERNAL
In Santa Monica this past week it was easy to see the open use and sale of meth and crack return as temperatures rose and the sun reappeared. All of the activity occurred in public spaces, adjacent to residents and visitors. Do Santa Monica's Mayor and City Council honestly believe Code Enforcement Officers and Downtown Ambassadors would even consider confronting these transients, most of whom are armed with knives, guns and sharp objects? More Police presence and sworn officers walking sidewalks would end this. Many residents and restaurant workers have to jaywalk more than once on a single block to avoid danger. Many choose to avoid Santa Monica altogether.

Insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DHEgVmIC_p6/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== YouTube
https://youtu.be/7BnyINdJiBk
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 13
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 1 David Yakobson
From: Wendy Dembo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 7:18 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Cc: Elaine Polachek; Douglas Sloan
Subject: FYI -- NYC wants to fund libraries 7 days a week, Not Sell them

EXTERNAL
https://gothamist.com/news/more-nyc-libraries-would-open-7-days-a-week-in-council-speakersbudget-proposal?fbclid=IwY2xjawI9JP5leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHTC9xcTYCi_M3C_ZryfcT6e31JFnSuy7hph9-OSMXykzcATuj6CAdHpaw_aem_THqjZDASL7-d70DaD9WTzA Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 14
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 2 David Yakobson
From: Ken Freimann <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 3:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: DONT LOWER OUR EDUCATION BUDGET !!

EXTERNAL
Office of the City Mayor and City Council
1685 Main St, Santa Monica, CA 90401
10 March, 2025
Dear Honorable City Councilmember,
As involved and concerned Santa Monica residents and parents of school-age children, and in advance of the March 8 Special Joint Meeঞng and Council Budget Workshop, we wanted to take the opportunity to share our perspecঞve on prioriঞes for the City of Santa Monica.

The City has long been a powerful partner to the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District. We moved to Santa Monica in part on the strength and quality of the school system; as parents of two children who have come through the District, we truly appreciate the support the City has provided.

This ongoing financial support has helped the District to minimize (but not eliminate) the volaঞlity of income planning and made possible the District’s renowned curriculum and moderate class sizes.

As you assess prioriঞes for the coming biennial budget, we urge you to place sustained and ongoing support of the SMMUSD at the very highest level of priority. This week, the SMM Council of PTAs execuঞve board pledged its support of maintaining current City funding to the District into the future.

We cannot imagine a greater investment in the future of our city than conঞnued funding of the educaঞon system. The benefits are well known: excellent schools lead to developing a cohort of producঞve and responsible ciঞzens and taxpayers, and also aract residents from around the world.

We have graঞtude for the City’s longঞme commitment to the District and responsiveness to us as ciঞzens. You can count on this community to conঞnue to work with the City to best meet the needs of the largest number of our students and families, with a focus on our most vulnerable.

We truly appreciate your work and success on issues impacঞng children, youth, and families in Santa Monica, and wish all the best for the future.

Sincerely,
Ken Freimann
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 15
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 1 David Yakobson
From: Wendy Dembo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 7:18 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Cc: Elaine Polachek; Douglas Sloan
Subject: FYI -- NYC wants to fund libraries 7 days a week, Not Sell them

1.a
Packet Pg. 16
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 1 David Yakobson
From: Elizabeth Stone <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 9, 2025 5:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Montana Avenue apartment house

EXTERNAL
Hello,
I wish to STRONGLY PROTEST ANY NEW 4-STORY APARTMENT BUILDINGS ON MONTANA AVENUE! The rent is too high — there is not enough parking available…this is a community avenue with lots of people, elderly, strollers, walking about.

FOR AN ALTERNATIVE I PROPOSE:

Wilshire Blvd — anywhere 20th Street and west — Lots of empty office and retail buildings. Lots more space for parking.

Thank you,
Elizabeth Stone
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 17
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 1 David Yakobson
From: Zoe <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 10:51 AM
To: Brandon Avila
Cc: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Douglas Sloan; Josh Kurpies; [email protected]; Ramon Batista; David Gardinier; Clerk Mailbox Subject: Re: OPA Police report presentation/Missing Police Reports Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Officer Avila,
In your absence, I met with two officers of the SMPD to update them on the harassment and criminal behavior of Sean Besser, the former landlord of 643 Pacific Street Unit #3 where I reside. I just wanted to let you know that as you probably know, there is another OPA meeting. Last Saturday Sean Besser once again came to the building unannounced to take property that does not belong to him, sell property from other units, and harass me in the process. Three Santa Monica Police Officers showed up at my door and refused to take a report and criminal complaint of trespass, claiming this is a civil matter. Trespass is not a civil matter. Sean Besser and his business partner claimed in Court the day before (March 7, 2025) THAT THEY NO LONGER OPERATE SANTA MONICA BEACH COLIVING. Hence, they have no business in the property, yet continue to show up to harass me and remove property that does not belong to them. I have a video of the incident, and SM Police Officers refused to receive it as evidence for an investigation. Also, Sean Better kicked me on camera, that is considered assault, which is a criminal complaint (in International Women's Day). This is not a good look for the Santa Monica Police Department and further exposed them to litigation.

Kindloy reply, thank you.

On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 4:40 PM Zoe <[email protected]> wrote:

Officer Avila,
I am following up on the concerns I brought to your attention 12 days ago. Are you available to meet this week?
Kindly reply, thank you.

On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 11:27 AM Zoe <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Officer Avila,
Two days ago, Officer Chabot and Officer Navarro told me to contact you regarding the missing reports from the presentation to the Ocean Park Association last meeting. Sean Besser is the Landlord of my Unit at 643 Pacific Street. He has been harassing me since October when I found multiple violations to the Santa Monica Rent Control Ordinance of Short Term Rental, Building Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 2 Code Enforcement and Violations to the Tenant Harassment Ordinance from the City Attorney's office. I reported it to the three separate agencies and he is supposed to be under investigation.

Three different City agencies are involved investigating Besser and his partner Maureen Morris, owners of Santa Monica beach CoLiving. Besser's wife trespassed the unit and refused to identify herself, she entered unit #3 without giving notice, refused to answer who she was and how she accessed the unit and when followed to her vehicle with complete knowledge I was recording her on my phone she called me: trash. This is recorded, this is trespassing and the police had not taken a report or investigated this incident. Sean Besser also entered the unit without previous notice, came to my bedroom and began to take pictures of me in my pajamas. This incident has not been investigated.

It has come to my attention that Sean Besser's ties with the political establishment of Santa Monica for Renters Rights and particularly his ties and friendship with recently elected Councilmember Ellis Raskin and his wife Rent Control Board Commissioner Kay Ambriz. that is the insurance that give them free reign to break the law without facing consequences. That behavior is a pattern that exposes the City of Santa Monica to scandal and litigation. Last night at the 2025 Homeless Count at St. Monica Catholic Community I recorded the interactions of Sean Besser and his wife Robyn Haas Besser with Ellis Raskin and his wife Kay Ambriz. Robyn Haas Besser with the entitlement of a privileged woman who has faced no consequences for breaking the law asked police officers to remove me from the event which I was covering as a citizen journalist. Ironically I am a member of the Church as well, which shows you how far an entitled white woman will go to use the privilege.

The biggest threat to democracy is corruption, this is also a classic example of white supremacy.

Kindly reply if you are serious in pursuing these incidents. In the midst of study sessions on reparations and a Citywide Equity plan, this is not a good look.

Thank you. Have a blessed weekend. I would like this email to be included in the record for next Tuesday's City Council Meeting.

1.a
Packet Pg. 19
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 3 IMPORTANT WARNING: This email (and any attachments) is only intended for the use of the person or entity to which it is addressed to and may contain privileged and confidential information. You, the recipient, are obligated to maintain it safely, securely, and confidentially.

Unauthorized re-disclosure or failure to maintain confidentiality may subject you to federal and state penalties. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify me by return email and delete this message from your computer.
--
Zoё Muntaner
“Do you have the patience to wait till your mud settles and the water is clear?"- Tao Te Ching IMPORTANT WARNING: This email (and any attachments) is only intended for the use of the person or entity to which it is addressed to and may contain privileged and confidential information. You, the recipient, are obligated to maintain it safely, securely, and confidentially.

Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 20
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 4 David Yakobson
From: Zoe <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 10:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Douglas Sloan; Brigette Garay; Autumn M. Rindels; [email protected]; [email protected]; Ramon Batista; Darrick Jacob; Clerk Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: Notice of Ex Parte for 24BHSC02835
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Please take notice that on March 11, 2025, at 8:30 AM or soon after that as the matter can be heard, in Department 304 of the Beverly Hills Courthouse, located at 9355 Burton Way, Beverly Hills, CA 90210, Plaiontiff Zoë Muntaner will and does move the Court by an Ex Parte Application for Notice of Motion and Motion for Order to have case evaluated by a Judge of the Court, and supply documents of the continued harassment and statements by Sean Besser (business partner of Defendant Maureen Morris) on Saturday March 8, 2025, to the first available hearing date or in the alternative shortening time for the hearing, because Petitioner will suffer irreparable prejudice, as per violations of the MS-410 accommodation declaration previously field and granted by the court.

Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 5 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:41 AM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition Organizer
Cc: John Alle
Subject: Santa Monica's Mayor and City Council Purposely Avoid Seeing Transient Addicts Blocking Public Entryways
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Santa Monica's City Council, and Staff could care less about PUBLIC SAFETY. This was the scene 20 minutes before Saturday's Special Meeting commenced at the Main Public Library. The Mayor, Councilmembers, and Staff purposely avoided the transients smoking meth and sleeping against the entry doors. Councilmembers entered the Library by underground parking, elevator or side stairway. Mayor Negrete refused to hold the meeting in City Council Chambers with adequate seating and audio visual recording. The size of the Library's meeting room and number of occupants violated Fire Code. The Mayor tried unsuccessfully to limit Public Comment to 1 minute instead of 2 minutes per person, but was successful in increasing each Council Member's comment to beyond the allowable 10 minute limit.

Insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DHBff2uiD4h/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== YouTube
https://youtu.be/-Eoean69ChM
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 6 David Yakobson
From: Wally Perkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2025 6:23 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox
Subject: No On Raises; Return City Services for Taxpaying Residents; Evict the Homeless Lunatics Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
I am at the end of my time in Santa Monica it seems.

Last week, I had to take a family member to the ER. It was so inundated with lunatic homeless, we had to wait for 6 hours with broken bones. The homeless were not in any emergency state, they were just visiting and taking up services because they have nothing else to do. The firemen would repeatably come in and say they were going to leave the person there even though they were just discharged as non emergency because people would keep calling. Employees were called down to talk to the person that keep showing up. They parked one guy outside in a wheelchair with a blanket over his head. Meanwhile, real emergency situations had to wait and witness sick children in need of care having to wait for hours because the ER was bogged down with these lunatics who contribute nothing to our society or City.

Our libraries are closed and you're going to cut more to give employees raises? That is wrong. Open libraries full time now!
Our parks are inundated with these same crazed lunatics sleeping all day, drinking, doing drugs. It is so unfair. Why do we need to live like this? We don't - but you want us to. It is unconscionable what you are making citizens suffer through.

Services in this City should be for taxpaying residents - not the homeless population you have invited into our City. No raises the City that refuses to serve citizens! You're pathetic.

Evict these homeless nuts. It is just so wrong that this City has been destroyed by the horrific government that wants to serve a non-Santa Monica population instead of people that actually live here.

Grants Pass means Cities can enforce the law against these people. Enforce the law now.

Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 7 David Yakobson
From: Zoe <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2025 8:01 PM
To: Santa Monica CoLiving
Cc: Douglas Sloan; Josh Kurpies; Lisa Parson; [email protected]; Ramon Batista; David Gardinier; Darrick Jacob; Brigette Garay; Edgar Sernas; Autumn M. Rindels; Caroline Torosis; Everth Gonzalez; Daniel Mick; Maurice Cochee; Daniel J. Costello; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Barry Snell; Dan Hall; Clerk Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Restraining Order Hearing
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Sean Besser & Maureen Morris,
As per Maureen Morris testimony at Beverly Hills Courthouse Room 304 yesterday, you dissolved the Santa Monica Beach CoLiving company that previously offered short term rentals in two properties of the Ocean Park neighborhood. Hence you no longer operate Santa Monica Beach CoLiving. The Beverly Hills Courthouse commissioner who heard the case yesterday said you cannot serve papers personally and you have to hire the services of a professional process server.The Los Angeles Sheriff department has such service, you can contact them in order to have the legal service performed. You were once a licensed attorney in California, you should know that.

I have included all the members of the Santa Monica City Council, the Chief of the Santa Monica Police De[partment and his Deputy Chief, who was the one to advise me on all the complaints I needed to file with the City of Santa Monica to stop you from harassing me at my home. Also I included members of the Santa Monica City Attorney's office for them to have a record of the continued harassment from you and your partner.

I did not receive anything on 3/7/2025. I cannot open the links you sent me, they are locked. Please send them by USPS. Your attorney has my postal address, I do not receive mail at 643 Pacific Street.

Avraham Sinai knows that and has followed my request that all mail is sent to my Postal Address.

On other fronts the Santa Monica Police came to the building after you left with property that does not belong to you. You trespassed the building. You are not welcome to come to the building anymore as you wrote in previous communication that you turned the property to the registered owner. You do not work for him anymore or are in the short term rental business any longer.

Please do not email any more. All communication should be in writing sent ny US Postal Service to my p;ostal and not residential adress since you have access to the mail box.

Best,
Zoë
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 8 On Sat, Mar 8, 2025 at 4:43 PM Santa Monica CoLiving <[email protected]> wrote:

Attached is the restraining order filing that was served on you on 3/7/25 and video proof of the serving. See you in court on 3/19.

To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet. Serving Papers on Zoe.MOV
--
Zoё Muntaner
“Do you have the patience to wait till your mud settles and the water is clear?"- Tao Te Ching IMPORTANT WARNING: This email (and any attachments) is only intended for the use of the person or entity to which it is addressed to and may contain privileged and confidential information. You, the recipient, are obligated to maintain it safely, securely, and confidentially.

Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 25
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 9 David Yakobson
From: Zoe <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2025 10:58 AM
To: George Centeno
Cc: Jaime Cruz; Dante Harrington; Craig Miller; Adya Mohanty; Manju Raman; Angela D.

Scott; Paul Winnemore; Brian Stedge-Stroud; councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Douglas Sloan; Josh Kurpies; [email protected]; Ramon Batista; David Gardinier; Caroline Torosis
Subject: March Meeting Cancellation-Meeting to Discuss SMPD Protection for Tennant Harassment
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Sir,
I was looking to speak to you and the rest of the Commissioners tonight at the Commission meeting but learned it was cancelled. I have serious concerns about how Santa Monica Police and the Santa Monica City Attorney's Office handle egregious tenant harassment by landlords in Santa Monica. This is escalating at a rapid pace and it potentially exposing the City of Santa Monica to litigation that would exacerbate the fiscal crisis of the budget.

Kindly reply with a day you are available to meet ( option: after Ash Wednesday St. Monica Catholic Community Mass tomorrow).

Thank you.

Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 26
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 10 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 8, 2025 7:34 AM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition Organizer
Cc: John Alle
Subject: Corrupt Beach Management

EXTERNAL
What's your thought? Supervisor LINDSEY HORVATH representing LA County's 3rd District, approved Will Rogers Beach Parking as a toxic waste dump site. Lindsey Horvath did NOT listen to LA City Council Member Traci Park's opposition and suggestions for alternate sites. Santa Monica Mayor Lana Negrete and Santa Monica's City Council remained silent. Do you think Supervisor Horvath cares about residents and visitors in Santa Monica, Pacific Palisades, or our seashore?
Insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DG8XoFUi1iN/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== YouTube
https://youtu.be/JxJbRl1_XwY
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 11 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 7, 2025 8:02 AM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition Organizer
Cc: John Alle
Subject: Change

EXTERNAL
For many younger residents who grew up, work and play in Santa Monica this encompasses what they think and know of the city. Many of us remember Santa Monica, the 3rd Street Promenade, Pier and parks differently. Safe and fun. Tomorrow the City Council will come together with the Public to lay out priorities and discuss economic development. Let's hope the Council listens and gets it right.

Insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DG5tbzKiE-h/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== YouTube
https://youtu.be/6uqqTP1E8YA
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) 12 David Yakobson
From: Tom Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 6, 2025 4:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMPL

EXTERNAL
Hello council members
As a long-term Sana Monica resident (40 plus years) and lifelong library patron, I have grown to appreciate the SM Public Library more and more over the years I have resided here. As a matter of fact, I worked there for a few years in the 90s. My most memorable shift was in the AV Dept on Sunday afternoons. As a patron I miss the Sunday and Friday hours, the 9:00 pm closing time during the week, and the friendly faces at the Ocean Park and Fairview branches. Santa Monica has a long tradition of strong community support for our library system as evidenced by the construction of the new Main Library some years ago. We need full funding for the library to be restored to pre-pandemic levels for so many reasons. Please give us back the library service we need and want in an enlightened community such as Santa Monica.

Tom Brown
Item 1
March 11, 2025
Item 1
March 11, 2025

1.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 1] (6981 : Written Comments) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 3.A
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Special Agenda Items
Subject: Commendation: Dr. Lizzy Moore - Santa Monica College Foundation Prepared By: Kennisha Williams, Customer Services Assistant Approved Forwarded to Council

3.A
Packet Pg. 30
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.A
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anuj Gupta, Director of Transportation, Department of Transportation, Transit Planning & Performance
Subject: Approval of Department of Transportation's Big Blue Bus Service Design Guidelines Update
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding that the Guidelines updates is not a “project” subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Approve the proposed updates to the Big Blue Bus Transit Service Guidelines, formerly known as the “Big Blue Bus Service Design, Performance, and Evaluation Guidelines”.

Summary
Big Blue Bus (BBB), a division of the Santa Monica Department of Transportation (DOT), operates 194 transit buses across 69 square miles of greater Los Angeles providing more than 800,000 rides each month. BBB’s Planning and Performance Division is responsible for planning and scheduling Big Blue Bus service. As required by Chapter 4 of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Circular 4702.1B, Title VI Requirements and Guidelines, DOT staff must set system-wide standards and policies for Big Blus Bus service design and operations. The standards and policies must address how service is distributed across the system and must ensure service design and operational practices do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin. The updated Big Blue Bus Transit Service Guidelines (Attachment A) are consistent with the federal requirements and addresses how service is designed, how performance is measured, and how service is evaluated across the system. Big Blue

4.A
Packet Pg. 31
2 of 5
Bus Transit Service Guidelines were last updated in October 2018 and are a component of the Big Blue Bus Title VI Standards and Policies.

Discussion
The FTA revised its Title VI Circular (C 4702.1B) on October 1, 2012, to provide additional clarification on Title VI regulations for transit agencies receiving federal funds.

DOT, as a recipient of federal funds, must comply with the evolution of revised Title VI guidelines. Non-compliance with Title VI may cause federal funding to be conditioned or withheld.

The following updates were made to the Big Blue Bus Transit Service Guidelines from the current 2018 version:
• Simplified name from “Big Blue Bus Service, Design, Performance, and Evaluation Guidelines” to “Big Blue Bus Transit Service Guidelines”. • Simplified the “Overview” and “Background Information” sections. • The “Service Performance” section was renamed to “Service Performance Monitoring”.
• The “Service Design” section was reorganized and expanded to better reflect the sub-categories comprising Service Design.
• Routes shown on the Service Categories table were updated to reflect changes under the Brighter Blue Five Year Service Plan the City Council adopted on July 9, 2024. An “Other Services” category for supplemental fixed route service was added to Service Categories.
• Minor modifications to “Span of Service” determination for Low Ridership routes and guidelines for changing span of service.
• Minor modifications to “Service Frequency” sub-category. • Simplification of “Vehicle Assignment” sub-category.
• Major modifications to “Stop Spacing, Placement, and Amenities” sub-category that include:
o Requiring adequate lighting at all stops.
o Lowering the requirement for seating at bus stops to 20 or more boardings.

4.A
Packet Pg. 32
3 of 5
o Lowering the classification of a “Very high volume” stop to 750 or more boardings for the purposes of installing amenities.
o Accessibility compliance guidelines for bus stops, amenities, and loading areas as required by the recently enacted “Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)” law.
• Service Performing Monitoring is reorganized into five sub-categories with emphasis on data needs and reporting schedule.
o Data Needs for Service Evaluation Process is moved from the Service Evaluation section.
o All items related to “Service Effectiveness Measures” and “Corrective Action” have been reorganized under the Service Evaluation sections namely the “New Service Evaluation” and “Changes to Existing Service” sub-category.
• Service Evaluation is reorganized into five sub-categories. o Changes to “Passengers per Revenue Hour” thresholds table to reflect current ridership trends and recommended actions.
o Changes to “Title VI Service Equity Analysis,” specifically what constitutes a major service change.
o Addition of “Annual Transit Service Plan” schedule and task description. o Addition of “Comprehensive Operational Analysis” as an as-needed planning and service design process.
o Removal of “Conclusion” section.
• Updates to Appendix section.

Environmental Review
The Transit Service Guidelines is not a “project” subject to CEQA. The guidelines are administrative in nature. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21065, the guidelines update does not meet the definition of a “project” subject to CEQA as it will not “cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.” Additionally, per Section 15378(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, a “project” does not include continuing administrative or maintenance activities, such as

4.A
Packet Pg. 33
4 of 5
purchases for supplies, personnel-related actions, general policy and procedure making. Therefore, the guidelines are not subject to CEQA.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
09/24/2013
(attachment B)
Adoption of Big Blue Bus Service Design, Performance &
Evaluation Guidelines
07/28/2015
(attachment C)
Big Blue Bus Title VI Service Standards and Policies for Conducting Service/Fare Equity Analyses
10/09/2018
(attachment D)
Modifications to BBB Service, Design, Performance, and
Evaluation Guidelines
07/09/2024
(attachment E)
Approval of Big Blue Bus Comprehensive Operational
Analysis (COA) Recommendations
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Adopting the proposed Transit Service Guidelines allows DOT to meet Federal requirements and to remain eligible for Federal funding. On average, DOT receives approximately $12 million annually in Federal financial assistance which supports the Department’s capital projects.

Prepared By: Alfredo Torales, Strategic Transit Planner Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025
B. Attachment B - September 24, 2013 Staff Report - Adopted BBB Service Design, Performance & Evaluation Guidelines (Web Link)
C. Attachment C - July 28, 2015 Staff Report - BBB Title VI Service Standards & Policies for Conducting Service/Fare Equity Analyses (Web Link) D. Attachment D - October 9, 2018 Staff Report - Modifications to BBB Service, Design, Performance, and Evaluation Guidelines (Web Link)

4.A
Packet Pg. 34
5 of 5
E. Attachment E - July 9, 2024 Staff Report - Approval of Big Blue Bus Comprehensive Operational Analysis (Web Link)

4.A
Packet Pg. 35

TRANSIT SERVICE

GUIDELINES
MARCH 2025

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 1 Overview ...............................................................................................................................................................2 Figure 1: Service Standard Components ...........................................................................................................2 2 Service Design......................................................................................................................................................3 Figure 2: Components of Service Design...........................................................................................................3

2.1 Service Categories.........................................................................................................................................3 Table 1: Service Categories.................................................................................................................................3

2.2 Fixed Route Design........................................................................................................................................4

2.3 Service Frequency .........................................................................................................................................4

2.4 Connectivity ...................................................................................................................................................5

2.5 Span of Service ..............................................................................................................................................5 Table 2: High Ridership Corridor Span of Service..............................................................................................5 Table 3: Low Ridership Corridor Span of Service ..............................................................................................5

2.6 Bus Assignment .............................................................................................................................................6

2.7 Stop Spacing, Placement, and Amenities ...................................................................................................6 Table 4: Stop Area Dimensions...........................................................................................................................7 Table 5: Amenities Based on Stop Activity.........................................................................................................7

2.8 Passenger Loads................................................................................................................................................8 Table 6: Passenger Load Standard .....................................................................................................................8 3 Service Performance Monitoring .............................................................................................................................9 Figure 3: Service Performance Monitoring.........................................................................................................9

3.1 Passengers per Revenue Hour .....................................................................................................................9

3.2 Farebox Recovery ..........................................................................................................................................9

3.3 On-Time Performance...................................................................................................................................9

3.4 Data Needs...................................................................................................................................................10 Table 7: Systemwide Data Needs .....................................................................................................................10 Table 8: Route-Based Data Needs....................................................................................................................10

3.5 Performance Monitoring and Reporting Schedule....................................................................................11 4 Service Evaluation...................................................................................................................................................11 Figure 4: Service Evaluation ..............................................................................................................................11

4.1 New Service Evaluation...............................................................................................................................11 Table 9: New Service Compliance....................................................................................................................12

4.2 Changes to Existing Service........................................................................................................................12 Table 10: Passengers per Revenue Hour .........................................................................................................13

4.3 Title VI Service Equity Analysis ...................................................................................................................14

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 1 4.4 Public Input & City Council Approval.........................................................................................................15

4.5 Annual Transit Service Plan .......................................................................................................................15 Table 11: Annual Service Plan Schedule..........................................................................................................15

4.6 Comprehensive Operational Analysis .......................................................................................................15 5 Appendices.........................................................................................................................................................16

5.1 Appendix A....................................................................................................................................................16 Santa Monica Department of Transportation Annual Report – Big Blue Bus KPIs............................................16

5.2 Appendix B ...................................................................................................................................................16 Public Hearing Procedures for Major Service or Fare Changes .........................................................................16

5.3 Appendix C...................................................................................................................................................16 Brighter Blue Five-Year Service Plan City Council presentation ........................................................................16

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 2 1 Overview
Since 1928, Big Blue Bus has been the primary transit provider for the City of Santa Monica as well as many surrounding portions of West Los Angeles. Service is provided to many major area destinations and transit centers, namely Downtown Santa Monica, UCLA, Santa Monica College, the LAX/Metro Transit Center, eight (8) Metro E Line Stations, Culver City Transit Center, and Downtown Los Angeles. Big Blue Bus operates on major corridors, including Santa Monica Blvd, Wilshire Blvd, Pico Blvd, Lincoln Blvd, Bundy Dr, and others.

The Big Blue Bus Transit Service Guidelines provide a framework to regularly monitor and evaluate the service and, when necessary, make modifications to ensure Big Blue Bus adapts to the evolving transit system and meets the needs of its riders. The service standards have three main components that can be divided further into integral parts related to service planning, as seen in Figure 1:

Figure 1: Service Standard Components
The Service Design standards outline how Big Blue Bus service should be designed and operated.

The Service Performance Monitoring standards describe the metrics by which Big Blue Bus will be monitored to ensure the highest possible levels of performance in terms of service effectiveness, efficiency, and quality for riders.

The Service Evaluation process analyzes and updates service plans while keeping riders, employees and visitors informed of changes.

Big Blue Bus service is planned and operated by the City of Santa Monica’s Department of Transportation (DOT). The Service Guidelines are consistent with USDOT’s Title VI Regulations, which prohibit discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin.

Service
Design
Service
Performance
Monitoring
Service
Evaluation

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 3 2 Service Design
Service design standards refer to how transit service is designed, implemented, and operated on the street, from route alignment and stop spacing to frequency and span of service. The standards outlined in this section are not intended to be absolute, but guidelines to develop an efficient, effective transit network.

Figure 2: Components of Service Design

2.1 Service Categories
Big Blue Bus service can be grouped into the following categories:

Table 1: Service Categories
Category Network Role Routes*
LOCAL Provides fixed route service along major and secondary corridors and serving larger local destinations and intermodal connections. 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15,
16, 17, 18, 41, 43, 44
RAPID Provides limited-stop fixed route service between destinations of strong regional importance.

R12
COMMUTER Augments the local network with additional peak-hour fixed route service to key destinations.

R10
DEMAND

RESPONSE
Provides shared curb-to-curb rides for areas where regular bus routes are impractical and for seniors and people with disabilities.

MODE
OTHER

SERVICES
Supplemental fixed route service such as school-specific trips, or “trippers,” to alleviate overcrowding or to accommodate specific school travel patterns.
9-Pali High Express
14-Paul Revere
Trippers
*Routes reflected are the result of services recommendations identified in the five-year service plan (2024 – 2029) adopted by the City Council in July 2024.

Each category of service may have different standards and expectations based on the types of markets served and the operating protocols required.

Corridors With Multiple Services – Big Blue Bus currently operates one Local/Rapid service pairings on the same corridor – Westwood Blvd. (Route 8/Rapid 12). To determine whether additional corridors may warrant Local/Rapid service, the following criteria should be met:
• Performance - Operating multiple service requires a significant investment in resources and should only be implemented on very high-performing corridors. Per section 3, Service Performance, corridors which perform at 150% of system average or better may be candidates for Rapid/Local service.

Service
Frequency
Connectivity Fixed Route
Design
Service
Categories
Service
Categories Bus Assignment
Stop Spacing,
Placement, and
Amenities
Passenger Loads

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 4 • Major stops - Corridors which have several high-volume stops interspersed with lower volume stops are good candidates for Rapid/ Local service, as the Rapid will serve a majority of ridership by making only the major stops.
• Corridors shared with another provider – For example, LA Metro operates service along Wilshire and Santa Monica boulevards. In cases like these, Big Blue Bus should evaluate and determine appropriate levels of service.

2.2 Fixed Route Design
The alignment of each route is a key factor in its ability to successfully serve riders’ mobility needs. Route design refers to route directness, connections to key origins and destinations, and how the route interfaces with other transit services. Big Blue Bus route design falls into four categories:
• Direct – Routes should be designed to serve origins and destinations via direct pathways, minimizing out-of-direction movements. This provides a faster service for riders while minimizing cost. • Arterial – Routes should be designed to serve major arterial streets, avoiding smaller neighborhood streets. The exception is when a route is intentionally designed to serve a neighborhood or destination. • Grid Based – Routes should be designed in a grid-based structure, with higher frequency routes serving major corridors and connecting on-street rather than deviating to serve transfer hubs. A limited number of exceptions are hubs forming the beginning or end of routes and/or serving major destinations, namely Downtown Santa Monica, UCLA, Pico/Rimpau Transit Center, and Metro Rail stations at LAX, Culver City, and along Wilshire Boulevard. • Interagency Connectivity – Big Blue Bus service should connect with other transit agencies operating on major corridors and the Metro Rail network, which today includes the Metro E Line on the Westside and the upcoming opening of the Metro D Line extension.

2.3 Service Frequency
Service frequency is defined as how often the bus arrives and results in how long riders must wait for the bus.

With higher frequencies, riders will wait on average less time for a bus, which helps make the service more useful to riders. At the same time, however, higher frequencies can significantly increase costs by requiring more buses and drivers.

High frequency Service is defined as:
• 10-minute frequency or better on weekdays during most of the day. • 15-minute frequency or better on weekends during most of the day.

The following are minimum frequency standards.
• Local routes should operate at a minimum frequency of every 30 minutes during most of the day. o Could operate at every 60 minutes at night to provide extended service hours. o When supported by ridership, service should be provided at higher frequencies such as every 20 minutes, 15 minutes, 12 minutes, 10 minutes, up to every 7.5 minutes. • Rapid routes should operate at every 15 minutes or better. • Commuter route frequency should be tailored to demand volumes.

Whenever possible, service frequency should be designed as “clock-facing” where service operates every 5, 10, 12, 15, 20, or 30 minutes –divisible by 60 – where the same times repeat each hour.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 5 This makes service easier for riders to remember and use without consulting schedules. Exceptions are permitted where a route (usually with less frequency) will be operationally inefficient (e.g., require an additional vehicle resource) with a clock-facing schedule.

2.4 Connectivity
Connectivity refers to facilitating ridertransfers to and from other routes and services. Transfers can take place at major transit hubs such as the LAX/Metro Transit Center or on-street at major intersections.

Routes cannot always provide riders with a one-seat ride to their destination, thus the need for convenient transfers. High frequency service on major corridors facilitates convenient transfers by minimizing wait time for riders transferring to and from other services. Designing service to enable convenient transfers allows Big Blue Bus to minimize service duplication (overlapping).

2.5 Span of Service
Span of service defines how many hours each day a certain route will operate. A longer span of service allows a route to serve more riders throughout the day for a wider variety of purposes. Longer span of service also results in more operating costs.

Span of service is based on rider demand and the corridor served rather than on the category of service (Local, Rapid, etc.). For example, a Local route serving a major corridor with high ridership may operate more hours in the day than a Local route serving a smaller, secondary corridor with lower ridership. When determining span of service, connecting routes should be coordinated to maintain transfer connections.

Table 2: High Ridership Corridor Span of Service
Weekday Weekend
Start Time End Time Start Time End Time
5am-6am Midnight 6am-7am Midnight
Table 3: Low Ridership Corridor Span of Service
Weekday Weekend
Start Time End Time Start Time End Time
5am-6am 10pm 6am-7am 9pm
Span of Service Guidelines:
• Consider extending service span when first/last trip carries 20+ passengers per hour. • Consider reducing service span when first/last trip carries 10 passengers or less per hour. • Consider operating similar service on Friday/Saturday based on demand. • Commuter service spans should be tailored to demand patterns. • Service may need to be adjusted on certain routes depending on the operating hours of connecting services such as the Metro Rail.
• During off peak hours, span of service may be reduced on routes with low ridership, where riders can access another nearby parallel running route with extended span of service.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 6 2.6 Bus Assignment
The Big Blue Bus fleet contains three sub fleets that are assigned by service type as follows:
• 40-foot buses
o The 40-foot buses make up over 80 percent of the Big Blue Bus fleet and are assigned to most of the service.
• 30-to-35-foot buses
o The 30-to 35-foot buses are assigned to routes with low ridership and/or to routes that use local and residential streets. Some 30-to 35-foot buses may also be assigned to routes that primarily use 40-foot buses, specifically at times when ridership is expected to be low, such as nights or weekends.
• 60-foot articulated buses
o The 60-foot articulated buses are assigned to routes and vehicle blocks with both higher average passenger loads and stops with sufficient curb space to physically accommodate the bus.

To ensure fair distribution of fleet quality, propulsion system (CNG, battery electric, etc.) and age across the system, buses should not be permanently assigned to specific routes. All routes should be serviced by the entire range of buses in the fleet whenever possible.

2.7 Stop Spacing, Placement, and Amenities
Stop Spacing and Placement – This standard involves the distance between bus stops. Wider stop spacing allows for less stops minimizing travel time for riders on the bus but requires some riders to walk further to access service. Different service types have different spacing standards. For example, local stops are spaced closer together than Rapid or Commuter stops.
• Local Bus Stop Spacing – For Local services, stop spacing from 1,000 feet up to ¼ mile (roughly 1,300 feet) is desirable. Very dense neighborhoods or smaller streets can have more closely spaced stops (since trip distances are usually shorter) while stops on major corridors can be spaced out at the farther range of the spacing standard (i.e., ¼ mile). Existing stops with consistently low usage may be consolidated with other stops or removed altogether to increase service speed and reliability. • Rapid Bus Stop Spacing – Rapid bus routes on corridors also served by Local routes should have stops spaced a minimum of ½ mile apart, and should be placed at major destinations, intersections, and transfer points. Rapid stop placement should be considered based on stop spacing and ridership. • Commuter Service Stop Spacing - Commuter services can use either Local or Rapid stopping patterns depending on the type of service and passenger needs. • Stop Placement – Placing stops on the far side of an intersection is recommended wherever possible.

Far side stop placement improves bus travel times as well as pedestrian and bicycle safety (since they will cross the street behind instead of in front of the bus). • Stop Removal - Any stop with less than five (5) total average daily weekday boardings plus alightings will be considered for elimination after a review of stop distances and consideration of impact on the affected riders. Stop spacing, route frequency, and span of service will be considered as part of this review. In cases where removal is necessary because of this analysis or safety concerns, the revised stop spacing distances may deviate from the recommended standards. • Stop Design – The length of a stop is based on several factors including size of bus serving stop, number of routes serving stop, space to merge back into traffic, and distance from crosswalk.

Although not always feasible due to limited curb space, the following is the ideal stop lengths that should be implemented when possible. See Table 4.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 7 Table 4: Stop Area Dimensions
Bus size Merge In and
Out Length
Buffer distance
from crosswalk
Total Stop
Length
Two (2) or
more buses
expected at
any one time.
30-ft or 40-ft 25-ft + 25-ft 10-ft 90-100-ft 140-150-ft 60-ft 25-ft +25-ft 10-ft 110-120-ft 180-190-ft
• Stop Amenity Placement – When placing new amenities, considerations include the existing site conditions at the stop, nearby amenities (especially when considering real-time information signs), ridership (Table 5), nearby connections, places of interest, environmental and demographic factors.

Table 5: Amenities Based on Stop Activity
Average Daily
Boardings Bus Stop Classification Amenities Provided
ALL STOPS All stops Printed public information kiosk plus adequate lighting 20 OR MORE

BOARDINGS
Low volume or more Above plus seating
50 OR MORE

BOARDINGS
Medium volume or more Above plus shelter or shade
100 OR MORE

BOARDINGS
High volume or more Above plus real-time signage. Waste receptacles (optional).
750 OR MORE

BOARDINGS
Very high volume Above plus multiple shelters or extra-large shelter. • Bus Stop Amenities – The Big Blue Bus service area includes the City of Santa Monica. Big Blue Bus works with various City Departments on the installation of bus stop amenities within the city. At these stops, amenities are allocated based on volume of average daily stop activity. • Accessibility Compliance – In 2025, the updated Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) were adopted and became law. They require Transit Agencies to comply with technical guidelines when siting Transit Stops and Transit Shelters. These guidelines only apply to new projects initiated after January 17th, 2025. PROWAG stipulates:
o Boarding and alighting areas at sidewalk or street-level transit stops must serve each accessible vehicle entry and exit.
o Boarding and alighting areas shall have a clear length of 96 inches (2440 mm) minimum, measured perpendicular to the face of the curb or street edge, and a clear width of 60 inches (1525 mm) minimum, measured parallel to the street.
o The slope of boarding and alighting areas measured parallel to the street shall be the same as the grade of the street. The slope of boarding and alighting areas measured perpendicular to the street shall be 1:48 (2.1%) maximum.
o In alterations, boarding and alighting areas and boarding platforms shall be connected to existing pedestrian circulation paths by pedestrian access routes. o Transit shelters shall be connected by pedestrian access routes. o Transit shelters shall provide a minimum clear space complying with R404 Clear Spaces; entirely within the shelter. Where seating is provided within transit shelters, the clear space shall be located either at one end of a seat or so as to not overlap the area within 18 inches (455 mm) from the front edge of the seat.
o Subject to section R410.10 Height from Ground Surface, Visual characters on signs shall be 40 inches (1015 mm) minimum above the ground surface.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 8 o Protruding objects within transit shelters shall comply with R402: Protruding Objects and Vertical Clerance.
▪ Objects with leading edges more than 27 inches (685 mm) and less than 80 inches (2030 mm) above the walking surface shall not protrude horizontally more than 4 inches (100 mm) into pedestrian circulation paths.

Where objects are mounted on a single post or pylon and the objects are more than 27 inches (685 mm) and less than 80 inches (2030 mm) above the walking surface, the objects shall not protrude into the pedestrian circulation path more than 4 inches (100 mm) measured horizontally from the post or pylon or more than 4 inches (100mm) measured horizontally from the outside edge of the base where the base height is 2 ½ inches (64 mm) minimum.

Bus stop amenities outside of the City of Santa Monica generally fall under the standards of their respective jurisdictions, such as the City of Los Angeles. Big Blue Bus has limited authority over the amenities at these stops but will work with those jurisdictions to advance improvements to the bus stop experience for its riders.

2.8 Passenger Loads
Passenger Loads – This standard specifies the acceptable average number of riders on a bus at any given time.

Overcrowding should be avoided whenever possible. Guidelines related to passenger loads are based on Big Blue Bus vehicle capacities and transit industry standards, and are designed to balance safety, passenger comfort, and operating efficiency.
• Passenger Load Methodology – Passenger loads are calculated by taking the number of passengers onboard a vehicle divided by the seated capacity of the vehicle. For example, a vehicle with 38 seats carrying 38 passengers would have a passenger load of 100 percent.

The maximum passenger load is calculated at the busiest point on the route during the busiest hour.

For instance, if a service operates at a 15-minute frequency, then 4 buses would pass the busiest point in an hour. The average number of passengers for these 4 buses should not exceed the maximum passenger load standard shown below, even though one bus may be more crowded than the average.

If the standard is consistently exceeded, Big Blue Bus should evaluate options to alleviate overcrowding. However, the standards are designed to allow standees during peak periods on a regular basis.

Table 6: Passenger Load Standard
Time of Day Service Type

RAPID LOCAL EXPRESS/COMMUTER
Average Maximum Passenger Load (percent of seated capacity by service type) PEAK WEEKDAY 120% 120% 120%
ALL OTHER TIMES 100% 100% 100%
Addressing Overcrowding – If the maximum passenger load standards are consistently exceeded, two different techniques could be implemented to alleviate overcrowding: First, assigning a larger vehicle (when possible) to match passenger loads, and second, providing more frequent service to disperse passengers across multiple buses.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 9 3 Service Performance Monitoring
Service performance standards are necessary to ensure that all services are fulfilling their roles in the transit network and contributing to the overall financial sustainability of Big Blue Bus. Performance should be measured regularly to identify trends over time, and to allow prompt changes to be enacted if necessary. The following performance metrics and standards help ensure that Big Blue Bus services are useful to riders as well as cost-effective for the agency. Service performance should be monitored quarterly and after every schedule change, but major service change decisions should be based on annual data.

Figure 3: Service Performance Monitoring

3.1 Passengers per Revenue Hour
Passengers per Revenue Hour (PRH) is a measure of service effectiveness or productivity based on ridership (unlinked boardings) generated for each hour of service operated. It is the primary metric used to determine whether modifications should be made to a route. When this metric either 1) does not meet or 2) exceeds certain thresholds, Big Blue Bus should consider service changes that utilize resources more effectively based on rider demand.

Some seasonal fluctuation in performance is to be expected, as ridership to schools and colleges may be lower during the summer, and recreational ridership may be higher. But overall, the thresholds outlined in the Service Evaluation section of this document provide guidelines for corrective action to take based on the passenger per revenue hour performance of each service.

3.2 Farebox Recovery
Farebox Recovery is an indicator that measures the amount of service operating costs that is recouped through farebox revenue and is expressed as a percentage. The higher the percentage, the higher the amount of cost that is covered by farebox revenue. Farebox recovery considers the cost of operation, the number of riders, and the average fares that customers pay. It’s important to note that due to the high number of transfers at Big Blue Bus, individual Farebox Recovery ratios should not be the sole reason for a service reduction but rather a consideration along with additional factors.

Big Blue Bus will monitor farebox performance to ascertain ridership trends and fare media choice. In the event of a proposal to change fare types or institute a fare increase or decrease, staff will perform a Fare Equity Analysis to determine the impacts, if any, on low-income and minority riders.

3.3 On-Time Performance
On-Time Performance defines a minimum threshold that Big Blue Bus should meet regarding the percentage of total daily trips and timepoints that are recorded as on time. On-time performance reflects both the quality and reliability of service.

Passengers
per Revenue
Hour
Farebox
Recovery
On-Time
Performance Data Needs
Performance
Monitoring

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 10 Big Blue Bus defines “on time” as one (1) minute before to five (5) minutes after the scheduled timepoint, disregarding early arrivals at the final timepoint.

The goal of 85% on-time performance system-wide is a common industry standard, which allows for some level of service variability while maintaining the reasonable expectation of reliability for riders.

3.4 Data Needs
The performance measures discussed above require the regular collection, cleaning and evaluation of the following data points:
• Ridership - Total boardings and alightings.
• Fare Revenue - Amount of fare and other revenue.
• Operational data - Number of runs, buses, revenue miles, and revenue hours per route by day type. • Operating Costs - The cost of operating the service.
• On-Time Performance - Departure times at each timepoint (and arrival at final timepoint). • Customer Feedback – Comments collected from City of Santa Monica 311 reporting system, Motor coach operator, community events, or partner jurisdiction input. • Demographics – Rider demographics including proportion of riders belonging to low-income households, identifying as minority, seniors, and people with disabilities will be collected primarily by on-board customer surveys. Additionally, U.S. Census or American Community Survey data will be used to identify these groups and their geographic relationship to Big Blue Bus routes. • Partnerships – Collect ridership, revenue and costs, and any other data to satisfy any partnerships agreements such as those with employers, educational institutions, and government.

When presenting data, staff should consider if the analysis done is from a systemwide or route-based perspective.

This distinction is important when determining what data needs to be gathered. Tables 7 and 8 below provide overviews of typical data needs for both systemwide and route-based analysis.

Table 7: Systemwide Data Needs
Systemwide
Total Ridership:
• Average Weekday,
Saturday, and Sunday
Passengers
Miles
Traveled
Vehicles Revenue
Miles (VRM)
Vehicle Revenue
Hours
Passengers per
Revenue Hour
Passenger Feedback On-Time
Performance
Total Operating
Costs
Operating Cost
per VRH
Operating Cost per
Passenger Mile
Operating Cost per
Passenger
Fare Revenue Average Passenger
Fare
Subsidy per
Passenger
Farebox Recovery
Ratio
Table 8: Route-Based Data Needs
Route based
Ridership by Route
• Average Weekday,
Saturday and Sunday
On-Time Performance by Route Passengers per Revenue Hour by Route Farebox Recovery by Route Cost per Passenger Boarding by Route On-Time Performance by Route

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 11 Comprehensive
Operations
Analysis
Annual Transit
Service Plan
Public Input
and Council
Approval
Title VI Service
Equity
Analysis
Changes to
Existing
Service
New Service
Evaluation

3.5 Performance Monitoring and Reporting Schedule
Performance will be monitored on a quarterly, service change, and annual basis, and will be reported on an annual basis. See Appendix A for a sample Santa Monica Department of Transportation Annual Report. 4 Service Evaluation
Service evaluations should be conducted to analyze the need for new Big Blue Bus services or significant changes to existing services. These evaluations aim to enhance service design and productivity while maintaining a consistent, user-friendly transit system.

Figure 4: Service Evaluation

4.1 New Service Evaluation
New Service – As ridership needs, transit options, and development patterns change, Big Blue Bus will analyze the need for new services. New services will be evaluated with respect to design standards and consistency with adopted policy principles.

Planning and implementing new transit service requires an examination of certain characteristics of the proposed service area. The densities and demographic characteristics of a given service area, as well as destinations served and integration with the surrounding transit network, are key parts of transit success. It is important to note that new service implementation is not dependent on any one factor below but arises from a combination of each of these factors. To determine whether an area warrants new transit service, Big Blue Bus will analyze the following characteristics of a proposed service area:
• Population Density - A minimum level of density (approximately 3,000 persons per square mile) needs to be present in each area to support regular bus service. In general, higher density areas are more conducive to effective bus service than low density areas due to greater demand and potential ridership. Density of the proposed new service area will be compared to the densities of existing service areas.
• Demographics – Neighborhoods and census tracts with higher-than-average proportions of seniors, people with disabilities, students, low-income individuals and households without automobiles should be considered for service expansion.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 12 • Parking - There are several neighborhoods and destinations in Santa Monica and Los Angeles where free or inexpensive parking is in short supply. These sites may have a higher propensity for transit ridership than similar sites with ample free parking.
• Transit Demand Management - Several schools and businesses in Santa Monica and Los Angeles offer subsidized transit passes and other programs to encourage their constituents to use transit.

Depending on the program features, these programs can lead to an increased demand for bus service. • Key Destinations - Connecting residents with key destinations such as employment centers, hospitals, schools, shopping, and entertainment is a key factor in designing bus service. • Network Integration - Any new service should avoid duplicating existing service (see service spacing guidelines) and should connect to the existing transit network. • Projected Performance - To ensure continued maintenance or improvement of Big Blue Bus service productivity, the new service should be projected to perform at levels that meet or exceed the system metrics outlined in the Service Performance Monitoring section. If the evaluation does not project those levels, Big Blue Bus should reconsider or modify the proposed new service until it does.

New services depend on budget availability and can only be initiated when funding allows, either through resource reallocation, additional fare revenue, or new outside funding. Introduction of new services are subject to a trial period of one year to meet minimum performance standards commensurate with service category using the following process:

New Service Productivity
New transit service should be evaluated for up to two (2) years to determine long term viability. During this time staff should monitor new routes based on their compliance with the guidelines referenced in Table 7 below.

Table 9: New Service Compliance
Timeframe 6 months 12 months 18 months 24 months
% Min. compliance with passenger per revenue hour
metric (Guideline 3.1)
50% 75% 90% 100%
New services will be examined at the intervals above to assess whether they are meeting minimum service effectiveness metrics.

If the new service does not meet the minimum service metric at the conclusion of the two (2) year period or during any preceding six-month period identified above, the new service will be subject to a corrective action plan. New service that does not meet minimum productivity metrics for passengers per weekday revenue hour following implementation of a corrective action plan will be subject to discontinuation.

4.2 Changes to Existing Service
Passengers per Revenue Hour Thresholds
Table eight provides recommended corrective action plans for existing routes failing to meet certain passenger per revenue hour thresholds. Routes in the low or high thresholds may warrant more significant corrective actions, while routes in the middle are adequately fulfilling their roles in the network. The following are passenger per revenue hour thresholds and recommended service changes when not met or exceeded.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 13 Table 10: Passengers per Revenue Hour
Passengers per Revenue Hour Recommended Action
10 OR LESS Eliminate trips or route
11-14 Reduce service to minimum frequency
15-29 Maintain service levels
30 OR MORE Increase service to or above goal frequency
Low-Performing Service (carrying 14 or fewer passengers per hour) If a route consistently does not meet the minimum thresholds for passengers per revenue hour, the service is subject to a Corrective Action Plan.

These routes will be evaluated to determine their potential for improvement. Evaluation and potential corrective actions include the following:
• Segment Level Analysis - A segment level analysis of a low-performing service may highlight a specific portion of the route that significantly reduces the overall performance, causing it to perform below the threshold. If a low-performing segment is identified, it can be modified to attempt to increase productivity for the route. If the results of a segment level analysis turn out to be inconclusive, however, modifications to the entire route should be considered. • Operational Analysis - Realigning service to cover only critical segments or eliminating unnecessary delay (e.g. deviations) are ways to reduce travel time and potentially improve productivity and performance.
• Change in Service Levels - Adjusting the service levels of a low-performing route – by any combination of frequency, span, or day of week changes – may improve the service for riders and make the route more productive and higher performing.
• Cost Sharing - Exploring cost sharing or public-private partnerships can reduce the amount of subsidy required on low-performing services. This is applicable for routes which do not meet minimum performance standards yet serve a need identified by businesses, schools, attractions, or other organizations that may be willing to assist with funding operations to continue service. • Targeted Marketing -Marketing can help to raise the public awareness of a low performing route. Poor ridership may be a result of a lack of public knowledge of a route, and investing in marketing can reverse this trend. Employment centers, shopping districts, schools, hospitals, agencies, and other major entities can be targeted for marketing of the service. • Rider Outreach - Onboard surveys and rider interviews are methods for gaining valuable information on how a route can be improved. These methods can reveal information about popular destinations that a route may bypass, or other aspects of a service that may not be useful to riders.

Using this information, Big Blue Bus will create a Corrective Action Plan for improving performance.

The Corrective Action Plan will be formally implemented in the next feasible service change window given the limitations in place regarding public process, public hearing (if required), and the Annual Service Plan process.

Once a Corrective Action Plan is implemented, the performance of the route will be monitored to ensure it meets minimum thresholds. Once a route reaches at least minimum performance thresholds, the process of Corrective Action is deemed concluded and any subsequent low performance is treated as a new event.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 14 • Discontinuation - This is the final option for a low-performing route that does not meet minimum performance thresholds. It can be applied to a route segment or the route as a whole. If none of the corrective actions are successful in raising its productivity, discontinuation may be considered to ensure optimization of resources. Any decision to discontinue service will consider impacts on riders.

Average-Performing Service (carrying 15 to 29 passengers per hour) Routes in this category are adequately fulfilling their roles in the transit network, and no corrective action is required. These routes will be monitored on an on-going basis to determine whether their performance improves, decreases, or remains steady. While no action is necessary, ranking in this category does not preclude service adjustments at the discretion of Big Blue Bus. • Actions - Routes with average performance may be consistent throughout or may combine very high and low performing segments or trips. These routes in this category should undergo detailed analysis at the trip and segment level to identify any areas of significantly high or low performance. Individual trips or segments that qualify as low or very high performing will be subject to in the corresponding service adjustments in those sections.

High-Performing Service (carrying 30 or more passengers per hour) Routes with high performance may indicate a need for greater investment, as their performance may signal overcrowding, capacity constraints, and unmet rider needs. The following course of action should be followed for high-performing routes:
• Increase service levels - To maintain a high quality of service, significant vehicle overcrowding should be prevented. Big Blue Bus should improve the service’s frequency, span, or days of week served.

Maintaining and Improving On-Time Performance
Routes not meeting the on-time performance standard will be subject to an evaluation and corrective actions.

Updating schedules, so that timetables reflect actual performance, may improve reported on-time performance without significant operational changes. If the evaluation finds that additional resources (i.e., buses) are needed to improve a route’s on-time performance, it should only be considered within the context of the entire service planning process to determine its priority.

4.3 Title VI Service Equity Analysis
A Major Service Change will require that a Title VI Service Equity Analysis be conducted. A Title VI Service Equity Analysis is conducted to determine any potential disparate impacts on minority populations or disproportionate burdens on low-income populations stemming from the proposed service change. If the analysis results in potential disparate impact and/or disproportionate burdens on these populations, Big Blue Bus will seek to mitigate those impacts by modifying the proposed service change. The following are considered Major Service Changes:
• A route change that impacts 25 percent or more of a route’s linear mileage. • Service span or frequency changes affecting 25 percent or more of a route’s revenue hours. • Proposed changes that are anticipated to be contentious with the public. • Proposed service that is expected to be operated more than twelve (12) months, including pilot programs.
• Elimination of a route has been operated for more than twelve (12) months, including pilot programs. • Any combination of proposed route changes that cumulatively impact 5 percent or more of the total system revenue hours.
• Any permanent fare or fare media change (subject to a Fare Equity Analysis).

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 15 4.4 Public Input & City Council Approval
Big Blue Bus will conduct public outreach prior to any route change. For minor adjustments made during regular schedule changes, Big Blue Bus will notify riders and the public of upcoming changes. For Major Service Changes, Big Blue Bus will follow the procedures set forth in the “Public Hearing Procedures for Major Service or Fare Changes.”
Major service changes must be approved by the Santa Monica City Council before implementing.

4.5 Annual Transit Service Plan
Big Blue Bus will develop an Annual Service Plan for the subsequent calendar year (starting in 2026). This Annual Service Plan is the culmination of service planning efforts throughout the year and provides Big Blue Bus staff and the public a framework in which to track service changes, provide and digest feedback, and to adjust any potential proposed changes to the service network. The following schedule outlines how the Annual Service Plan will be developed over the course of the year:

Table 11: Annual Service Plan Schedule
Timeframe Responsible Party Tasks
January – March Planning,
Communications,
Finance, Operations
• Propose service plan and changes for subsequent
year.
• Analyze existing conditions.
• Preliminary Title VI Service Equity Analysis (If
necessary).
• Creation of maps, tables, and social media copy.

April - June Planning,
Communications
• Outreach and Engagement period, present draft
service plan at community events, social media,
stakeholder channels.
• Receive and document external and internal
feedback on plan.

July - September Planning,
Communications,
Operations
• Analyze feedback.
• Finalize network and frequency changes.
• Final Title VI Service Equity Analysis (if necessary).

October - December Planning,
Communications,
Operations
• Approve final service plan for upcoming year.
• Acquire City Council approval if necessary.
• Share plan with riders’ and community stakeholders.

4.6 Comprehensive Operational Analysis
Big Blue Bus should conduct a comprehensive operational analysis (COA) as needed to ensure the service is meeting the needs of its riders and responding changes in its service area. The COA should consist of the following:
• On-board customer survey
• Public outreach & stakeholder engagement
• Route by route analysis
• Title VI analysis
• Public meetings and hearings (if necessary)
• List of recommended actions
The most recent COA was adopted by Santa Monica City Council on July 9th, 2024. An overview of the recommendations adopted by the City Council can be found in Appendix C below.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) 16 5 Appendices

5.1 Appendix A
Santa Monica Department of Transportation Annual Report – Big Blue Bus KPIs

5.2 Appendix B
Public Hearing Procedures for Major Service or Fare Changes

5.3 Appendix C
Brighter Blue Five-Year Service Plan City Council presentation

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update)

4.A.

SANTA MONICA’S BIG BLUE BUS

PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES FOR MAJOR SERVICE

OR FARE CHANGES

1. BACKGROUND
Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus (BBB) is required by the Federal Transit Act, as amended through 1992, to establish a policy which defines a process to solicit and consider public comment prior to raising fares or implementing a major reduction of transit services.

2. BBB POLICY
A. It shall be the BBB’s policy that public comments be solicited prior to:

1. A route change that impacts 25 percent or more of a route’s linear mileage.

2. Service span or frequency changes affecting 25 percent or more of a route’s revenue hours.

3. Proposed changes that are anticipated to be contentious with the public.

4. Proposed service that is expected to be operated more than twelve (12) months, including pilot programs.

5. Elimination of a route has been, operated for more than twelve (12) months, including pilot programs.

6. Any combination of proposed route changes that cumulatively impact 5 percent or more of the total system revenue hours.

7. Any permanent fare or fare media change (subject to a Fare Equity Analysis) .

B. It shall be the BBB’s policy that the following shall be exempt from public comment and public hearing:

1. A minor change in fare or service. Examples would be temporarily reduced, experimental or promotional fares, minor reroutes, or minor temporary reroutes due to street construction(s) or minor schedule changes.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 73
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update)

2. Experimental, seasonal or emergency service or fare changes expected to exist fewer than one hundred and eighty (180) consecutive days in service. If these changes ultimately continue to remain in effect for more than one hundred and eighty (180) consecutive days, they will be the subject of public comment and public hearing.

3. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
When required, the public comment process will begin with the publishing of a legal notice seven calendar days in advance of the public hearing date in the local newspapers of general circulation. This notice will set a specific place, date and time for one or more public hearings. Written comments will also be accepted on the proposed changes seven calendar days beyond initial publishing of the legal notice.

Legal notices will inform the public of the proposed actions that initiated the public comment process. Press releases will also be prepared and sent to the local media.

4. SCHEDULING PUBLIC HEARING(S)
The public hearing(s) will be scheduled and conducted by the City of Santa Monica City Council at a time, date and place to be designated. The facility utilized for public hearings will be accessible to persons with disabilities. Special arrangements will be made for sight or hearing impaired persons if requested at least three days prior to the meeting.

5. PROCEDURE FOR CONDUCTING PUBLIC HEARING
Forms will be available to attendees to register their presence and desire to speak.

Public hearings will begin with a reading of the public notice, purpose and proposed action that necessitated the public hearing. After an explanation of the proposed action is completed, the public will be invited to offer their comments. The City Council will determine the amount of time the public has to comment during the public hearing. After all registered persons have commented, a final opportunity will be offered for any additional public comment. This offering will precede the close of the public hearing.

6. DOCUMENTATION OF PUBLIC HEARING
Official records of BBB public hearings on fare or service adjustments will be generated by:

A. Affidavits of newspaper publications of public notices.

B. Press releases conveying information on upcoming public hearings.

C. Digital recordings and transcripts of proceedings.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 74
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update)

7. ADDRESSING PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED
All relevant comments received verbally, digitally, or in writing at a public hearing, or as otherwise conveyed to BBB prior to the established deadline, will be entered into the public record of the comment process. Subsequent to the public comment period, staff will evaluate and analyze all relevant comments received and prepare a written report for consideration by the Santa Monica City Council.

8. CITY COUNCIL
The City Council will be notified by the City Manager of all written public comment solicitations in advance of all scheduled public hearings on fare and service adjustments. A summary of public feedback received will be provided to the City Council along with staff recommendation for final disposition of the issues. Upon review by the City Council, the City Manager will be directed accordingly to proceed with or amend the recommended service and/or fare adjustments.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 75
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Guidelines Update) Approval of Brighter Blue
Five Year Service Plan for
Big Blue Bus
City Council Meeting
July 9, 2024

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 76
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service What is Brighter Blue?  Comprehensive Operational Analysis  Analysis of Existing Service  Public Outreach and Stakeholder Engagement  Five Year Service Plan  From January 2023 to June 2024  Transportation Management & Design, Inc  Arellano Associates  Fehr & Peers

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 77
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Deliverables  Five Year Service Plan
(Route by Route Proposed Changes)
 Brighter Blue Final Report  Public Outreach Summary Report  Existing Conditions Report

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 78
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Public Outreach & Stakeholder Engagement  On-board customer survey  Online surveys  Focus group meetings  Project dedicated website and e-mail  Public workshops & hearings, virtual and inperson, live Spanish interpretation  Meetings, flyers, surveys, etc., in English & Spanish

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Public Outreach (cont.)

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service “Brighter Blue Bucks” Results

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Brighter Blue Service Plan Summary  Improve frequencies on most routes including 10 minutes or better service on select major routes
 Expand service hours so most routes start earlier,
end later, and operate on weekends
 Ensure connections to the new LAX/Metro Transit
Center and Metro Rail D Line extension, and
other essential destinations

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Frequency Improvements
- Weekday

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Proposed Service Hours
- Weekdays

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Proposed Service Hours
- Weekends

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route by Route
Proposed Changes

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route by Route Proposed Changes
Route Corridor or
Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
1 Santa Monica
Blvd/
Main St
Earlier/later service on weekdays & weekends. Minor re-route at UCLA. Aug ‘26 2 Wilshire Blvd Increase peak frequency from 20 to 10 minutes in 2027. Earlier/later service on weekdays & weekends. Minor re-route at UCLA.

Aug ‘26 (UCLA)
Aug ‘27 (D Line)
3 Lincoln Blvd Increase peak frequency from 13 to 10 minutes. Re-route at LAX. Earlier and later service on weekdays and weekends.

Dec '24
R3 Lincoln Blvd Discontinue Rapid 3; reinvest resources on Route 3. Dec ‘24

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Local vs. Rapid Travel Time Comparison

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route 5
Proposed
Changes
Route Corridor or
Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
5 Olympic Blvd Increase peak frequency from 60 to 30 minutes. New weekend service. Discontinue Century City to Palms segment and discontinue service west of SMC.

Aug ‘25

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route by Route Proposed Changes (cont.)
Route Corridor or
Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
7 Pico Blvd Increase peak frequency of Route 7 from 14 to 7.5-10 minutes.

Earlier and later service on weekdays and weekends.

Aug ‘25
R7 Pico Blvd Discontinue Rapid 7; reinvest resources on Route 7. Aug ‘25 E7 Pico Blvd Discontinue Express 7; reinvest resources on Route 7. Aug ‘25

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route by Route Proposed Changes (cont.)
Route Corridor or
Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
8 Ocean Park Blvd Increase peak frequency from 30 to 20 minutes. Earlier/later service on weekdays & weekends. Minor re-route in DTSM and UCLA.

Aug ‘26
9 Pacific Palisades Increase peak frequency from 20 to 15 minutes. Earlier/later service on weekdays & weekends. Extend northern terminus to PCH and Sunset, pending new bus turnaround.

Aug ’25
TBD (extension)
R10 Downtown LA
Freeway Express
No changes currently proposed. N/A
R12 Westwood Blvd Increase peak frequency from 12 to 10 minutes. Earlier/later service on weekdays & weekends.

Aug ‘26

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route 14
Proposed
Changes
Route Corridor
or Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
14 Bundy Dr/
Centinela Ave
Increase peak frequency from 20 to 15 minutes. Discontinue service to Inglewood. New southern terminus in Culver City. Re-route to Westwood/VA Hospital Station in 2027.

Dec ’24 (Culver City)
Aug ’27 (D Line)

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route by Route Proposed Changes (cont.)
Route Corridor
or Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
15 Barrington Ave Increase peak frequency from 60 to 30 minutes. Re-route to serve Westwood/VA Hospital D Line Station in 2027.

Aug ’25
Aug ’27 (D Line)
16 Wilshire Blvd/
Bundy Dr –
Playa del Rey
Earlier/later service on weekdays. New weekend service. Re-route to Westwood/VA Hospital Station in 2027.

Aug ’25
Aug ’27 (D Line)
17 UCLA –VA –
Sawtelle - Palms
Increase peak frequency from 20 to 15 minutes. Earlier/later service on weekdays & weekends.

Aug ‘26
18 UCLA - Montana Ave –
4th St -
Marina Del Rey
Increase peak frequency from 30 to 20 minutes. Earlier/later service on weekdays & weekends. Minor re-route at UCLA.

Aug ’26
TBD (extension)

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route 41
Proposed
Changes
Route Corridor or
Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
41 SMC & Montana Ave
& 14th St & 20th St
Increase peak frequency from 20 to 15 minutes. Earlier/later service on weekdays. New weekend service. Re-route to serve Ocean Park Blvd./Sunset Park neighborhood.

Aug ‘25

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Route by Route Proposed Changes (cont.)
Route Corridor or
Route Name Summary of Proposed Change(s)
Tentative
Implementation
Timeline
42 SMC & Montana Ave
& 14th St & 20th St
Discontinue Route 42. Reinvest resources on Route 41. Aug ‘25 43 San Vicente Blvd
& 26th St
Extend northern terminus to San Vicente Blvd. and 7th St. Aug ‘25 44 SMC Connector Re-route to serve Santa Monica College Performing Arts Center. Aug ‘25

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Ridership Impacts  Approx. 650 customers (~2% of
all customers) will now be more
than 1/4 mile from a bus stop.
 About 520 of those board at
Aviation/LAX Station but will
now board at the new LAX/Metro
Transit Center.
 The remaining 130 (~0.6% of all
customers) will need to walk
further or use another service.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Title VI Service Equity Analysis  Determine disparate impacts or disproportionate burdens on
disadvantaged populations
 Proposed changes exceed thresholds in
BBB’s Policies
 Final service plan proposes mitigations &
provides rationale (e.g., Route 7 service
frequencies)

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Tentative Implementation Timeline
Timeline Proposed Change(s) Routes
December 2024 Changes impacted by opening of the LAX/ Metro Transit Center 3, R3, 14 August 2025 Changes to SMC service routes 5, 7, R7, E7, 9, 16, 41, 42, 43, 44
August 2026 Changes to UCLA serving routes 1, 2, 8, R12, 17, 18 August 2027 Changes to Westwood/ VA Hospital Station serving routes 2, 14, 15, 16 2028 Remaining frequency & service hour changes (if any) TBD

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Corridors Targeted for Improvements
Corridor Segment City Routes(s)
4th Street Wilshire Blvd. to Colorado Ave. Santa Monica 1,2,3,7,9,18 Bundy Dr Wilshire Blvd. to Ocean Park Blvd. Los Angeles 14,15 Lincoln Blvd Rose Ave. to Mindanao Way Los Angeles 3
Ocean Park Blvd 25th St. to Centinela Ave. Santa Monica 8,44 Ocean Park Blvd Centinela Ave. to Bundy Dr. Los Angeles 8,44 Pico Blvd 16th St. to Centinela Ave. Santa Monica 7
Pico Blvd Centinela Ave. to Sepulveda Blvd. Los Angeles 7 Pico Blvd Ave. of the Stars to Crenshaw Blvd. Los Angeles 7 Santa Monica Blvd Centinela Ave. to Westwood Blvd. Los Angeles 1 Wilshire Blvd Bundy Dr. to Westwood Blvd. Los Angeles 2,17,18

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service DOT Initiatives Supporting Plan  Safety and Security including new Transit Safety Officer
Program
 Transition to Zero Emission
Fleet & building of charging
infrastructure
 Recruitment and retention of
Motor Coach Operators

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
• No immediate financial impact or budget action necessary. • Increases related to labor and maintenance expected over FY2025-27 Biennial Budget period.
• Staff will return to Council if budget actions are required in future.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service 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. Approve the proposed Brighter Blue five-year service plan for Big Blue Bus.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service UCLA Route Changes
• Decision primarily made to directly serve UCLA campus and Medical Center (Routes 1, 2, 8, R12, 17, 18). • All UCLA-serving routes would operate on campus, instead of periphery of the campus, where Hilgard Terminal is located. • Routes would terminate at:
o Gateway Plaza (Route 8 and Rapid 12), Macgowan Hall Terminal (Route 17), or Parking Structure 2 (Routes 1, 2 and 18). • Feedback from North Westwood Neighborhood Council (NWNC) and others incorrectly suggests that Big Blue Bus is removing service from the North Campus. Route 17 still serves North Campus. • Seating and real-time information signs do exist at Parking Structure 2. Staff has received assurances from the UCLA Transportation office to work on adding more amenities if the changes are approved. • Notably, Hilgard Terminal is inaccessible to people with disabilities; accessing campus from this stop requires taking stairs. • Restroom facilities at Parking Structure 2 are available and preferred by our motor coach operators • In our survey, 72 percent of riders prefer a longer walk if it means more frequent service. From Gayley/Strathmore:
• 5-minute walk to UCLA Gateway Plaza gets riders access to Big Blue Bus service that will operate every 6.7 minutes • 8-minute walk to the UCLA Medical Center gets riders access to Big Blue Bus service that will operate every 2.3 minutes. • As an alternative, riders can still take Metro Line 602 at Gayley/Strathmore to reach Westwood Village.

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service

4.A.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: Attachment A - TSG_Final_2025 [Revision 1] (6723 : Transit Service City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.B
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Engineering and Street Services
Subject: Award Request for Proposal SP2721 and Agreements for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of exemptions pursuant to Section 15262 and Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute agreements with Tetra Tech, Inc., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., and Willdan Engineering, each in an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 over a five-year period, with one (1) fiveyear renewal option to extend in the amount of $1,500,000 on the same terms and conditions, for a total amount not to exceed $3,000,000 per agreement and $9,000,000 total for all three agreements over a ten-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

Summary
The Public Works Department remains committed to prioritizing infrastructure maintenance, safety enhancements, and adopting innovative approaches to streamline project delivery. These efforts align with the City Council’s goals of fostering a Clean and Safe Santa Monica while building a Sustainable and Connected Community. To efficiently address smaller-scale and time-sensitive projects, Public Works utilizes oncall civil engineering design services. Staff recommends awarding three agreements to Tetra Tech, Inc., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., and Willdan Engineering to provide

4.B
Packet Pg. 107
2 of 6
on-call civil engineering design services for the Public Works Department, in an amount each not to exceed $1,500,000 over a five-year period, with one (1) five-year renewal option to extend in the amount of $1,500,000 on the same terms and conditions, for a total amount not to exceed $3,000,000 per agreement and $9,000,000 total for all three agreements over a ten-year period. The recommended agreements would only be utilized, on an as-needed basis, if funding is available and approved by Council, as reflected in the Adopted Operating and Capital Program Budget.

Discussion
Staff have utilized an on-call civil engineering design agreement mechanism since August 2018, when Council awarded a similar on-call design agreement to Kimley-Horn and Associates (Attachment A). This process allows the City to respond promptly to urgent infrastructure design needs and reduces the demand on administrative bandwidth. With the current agreement nearing completion, a new design agreement is necessary.

To preserve this efficiency in design and project delivery, staff proposes to continue the on-call civil engineering design model. Utilizing on-call consultants through as-needed agreements could reduce delivery timelines by up to eight months. This enables faster implementation of high-priority roadway safety projects and enhances the City’s ability to deliver timely and effective solutions.

On-call civil engineering firms would be equipped to quickly produce designs and construction documents for a variety of projects, including but not limited to:
• Water/sewer/recycled water main replacement.
• Storm drain improvements and stormwater infrastructure. • Roadway paving and reconstruction.
• Concrete sidewalk and curb ramp improvements, including ADA upgrades. • Concrete curb, gutter, and alley improvements.
• Parking structure repair and rehabilitation.
• Street lighting / EV charging improvements.
• Watershed management.

4.B
Packet Pg. 108
3 of 6
• Geotechnical inspection and risk mitigation.
• Streetscape improvements.
• Structural design, retrofit, repairs, evaluation, including Marine and pier work. • Mobility including Traffic Engineering and Temporary Traffic Control.

RFP process:

On October 30, 2024, staff issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for on-call civil engineering design services. Proposals were evaluated based on experience, references, work plan and timelines, project team, and cost. Based on this evaluation, staff recommends awarding as-needed professional services agreements to Tetra Tech, Inc., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., and Willdan Engineering as the best-qualified firms. Each agreement will be for an amount not to exceed $1,500,000 over a five-year period, with one five-year renewal option under the same terms and conditions, bringing the total not-to-exceed amount for all three contracts to $9,000,000 over ten years.

The three recommended on-call firms would be utilized on an as-needed basis only.

Staff would issue a Task Order Request (Request) inviting proposals from the three oncall firms. A Task Order would be awarded to the best task order response in an amount not to exceed $1,000,000 per Request. Proposals would be evaluated and ranked based on criteria defined in the Request. Funding for individual task orders would come from various accounts already approved by Council as a part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program budget. Projects are funded by various sources, including grants, local return funds, City enterprise funds, such as Water and Wastewater, Beach, Pier, BBB, as well as General Fund when funding is available.

Consultant Selection
Bidder Recommendation
Best Qualified
Firms
Tetra Tech, Inc. Stantec Consulting
Services, Inc.

Willdan Engineering
Evaluation
Criteria
Experience (expertise and past performance in relevant projects), References (client feedback and reliability), Work Plan/Timelines (approach to project execution and adherence to schedule).

Project Team (qualifications and capability of assigned

4.B
Packet Pg. 109
4 of 6
personnel), and Cost (competitiveness and value of the proposed pricing). These criteria ensured a comprehensive assessment of each firms’ abilities to successfully complete the project.

Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.190
RFP Data
Date
Posted Posted On
Advertised In
(City Charter &
SMMC)
Vendors
Downloaded
Submittals
Received
Date
Publicly
Opened
10/30/2024 City's Online
Bidding Site
Santa Monica
Daily Press 127 19 12/16/2024
Justification to Award
Vendor proposals were reviewed by a panel from the Public Works Department and evaluated using the evaluation criteria above. Based on these criteria, the vendors listed above are recommended as the best qualified firms to be awarded a contract.

The RFP stated three consultants would be selected to ensure competitiveness among the on-call consultants when proposing for future Requests. Staff recommends Tetra Tech, Inc., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc., and Willdan Engineering as the best qualified firms to provide on-call civil engineering design services and be awarded as-needed services agreements. An efficient, pre-qualified procurement process in place ensures cost savings in both design and construction by reducing delays and administrative costs associated with issuing multiple standalone RFPs. A longer agreement term and increased contract authority allows for greater flexibility to address critical infrastructure needs while maintaining financial oversight through task order approvals.

Environmental Review
The award of as-needed professional services agreements for on-call civil engineering design services is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies), which exempts feasibility and planning studies for possible future actions which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded.

Additionally, the agreements are categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the CEQA Guidelines which states that CEQA does not apply “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility

4.B
Packet Pg. 110
5 of 6
that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” These agreements will provide for design services. It can be seen with certainty that the agreements would not result in adverse physical impacts on the environment, and as such, is exempt from CEQA.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
08/14/2018 (Attachment A) Council gave staff direction to implement on-call design services.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to award as-needed professional services agreements with Tetra Tech, Inc., Stantec Consulting Services, Inc, and Willdan Engineering for on-call civil engineering design services. Awarding the recommended agreements does not negatively impact any previously unfunded or future projects, as the agreements would only be utilized for funded City projects, as reflected in the adopted operating and capital improvement program budgets. Each agreement amount is not to exceed $1,500,000 over a five-year period, with one (1) five-year renewal option in the amount of $1,500,000, for a total amount not to exceed $3,000,000 per agreement over ten years and a total of $9,000,000 total for all agreements. Expenditures would be incurred upon the issuance of a task order by the Public Works Director.

Prepared By: Jonathan Maldonado, Civil Engineering Associate Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. August 14, 2018 Staff Report

4.B
Packet Pg. 111
6 of 6
B. Tetra Tech - Levine Act
C. Tetra Tech - Oaks Initiative
D. Stantec - Levine Act
E. Stantec - Oaks Initiative
F. Willdan - Levine Act
G. Willdan - Oaks Initiative

4.B
Packet Pg. 112
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: August 14, 2018
Agenda Item: 3.D
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Susan Cline, Director, Public Works, Civil Engineering Subject: Award Contracts for On Call Signage/Striping and Civil Engineering Design/Preparation of Temporary Traffic Control Plans
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Establish a pre-qualified list for on-call Civil Engineering Design Services as part of RFQual #SP2564 consisting of Cannon Corporation, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., KPFF Consulting Engineers, RICK Engineering Company, and Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. (all California-based companies) to create a pre-qualified list for on-call Civil Engineering Design Services,

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with KimleyHorn and Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $750,000 for three years with one two-year renewal option in the amount of $500,000, for a total amount not to exceed $1,250,000 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval. This is an on-call agreement and an RFP would be issued once there is a known scope of work. Funding would be identified as projects and tasks are identified.

3. Award Bid #SP2543 to Superior Pavement Markings Inc. and PCI, Californiabased companies, for on-call signing and striping services,

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Superior Pavement Markings Inc. in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for three years, with one two-year renewal option, which would extend the contract term but not increase the budget, for a total amount not to exceed $250,000 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval. This is an on-call agreement and funding would be identified as projects and tasks are identified, and

5. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with PCI, in an amount not to exceed $250,000 for three years, with one two-year renewal option, which would extend the contract term but not increase the budget, for a total amount not to exceed $250,000 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval. This is an on-call agreement and an RFP would be issued once there is a known scope of work. Funding would be identified as projects and tasks are identified.

Summary

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: August 14, 2018 Staff Report (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 2 of 6
In an effort to incorporate innovative procurement efficiencies by developing shortlists of vendors for broadly defined services, Public Works is seeking to deliver projects more quickly and in ways better suited to the current marketplace (Attachment A). The procurement processes for Public Works projects were designed for large, complex capital improvements and correspondingly require more time for consultant/contractor selection and contract execution. Public Works projects that are smaller in scope and budget, such as street striping and paving, routinely go through the same process, causing significant delays and additional cost to the City in terms of staff time and lost productivity. In order to streamline the selection and contract execution processes to allow for the delivery of these smaller-scale projects more expeditiously staff recommends awarding a professional services agreement for on-call civil engineering design services to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. and two construction contracts for on-call signing and striping work to Superior Pavement Markings Inc. and PCI, respectively. This would reduce staff time spent on bid postings and contract routing and would enable rapid deployment of priority projects.

Discussion
The City does not currently have an efficient delivery model for infrastructure projects that require expedited delivery. For example, Vision Zero improvements - roadway safety projects designed to eliminate fatal and severe injury crashes on City streets – would be subject to existing procurement and contract execution procedures which could take up to 10 months. While existing procurement processes work well for large, complex projects for which they were created, the lengthier processes hinder the City’s ability to quickly deliver small- to medium-sized projects. Staff recommends utilizing an on-call civil engineering designer and on-call contractors that would allow the City to deliver certain projects up to eight months sooner (Table 1).

Table 1 – Typical Project Delivery vs. On-Call/Expedited Project Delivery (Administrative Processes) Typical Process Typical Duration Expedited Process Expedited Duration
Design
Circulate for Approval and Post
Request for Proposals 45 days Confirm scope with designer 30 days Prepare Staff Report 45 days N/A -

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: August 14, 2018 Staff Report (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 3 of 6
Negotiate & Execute
Professional Services
Agreement
60 days N/A -
Prepare Bid Package & Post
Bid 60 days Confirm scope with contractor 30 days
Construction
Prepare Staff Report 45 days N/A -
Negotiate & Execute
Construction Contract 60 days N/A -
Total 315 days Total 60 days
An on-call civil engineering designer would be able to quickly provide design and construction documents for projects such as, but not limited to, pedestrian and bicycle striping improvements, bulb-outs, traffic control plans, and traffic-calming circles. The work produced by the designer would clearly define the project scope and be used to either competitively bid the work or to obtain quotes from the on-call contractors.

On-call signing and striping contractors would be able to quickly mobilize and construct improvements for projects such as, but not limited to, pedestrian and bicycle striping improvements, pavement marking upgrades, and traffic sign replacement.

Vendor/Consultant Selection
Table 2 – On-Call Civil Engineering Design / Preparation of Temporary Traffic Control Plans Request for Qualifications (RFQual) Data
RFQual Posting Date RFQual
Posted On
RFQual Advertised In
(City Charter &
Municipal Code)
# of Vendors
Downloaded
# of
Submittals
Received
Date
Publicly
Opened
05/02/2018 City's Online
Bidding Site
Santa Monica Daily
Press 83 12 06/01/2018
Pre-qualified List Vendor Selection Recommendation
Cannon
Corporation
KimleyHorn &
Associates,
Inc.

Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.073
KPFF Consulting
Engineers
RICK
Engineering
Evaluation Criteria Experience/Technical Competence, Ability to Meet Project Work Plan & Timeliness, Quality Control, Cost Control,
Stantec Stability/References
Consulting
Services, Inc.

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: August 14, 2018 Staff Report (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 4 of 6
Justification to Short-List
The vendor responses were reviewed by a selection panel from the Public Works Department and evaluated using the evaluation criteria above, including their technical expertise and ability to promptly respond to the City’s requests. Based on these criteria, the vendors listed above are recommended as the best qualified firms to be placed on a shortlist. The RFQual stated a shortlist of five consultants would be created and this ensures competitiveness among the most-qualified consultants when proposing for future projects. Staff recommends Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., the top-ranked firm, as the best qualified firm to provide as-needed design services and be awarded an on-call contract not to exceed $750,000 for three years with one two-year renewal option in the amount of $500,000, for a total not to exceed amount of $1,250,000 over a five-year period. Staff will utilize the shortlist as required.

Table 3 – On-Call Signing and Striping Contractors
Request for Qualifications (RFQual) Data
RFQual Posting Date RFQual
Posted On
RFQual Advertised In
(City Charter &
Municipal Code)
# of Vendors
Downloaded
# of
Submittals
Received
Date Publicly
Opened
03/15/2018 City's Online
Bidding Site
Santa Monica Daily
Press 27 2 04/16/2018
Pre-qualified List Vendor Selection Recommendation
PCI Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.073
Superior Pavement
Markings Inc.

Evaluation Criteria Experience/Technical Competence, Ability to Meet Project Work Plan & Timeliness, Quality Control, Cost
Control, Stability/References
Justification to Short-List
The vendor responses were reviewed by a selection panel from the Public Works Department and evaluated using the evaluation criteria, including their technical expertise and ability to promptly respond to the City’s requests. Based on these criteria, the vendors listed above are recommended as best qualified firms to be placed on a shortlist. Staff recommends PCI and Superior Pavement Markings as the best qualified firms to provide as-needed signing and striping services and each be awarded an oncall contract in an amount not to exceed $250,000, for three years with one two-year renewal. Staff would utilize the shortlist as required.

Past Council Action
06/28/16 (Attachment A) Council gave staff direction to pilot or implement new methods of procurement.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: August 14, 2018 Staff Report (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 5 of 6
Staff seeks authority to award a professional services agreement with Kimley-Horn and Associates for on-call civil engineering design services.

Professional Services Agreement Request: Kimley-Horn
Request Amount
FY 2018-19 Budget
Department/CIP Account # Total Contract Amount
$250,000
Funding will come from various accounts
and be identified as projects requiring
engineering design and construction
services are identified.
$1,250,000
Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Staff seeks authority to award a contractual services agreement with Superior Pavement Markings Inc. for on-call signing and striping services.

Contractual Services Agreement Request: Superior Pavement Markings Inc.

Request Amount
FY 2018-19 Budget
Department/CIP Account # Total Contract Amount
$250,000
Funding will come from various accounts
and be identified as projects requiring
engineering design and construction
services are identified.
$250,000
Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Staff seeks authority to award a contractual services agreement with PCI for on-call signing and striping services.

Contractual Services Agreement Request: PCI
Request Amount
FY 2018-19 Budget
Department/CIP Account # Total Contract Amount
$250,000
Accounts and funding will be identified as
projects requiring engineering design and
construction services are identified.
$250,000
Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: August 14, 2018 Staff Report (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 6 of 6
Prepared By: Curtis Castle, Civil Engineer
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. June 28, 2016 Staff Report
B. PCI Oaks Initiative_Rev1
C. Superior Oaks Initiative
D. Kimley-Horn Civil Engineering Design Oaks Form

4.B.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: August 14, 2018 Staff Report (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 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: _________________________________

4.B.b
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Tetra Tech - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 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.

4.B.b
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Tetra Tech - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 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

4.B.b
Packet Pg. 121 Attachment: Tetra Tech - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Page 2 ends

• 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

4.B.b
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Tetra Tech - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Page 3 ends

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

4.B.b
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Tetra Tech - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

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-month period;

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 in any 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:

Prepared by: Title:

Signature: Date:

Email: Phone:

FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # Permit #
See attached list of Tetra Tech Officers.

Tetra Tech, Inc.

Name(s) of persons with more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest:

No persons have more than a 10% equity, participation, or revenue interest.

Jason Fussel Vice President
[email protected]
12/12/2024
(805) 542-9052

4.B.c
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Tetra Tech - Oaks Initiative [Revision 1] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) Tetra Tech Corporate Leadership
Dan L. Batrack, Chief Executive Officer, President
Steven M. Burdick, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer Leslie L. Shoemaker, PhD, Executive Vice President, Chief Innovation and Sustainability Officer William R. Brownlie, Senior Vice President, Chief Engineer Brian N. Carter, Senior Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer Craig L. Christensen, Senior Vice President, Chief Information Officer Preston Hopson, Senior Vice President, General Counsel, and Secretary Richard A. Lemmon, Senior Vice President, Corporate Administration Brendan O’Rourke, Senior Vice President, Enterprise Risk Management Tetra Tech Operational Leadership
Roger R. Argus, President, Commercial/International Group Jeremy B. Travis, President, Government Services Group and U.S. Government Division Stuart W. Fowler, President, High Performance Buildings Division Craig Hatch, President, Europe and UK Division
Olivier H. Jeannot, President, Federal Information Technology Division Thomas Reilly, President, Global Development Services Division Lauren Springer, President, U.S. Infrastructure Division Meegan Sullivan, President, Asia Pacific Division
Bernard Teufele, President, Environment/Geotech Division Jonathan S. Weiss, President, Energy Engineering Division Tetra Tech Directors
Dan L. Batrack, Chairman of the Board
Gary R. Birkenbeuel, Director
John Douglas, Director
Prashant Gandhi, Director
Christie Obiaya, Director
Kimberly E. Ritrievi, Director
Kirsten M. Volpi, Director
Li-San Hwang, Chairman Emeritus

4.B.c
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Tetra Tech - Oaks Initiative [Revision 1] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) City of Santa Monica Levine Act Disclosure Form

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

4.B.d
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Stantec - Levine Act [Revision 1] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 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.

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.

4.B.d
Packet Pg. 127 Attachment: Stantec - Levine Act [Revision 1] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 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.

4.B.d
Packet Pg. 128 Attachment: Stantec - Levine Act [Revision 1] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Page 2 ends

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

4.B.d
Packet Pg. 129 Attachment: Stantec - Levine Act [Revision 1] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Page 3 ends

other expenses coordinated with a candidate or committee, loans, tickets to political fundraisers, etc.

4.B.d
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Stantec - Levine Act [Revision 1] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

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 in any 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:

FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # Permit #
Stantec Consulting Services Inc.

See attached list of SCSI directors and officers
N/A; Stantec Consulting Services Inc. is 100% owned by Mustang Acquisition Holdings Inc.

4.B.e
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Stantec - Oaks Initiative [Revision 2] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) Corporate Information Summary Page 1 of 3
C:\Users\lchilders\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\XDENOMZT\SCSI Directors and Officers as of 10-4-

24.docx
Updated: Oct 4/24
STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.

SHAREHOLDERS: Mustang Acquisition Holdings Inc. - 100%
DIRECTORS:

Stuart E. Lerner
Jeffrey P. Stone
OFFICERS:

President Gordon A. Johnston
Chief Operating Officer – North America
CEO – Engineering & Executive Vice President Stuart E. Lerner Chief Operating Officer – Global &
Executive Vice President Catherine Schefer
Chief Growth & Innovation Officer &
Executive Vice President John Take
Chief People & Inclusion Officer &
Executive Vice President Asifa Samji
Chief Practice and Project Officer &
Executive Vice President Steve Fleck
Executive Vice President Leonard Castro
Executive Vice President Marshall W. Davert Jr.

Executive Vice President David Emery
Executive Vice President Mario Finis
Executive Vice President Bjorn Morisbak
Executive Vice President Susan Reisbord
Executive Vice President Ryan Roberts
Executive Vice President Susan Walter
Senior Vice President & Chief Information
Officer Chris McDonald
Senior Vice President & Chief Technology
Officer Shankar Kalyana
Senior Vice President Paul J.D. Alpern
Senior Vice President David R. Bernier
Senior Vice President Paul R. Blaszczyk
Senior Vice President Clayton A. Bock
Senior Vice President Peter Bokor
Senior Vice President Patrick G. Corser
Senior Vice President Luke De Hayr
Senior Vice President Paul J. DeKeyser
Senior Vice President Joseph Geller
Senior Vice President Harris J. (Josh) Gould

4.B.e
Packet Pg. 132 Attachment: Stantec - Oaks Initiative [Revision 2] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.

Corporate Information Summary Page 2 of 3
C:\Users\lchilders\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\XDENOMZT\SCSI Directors and Officers as of 10-4-

24.docx
Updated: Oct 4/24
Senior Vice President John J. Hanula
Senior Vice President Jonathan A. (Andy) Hersey
Senior Vice President Peter Howe
Senior Vice President David Irvine
Senior Vice President Adriana Jaegerman
Senior Vice President Michael Johnson
Senior Vice President Jennifer Josephs
Senior Vice President John S. Montgomery
Senior Vice President Robert Mullins
Senior Vice President Michael Newbery
Senior Vice President Brian P. Norris
Senior Vice President James (Jim) R. Obermeyer
Senior Vice President Philip R. Perciavalle
Senior Vice President Sujan Punyamurthula
Senior Vice President Marilynn F. Robinson
Senior Vice President Carrie Sabin
Senior Vice President Kari Shively
Senior Vice President Robert A. Simm
Senior Vice President Joseph Russell (Russell) Snow
Senior Vice President Scott Storlid
Senior Vice President Glenn S. Tarbox
Senior Vice President Matthew D. Travers
Senior Vice President Joseph Uglevich
Senior Vice President Arthur Umble
Senior Vice President Mike Watson
Senior Vice President Christopher Williams
Senior Vice President Andrew C. Wilson
Vice President Frank Aceto
Vice President Rusty Benkosky
Vice President Andrew Burnham
Vice President Amy Campbell
Vice President Ramon Castella
Vice President David Dargie
Vice President Becky Hachenburg
Vice President Megan Holmes
Vice President Sarah McIlroy
Vice President Scott Peyton
Vice President Michael Reagan
Vice President Jeffrey P. Stone
Vice President Kristopher Wilhoit
Senior Principal Scott Buttari
Senior Principal Cecilia Einarson
Senior Principal Long Hoang
Senior Principal David Kennedy
Senior Principal Douglas Stoker
Principal Robert R. Cunningham

4.B.e
Packet Pg. 133 Attachment: Stantec - Oaks Initiative [Revision 2] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES INC.

Corporate Information Summary Page 3 of 3
C:\Users\lchilders\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\XDENOMZT\SCSI Directors and Officers as of 10-4-

24.docx
Updated: Oct 4/24
Principal Steve Shadix
Principal Stephen Varsa
Senior Associate Linda Brown
Senior Associate Jason Schneider
Senior Associate Gregory Sebourn
Senior Associate Kelly VanElders
Senior Associate Matthew Vernon
Associate & CEO – Surveying Jerome Means
Account Manager Michael A. Kennedy
Director, Taxation Ally Gerlach
Right of Way Officer Geraldine V. Webb
Employee Brian Larson
Corporate Counsel Michael Aceto
Corporate Counsel David Archer
Corporate Counsel Eli Bilek
Corporate Counsel William A. Butler
Corporate Counsel Thomas Curran
Corporate Counsel William J. Edwards
Corporate Counsel Victoria Hall-Sturt
Corporate Counsel Cate Hite
Corporate Counsel Katharine LaFrance
Corporate Counsel Amy Oygen
Corporate Counsel Robert J. Ray
Corporate Counsel Charles B. (Chad) Rogers II
Corporate Counsel Corey Sanchez
Corporate Counsel Matthew Storey
Secretary Christopher O. Heisler
Assistant Secretary Jeffrey P. Stone
Treasurer Vito Culmone

4.B.e
Packet Pg. 134 Attachment: Stantec - Oaks Initiative [Revision 2] (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) City of Santa Monica Levine Act Disclosure Form

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

4.B.f
Packet Pg. 135 Attachment: Willdan - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 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.

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.

4.B.f
Packet Pg. 136 Attachment: Willdan - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) 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.

4.B.f
Packet Pg. 137 Attachment: Willdan - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Page 2 ends

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

4.B.f
Packet Pg. 138 Attachment: Willdan - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Page 3 ends

other expenses coordinated with a candidate or committee, loans, tickets to political fundraisers, etc.

4.B.f
Packet Pg. 139 Attachment: Willdan - Levine Act (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services)

Public benefits include:

1. Personal services contracts in excess of $25,000 over any 12-month period;

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 in any 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:

FOR CITY USE ONLY:

Bid/PO/Contract # Permit #
Willdan Engineering
Michael A. Bieber - Chairman of the Board
Vanessa Muñoz - President, CEO
Creighton K. Early - CFO,
Treasurer Kate Nguyen - Secretary
Cathaleen D. Steele - Assistant Secretary
N/A
Vanessa Muñoz
[email protected]
President, CEO
12/10/24
(714) 940-6300

4.B.g
Packet Pg. 140 Attachment: Willdan - Oaks Initiative (6767 : Award RFP SP2721 and Contracts for On-Call Civil Engineering Design Services) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.C
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Architecture Services Subject: Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center Project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 (Replacement/Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award contract for Bid #SP2744 to Urban Professional Builders, INC. for the construction of the SMART Center Project for the Public Works Department; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with Urban Professional Builders, INC., in an amount not to exceed $1,290,000 (including a $76,000 contingency).

4.C
Packet Pg. 141
2 of 6
Summary
The Santa Monica Police Department (“SMPD”) seeks to renovate space at the City’s Public Safety Facility (“PSF”) to develop the Santa Monica Analytical Real-Time Center (“SMART Center”). The City of Santa Monica (“City”) was awarded an Organized Retail Theft Prevention Program grant for $6,125,000 from the Board of State and Community Corrections (“BSCC”), that was accepted by the City at the City Council’s regular meeting on October 24, 2023 (Attachment A). The SMART Center would facilitate and enhance SMPD’s ability to deter, detect, locate, and investigate organized retail thefts, vehicle thefts, and catalytic converter thefts in the City. Staff recommends awarding the construction services contract to Urban Professional Builders, INC. for the SMART Center Project (“Project”) for an amount not to exceed $1,290,000, which includes a $76,000 contingency.

Discussion
The Organized Retail Theft Prevention Program grant comes from the State of California through the State Budget Act of 2022 (Senate Bill 154). Funding was available to California city police departments, sheriff departments, and probation departments to support local law enforcement agencies in preventing and responding to organized retail theft (“ORT”), motor vehicle theft, or motor vehicle accessory theft.

On July 7, 2023, SMPD submitted a grant application to develop a SMART Center and was notified of its award on September 15, 2023. The City Council authorized acceptance of the grant on October 24, 2023. Per the grant requirements, funds must be expended by December 31, 2026, and all reimbursement requests must be completed no later than June 1, 2027. No local match was required and SMPD staff continue to pursue funding opportunities for ongoing technology maintenance following the grant term.

The SMART Center would be a local crime fighting tool, as well as a regional criminal intelligence resource, for fighting ORT and catalytic converter theft. The SMART Center would be operational 24 hours per day for at least six days per week and would be used to direct all City technology assets to address ORT and other crime related issues

4.C
Packet Pg. 142
3 of 6
through the 3-year grant period. The SMART Center would be designed to serve as the hub of the City’s intelligence-driven crime fighting efforts beyond the grant period, subject to available funding.

On March 12, 2024, the City issued a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) to pre-qualified consultants for on-call professional design services for the Project. Only one proposal was received, and that bidder (John Wyka Architecture, Inc.) was awarded the contract for an amount not exceeding $50,300. The design work incorporated the SMART Center Project’s scope of work and is now complete.

Vendor Selection
Bidder Recommendation
Best Bidder Urban Professional Builders, INC.

Evaluation
Criteria
Price, Experience, Team; the quality of the material or services offered; the ability, capacity and skill of the bidder to perform or provide the materials or services; the capacity of the bidder to perform the contract or provide the service promptly, within the time specified, and without delay or interference; the sufficiency of the bidder’s financial resources; the character, integrity, reputation, judgment, training, experience and efficiency of the bidder; any other factor that will further the intent set forth in Section 608 of the City Charter.

Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.180
Bid Data
Date
Posted Posted On
Advertise In
(City Charter & SMMC)
Vendors
Downloaded
Date Publicly
Opened
12/11/2024 OpenGov Santa Monica Daily
Press
09 01/13/2025
Best Bidder Justification
On December 11, 2024, the City issued a formal Request for Bids (“RFB”) to obtain construction services for the Project. The City received a total of six construction bids; however, the bids received from BNS Construction, Estate Design and Submittals Received
Urban Professional Builders, INC. $1,214,000
Olympos $1,346,153
Waisman Construction $1,432,000

4.C
Packet Pg. 143
4 of 6
Construction Inc., and Ramco, General Engineering Contractor, Inc. did not meet the basic requirement of the RFB and were considered nonresponsive, and were rejected without evaluation. An evaluation panel composed of Architecture Services and Police Department staff evaluated the remaining three bids and recommended Urban Professional Builders, INC. as the best and lowest bidder.

Therefore, staff recommends Urban Professional Bidders, INC. as the best bidder based on bid price, experience, and project team. The recommended bidder has demonstrated the ability to perform and complete quality work on past projects in Los Angeles.

Environmental Review
The project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15301 exempts Class 1 (Existing Facilities) projects from CEQA, which include the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Section 15302 exempts Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction) projects which include the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located in the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. The project would renovate the existing city facility at 333 Olympic Boulevard, and therefore, it has been determined that the project would fall within the Class 1 and Class 2 categorical exemptions.

Furthermore, none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2 apply to this project.

Past Council Actions

4.C
Packet Pg. 144
5 of 6
Meeting Date Description
10/24/23
(Attachment A)
Authorization to Accept Grant from the Board of State and Community Corrections for the Organized Retail Theft
Prevention Grant Program
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from the Miscellaneous Grants Fund and the General Fund to award a contract to Urban Professional Builders, INC. for the construction services for the Project.

Contract Request
Funding
Source
Department
Account #
FY 2025-26
Request
Amount
Future
Years
Amount
Total
Contract
Amount
BSCC Grant 20180001.556631 $1,214,000 $1,214,000
General Fund 01180005.529140 $76,000 $76,000
Total $1,214,000 $76,000 $1,290,000
Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval.

Prepared By: Jared Schultz, CIP Project Manager
Approved Forwarded to Council

4.C
Packet Pg. 145
6 of 6
Attachments:

A. October 24, 2023 Staff Report (Web Link)
B. Urban Professional Builders Inc - Levine Act
C. Urban Professional Builders Inc - Oaks Initiative

4.C
Packet Pg. 146

4.C.b
Packet Pg. 147 Attachment: Urban Professional Builders Inc - Levine Act (6792 : Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center

4.C.b
Packet Pg. 148 Attachment: Urban Professional Builders Inc - Levine Act (6792 : Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center

4.C.b
Packet Pg. 149 Attachment: Urban Professional Builders Inc - Levine Act (6792 : Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center

4.C.b
Packet Pg. 150 Attachment: Urban Professional Builders Inc - Levine Act (6792 : Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center

4.C.b
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Urban Professional Builders Inc - Levine Act (6792 : Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center Melanie Shone Khalil, Vice President
Naji Haj-Khalil-President
URBAN PROFESSIONAL BUILDERS, INC.

4.C.c
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Urban Professional Builders Inc - Oaks Initiative (6792 : Award Bid SP2744 and Construction Contract for the Police Department Smart Center Project) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.D
1 of 4
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Architecture Services Subject: Award Bid SP2739 and Agreement to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant Roof Replacement Project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemptions pursuant to Sections 15301 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 (Replacement/Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award Bid #SP2739 to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for the Arcadia Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Roof Replacement Project for the Public Works Department; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Best Contracting Services, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $310,000 (including a 20% contingency).

Summary
The Arcadia Water Treatment Plant (WTP) Roof Replacement Project (Project) would consist of the full replacement of roofing systems to prevent further water leaks and protect the structural integrity of the WTP’s Administration, Laboratory, and Control buildings. Staff recommends awarding a construction contract to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for the Project in an amount not to exceed $310,000 (including a 20% contingency). The Project is funded with Water Resources Funds. Construction is expected to begin in spring 2025 and be completed within four months.

Discussion
The City of Santa Monica’s Arcadia Water Treatment Plant is located at 1228 South Bundy Drive in Los Angeles. The site contains numerous buildings that house essential

4.D
Packet Pg. 153
2 of 4
services to provide residents, commercial customers, and visitors with drinking water.

The Arcadia Water Treatment Plant is an important component of the City’s Sustainable Water Master Plan (Attachment A) and enhances resiliency of the local water supply.

The existing roofs of the WTP’s Administration, Laboratory, and Control buildings are beyond their useful life, have been repaired and patched multiple times over recent years, and are in need of replacement. The Project would consist of the full replacement of roofing systems to prevent further leaks and protect the structural integrity of these buildings that support the Water Resources Division in delivering public services.

Vendor Selection
Bidder Recommendation
Best Bidder Best Contracting Services, Inc.

Evaluation Criteria Base Price, Project Team, Experience, Added Value Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.180
Submittals Received
Vendor Total
(sum of base bid and additive bids)
Best Contracting Services, Inc. $257,360
AME Builders Inc. $287,788
Letner Roofing Company $346,000
Bid Data
Date Posted Posted On Advertise in (City
Charter & SMMC)
Vendors
Downloaded
Date Publicly
Opened
11/12/2024 City’s Online
Bidding Site
Santa Monica
Daily Press 65 01/08/2025
Best Bidder Justification
On November 12, 2024, the City issued a formal Request for Bids (RFB) to obtain construction services for the Project. The City received a total of four construction bids; however, AC Pros, Inc.’s bid did not meet the basic requirements of the RFB and was considered nonresponsive and rejected without evaluation. An evaluation panel composed of Architecture Services staff evaluated the remaining three bids and recommend Best Contracting Services, Inc. as the best and lowest bidder.

Staff recommends Best Contracting Services, Inc. as the best bidder based on the

4.D
Packet Pg. 154
3 of 4
evaluation criteria. The recommended bidder has demonstrated the ability to perform and complete quality work on past projects for the City of Santa Monica.

Environmental Review
The project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15302 of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15301 exempts Class 1 (Existing Facilities) projects from CEQA, which include the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Section 15302 exempts Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction) project which include the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located in the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced. The project would replace the existing roofs of the Administration, Laboratory, and Control buildings at 1228 South Bundy Drive, and therefore, it has been determined that the project would fall within the Class 1 and Class 2 categorical exemptions. Furthermore, none of the exceptions to Categorical Exemptions set forth in the CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2, apply to this project.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
04/11/2023
(Attachment B)
Adoption of Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Midyear Budget – Arcadia Water Treatment Plant Roof and HVAC Repairs
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from the Water Fund to award a contract to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for construction services for the Project.

Funding Source FY 2024-25
Request Amount CIP Account # Total Contract Amount
Water Fund $310,000 C5008780.689000
Water Resources $310,000
Total $310,000 $310,000

4.D
Packet Pg. 155
4 of 4
Prepared By: Tania Hoy, Architectural Associate
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Sustainable Water Master Plan (Web Link)
B. April 11, 2023 Staff Report (Web Link)
C. Best Contracting Services - Oaks
D. Best Contracting Services - Levine Act

4.D
Packet Pg. 156

4.D.c
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Best Contracting Services - Oaks (6830 : Award Bid SP2739 and Contract to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for Arcadia Roof

4.D.d
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Best Contracting Services - Levine Act (6830 : Award Bid SP2739 and Contract to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for Arcadia Roof

4.D.d
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Best Contracting Services - Levine Act (6830 : Award Bid SP2739 and Contract to Best Contracting Services, Inc. for Arcadia Roof City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.E
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Architecture Services Subject: Award Bid SP2710 and Construction Agreement to RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. for Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden Project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award Bid #SP2710 to RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. for construction services for Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden Project for the Department of Public Works; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a contract with RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $355,000 (including a 10% contingency).

Summary
Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden Project (Project) would secure and prepare the City-owned vacant parcel located at 2018 19th Street for general accessibility, including grading, a new pathway, and new walls/fencing, before developing and integrating the community garden aspect in a future phase 2. Staff recommends awarding the contract for phase 1 construction of the Project to RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $355,000 (including a 10% contingency). The Project is funded with Council-approved FY 2023-24 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds. Construction would begin in spring 2025 and be completed within five months.

4.E
Packet Pg. 160
2 of 5
Discussion
The City of Santa Monica’s Community Garden Program includes five community garden locations with rental garden plots and/or communally grown gardens. The Pico Neighborhood is currently home to one communally-grown garden at Ishihara Park.

This Project would provide the Pico Neighborhood with its second communally-grown garden. Community Gardens are a source of pride for the community and provide active living opportunities for residents to engage in urban agriculture and create unique, biodiverse habitats that support efforts to be a Sustainable City through local food production, sustainable land stewardship, community composting, water conservation practices, and community engagement. This garden will ensure all residents in the area have an opportunity to participate in the urban agriculture as community volunteers.

Communally-grown gardens do not have individual rental garden plots and thus will not reduce our current rental waitlist.

Using a combination of FY 2019-20 General Funds and Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds, the City purchased the vacant land parcel located at 2018 19th Street to develop the space into a beneficial resource informed by community engagement in service of Pico Neighborhood residents. On May 9, 2023, the City approved FY 2023-24 CDBG funds for phase 1 development (design and construction) of the Project. Currently fenced and inaccessible, phase 1 improvements focus on securing and preparing the site for general accessibility use, including but not limited to grading, water and sewer connections, a new pathway, and new walls/fencing, before developing and integrating the community garden aspect in a future phase 2. Phase 2 development, which will also be funded by CDBG, would include the necessary infrastructure to support a community garden, including raised garden beds, seating, Southern California Edison service connection, and lighting. With the completion of phase 2, the parcel would be transformed into a valuable amenity serving the Pico Neighborhood community while also adding an additional garden to the City's Community Garden Program.

Vendor Selection

4.E
Packet Pg. 161
3 of 5
Bidder Recommendation
Best Bidder RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc.

Evaluation Criteria Bid Price, Experience & Technical Competence, Added Value Municipal Code SMMC 2.24.180
Submittals Received
Vendor Total
(base bid and alternate bids)
RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. $321,643.00 Bayview Construction, Inc. $343,406.55
GC Landscaping and General Construction $350,446.00
ADA General Engineering, Inc. $380,570.00
KASA Construction, Inc. $519,435.00
Bid Data
Date
Posted Posted On Advertise In(City Charter & SMMC)
Vendors
Downloaded
Date Publicly
Opened
11/13/2024 City's Online
Bidding Site
Santa Monica Daily
Press 82 12/30/2024
Best Bidder Justification
On November 13, 2024, the City issued a formal Request for Bids (RFB) to obtain construction services for phase 1 of the Project. The City received a total of five construction bids. An evaluation team composed of Architecture Services and Office of Sustainability and the Environment staff evaluated the bids and recommend RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. as the best and lowest bidder for the price, training, experience, and efficiency consistent with City requirements.

Environmental Review
The bid award for phase 1 of the Project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15304 (Minor Alterations in Land) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15304 provides exemption of minor public or private alterations in the condition of land and/or vegetation. The project would make minor improvements to the vacant parcel at 2018 19th Street, including grading, a new pathway, and new walls/fencing. Therefore, the project qualifies for exemption under Section 15304. In addition, none of the exceptions specified in Section 15300.2 of CEQA Guidelines would apply that preclude the use of this CEQA exemption. The project site is not located in a sensitive environment, would not have a significant effect on the environment, would not damage scenic resources,

4.E
Packet Pg. 162
4 of 5
would not be located on a hazardous waste site, and would not cause a change to historic resources. Therefore, this project is categorically exempt from CEQA.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
04/28/20
(Attachment A)
Approval of Master Services Agreement for Architectural, Structural Engineering, and Mechanical/Electrical/Plumbing Design Services
05/09/23
(Attachment B)
Approval of FY 2023-24 Annual Action Plan – 19th Street Parcel Development: Phase I
06/27/23
(Attachment C)
FY 23-25 Biennial Capital Improvement Program Budget –
Addendum to FY 22-24 CIP Budget – 19th Street Open Space Project - Phase 1
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks authority to approve available funding from the CDBG Fund to award a contract to RAMCO General Engineering Contractors, Inc. for construction services for phase 1 of the Project.

Funding Source FY 2024-25
Request Amount CIP Account #
Total Contract
Amount
CDBG Fund $355,000 C1908820.689000 $355,000
Total $355,000 $355,000
Prepared By: Yukiko Takahashi, Architectural Associate
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. April 28, 2020 Staff Report (Web Link)
B. May 9, 2023 Staff Report (Web Link)
C. June 27, 2023 Staff Report (Web Link)

4.E
Packet Pg. 163
5 of 5
D. RAMCO - Oaks
E. RAMCO - Levine Act

4.E
Packet Pg. 164

4.E.d
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: RAMCO - Oaks (6846 : Award Bid SP2710 and Construction Contract for Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden

4.E.e
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: RAMCO - Levine Act (6846 : Award Bid SP2710 and Construction Contract for Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden

4.E.e
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: RAMCO - Levine Act (6846 : Award Bid SP2710 and Construction Contract for Phase 1 of the 19th Street Community Garden City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.F
1 of 6
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Jing Yeo, Planning Manager, Administration
Subject: Adoption of Resolution Authorizing Receipt of State of California Cannabis Equity Grant Funding for $35,000 for Development of a Cannabis Equity Program and Authorization for 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 Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant and all grant renewals.

4. Authorize budget amendment as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report (requires 5 votes).

Summary
In continued response to City Council’s direction at the June 13, 2023, adult-use cannabis study session, City Planning Division staff applied for the Cannabis Equity Grants Program for Local Jurisdictions Type 1 Grant funding from the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development to assist in the development of a local cannabis equity program. On January 23, 2025, staff received notification that the City was awarded the grant for the maximum amount of $35,000.

The development of the equity program will be informed by the findings and recommendations of the cannabis equity assessment which is currently in progress and

4.F
Packet Pg. 168
2 of 6
expected to be completed by the end of March. This report requests Council’s approval of the attached resolution to authorize the acceptance of the California Cannabis Equity Type 1 Grant and to authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant.

Discussion
On June 13, 2023, the City Council held a study session to answer key policy questions regarding adult-use cannabis. Council directed staff to move forward with developing an adult-use cannabis ordinance including a social equity program.

The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development administers the Cannabis Equity Grants Program for Local Jurisdictions. Type 1 Grant funding provides up to $75,000 for eligible jurisdictions to establish a social equity program. Specifically, up to $40,000 may be awarded to assist with conducting an equity assessment and up to $35,000 to assist in developing a new equity program.

City Planning Division staff previously applied for the Cannabis Equity Grants Program for Local Jurisdictions Type 1 Grant funding from the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development to conduct a cannabis equity assessment for the City of Santa Monica, and the grant was awarded on January 19, 2024, for the maximum amount of $40,000 to conduct the assessment. The funds are currently being allocated to consultant professional services and minimal reimbursement for City staff project management.

Having successfully obtained $40,000 for the cannabis equity assessment last year, City Planning staff pursued the remaining funds for the program development. The grant was announced on October 8, 2024, applied for on December 2, 2024, and awarded on January 23, 2025. A Resolution adopted by the City Council to authorize the acceptance of the grant is required and must be submitted to the State by March 31, 2025, with final grant agreement executed by March 31, 2025, by the City Manager, as requirements for accepting the grant.

4.F
Packet Pg. 169
3 of 6
This report recommends Council’s approval of the attached resolution to authorize the acceptance of the California Cannabis Equity Type 1 Grant and to authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant.

Developing a cannabis equity program is the final phase of developing a greater adultuse cannabis ordinance and program. The cannabis equity program will focus on inclusion and support of individuals and communities in Santa Monica’s cannabis market who are linked to populations or neighborhoods that were negatively or disproportionately impacted by its criminalization.

The scope of the social equity program is expected to consist of establishing eligibility criteria, application and administrative processes, and levels of service provided.

Program benefits may include, but are not limited to, tiered fees or fee waivers, financial literacy training, business development support, workforce development, direct or indirect financial assistance, priority selection, and/or streamlined permitting processes.

Staff will also determine the level of involvement required to accommodate applicants and if a consultant will be required to assist in this effort.

SCI Consulting Group was contracted in 2024 to conduct the equity assessment.

Building on of SCI’s findings and recommendations, the City Planning Division will lead the development of the local cannabis equity program in partnership with the City’s Diversity Equity & Inclusion and other City staff. While the equity assessment is underway, the Planning Division is concurrently developing an adult-use cannabis ordinance.

It is anticipated that the scope and budget of $35,000 will include the following staffrelated tasks and associated expenses:

Administrative Expenses
• Program Development
o City Planning staff time to develop and adopt eligibility requirements, application and review process, levels of services provided, staff

4.F
Packet Pg. 170
4 of 6
involvement and/or local agency support; integration with the Adult-Use Cannabis Ordinance.
• Public meetings/hearings:
o Staff time to prepare presentations on the cannabis equity program options, benefits and process explainers for City Council adoption and public use.
• Community Outreach:
o Produce marketing materials and implement outreach.
o Develop and organize resources to help inform the public of the equity program.

Equity Program Launch
• Community outreach:
o Conduct community outreach to promote the new equity program and provide explanation of eligibility and benefits. Website development and social media posts.
o Staff time for application intake, review, and processing of equity applicants.

The anticipated schedule of activities for the equity program is as follows:
• March 2025: Receive grant funding/execute the grant agreement. • April – July 2025: Develop equity program including eligibility criteria, administrative processes, conduct community outreach and public hearings on draft equity program, finalize and adopt Adult-Use Cannabis Ordinance and equity program.
• Commencing August 2025: Finalize administrative guidelines and implement Equity Program and Adult-Use Cannabis Ordinance.

Additional grant funding may be applied for in the future through this grant program to assist with implementation and ongoing administration of a cannabis equity program.

The amount available for request varies each year based on available State funds.

4.F
Packet Pg. 171
5 of 6
Environmental Analysis
The acceptance and use of grant funding is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. The grant activities are covered by the common sense exemption which states that CEQA does not apply, “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” The grant will allow the City Planning Division to develop a Cannabis Equity Program in concert with the establishment of an Adult-Use Cannabis Ordinance. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the grant would not result in adverse physical impacts on the environment, and as such, is categorically exempt from CEQA.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
06/13/23 (Attachment A) Adult-Use Cannabis Study Session 03/19/24 (Attachment B) Adoption of Resolution for Grant Funding Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
Staff seeks the adoption of the resolution to accept the State of California Cannabis Equity Grand Funding for $35,000. Adoption of the resolution requires the following budget amendment:

FY 2024-25 Grant Budget Amendment
Fund Establish Revenue Budget Appropriate Funds
Account Number Amount Account Numbers Amount
Miscellaneous
Grants
20700002.406060 $35,000 20800002.69XXXX
(transfer out)
$35,000
General Fund 01800001.69XXXX
(transfer in)
($35,000)
If renewals or additional grant funding is awarded, budget changes will be included in subsequent year budgets, contingent on Council budget approval.

4.F
Packet Pg. 172
6 of 6
Prepared By: Tony Kim, Principal Planner
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. June 13, 2023 Council Meeting Adult-Use Cannabis Study Session (Web Link) B. March 19, 2024 Council Meeting Adoption of Resolution for Grant Funding (Web Link)
C. Cannabis Grant Resolution
D. Written Comment

4.F
Packet Pg. 173
1 City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025 Santa Monica, California

RESOLUTION NUMBER (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

SANTA MONICA AUTHORIZING STATE OF CALIFORNIA CANNABIS EQUITY ACT

GRANT FUNDING
WHEREAS, the members of the California Legislature have recognized the need for cannabis equity grant funding; and
WHEREAS, funding has been provided to the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development to provide grant funds to local governments; and WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica supports the development of a local equity program; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santa Monica has determined that it will use grant funds from the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development to conduct a cannabis equity assessment and assist the development of a local equity program as described in its application for grant funds.

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

SECTION 1. The City Manager of the City of Santa Monica, or designee, is authorized to execute, by electronic signature on behalf of the City of Santa Monica, the grant agreement with the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, including any extensions or amendments thereof and any subsequent grant agreement with the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development in relation thereto.

4.F.c
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Cannabis Grant Resolution [Revision 1] (6890 : Resolution to Accept Cannabis Equity Grant) 2 SECTION 2. City Council agrees that any liability arising out of the performance of this grant agreement, including civil court actions for damages, shall be the responsibility of the City of Santa Monica. The Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development and the State of California disclaim responsibility for any such liability.

SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution by the City Council of the City of Santa Monica, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Douglas Sloan, City Attorney

4.F.c
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Cannabis Grant Resolution [Revision 1] (6890 : Resolution to Accept Cannabis Equity Grant) From: [email protected]
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica City Survey 2025- Homeless, Safety and Economy Top priority!! NOT "Cannabis Equity??" See Attached Survey and Screenshots..

Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2025 3:10:27 PM
Attachments: Snapshot-50976.pdf
Screenshot 2025-03-04 at 2.35.55 PM.png
Screenshot 2025-03-04 at 2.34.57 PM.png
Screenshot 2025-03-04 at 2.32.37 PM.png

EXTERNAL
Santa Monica City Survey 2025- Homeless, Safety and Economy Top priority!! NOT "Cannabis Equity??" -See Attached Survey and Screenshots..

COUNCIL: Do the Right Thing: Address our City’s Residents and Owners Requests and Priorities; Not Issues Created by Recent Council Members and Out of Town Homeless Transients…. **Follow Your Own SM City Survey Telling You What Your Constituents Want and Need!!!! YOUR Tax Paying CONSTITUENTS Blatantly State Priorities in your Own SM City Survey!!!

1. Homeless Clean Up and Enforcement- Enforce Grants Pass Instructions Per Governor Gavin Newsom!

2. Public Safety- More POLICE for Our Residents and Our Struggling Businesses and Tourism Economy!

3. Removal of Needle Distribution @ Our Parks.. Inviting Drug Addicts, Increasing crime and threats to our Kids, Residents, Police, City Staff and Businesses.

4. Affordable Housing While Preserving Single Family Neighborhoods and SM Character.. (Nowhere is Cannabis Equity a Priority for SM - As reflected in Your Survey) Item 4-F
March 11, 2025
Item 4-F
March 11, 2025

4.F.d
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Written Comment (6890 : Resolution to Accept Cannabis Equity Grant) Item 4-F
March 11, 2025
Item 4-F
March 11, 2025

4.F.d
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Written Comment (6890 : Resolution to Accept Cannabis Equity Grant) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.G
1 of 3
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Dana Brown, Human Resources Director, Human Resources Department Subject: Adoption of Salary Resolution to Reflect Title Change for Assistant Building Officer
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council

2. Adopt a salary resolution changing the classification title of Assistant Building Officer to Assistant Building Official.

Summary
The attached resolution presents a change in classification title of Assistant Building Officer to Assistant Building Official.

Discussion
Staff requests that a job classification be retitled to Assistant Building Official. This change better aligns the title of the position reporting to and supporting the City’s Building Official. Building Official is more widely used among California municipalities, rather than Building Officer. The Building Official and Assistant Building Official titles better reflect the nature of their responsibilities to the development community and potential employees. The position is currently vacant and recruitment will commence immediately after this action to support the time sensitive work of the Building and Safety Division to support the timely completion of building projects in the community.

4.G
Packet Pg. 178
2 of 3
Upon approval of this action, the City’s salary schedule, which reflects the City’s list of active classifications, will be updated to reflect this action. There is no salary change as the result of this action. Human Resources supports this request.

Environmental Review
The revision to the classification title is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15324 (Regulations of Working Conditions) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15324 (Class 24) of the CEQA Guidelines exempts actions taken by regulatory agencies to regulate working conditions, including wages. Additionally, the revisions are exempt pursuant to Section15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that CEQA does not apply, “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” This revision to the City’s classification title is administrative in nature. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the agreement would not result in adverse physical impacts on the environment, and as such, is exempt from CEQA.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future.

FY 2024-25 Position Changes
Fund Dept Delete Add Net
Change
Reason
FTE Title FTE Title
Genera
l
Fund
CD
D

1.0 Assistant
Building
Officer

1.0 Assistant
Building
Official - Add/Delete

4.G
Packet Pg. 179
3 of 3
Prepared By: Beth Rolandson, Administrative Services Officer Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Attachment A - General Salary Resolution Mid Year March 2025

4.G
Packet Pg. 180

ATTACHMENT A
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER ________(CCS)
(City Council Series)

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

ADOPTING SALARY RATES FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF ASSISTANT BUILDING

OFFICIAL

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

SECTION 1. The following salary level is hereby established, effective March 23, 2025, for the indicated classification:

Classification Salary Reason
Assistant Building Official* $183,408/annual; Step 5 Title change only, no change in salary
*Pending approval by the Personnel Board
SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
Douglas T. Sloan
City Attorney

4.G.a
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Attachment A - General Salary Resolution Mid Year March 2025 [Revision 1] (6925 : Adoption of Salary Resolution to Reflect Title City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.H
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department Subject: Approval of Corrected Minutes for the City Council Meeting of May 14, 2024 Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the corrected minutes of the May 14, 2024 meeting.

Prepared By: Nikima Newsome, City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. m20240514_CORRECTED

4.H
Packet Pg. 182
1 May 14, 2024

CORRECTED

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
MAY 14, 2024
A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Brock at 5:50 p.m., on Tuesday, May 14, 2024, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA and 2319 14th Street #7, Santa Monica, CA 90401
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
Councilmember Jesse Zwick
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 5:50 p.m., with all members present. Councilmember Torosis 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:

Members of the public Johnathan Foster, Jerry Rubin, Jayson Gladstone, Denise Barton, Lydia Ponce, Alfred Cockrell, Chase Sherman, Alec Porter, Zoe Muntaner, and Templar Soto commented on various local issues.

PUBLIC INPUT FOR

CLOSED SESSION,
Members of the public Debbie Mulvaney, Natalya Zernitskaya, Chris Harding, Joe Pertel, Caro Vilain, Tom Larmore, and Zoe Muntaner

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 2 May 14, 2024

SPECIAL AGENDA

ITEMS AND CONSENT
CALENDAR ONLY:
commented on closed session items.

Members of the public Carol Vilain and Alex Cardiel commented on consent calendar items.

CLOSED SESSIONS
(Councilmember de la Torre
recused himself at 6:34 p.m.
and returned at 6:54 p.m.)
On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 6:34 p.m., to consider closed sessions and returned at 8:53 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:

4.A. Conference with legal counsel – anticipated litigation – Gov.

Code 54956.9(d)(2): 1 case (Initiative to Partially Exempt Multifamily Developments from Part of the Third Tier Transfer Tax)
This item was continued from the May 14, 2024 special Council meeting to be heard in conjunction with the closed session items on the May 14, 2024 regular Council meeting agenda.

The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.A. 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.

4.B. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): Cheyenne Robinson, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 21STCV22392
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.C. Conference with legal counsel - potential litigation regarding public nuisance, Government Code 54956.9(d)(4), City of Santa Monica and People of the State of California v. Pavilions Motel, Inc., Saeed Farzam and Goharshad Farzam
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.D. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica, L.A.S.C. Case No. BC 616804; Second District Court of Appeal Case No. B295935

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 3 May 14, 2024
The City Attorney advised this matter was not heard.

4.E. Conference with real estate negotiator, Gov. Code §54956.8:

Santa Monica Beach, 1550 Parking Lot (venue for L.A. Olympics 2028 beach volleyball); City Negotiators: Susan Cline, Assistant City Manager and Melissa Spagnuolo, Community Partnerships Manager; Venue Negotiators: Vic Nol, Director, Venue Cities Relations, Los Angeles Organizing Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games 2028; under negotiation: price and terms of payment
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.F. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): John U.N.B. Doe, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCV12746
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.G. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): Hector Orozco v. John Doe: Does 1-2; LASC Case No. 23SMCV03120
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.H. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): John Doe 1, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCV15009
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.I. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): John Doe (A.G.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al.; LASC Case No. 23SMCV0606
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.J. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): John JPC Doe v. Doe City, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCV22020

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 4 May 14, 2024
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.K. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): John AD Doe, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCV26548
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.L. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): John CW Doe, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 23STCV29623
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.M. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): John Doe 15, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 24STCV07647
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

4.N. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code §54956.9(d)(1): Jane Doe 1, et al. v. City of Santa Monica, et al.; LASC Case No. 24STCV06207
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

REPORT ON COUNCIL
TRAVEL
Councilmember Davis reported that she traveled to Vienna, Austria, with the Global Policy Leadership Academy.

Councilmember de la Torre reported that he traveled to Arizona, participating with the National Association of Latino Elected Officials for a conference, where there was discussion on housing and homelessness.

Mayor Brock traveled to Washington, D.C. for the US Conference of Mayors, as a member of the Homelessness Task Force, focusing on strategies to address homelessness. Additionally, Mayor Brock attended the Southern California Association of Governments conference in Palm Desert, California.

CONSENT CALENDAR: Interim City Clerk Nikima S. Newsome stated into the record the following correction regarding Item 5.E., whereas Attachment B should have

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 5 May 14, 2024
referenced the December 13th, 2022 Staff Report, and Attachment C should have referenced the May 23rd, 2023 Staff Report.

All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.

At the request of Mayor Brock, Item 5.A. was removed from the Consent Calendar.

Motion by Councilmember Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Parra, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Item 5.A, 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

ENGINEERING DESIGN

SERVICES

5.B. Award Agreement No. 11570 (CCS) to Woodard and Curran for Engineering Design Services for the Moss Avenue Pump Station and Santa Monica Urban Runoff Recycling Facility Rehabilitation Project, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) and Section 15302
(Replacement/Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines;

2. Award RFP #388 to Woodard and Curran for design services for the Moss Avenue Pump Station and Santa Monica Urban Runoff
Recycling Facility Rehabilitation Project for the Public Works Department; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11570 (CCS) with Woodard and Curran, in an amount not to exceed $1,525,401 over a 5-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

SANTA MONICA BLVD
SAFETY

ENHANCEMENT STUDY

5.C. Award of Agreement No. 11571 (CCS) to Michael Baker International to conduct the Santa Monica Blvd Safety Enhancement Study supported by a Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 6 May 14, 2024

1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15252 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.

2. Award RFP # 389 to Michael Baker International to provide transportation planning and traffic engineering services for the Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Enhancement Study for the Department of Transportation.

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11571 (CCS) with Michael Baker International in an amount not to exceed $590,000 (including an 11.6% contingency) for two years, with an additional one-year no-cost renewal option on the same terms and conditions, for a total amount not to exceed $590,000 over a three-year period. Any additional future year funding would be contingent on Council budget approval.

DATA ANALYTICS

MANAGEMENT

SERVICES

5.D. Approval of Modification for Contract Extension and Additional Funding for Parking Data Analytics Management Services with ParkHub, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

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

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to Agreement No. 10806 (CCS) in the amount of $486,948 with ParkHub, for parking data analytics management services for the Department of Transportation. This will result in a seven-year agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $1,705,948, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

WELL DRILLING AND

EQUIPMENT PROJECT

5.E. Award Construction Contract No. 11572 (CCS) for The Groundwater Recharge Well SM-11i and Monitoring Wells MWi-2 & MWi-3 Drilling and Equipping Project, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding that the groundwater recharge wells were analyzed in the adopted Olympic Arcadia Treatment Plant Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (State Clearinghouse No. 2020070129), and a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15302,15303 and 15304 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award Bid #2678-C to Environmental Construction, Inc.to provide construction services to the Groundwater Recharge Well SM-11i and

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 7 May 14, 2024
Monitoring Wells MWi-2 & MWi-3 Drilling and Equipping Project for the Public Works Department;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Contract No. 11572 (CCS) with Environmental Construction Inc., in an amount not to exceed $7,477,314 (including a 15% contingency);

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

5. Authorize budget amendment as outlined in the Financial Impacts and Budget Actions section of this report (requires 5 votes).

WATER/WASTEWATER

RATE STRUCUTURE

5.F. Award Professional Services Contract No. 11573 (CCS) to NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS to Analyze the Existing Water/Wastewater Rate Structure and Establish a New Five-Year Rate Structure for Potable Water, Recycled Water, and Wastewater Commodity Charges; Fire Line Rates; and Capital Facility Fee for Calendar Years 2025 to 2029, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Award RFP #391 to NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS to analyze the existing water/wastewater rate structure and establish a new five-year rate structure for potable water, recycled water, and wastewater commodity charges; fire line rates; and a capital facility fee for calendar years 2025 to 2029 for the Public Works Department; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11573 (CCS) with NBS Government Finance Group, dba NBS in the amount not to exceed $420,000 over a 5-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

ANNUAL WATER

SHORTAGE

ASSESSMENT REPORT

5.G. Resolution No. 11584 (CCS) entitled “A RESOLUTION OF THE

CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA ADOPTING THE
2024 ANNUAL WATER SHORTAGE ASSESSMENT REPORT,” was
adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of statutory exemption pursuant to Section 10652 of the California Water Code; and

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 8 May 14, 2024

2. Receive public comment and approve attached Resolution No. 11584 (CCS) adopting the 2024 Annual Water Shortage Assessment Report.

BACKUP LANDFILL

FACILITY SERVICES

5.H. Award Contracts to Browning Ferris Industries, Inc., Waste Management of California, and County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County for Backup Landfill Facility Services, were approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 and 15308 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11574 (CCS) with Browning Ferris Industries, Inc., dba Sunshine Canyon Landfill to provide backup landfill services for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an
exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section

2.24.250 (g) and is for a total amount not to exceed $2,277,521 (including a 20% contingency) for 10 years, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11575 (CCS0 with Waste Management of California – Simi Valley Landfill to provide backup landfill services for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (g) and is for a total amount not to exceed $1,824,264 (including a 20% contingency) for 10 years, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11576 (CCS) with Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts – Puente Hills Material Recycling Facility to provide backup landfill services for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (g) and is for a total amount not to exceed $1,175,856 (including a 20% contingency) for 1.5 years, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

SIX SCHOOLS PROJECT 5.I. Award Construction Contract No. 11577 (CCS) to Environmental Construction, Inc. for Pedestrian Improvements at Six Schools Project, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 9 May 14, 2024

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 and Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Section 21080.25 of CEQA;

2. Award Bid #SP2649 to Environmental Construction, Inc., for the construction of the Safe Routes to Schools: Pedestrian Improvements at Six Schools Project for the Public Works Department;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Contract No. 11577 (CCS) with Environmental Construction, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $ 3,545,430 (including a 10% contingency);

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

5. Authorize budget amendment as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report (requires 5 votes).

ANY LINE, ANY TIME

PROGRAM

5.J. Approval of Big Blue Bus Renewal of Any Line, Any Time Program for Santa Monica College, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

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

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11578 (CCS) to renew the “Any Line, Any Time” unlimited ride transit program with Santa Monica College (SMC), effective July 1, 2024, for a two-year term through June 30, 2026. SMC will reimburse Big Blue Bus for transit services in the amount of $1,258,000 over the two-year term.

ELECTRICAL

CONTRACTOR

SERVICES

5.K. Award Contract to Reign Industries, Inc. as Primary and Leed Electric, Inc. as Secondary to Provide Electrical Contractor Services at Water & Wastewater Treatment Facilities, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:

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

2. Award Bid #4476 to Reign Industries Inc. as the primary vendor to provide electrical contractor services at water and wastewater treatment facilities; and to Leed Electric, Inc. as the secondary vendor to provide electrical contractor services at water and wastewater treatment facilities for the Public Works Department;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11579 (CCS) with Reign Industries, Inc. in an amount not to exceed

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 10 May 14, 2024
$300,000 for one year, with four additional one-year renewal options in the amount of $1,200,000 on the same terms and conditions for a total amount not to exceed $1,500,000 over a five-year period with future funding contingent on Council budget approval; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11580 (CCS) with Leed Electric, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $160,000 for one year, with four additional one-year renewal options in the amount of $640,000 for a total amount not to exceed $800,000 over a five-year period with future funding contingent on Council budget approval.

WATER &

WASTEWATER

FACILITIES

MAINTENANCE

5.L. Award Contract to Global Power Group, Inc. as Primary and Bay City Electric Works as Secondary to Provide Emergency Generator Maintenance & Repair at Water & Wastewater Facilities, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that City Council:

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

2. Award Bid #4478 to Global Power Group, Inc. as the primary vendor to provide emergency generator maintenance and repair services at water and wastewater treatment facilities; and to Bay City Electric Works as the secondary vendor to provide emergency generator maintenance and repair services at water and wastewater treatment facilities for the Public Works Department;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11581 (CCS) with Global Power Group, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $350,000 over a five year period, with future funding contingent on Council budget approval; and

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11582 (CCS) with Bay City Electric Works in an amount not to exceed $250,000 over a five year period, with the same price, terms and conditions in renewal years two through four, with future funding contingent on Council budget approval.

RECREATIONMANAGEMENT

SOFTWARE SYSTEM

5.M. Approval of Modification to Contract #10571 with Active Net to Extend the Contract Term and Price, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemptions pursuant to Section15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a fifth modification to extend the term and contract price of Agreement No. 10517 (CCS) for one year in the amount of $54,366, with a one year

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 192 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 11 May 14, 2024
option to renew for $52,388, with Active Network Inc. to provide a cloud-based hosted recreation-management software system for the Recreation and Arts Department, Housing and Human Services Department, and Department of Transportation. This will result in a 14-year amended agreement with a total not to exceed amount of $645,579 with future-year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

HOMELESS OUTREACH

SERVICES

5.N. Approval of Sixth Modification with West Coast Care Foundation for Homeless Outreach Services, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that 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 sixth modification to Contract No. 10684 (CCS) in the amount of $150,000 with West Coast Care Foundation for homeless outreach services.

This will result in a seven-year amended contract with a new total not to exceed $1,450,000.

CALIFORNIA GREEN

BUILDING STANDARDS
CODE

5.O. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2778 (CCS) Amending Article 8 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to Adopt the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code, Repeal Outdated Local Amendments, and Adopt a 2022 Local Amendment Relating to Concrete Requirements for Newly Constructed Buildings, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

STATE DENSITY BONUS
LAW

5.P. Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 2779 (CCS) Amending the Text of the City's Zoning Ordinance to Update Provisions Related to State Density Bonus Law for Consistency with Recent Amendments to State Law Adopted by AB 1287 and Making Other Minor Changes, Corrections, and Clarifications, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

CITY COUNCIL

MEETING RULES OF
ORDER

5.Q. Resolution No. 11585 (CCS) entitled “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
11547 (CCS),” was adopted.

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 12 May 14, 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. Pursuant to a Council approved 16 Item, consider amendments to the Council Rules to allow 16 items, with exceptions, to be treated like the Consent Calendar with one vote for all items. Additional changes are proposed to provide clarity and document procedures for Councilmembers requesting 16 items and closed session items.

OLYMPIC BLVD AND
26th STREET PROJECT

5.A. Award Construction Contract for Olympic Boulevard and 26th Street Project, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 and 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and Section 21080.25 of CEQA;

2. Award Bid #SP2662 to Hardy & Harper, Inc., a California-based company, for the construction of the Olympic Boulevard and 26th Street Project for the Public Works Department;

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Contract No. 11569 (CCS) with Hardy & Harper, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $1,248,500 (including a 10% contingency); and

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

Questions asked and answered of staff included: will the same type of barrier used on 17th street be used; what is the street’s width in comparison to 17th street; will barriers be placed on both sides of the street and have any alternatives been considered to limit the space needed.

Motion by Mayor Brock, seconded by Councilmember de la Torre, to approve 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
AGENDA

MANAGEMENT
Motion by Mayor Brock, seconded by Councilmember Torosis, to first hear public input on Items 10.A. and 11.A. and hear Items 10.A. and 11.A together, with remaining public input to be heard after and limit public comment to one minute per speaker. The motion was approved by the

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 13 May 14, 2024
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:

Member of the public Caro Vilain commented on Item 10.A.

Members of the public Denise Barton and Johnathan Foster commented on Item 11.A.

Members of the public Jerry Rubin Johnathan Foster and Denise Barton commented on Item 16.C.

Members of the public Andrew Liberman, Charles Fredricks, Jerry Rubin, Sherna Berger Gluck (time donated by Cynthia Anderson Barker), David Clennon (time donated by Matthew Hom), Rosemarie Driscoll, Sarah Newell, Janet McKeithen, Suzanne Thompson, Randall Heyn-Lamb, Mimi Kennedy, Hadir Azab, John Mooney, Rima Abu-Isa Thierry, Jodie Evans, Baba Akili, Almas Sayeed, Will Alden, Dorothy Yungman, Igal Yungman, Adam Hirsch, Erika Verba, Lolo Movsessian, Denise Barton, John Alle, Jennifer Vaughan, Vivien, Mariah, Rabbi Eli Levitansky, Ignacio Fernandez, Metabrafar Agindotan, Dorothy Chapman, Robin Boerner, John Williams, Jamie Kelleher, Susan Adelman, Debbie Paperman, Lawson Adams, Kiran Randhawa, Rozima Tarr, Rebeca Kon, Dr. Ghassan Khoury, Peter Himmelman (time donated by Rabbi Chaim Teleshevsky), Johnathan Foster, Arnold Seid, Jennifer Roth Krieger, Rabbi Naomi Levy, Justin Baltz, Afroze Bari, Timothy Arnold, Zoe Muntaner, Aseya Jooma, Majed Harb, Nasiha Solakovic, Isaac Yerushalmi (time donated by David Noormand, Riyad Shauk, Valida Carroll, Craig Ali, Joanne Berlin, Joshua Martinez, Michele Prince Itai Klein (time donated by John Mcallister), Sharon Ben-Roohi, Suleman Adeyemi, Amelia Hall, John Seeley, Lee Garrum (time donated by Sophy Yurman), Maggie Lang, Nadia, Alexandra Anemone, Melanie Campbell, Christie Becu, Taylor Brophy, Alan Luna, Ladan M, Elly Levy, Anastasia Shakhidzhanova, Jesssica Pirrone, Dana Kotler, Yves Marton, Vicki Plaks, Miriam Alpern, Peter Birnstein, Robert Shiri, Hagai Feiner, Assaf and Ray Schwartz commented on 16.D.

Member of the public Michael Masucci, Jeff Gordon, Federico Galavis, Deepa Subramaniam, Janet Owen Driggs, Mona Kuhn and Robert Berman commented on Item 16.F.

Member of the Public Johnathan Foster, John Alle (time donated by Jessica Rogers) and Denise Barton commented n Item 16.I.

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 14 May 14, 2024
ORDINANCES:

BICYCLIST

HARRASSMENT

10.A. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Adding Section

3.75 to the Municipal Code to Prohibit Harassment of Bicyclists and Provide for a Private Right of Action for Violations, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15321 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Introduce for first reading the attached ordinance adding Section 3.75 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to prohibit harassment of bicyclists and provide a private right of action for violations.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: could these protections be offered to pedestrians and what educational outreach would be provided to inform residents of these protections.

Motion by Councilmember Davis, seconded by Councilmember Zwick, to introduce and hold first reading of the ordinance reading by title only and waiving further reading thereof and providing direction to staff to include pedestrians to the ordinance. 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
STAFF

ADMINISTRATIVE
ITEMS:

ANNUAL UPDATE ON

HOMELESSNESS

11.A. Annual Interdepartmental Update on Addressing Homelessness, was presented.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Receive the 2024 Annual Interdepartmental Update on Addressing Homelessness.

2. Adopt the attached Proclamation declaring a local emergency on Homelessness through 05/31/2025 (Attachment A), unless repealed or extended by Council, due to the ongoing crisis of homelessness as evidenced by the 2023 increase in the Point-In-Time Count.

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.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: why is the occupancy rate only at 50% at this time at SAMOSHEL; do people need to be referred to be provided a bed; how much money is spent towards homeless services and programs and how does it compare to other cities; has the Governor’s 2024-

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 15 May 14, 2024
25 May budget revision been analyzed for implications to current funding sources; is there anything structurally the City can do to improve the prevention of homelessness; is staff aware of the Orange County homeless consent decree; what is the bed count for temporary shelters within the city; has staff evaluated the potential impacts of signing or not signing the consent decree; what are the implications of transferring from the city’s proprietary homeless management information system (HMIS) to the HMIS managed by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority (LAHSA) and are there any immediate actions the city can do to make tangible differences to the behavioral health approach.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, seconded by Councilmember de la Torre, to adopt a proclamation declaring a local emergency on Homelessness through 5/31/2025 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

COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:

COMMISSION ON

SUSTAINABILITY,

ENVIRONMENTAL

JUSTICE AND THE

ENVIRONMENT

16.A. Appointment to an unscheduled vacancy on the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment for a term ending on June 30, 2024, was heard.

On order of the Mayor, the floor was opened for nominations.

Councilmember Davis nominated Gerda Newold.

Councilmember Parra nominated Jeff Bush.

Jeff Bush was appointed to a term ending June 30, 2024, by the following vote:

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

TRANSIENT

OCCUPANCY TAX

ADVISORY COMMITTEE

16.B. Appointment to an unscheduled vacancy on the Transient Occupancy Tax Advisory Committee for a term ending on June 30, 2025, was continued to June 11, 2024 meeting.

CITY COUNCIL RULES

AMENDMENT

16.C. Request of Mayor Brock that the City Attorney, City Clerk, and City Manager return with an amendment to the City Council Rules to limit the time period for general public input (e.g., 20 minutes), and to continue any remaining general public input to the end of the meeting,

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 16 May 14, 2024
was heard.

Motion made by Mayor Brock with no second. Motion failed for lack of a second.

CEASEFIRE AND ANTIRACISM RESOLUTION16.D. Request of Councilmembers Zwick, Torosis, and Davis that the City Council adopt attached Resolution No. 11586 (CCS) supporting the resumption of a negotiated bilateral ceasefire in Gaza and reiterating the City’s condemnation of all antisemitism, anti-Arab racism, Islamophobia, and all forms of hate and incitement to violence, was heard.

Motion by Mayor Brock to propose Resolution No. 11587 (CCS) with the following language: “It is resolved that while tragic armed conflicts are occurring in the Middle East, we acknowledge that feelings of hate and despair within our community from these outside events are stirring Antisemitism and Islamophobia in Santa Monica. Be it known to all that tolerance of all faiths and beliefs are integral to life within Santa Monica and that all faiths and beliefs are welcome here without prejudgment.

Further, verbal and/or physical attacks on any member of the Santa Monica community will not be tolerated, no matter their religion, faith, or creed.

Santa Monicans strive for peace in our community and throughout the world. As the City Council, we are responsible for promoting the safety and security of all who live and come here. Tolerance, not intolerance, is the key to peace in our city.

We urge all of Santa Monica’s residents to treat each other respectfully and not judge others based on external factors but as humans dedicated to peace and justice for all other humans.”
Friendly amendment proposed by Councilmember Zwick to change the following language to the first proposed Resolution from “WHEREAS, the horrific slaughter of Israeli civilians perpetrated by Hamas on October 7, 2023, was the largest mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust, and 240 Israeli civilians were taken as hostages” to “WHEREAS, the horrific slaughter of 1,000 Israeli civilians perpetrated by Hamas, a designated foreign terrorist organization, on October 7, 2023, was the largest mass murder of Jews since the Holocaust, and 240 Israeli civilians were taken as hostages.” The motion was considered friendly by the maker and seconded by Councilmember Davis.

Motion by Mayor Brock, seconded by Councilmember Davis, to adopt both resolutions. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers de la Torre, Torosis, Davis, Zwick, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: Councilmember Parra

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 17 May 14, 2024
ABSENT: None
For the record, Councilmember Parra stated she voted against the motion because it would create division within the community and wished to be sensitive to all members.

MITIGATING VEHICLE

SPEEDING
(Councilmember Davis
recused herself at 1:32 a.m.)

16.E. Request of Councilmember Zwick, Councilmember Torosis, and Councilmember Davis that the City Council direct the City Manager to prioritize measures to reduce vehicle speeding and mitigate crashes on Neilson Way in order to enhance safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers on the corridor; specifically, the City Manager is directed to prepare cost estimates and identify potential funding sources and tradeoffs for adding the installation of speed cushions along Neilson Way as a project for consideration as part of the upcoming biennial Capital Improvement Program budget process.

This would result in Neilson Way being prioritized as the next phase of the ongoing partnership among the Department of Transportation, Santa Monica Fire Department, and Public Works Department to reinitiate deployment of speed humps/bumps and other speed calming measures that do not impact emergency response times, as resources and staff capacity allow, was heard.

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, Torosis, de la Torre, Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Davis

CONTRACT WORDING
(Councilmember Davis
returned at 1:40 a.m.)

16.F. Request of Vice Mayor Negrete, Councilmember Parra, and Councilmember de la Torre that the City Manager include language in contracts between the City of Santa Monica and Venice Family Clinic and CLARE|Matrix pursuant to the Fiscal Year 24/25 Human Services Grant Program (HSGP) that states: “Agency will not use HSGP funds provided under this contract or renewals of this contract for the purpose of syringe distribution/exchange at or around parks and public open spaces.” On April 9, 2024, the City Council adopted a resolution that was transmitted to Los Angeles County indicating that harm reduction is an important tool to connect individuals to healthcare, behavioral health, and substance abuse resources but objects to the County of Los Angeles Substance Abuse Prevention and Control Bureau’s (County) distribution of clean needles and other drug paraphernalia in parks or near schools. To this end, Vice Mayor Negrete, Councilmember Parra, and Councilmember de la Torre are

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) 18 May 14, 2024
requesting that the City Manager incorporate additional language into the City’s contracts with Venice Family Clinic and CLARE|Matrix to reflect City Council policy direction, was heard.

Motion by Councilmember de la Torre, seconded by Councilmember Parra, to approve the item. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Parra, Davis, de la Torre,
Mayor Pro Tem Negrete, Mayor Brock
NOES: Councilmember Torosis
ABSENT: None
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 1:50 a.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Nikima S. Newsome Phil Brock
Interim City Clerk Mayor

4.H.a
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: m20240514_CORRECTED (6934 : Corrected City Council Minutes of 5/14/24 (1 min)) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.I
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office, Administration Subject: Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition Against Camping in Public Places
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

Executive Summary
At its meeting on February 25, 2025, the City Council introduced for first reading an Ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition Against Camping in Public Places, to omit from the definition of “camp facility” certain items. The ordinance is now presented to the City Council for adoption.

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

A. ORD-CAO-Camping 2d
B. Written Comments

4.I
Packet Pg. 201

Page 1 of 3 ends

City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025 Santa Monica, California ORDINANCE NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 4.08.095, PROHIBITION AGAINST

CAMPING IN PUBLIC PLACES, TO OMIT CERTAIN COMFORT ITEMS FROM THE

DEFINITION OF CAMP FACILITY
WHEREAS, Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095 prohibits camping in prohibited public places; and
WHEREAS, on November 15, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2728 (CCS) (Ordinance 2728), amending Section 4.08.095 in response to a ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Johnson v. City of Grants Pass (Grants Pass), which held that it is “cruel and unusual punishment” in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution to prohibit individuals that are “involuntarily” unhoused from sleeping or using blankets, pillows, sleeping bags, cardboard boxes, and other rudimentary protections against the weather on public property, unless shelter space is available; and
WHEREAS, for consistency with the Ninth Circuit’s decision, Ordinance 2728 amended Section 4.08.095 by: 1) removing sleeping bags and bedrolls from the list of items that could be used to determine whether an individual has erected a camp facility for the purpose of living accommodations in a public place in violation of Section 4.08.095; and 2) adding language clarifying that unhoused individuals are not prohibited from using “sleeping bags, blankets, pillows, and/or bedrolls while sleeping”; and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Grants Pass, overturning the Ninth Circuit and holding that regulating camping

4.I.a
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: ORD-CAO-Camping 2d (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading)

Page 2 of 3 ends

on public property does not constitute “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment; and
WHEREAS, The Supreme Court held that legislative bodies, rather than courts, are the appropriate decision maker when determining criminal regulations and penalties for camping in public, and the Court acknowledged legislative bodies have broad discretion in this regard, while further acknowledging that a number of Constitutional and common law protections still apply; and
WHEREAS, in response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Grants Pass, on September 24, 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance Number 2789 (CCS), repealed the changes made by Ordinance 2728 by: 1) adding sleeping bags and bedrolls to the list of items that could be used to determine whether an individual has erected a camp facility for the purpose of living accommodations in a public place in violation of Section 4.08.095; and 2) removing language clarifying that unhoused individuals are not prohibited from using “sleeping bags, blankets, pillows, and/or bedrolls while sleeping”: and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that a ban on sleeping bags and bedrolls to be an inappropriate conflation of comfort items with “encampments,” an ineffective tool to combat the chronic issue of homelessness, and against the values we hold as a community of treating our unhoused neighbors with compassion, dignity, and respect; and
WHEREAS, implementing measures with the intent of making our city inhospitable to fellow human beings in an attempt to force them to seek shelter in Los Angeles does not solve our homelessness crisis, invites Los Angeles and neighboring cities to do the

4.I.a
Packet Pg. 203 Attachment: ORD-CAO-Camping 2d (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading)

Page 3 of 3 ends

same to us, and merely perpetuates the shell game the Los Angeles region has played with our unhoused population for decades; and
WHEREAS, our goal as City leaders is to entice unhoused individuals into housing and services for long term stability and ensuring a clean and safe Santa Monica for our residents, visitors, property owners, and businesses; and WHEREAS, the Council now desires to amend Section 4.08.095 to omit from the definition of “camp facility” certain items.

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

SECTION 1. Section 4.08.095 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:

4.08.095 Prohibition against camping in public places.
(a) No person shall camp in a prohibited public place.
(b) For the purpose of this Section:
(1) “Camp” means to erect, maintain, or occupy a camp facility for the purpose of living accommodations.
(2) “Camp facility” means the use of, settling, fixing in place, setting up, locating, or leaving behind in a prohibited public place any or a combination of the following: tents, huts, other temporary physical shelters, cots, beds or hammocks.
(3) “Prohibited public place” means any of the following: the public parks listed in Section 4.55.020, public beaches, the Santa Monica Municipal Pier, public streets, public alleyways, public parking lots,

4.I.a
Packet Pg. 204 Attachment: ORD-CAO-Camping 2d (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading)

Page 4 of 3 ends

public passageways, public rights-of-way, publicly-owned landscaped areas or greenbelts, public educational institutions including properties owned by the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District or Santa Monica College, or other government-owned properties located within the City of Santa Monica.
(c) The City Council may, by majority vote, establish one or more specified camping areas. Such camping areas, if any, may be located in prohibited public places, except that such camping areas shall not be located within public parks.

SECTION 2. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance.

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

SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official

4.I.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: ORD-CAO-Camping 2d (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading)

Page 5 of 3 ends

newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from its adoption.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney

4.I.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: ORD-CAO-Camping 2d (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) Recreation and Parks Commission
November 8, 2024
Mayor and City Council Members
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica,CA 90401
Re: Public Safety at Reed Park
Dear Mayor, Council Members and City Manager,
The Recreation and Parks Commission recently received a wide-ranging public safety update on Reed Park following a homicide in an alley nearby. The Commission asked for the briefing because members feel the city and police department have made recent progress in addressing some of the public safety challenges that have plagued the park at various times for decades.

That progress includes:
--Funding for the planned re-imagining of the Miles Playhouse and areas around it…
--The installation of a new hi-tech video surveillance system… --A noticeable and increased police presence during peak daylight hours to discourage and prevent open drug use and smoking at the park… --Successful efforts by Code Enforcement to force the owner of an eyesore property across from Reed to fence off and secure the property so it is no longer a hangout for homeless populations…
--A recent SCOTUS ruling and Council action to dissuade flagrant camping in parks…
--A series of fun, family-oriented summer music and movie events at Reed cosponsored by the Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition with financial support from the city and SMPD…
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025

4.I.b
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) Ever since the last event in mid-September, the Santa Monica Police Department has worked to prioritize putting a Public Safety Officer at the park during daylight hours whenever possible. Flagrant drug use at the park has lessened substantially since. Encouraged by the positive changes and recent developments, the Commission discussed and voted, 7-0, to make the following recommendations:
--Consider new, strategic signage that specifically targets illegal activities such as “No Drug Use Allowed”, “No Smoking Permitted” and “This Park is under Video Surveillance”…
--Continued Public Service Officer “rollcalls” as much as possible… --Continued PSO presence during daylight hours as much as possible… --A return to two-person Ambassador teams whenever possible… --Consider a return of city-sponsored events such as “Meet Me At Reed” or perhaps a new series of Saturday concerts in June or July similar to “Americana in the Park” at Gandara…
--The creation of “tree aprons” around certain trees in the center of the park to protect them from root compression and to discourage day-camping by groups of individuals who frequent the park…
--A possible police substation/work station at the park if space/resources are available…
We recognize and appreciate all the work the Council, city staff and SMPD are doing to help make Reed Park more inviting and appealing to everyone. We believe the above recommendations will go a long way towards that goal.

Sincerely,
Chair Steven Johnson
Recreation and Parks Commission
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025

4.I.b
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) sm
§antamonic:aJDairr :}Oress
Home > Featured
Encan1pinent c s
sp· easS PD
responds to hoineless
• •
cns1s
by Matthew Hall - March 6, 2023
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025

4.I.b
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) 1 David Yakobson
From: John Cyrus Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 10:38 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; councilmtgitems; Elaine Polachek
Subject: 3-11-25 ITEM 4.I. CAMPING ORDINANCE
Attachments: 2 RP REED PROGRESS LTR TO CC 110824.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor, Council, City Manager,
Please see the attached letter from the Rec and Parks Commission concerning Reed Park and the proposed changes to the anti-camping ordinance..

Thank you,
John Cyrus Smith
[email protected]
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025

4.I.b
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) Recreation and Parks Commission
November 8, 2024
Mayor and City Council Members
City of Santa Monica
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica,CA 90401
Re: Public Safety at Reed Park
Dear Mayor, Council Members and City Manager,
The Recreation and Parks Commission recently received a wide-ranging public safety update on Reed Park following a homicide in an alley nearby. The Commission asked for the briefing because members feel the city and police department have made recent progress in addressing some of the public safety challenges that have plagued the park at various times for decades.

4.I.b
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) Ever since the last event in mid-September, the Santa Monica Police Department has worked to prioritize putting a Public Safety Officer at the park during daylight hours whenever possible. Flagrant drug use at the park has lessened substantially since. Encouraged by the positive changes and recent developments, the Commission discussed and voted, 7-0, to make the following recommendations:
--Consider new, strategic signage that specifically targets illegal activities such as “No Drug Use Allowed”, “No Smoking Permitted” and “This Park is under Video Surveillance”…
--Continued Public Service Officer “rollcalls” as much as possible… --Continued PSO presence during daylight hours as much as possible… --A return to two-person Ambassador teams whenever possible… --Consider a return of city-sponsored events such as “Meet Me At Reed” or perhaps a new series of Saturday concerts in June or July similar to “Americana in the Park” at Gandara…
--The creation of “tree aprons” around certain trees in the center of the park to protect them from root compression and to discourage day-camping by groups of individuals who frequent the park…
--A possible police substation/work station at the park if space/resources are available…
We recognize and appreciate all the work the Council, city staff and SMPD are doing to help make Reed Park more inviting and appealing to everyone. We believe the above recommendations will go a long way towards that goal.

Sincerely,
Chair Steven Johnson
Recreation and Parks Commission
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025

4.I.b
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) 1 David Yakobson
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 8:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Lana Negrete; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell
Subject: In Support: Item 4.I

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
As a voter, resident, and parent, I support the proposed ordinance in Item 4.I. The existing municipal code is cruel, and it saddens me deeply to see our welcoming City have on the books a both literal and figurative blanket ban. It is time to repeal it.

The existing code criminalizes people with no other place to go, for merely seeking shelter when they otherwise lack anywhere else safe to sleep. It does nothing to solve homelessness, merely forcibly pushing people from place to place. It wastes our tax dollars while accomplishing very little. Legal scholars have argued that such ordinances violate basic human rights. The crisis requires far more beds and shelter space than we have available.

I hate to see the City side with the conservative wing of the Supreme Court here.

Having had unhoused people take shelter in my car ports before, and living myself just next door to a residence housing the formly unhoused, I know that compassion is needed and that our unhoused neighbors simply want a home first and foremost.

Thank you for this move in the right direction.

Jacob Wasserman
11th and Washington
90403
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025
Item 4-I
March 11, 2025

4.I.b
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (6938 : Camping Ordinance Update-Second Reading) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.J
1 of 3
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Dana Brown, Human Resources Director, Human Resources Department Subject: Approval of City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council

2. Approve the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement with Douglas Sloan for his services as City Attorney; and

3. Authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement on behalf of the City.

4.J
Packet Pg. 214
2 of 3
Executive Summary
On February 11, 2025, Council approved an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement with Douglas Sloan for his services as City Attorney. Mr. Sloan was originally appointed into the position on May 10, 2022, and entered into the original Employment Agreement. In March 2024, the City and Sloan entered into a First Modification of Employment Agreement to increase Sloan’s salary, in order to maintain appropriate internal alignment between the salary of the City Attorney and the salary of other City officials. The City and Sloan wish to enter this Amended and Restated Employment Agreement to provide Sloan with additional non-cashable leave on a onetime basis, and to consolidate all terms and conditions of Sloan’s employment into one document.

Environmental Review
Pursuant to CEQA Section 21065, the agreement for Mr. Sloan’s service does not meet the definition of a “project” subject to CEQA as it will not “cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment”. Additionally, per Section 15378(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, a “project” does not include administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. Therefore, the agreement is not subject to CEQA. Additionally, the agreement is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that CEQA does not apply, “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” The agreement is administrative in nature.

Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that the agreement would not result in adverse physical impacts on the environment, and as such, is exempt from CEQA.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of recommended action. Salary and benefits for the City Attorney position are included in the City’s budget.

4.J
Packet Pg. 215
3 of 3
Prepared By: Sasha Sargent, Executive Administrative Assistant Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. SLOAN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT 2025
B. Written Comments

4.J
Packet Pg. 216

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
This Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, entered into as of _________________, 2025 (“Execution Date”), by and between the City of Santa Monica, a California municipal corporation (the “City”), and Douglas Sloan (“Sloan” or “Employee”), is made with reference to the following.

RECITALS
A. On May 10, 2022, the Santa Monica City Council appointed Sloan to the position of City Attorney of the City of Santa Monica effective as of June 6, 2022 (“Employment Date”).

B. On or about May 11, 2022, the City and Sloan entered into an Employment Agreement setting forth the terms and conditions of Sloan’s employment as the City Attorney of the City as of the Employment Date, including a preference by both parties that during Sloan’s employment as the City Attorney, Sloan live within the City of Santa Monica (“Original Agreement”).

C. In approximately March 2024, the City and Sloan entered into a First Modification of Employment Agreement (“First Modification”) to increase Sloan’s salary, in order to maintain appropriate internal alignment between the salary of the City Attorney and the salary of other City officials.

D. The City and Sloan wish to enter this Amended and Restated Employment Agreement to provide Sloan with additional non-cashable leave on a one-time basis, and to consolidate all terms and conditions of Sloan’s employment into one document.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Sloan agree as follows.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. Salary. Commencing as of June 6, 2022, the City agreed to pay Employee a base annual salary in the amount of $320,136, payable in installments in the same manner and at the same time as other City employees are paid. Commencing as of March 10, 2024, the City agreed to pay Employee an annual base salary of $380,004, payable in installments in the same manner and at the same time as other City employees are paid.

In July of each year, Employee’s pay scale shall be automatically adjusted in the same percentage as any general salary increase that may be granted to participants of the Executive Pay Plan, with the base salary adjusted accordingly (currently $387,604.08).

2. Performance Evaluations. The City Council will complete formal performance evaluations of Employee’s performance in the position of City Attorney as follows. (a) initial evaluation after completion of first 6 months of employment; (b) second evaluation after completion of first 12 months of employment; (c) thereafter, an annual evaluation after completion of every 12 months of employment.

3. Other Terms of Employment.

3.1 Duration of Agreement. The parties acknowledge and agree that the terms and conditions of this Agreement apply to the complete term of Employee’s continuous performance of job duties in the position of City Attorney, provided as

4.J.a
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: SLOAN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT 2025 (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) of the Employment Date and prior to the execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect for a period of five years until June 6, 2027 (the “Initial Term”), or such earlier date on which Employee, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, is no longer employed by City as its City Attorney, whether as the result of resignation, termination, separation, or any other reason.

On June 7, 2027, and on each succeeding June 7 while this Agreement is in effect, the Initial Term, and any subsequent term resulting from extension of this Agreement, shall be automatically extended for successive periods of one year.

3.2 Termination of Employment. The City Attorney position is an at-will position, subject to termination by the City Council at any time. Upon resignation, Employee agrees to provide a 90-day written notice. Upon the termination of Employee’s employment with the City Attorney’s Office, the City will pay Employee all accrued benefits under this Agreement consistent with the provisions of the Executive Pay Plan and any applicable law.

3.3 Severance. The position of City Attorney may be terminated at the discretion of the City Council in accordance with the procedures set forth in City Charter Section 700. In the event of such a termination of Employee’s employment, or upon Employee’s separation from employment by mutual agreement documented in writing between the City and Employee, the City shall pay to Employee severance pay in an amount equal to 9 months of Employee’s base biweekly salary, such payment to be made within 30 days of Employee’s termination or separation from employment. Severance pay shall not be required pursuant to this paragraph, and Employee shall not be entitled to any severance pay only if:
(a) Employee resigns or retires; (b) the termination of Employee from the position of City Attorney was the result of good cause as defined below; or (c) Employee moves from employment by the City in the position as City Attorney to employment by the City in any other position. For purposes of this Agreement, good cause is defined only as follows. (1) conviction of Employee, whether by verdict or plea of guilty or nolo contendere, of any crime of moral turpitude; (2) willful misconduct by Employee; or (3) proven failure of Employee to observe or perform any of his duties and obligations as City Attorney, if that failure continues for a period of 30 calendar days from the date of Employee’s receipt of written notice from the City Council specifying the acts or omissions deemed to constitute that failure.

3.4 CalPERS Retirement. California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) retirement formula is based on appointment date and membership status with CalPERS. The City does not participate in Social Security but does participate in Medicare, which requires a 1.45% contribution by both the employee and the City.

4. City-Paid Health Insurance. The City pays 92% of the medical insurance premium for employee and eligible dependents. Employee contributes 8% towards the premium. The City pays 100% of premiums for dental and vision plans and Employee Assistance Program for employee and eligible dependents. Employees who elect cashin-lieu of medical coverage, are entitled to a bi-weekly taxable payment in the amount of $69.23 ($1800/annually).

4.J.a
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: SLOAN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT 2025 (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement)

5. Retiree Medical. The City contributes into a retiree medical trust ($176.56 per month as of January 2022). Upon eligibility, the City pays for the retiree’s (employees only) medical insurance up to age 70, as provided in the Executive Pay Plan (EPP).

6. Long-Term Disability (LTD) Insurance. The City pays the premium for LTD coverage.

7. Supplemental Retirement Plans. A 457 plan is available for voluntary participation. A 401(a) plan is also provided and there is a $625/month employee contribution with a one-time option to opt-out of the plan. The City contributes $190/month to the 401(a) plan.

8. Holiday/Vacation/Sick Leave.
14 holidays, includes 2 floating holidays, one of which can be cashed out at the end of the fiscal year.
21 vacation days/year, which accrues at 1.75 days per month. This is a higher accrual rate based on Employee’s years of service in the public sector. Following completion of the first six calendar months of service, Employee will receive 48 hours of vacation in Employee’s account. Thereafter, Employee will accrue 14 hours of vacation per month.

A bank of 40 hours of vacation leave will be available immediately as of the Employment Date.

One sick leave day per month. Sick leave accrued but not used in a fiscal year can be cashed out at the end of the fiscal year based on the formula outlined in the Executive Pay Plan. A bank of 40 hours of sick time will be available immediately as of the Employment Date.

9. Term Life Insurance. City-paid term life insurance coverage of two times Employee’s base salary, rounded to the next $1,000, not to exceed $500,000.

10. Management Leave Days. Employee will receive three days of non-cashable leave and one day of cashable leave July 1st of each fiscal year. The non-cashable days must be taken by the end of the fiscal year and cannot be carried over to the following year. The cashable day must be used by or cashed out at the end of the fiscal year.

11. One-Time Non-Cashable Leave. On July 1, 2025, Employee shall receive an additional 40 hours of non-cashable leave on a one-time basis for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Employee shall not be compensated for any unused non-cashable leave hours at the end of said fiscal year. Any unused non-cashable leave hours shall be forfeited at the end of the fiscal year.

12. Tuition Reimbursement. Participants of the Executive Pay Plan are reimbursed for tuition and required study materials for career improvement or job enhancement courses approved by the Mayor up to $2,000/annually. Professional dues, memberships, and continuing education are considered within the City Attorney’s Office department budget.

13. Relocation Costs. The City shall reimburse Employee for moving expenses (up to $20,000 based on actual invoices). Employee must obtain three bids for moving services, provide those bids to the Mayor, confer with the Mayor to arrive at a mutually

4.J.a
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: SLOAN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT 2025 (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) agreed on selection of moving services, and provide to the City receipts for the payment of moving expenses.

14. Temporary Rental Assistance. City shall provide $3,000 per month for a maximum of seven months for temporary rental housing allowance during the time on and after the Employment Date in which Employee is living in temporary rental housing in Santa Monica (or as close to Santa Monica as possible if Employee is not able to obtain temporary rental housing within Santa Monica) prior to moving into a permanent residence, whether rented or owned, in Santa Monica, or as close as possible to Santa Monica.

15. Executive Pay Plan. Employee will receive any other benefits provided under the terms of the Executive Pay Plan, which covers department head positions, as may be amended from time to time. To the extent provisions in this Agreement differ from provisions in the Executive Pay Plan, the provisions of this Agreement shall control.

16. Exempt Employee. As City Attorney, Employee is an exempt employee under the Fair Labor Standards Act, works during normal business hours of the City, and is required to devote whatever time is necessary to accomplish the work of the City Attorney position without eligibility to accrue additional compensatory time or to be paid overtime compensation. As a result, Employee will not have to account for his work time on an hourly basis and will only need to account for each full day of absence that occurs on a regularly scheduled workday.

17. Integrated Contract. This Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties, and replaces and supersedes all previous employment agreements between the City and Sloan. Any preliminary negotiations and agreements of any kind or nature are merged into this Agreement. No oral agreement or implied covenant may be held to vary the provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement may be modified only by written agreement signed by the City and Employee.

18. No Presumption Against Any Party. This Agreement is the product of the efforts of all parties, and the terms of this Agreement shall not be construed or interpreted for or against any party solely on the grounds that the party proposed or drafted a particular clause.

19. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California, without regard to any choice of law provisions, will govern this Agreement.

20. Venue and Jurisdiction. Any litigation arising out of this Agreement may only be brought in either the United States District Court, Central District of California, or the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, West District, as appropriate. The parties agree that venue exists in either court, and each party expressly waives any right to transfer to another venue. The parties further agree that either court will have personal jurisdiction over the parties to this Agreement.

21. Severability. If any part, term, or provision of this Agreement is declared or determined by a court to be illegal, invalid, or unenforceable, the legality, validity, and enforceability of the remaining parts, terms, or provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby, and the illegal, invalid, or unenforceable part, term, or provision shall

4.J.a
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: SLOAN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT 2025 (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) either be deemed modified in such manner as to render such part, term, or provision legal, valid, and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law or shall be deemed not to be a part of this Agreement.

22. Waiver of Breach. A non-breaching party may waive the breach of any provision of this Agreement only by executing a writing. Waiver of any breach shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement.

23. Indemnification. To the full extent of the law as provided by the California Government Claims Act (formerly the California Torts Claims Act (Government Code Section 810, et seq.)), City shall defend and indemnify Employee against any claim or action filed against Employee for injury or loss arising out of an act or omission occurring with the scope of the Employee’s duties on the City’s behalf for the period of Employee’s employment, subject to the limitation of the California Government Claims Act.

24. Electronic Signatures. Each party agrees that the transaction consisting of this Agreement may be conducted by electronic means. Each party agrees and acknowledges that it is such party’s intent, that if such party signs this Agreement using an electronic signature, it is signing, adopting, and accepting this Agreement and that signing this Agreement using an electronic signature is the legal equivalent of having placed its handwritten signature on this Agreement on paper. Each party acknowledges that it is being provided with an electronic or paper copy of this Agreement in a usable format.

25. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed simultaneously or in any number of counterparts, including both counterparts that are executed manually on paper and counterparts that are in the form of electronic records and are executed electronically, whether digital or encrypted, each of which shall be deemed an original and together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

In witness whereof, this Agreement was executed on the day and year first written above.

CITY OF SANTA MONICA,
a municipal corporation
By:

Lana Negrete, Mayor Douglas T. Sloan, Employee
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Susan Cola, Assistant City Attorney Nikima Newsome, City Clerk

4.J.a
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: SLOAN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRACT 2025 (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) Gmail - 1131 14th Street Apartment #8 Property-Marty Kaplan 3/5/25, 4:47 PM https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=3b31a130d8&view=pt&search=a…gid=msg-a:r7779424771357824480&simpl=msg-a:r7779424771357824480 Page 1 of 2 Zoë Muntaner <[email protected]>
1131 14th Street Apartment #8 Property-Marty Kaplan
Zoe <[email protected]> Sun, Jan 5, 2025 at 8:24 PM
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], David White <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Avraham Sinai, Esq.
2118 Wilshire Blvd
Box 311,
Santa Monica, CA 90403-5704
As you recall, the last time we texted was when my mother passed away last January 20, 2024. I requested access to my property before I traveled to Puerto Rico for her funeral, which kept me away from town for a couple of months.

You never replied to my request nor offered condolences (a common courtesy and sign of civility).

Your client has kept all my property hostage for over a year. As you might recall, I was promised access to my property on November 29, 2024. Instead, your client assaulted me at the door of the unit, knowing that she was being filmed by a witness while preventing me from recovering everything I own. In today's political climate, this type of behavior is frowned upon. It is not a good look for you and your client and reflects poorly on both of your morals. This goes beyond grand larceny; the political implications of your and your client's actions have dire consequences.

See the attached screenshot.

Does your client want to keep my property? I need to know the status of my belongings and when I will be granted access to my property.

Kindly reply; thank you.

Zoё Muntaner
“Do you have the patience to wait till your mud settles and the water is clear?"- Tao Te Ching IMPORTANT WARNING: This email (and any attachments) is only intended for the use of the person or entity to which it is addressed to and may contain privileged and confidential information. You, the recipient, are obligated to maintain it safely, securely, and confidentially. Unauthorized re-disclosure or failure to maintain confidentiality may subject you to federal and state penalties. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately notify me by return email and delete this message from your computer.

Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) Gmail - 1131 14th Street Apartment #8 Property-Marty Kaplan 3/5/25, 4:47 PM https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=3b31a130d8&view=pt&search=…gid=msg-a:r7779424771357824480&simpl=msg-a:r7779424771357824480 Page 2 of 2 Screenshot 2025-01-05 at 7.55.38 PM.png
559K
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) Gmail - Implicit Bias, Cultural and Social CompetencyTraining 3/5/25, 4:41 PM https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=3b31a130d8&view=pt&search=al…id=msg-a:r-2250739257115363183&simpl=msg-a:r-2250739257115363183 Page 1 of 1 Zoë Muntaner <[email protected]>
Implicit Bias, Cultural and Social CompetencyTraining
Zoe <[email protected]> Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 11:49 AM To: [email protected], [email protected], David White <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], David White <[email protected]>, [email protected]
Dear Mayor Negrete, City Manager David White, SMPD Chief Ramón Batista and BBB Director Anuj Gupta, After my experience with drivers of the Big Blue Bus, Santa Monica Rent Control staff member Laima Noseworthy and City Attorney Douglas Sloan, it is imperative that the City of Santa Monica do a mandatory participation training across all departments on:

1. Implicit bias and

2. Cultural and Social Competency.

The lack of training and meaningful change is constantly exposing the city to litigation and potential bankruptcy.

This has gone unexamined since I filed a 12-Item Form Request to place an Item in the City Council Agenda on July 23, 2013, and followed up with the same form on October 11, 2016. Ignoring this twice has brought us to where we are today. The city has been negligent in addressing this in a timely fashion.

It would be sad if I had to share again "I told you so" after last Friday's cover story of the Santa Monica Daily Press about Small Business (another negligence from the Economic Development Department). I continue raising FLAGS (pun intended) for you and you are not paying attention.

Kindly reply, thank you.

Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

RECITALS
A. On May 10, 2022, the Santa Monica City Council appointed Sloan to the position of City Attorney of the City of Santa Monica effective as of June 6, 2022 (“Employment Date”).

NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Sloan agree as follows.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS

3. Other Terms of Employment.

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) of the Employment Date and prior to the execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall continue in full force and effect for a period of five years until June 6, 2027 (the “Initial Term”), or such earlier date on which Employee, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, is no longer employed by City as its City Attorney, whether as the result of resignation, termination, separation, or any other reason.

Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement)

6. Long-Term Disability (LTD) Insurance. The City pays the premium for LTD coverage.

A bank of 40 hours of vacation leave will be available immediately as of the Employment Date.

9. Term Life Insurance. City-paid term life insurance coverage of two times Employee’s base salary, rounded to the next $1,000, not to exceed $500,000.

11. One-Time Non-Cashable Leave. On July 1, 2025, Employee shall receive an additional 40 hours of non-cashable leave on a one-time basis for Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Employee shall not be compensated for any unused non-cashable leave hours at the end of said fiscal year. Any unused non-cashable leave hours shall be forfeited at the end of the fiscal year.

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) agreed on selection of moving services, and provide to the City receipts for the payment of moving expenses.

19. Governing Law. The laws of the State of California, without regard to any choice of law provisions, will govern this Agreement.

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) either be deemed modified in such manner as to render such part, term, or provision legal, valid, and enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law or shall be deemed not to be a part of this Agreement.

In witness whereof, this Agreement was executed on the day and year first written above.

CITY OF SANTA MONICA,
a municipal corporation
By:

Lana Negrete, Mayor Douglas T. Sloan, Employee
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Susan Cola, Assistant City Attorney Nikima Newsome, City Clerk Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) Gmail - DUTY 3/5/25, 4:58 PM
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=3b31a130d8&view=pt&search=a…gid=msg-a:r3300216841376327182&simpl=msg-a:r3300216841376327182 Page 1 of 1 Zoë Muntaner <[email protected]>
DUTY
Zoe <[email protected]> Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 8:01 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], David White <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Sir,
On Tuesday, January 7, 2025 from 12:30pm – 1:30 pm. PST I attended a LA Law Library MCLE class, “Can’t We All Just Get Along? Civility in the Practice of Law”. It was hosted by two prominent Judges of the LA Superior Court-- Judge Mark Juahas and Judge Robert Broadbelt. See attachment. “We conclude by reminding members of the Bar that their responsibilities as officers of the court include professional courtesy to the court and to opposing counsel. All too often today we see signs that the practice of law is becoming more like a business and less like a profession. We decry any such change, but the profession itself must chart its own course. The legal profession has already suffered a loss of stature and of public respect.... Lawyers and judges should work to improve and enhance the rule of law, not allow a return to the law of the jungle.” (Lossing v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 635, 641.) It seems to me there is a crisis in your department that is escalating at wildfire pace. Would you like to discuss this in person? Perhaps you can explain better how the law works in Santa Monica. You might want to consider having your staff take this online course as soon as possible to avoid scandal and exposure to litigation.

Kindly reply, thank you.

Cant We All Just Get Along Civility in the Practice of Law.pdf 862K
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) Click to edit Master title style
1 CAN’T WE ALL JUST GET
ALONG? CIVILITY IN THE

PRACTICE OF LAW
Los Angeles Law Library
January 7, 2025
Judge Mark Juhas
Judge Robert Broadbelt
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
2 2
“We conclude by reminding members of the Bar that their responsibilities as officers of the court include professional courtesy to the court and to opposing counsel. All too often today we see signs that the practice of law is becoming more like a business and less like a profession. We decry any such change, but the profession itself must chart its own course.

The legal profession has already suffered a loss of stature and of public respect…. Lawyers and judges should work to
improve and enhance the rule of law, not allow a return to the law of the jungle.”
(Lossing v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 635, 641.) Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
3 3
“The timbre of our time has become
unfortunately aggressive and disrespectful.

Language addressed to opposing counsel and
courts has lurched off the path of discourse
and into the ditch of abuse. This isn’t who we
are.”
(In re Mahoney (2021) 65 Cal.App.5th 376,
381.)
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
4 WHAT IS INCIVILITY?
4 •Personal attacks/insults •Threats and taunts •Intimidation and bullying •Abusive and harassing conduct • Disrespectful comments •Playing “hardball” (e.g., not granting reasonable extensions)
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
5 INCIVILITY DRIVEN BY BIAS
5 • “Any conversation about civility must talk about
gender and people of color.”
• Incivility toward less-experienced attorneys
• Interrupting and talking-over
• Challenges to competence
• Comments of a gendered or ethnic/cultural nature
(e.g., attorney’s appearance or dress)
• Addressing attorney unprofessionally (e.g., terms of
“endearment”)
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
6 WHY CIVILITY MATTERS • CHALLENGES IN PRACTICE • CHALLENGES WITH CLIENTS • CHALLENGES WITH THE OTHER SIDE • CHALLENGES WITH THE TRIAL COURT • CHALLENGES WITH THE APPELLATE COURT • CHALLENGES WITH THE BAR • CHALLENGES WITHIN THE FIRM • CHALLENGES AT HOME 6 Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
7 WHO INCIVILITY IMPACTS
7 • Your reputation
• Your health
• Your firm's reputation
• Your firms'
employees
• The “other side”
• Your client
• The court
• Courtroom staff
• Court employees
•Your case
•Witnesses
• Case outcomes
• Case expenses
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
8 8
“Beyond the Oath: Recommendations
for Improving Civility”
California Civility Task Force
report (2021)
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
9 report’s proposals to improve
civility:

2. Training for judges on attorney civility and tools to address incivility

3. Revise RPC to clarify that repeated incivility constitutes professional misconduct

4. Require attorneys to affirm oath of civility during annual license renewal

1. Mandate 1 hour of attorney MCLE on incivility.

Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
10 CHALLENGES WITH

THE STATE BAR
10 Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
11 “
Oath for admission to practice of law
includes:
"As an officer of the court, I will strive
to conduct myself at all times with
dignity, courtesy and integrity."
(CRC 9.7, effective 2014)
11 Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
12 RPC 8.4.2 (proposed)
12 • Would make incivility a disciplinable offense
• Under consideration by California Supreme Court
• Text:
(a) In representing a client, a lawyer shall not engage in incivility in the practice of law.
(b) For purposes of this rule, “incivility” means significantly unprofessional conduct that is abusive or harassing and shall be determined on the basis of all the facts and circumstances surrounding the conduct.

Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
13 RPC 8.3
13 • A lawyer must report another lawyer if the lawyer knows of credible evidence that the lawyer committed a criminal act or engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or reckless or intentional misrepresentation or misappropriation of funds or property that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.
• Failure to report may result in discipline
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
14 CIVILITY TOOLBOX STATE BAR WEBSITE
14 • Sample court order
• Civility rules from
various bar
associations
• Civility rules from
various courts
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
15 Los Angeles
Superior Court
Local Rule 3.26
S u b t i t l e
15 Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
16 LASC GUIDELINES FOR CIVILITY IN LITIGATION
16 LOCAL RULE 3.26: LITIGATION CONDUCT
•The guidelines adopted by the Los Angeles
County Bar Association are adopted as civility in
litigation recommendations to members of the
bar, and are contained in Appendix 3.A
•Appendix 3.A sets forth detailed guidelines in the
conduct of litigation
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
17 APPENDIX 3.A – Guidelines for Civility in Litigation include:
17 • Extensions of time
• Not disparage the intelligence, ethics, morals,
integrity or personal behavior of one’s
adversaries, unless those matters are directly and
necessarily in issue
• Counsel should be civil and courteous in
communicating with adversaries
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
18 HOW IS INCIVILITY TREATED?
18 • After the court ruled against an attorney, the attorney called the represented other party a “lying bitch”, among other things
• Trial court disqualified attorney from case
• Court of Appeal affirmed:
• “Rule 4.2(a) is not limited to communications made in the absence of the party’s counsel; rather, it applies by its terms to all communications made without counsel’s consent. And there is nothing in this record to show counsel consented to [attorney] approaching [opposing party] and speaking to her in vulgar and insulting terms and an angry manner.”
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
19 HOW IS INCIVILITY TREATED?
19 • Attorney, in rehearing brief, impugned the integrity of Court of Appeal:
• “Our society has been going down the tubes for a long time, but when you see it in so black and white as in the opinion in this case, it makes you wonder whether or not we have a fair and/or equitable legal system.” • “...[B]ecause of a judicial slight [sic] of hand with no factual basis, the court has altered the landscape and created a windfall...”
• “Court ‘indiscriminately screw[ed]’ [petitioner].”
• Court of Appeal found attorney guilty of 2 counts of contempt:
• “The timbre of our time has become unfortunately aggressive and disrespectful. Language addressed to opposing counsel and courts has lurched off the path of discourse and into the ditch of abuse.” • Attorney sanctioned and reported to the State Bar.

Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
20 HOW IS INCIVILITY TREATED?
20 • Nasty communication between counsel about deposition scheduling. The attorney attended the deposition with pepper spray and a stun gun. Attorney pointed the pepper spray at the face of opposing counsel saying: ‘I will pepper spray you if you get out of hand.’ Attorney brandished a stun gun, pointed it at opposing counsel’s head, and said: ‘If that doesn’t quell you, this is a flashlight that turns into a stun gun.’ Counsel discharged the stun gun close to opposing counsel’s face.
• The trial court imposed terminating sanctions and Court of Appeal affirmed:
• “If ever a case required a terminating sanction, this is it. [Counsel] made it impossible to continue with the litigation. Far from the trial court abusing its discretion, it would have been an abuse of discretion not to impose a terminating sanction.”
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
21 WHAT IS THE RESULT OF INCIVILITY?
21 • SANCTIONS --
• MONETARY
• EVIDENCE AND ISSUE PRECLUSION
• TERMINATING
• ATTORNEY FEES
• CONTEMPT
• DISQUALIFICATION
• REPORTED TO STATE BAR
• NAME FOREVER ENSHRINED IN APPELLATE REPORTS
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
22 BENEFITS TO BEING CIVIL
22 • credibility with judges
•respect of, and positive relationships with,
opposing counsel
• save time, money, and energy from
unproductive actions
• help settle case when the time comes
•reduce negativity and stress in your life
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
23 HOW TO DEAL WITH INCIVIL ATTORNEYS
23 • Not return incivility in kind (take the high
road)
•If you witness inappropriate behavior and
have personal rapport with the person
engaging in it, have a private conversation
to sensitize them
•If incivility becomes a serious problem,
seek relief from the court
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
2424
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
2525
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Click to edit Master title style
2626

THANK YOU
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Gmail - Rent Control Complaint for Non Registration an/or Excess Rent Receipt and Retention 3/5/25, 4:43 PM https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=3b31a130d8&view=pt&search=…d=msg-a:r-2333037449420370861&simpl=msg-a:r-2333037449420370861 Page 1 of 2 Zoë Muntaner <[email protected]>
Rent Control Complaint for Non Registration an/or Excess Rent Receipt and Retention
Zoe <[email protected]> Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 9:55 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Ms. Riddles,
Ms. Freeman shared that you are in charge of the complaint I filed against my landlord two months ago. Yesterday I went to the Rent Control office to file a Complaint for Non Registration an/or Excess Rent Receipt and Retention against Sean Besser and Janeen Morris. The appointment was rescheduled for Friday. In order for the Rent Control office to schedule a hearing for the above complaint, I need to supply them with certain documents that you can request from the landlords. rent is paid by Zelle app payment services.

Since I moved to the unit there have been 7 tenants that moved in and out of the unit because of the unlawful co living operation. We are given one year leases but told we can break the leases any time without any charges for the rest of the year. That is the strategy used to prevent being found out and make it look like a regular apartment rental. 3A- three different tenants since I moved in
3B-Two different tenants since I moved in
3C -Just myself since May 2, 2024
3D-two different tenants since I moved in (only room that has a private bathroom that pays a higher rent than the other 3 rooms)
My meeting with Rent Control is with Karen, the most Senior staff of rent control with the experience of the type of complaint I am filing. Daniel Costello told me yesterday that the issue revolves around when the base rent started. Is it when I first paid rent or is it started with previous tenants? He told me that this is a question for the City Attorney to answer and/or investigate. To determine the rent I was asked to supply the leases and rent amounts of the other tenants that have lived here but I do not have access to that. Only you can demand that from the landlord, for investigation.

Names of the two other current tenants:

William Yates (Moved in October 1, 2024- has alcohol consumption disorder, sleeps, drinks and barely eats-in his bedroom all the time)
Dardan Gashi +41 78 204 96 61 (From Italy-Moved in September 13, 2024- was in unit C and changed units yesterday to unit D).

Names of previous tenants:

Sunny (Seon Woo) +82 10-4191-7582 (from Korea moved in June, moved out September) Geffen Chang (408) 858-8419 (moved in June moved out August, removed his belongings from room in September) Steve Lash: (847) 946-0117 (was there before I moved-moved out September) Andrey Zharkov +7 916 730-76-72 (From Russia, was there before I moved and moved out in June) Sarah (British woman who was there before I moved in and moved out in June, do not know her last name or contact) Let me know if you can request the leases and amounts paid by each tenant during their tenancies to include in my Rent Control Complaint for Non Registration and Excess Rent. I am afraid that the landlord will use the open loophole to file a bogus UD as a strategy to prevent the City Attorney, Rent Control, and Code Enforcement from Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) Gmail - Rent Control Complaint for Non Registration an/or Excess Rent Receipt and Retention 3/5/25, 4:43 PM https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=3b31a130d8&view=pt&search=…d=msg-a:r-2333037449420370861&simpl=msg-a:r-2333037449420370861 Page 2 of 2 intervening in the investigation - like it happened with Marty Kaplan before. We need to close that loophole as soon as possible to prevent this from happening again. The claim was filed two months ago.

Kindly reply;thank you.

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) Item 4-J
March 11, 2025
Item 4-J
March 11, 2025

4.J.b
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Written Comments (6941 : City Attorney Amended and Restated Employment Agreement) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 4.K
1 of 3
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office, Administration Subject: Adoption of Resolution Amending the Council Rules of Procedure Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt resolution amending the Council Rules of Procedure to address technological failure during public comment, and a change to the ranked choice voting process.

Executive Summary
The City Attorney and City Clerk have prepared the proposed changes to the Council Rules to address technological failures during public comment, and a change to the ranked choice voting process.

Background
Use of Electronic Materials During Public Comment
The City allows members of the public to submit electronic presentations to be used as part of their public comment to Council. The Council Rules require the presentation be provided by noon on the day of the Council meeting, and presentations are displayed on the City’s equipment during the meeting. The City does not allow members of the public to plug their laptops into the City’s system for cybersecurity reasons. Occasionally, a presentation provided by a member of the public will not work during their public comment period. The City cannot make an unconditional guarantee that its technology will work, or that the file provided by the commenter will work. Under the proposed rule change, any member of the public choosing to use an electronic presentation does so at their own risk, and the City makes no guarantees regarding technology. If a public

4.K
Packet Pg. 260
2 of 3
commenter’s electronic presentation is not working after one minute, the commenter may choose to continue with their presentation, or may choose to stop the presentation, restart their timer, and address the Council directly without the presentation.

Change to Ranked Choice Voting Process
At the January 28, 2025, Council meeting, Council approved a rule to select board and commission appointments by ranked choice voted and directed the City Clerk to determine the application to be used to implement the process. After much research, the City Clerk has selected rankedchoices.com as a suitable application. However, this application employs the Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method (WIGM) to calculate the votes, which is contrary to the voting process adopted by Council. Using this method, the number of Councilmembers who chose a nominee as their first choice is added to the number of Councilmembers who chose the nominee as their second, third, etc. choice, with each count given approximately 2/3 of the weight given to the previous count. Then all the votes are added together to arrive at a tiebreaker value for each nominee. As such, an amendment to the rule is necessary to incorporate this method of voting.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate fiscal impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action.

Prepared By: Katie Doerr, Deputy City Attorney III
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. CC-Council Rules Reso

4.K
Packet Pg. 261
3 of 3
B. CC-Council Rules Ranked Choices Explainer

4.K
Packet Pg. 262
1 City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025 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 11642 (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, Redevelopment Successor Agency, Financing Authority, or Parking 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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 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. However, if it is determined by the Mayor, City Manager, and City Clerk that a Council meeting is expected to be lengthy, and all Councilmembers are available, as may be noticed by the City Clerk, a regular Council meeting may commence earlier than 5:30 p.m. to allow for closed session and/or special agenda items to be heard then. 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 it is expected that Closed Session will require more than 90 minutes to complete, and if all Councilmembers are available, a separate special meeting to complete Closed Session shall be considered. 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 3 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 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 4 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 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 requesting a substantive discussion on an open session Agenda item shall do so by initiating a “16 item” first to obtain Council direction (see Rule 6(x)). Councilmembers shall

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 5 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 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 rejected the same or substantially similar item may not be placed on a subsequent Agenda for reconsideration for 12 months,

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 6 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.

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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 7 (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 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 8 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 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 9 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 following is the order of business:
(a) Call to Order.
(b) Salute to the Flag and Land Acknowledgement.
(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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 10 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 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. No more than 2 proclamations or commendations shall be placed on any one agenda, unless an additional item is particularly time sensitive.
(i) Consent Calendar. The consent calendar shall consist of the approval of minutes of previous meetings and those other items such as contracts and routine resolutions and ordinances 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 approved by a majority at first reading. 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 11 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 shall notify the City Manager by 5 p.m. 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, or Staff will not be present for the item to make a presentation or answer questions. When the Clerk calls the Consent Calendar, the Clerk shall identify those items that Councilmembers have indicated they wanted to pull (by 5 p.m. 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.
(j) Closed Session.
(k) Reports and any Additional Public Actions from Closed Session. (l) City Manager’s Report.
(m) Councilmember Travel Announcements.
(n) Mayor’s highlight.
(o) 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. (p) Study Session. During Study Sessions staff will present information regarding a complex matter that will be subject to Council deliberation and decisions in

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 12 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. (q) 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. Nonetheless, continued 16 Items shall be heard along with 16 items for the current meeting.
(r) Administrative Proceedings. This item includes proceedings requiring the City Council to make a quasi-judicial decision concerning an individual application or appeal.
(s) Ordinances.
(1) Second Reading and Adoption. No public comment is permitted on second readings.
(2) Introduction and First Reading.
(t) 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.
(u) Public Hearings. This item consists of public hearings required by specific provisions of law. Public comment on a Public Hearing item shall be taken at the time the item is heard following the Staff presentation of the item. (v) Reports of Boards and Commissions. Boards and commissions that may

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 13 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.
(w) 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. No resolution may be placed on an agenda regarding international affairs, except for items of support or condolences for natural disasters or similar tragedies involving Santa Monica’s sister cities.
(x) Written Communication. This item allows the City Council to consider issues raised by written submissions from the public.
(y) 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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 14 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.

A Councilmember may place a 16 item on an agenda to consider a formal censure of a Councilmember for violation of the law, local ordinance, common law conflict of interest, Council rule, or resolution. Due process shall be provided, including notice of the allegations and an opportunity to oppose the accusation.

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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 15 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.

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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 16 of the Council Rules, and shall be implemented until duly repealed or amended by the Council.
(c) The term “Vice Mayor” shall not be used in place of the term “Mayor Pro Tempore.”
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 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 17 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 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 18 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, 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 19 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.
(j) Each Councilmember shall observe a time limit of 10 minutes each to speak on an agenda item, with exceptions for asking questions of the Councilmember(s) who introduced the item (both questioners and respondents) or staff. The 10 minutes may be used at once or apportioned across debate of an item. If the proposing Councilmember does not save a portion of their time to avail themselves of their privilege of final comment in accordance with Rule 12, Section (f), the Councilmember forfeits their privilege of final comment. Time limits in this Rule may be extended at any time by a 2/3rds vote of the Councilmembers present, and such an extension shall apply to all Councilmembers, if approved.
(k) Time to speak to a Point of Personal Privilege shall be limited to 1 minute. (l) Time to speak for a Councilmember’s protest statement in opposition to an action shall be limited to 5 minutes.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 20 (m) Time to speak to a proclamation or commendation, excluding the reading of a resolution or certificate, shall be limited to 2 minutes.

RULE 13. PROTEST AGAINST CITY COUNCIL ACTION.

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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 21 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 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. 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,

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 22 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 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.

Honorees’ time to speak shall be limited to 2 minutes each. (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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 23 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 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 24 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 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). Any member of the public choosing to use electronic presentations during public comment does so at their own risk, and the City makes no guarantees regarding compatibility with the City’s technology equipment and system, technological functionality, audio or visual quality, etc. If a public commenter’s electronic presentation is not working as desired after one minute, the commenter shall be given the option to restart their time and address the Council directly, or may choose to continue their time and continue with their electronic presentation. (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) 4588211 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 25 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 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

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 26 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.
(a) 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.
(b) Unless any Councilmember calls for separate votes in advance, any item on the 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 (some subparts may require 4 votes and some subparts 5), 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. (c) When the Council is making appointments to any committee, board, commission, or equivalent, the Council shall use ranked choice voting. Ranked choice voting process shall be as follows:

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 27 (1) The ranked choice voting application to be used shall be rankedchoices.com. Should this application become available for any reason, another application may be selected as determined by the City Clerk. (2) The Clerk shall ask the Council for nominations from among the qualified applicants, and upon collecting all nominations, shall present the Council with the slate of nominees.
(3) Each Councilmember shall then indicate their first choice from among the slate of nominees; they each may indicate only 1 first choice; (4) Each Councilmember shall also indicate their second choice from among the nominees; they may indicate only 1 second choice; (5) Proceed to do the same for up to the total number of nominees; (6) Each Councilmember may rank as many or as few nominees as they may choose; each may not give the same rank to more than 1 nominee; each may not rank the same nominee more than once;
(7) As per rankedchoices.com, votes shall be counted using the Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method (WIGM). The number of Councilmembers who chose a nominee as their first choice is added to the number of Councilmembers who chose the nominee as their second, third, etc. choice, with each count given approximately 2/3 of the weight given to the previous count. Then all the votes are added together to arrive at a tiebreaker value for each nominee. by first counting the total number of first choice votes for each nominee; if a nominee wins a majority (at least 4) of first choice votes in this round, that nominee wins; counting is then complete;

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 28 (8) If there is no winner in the first round, then there is a second round count; in the second round, the nominee with the fewest first choice votes is eliminated; so, if a Member’s first choice nominee had the fewest total first choice votes, then their second choice nominee is counted as their new top choice; if a nominee wins a majority in the second round, that nominee wins; counting is then complete; if there is no majority winner, then again the nominee with the fewest votes is eliminated. There is then a recount, and continue this process until a nominee wins. After all Councilmembers cast their ballots, ranking their preferred nominees for election, the tabulation of votes takes the rankings into account. The process may take multiple rounds of counting.
(9) If two nominees are tied for first or second after applying the ranked choice process, or if there are only two nominees, the Clerk shall call upon each Councilmember to state their choice between those two to break the tie and make the selection. The threshold (quota) needed to win an election is calculated by the application. The first-ranked nominees on all ballots are counted to determine which candidates meet the threshold (quota). Any nominee who has so few votes that they cannot mathematically meet the threshold at any point shall be eliminated.
(10) Any nominee who meets the threshold is a winner, and if the number of winners equals the number of seats to be elected, the vote is closed. If not, the winners’ ballots are evaluated, this time by the second-ranked nominees on the ballots, and the votes are transferred to candidates who are not yet winners and who haven’t been eliminated, but only to the extent that the winners had more than

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 29 enough votes to win. For example, if Winner A received 20% over the threshold, the votes transferred to the second-ranked nominees are only 20% of a whole vote. (11) The process repeats through as many rounds of counting as necessary until the number of winners equals the number of seats to be filled. (12) If there are only two nominees for one open seat, the Clerk shall call upon each Councilmember to state their choice between those two nominees to make the selection.

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 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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 30 (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. (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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 31 (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 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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 32 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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 33 (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. [Repealed]
RULE 29. CHARTER SECTION 615

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 34 In accordance with Charter Section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and 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.

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 35 SECTION 2. Resolution Number 11642 (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 thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_________________________
Douglas Sloan, City Attorney

4.K.a
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Reso (6955 : Council Rules Reso) RANKEDCHOICES.COM: Quick Explainer
ACESSING THE VOTE PAGE:
 Option A: QR Codes
- Council members will be provided with QR codes for voting by phone (one QR code per commission/board) Note: In a multi-seat appointment with unique seat requirements, seat-specific ballots will be created.  Option B: Website Access
- The vote page can be accessed by visiting: rankedchoices.com/item# (where item# is the related item) EXAMPLE: www.rankedchoices.com/16a

VOTE PAGE (WITHOUT NAME)
 The candidate list will appear once a name is entered. EXAMPLE: Councilmember Zwick

VOTE PAGE (WITH NAME)
 Interface
- Trash icon (circled in red): Allows you to remove a candidate - Reset button (circled in green): Restores the original candidate list  How to vote
- Drag and slide the candidates to your preferred ranking (top being first, bottom being last) - Click on “Vote!” to complete

4.K.b
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Ranked Choices Explainer (6955 : Council Rules Reso) RANKEDCHOICES.COM: Quick Explainer

RESULTS PAGE (MULTI-SEAT APPOINTMENT)
Scenario A: Three candidates for two seats
 Results Summary
 Detailed Results (Round 1)
- Quota (circled in red): Minimum number of votes needed to be elected - Only one candidate (Susman, Matthew B.) exceeded the quota (threshold) and was elected to one of the two open seats.

4.K.b
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Ranked Choices Explainer (6955 : Council Rules Reso) RANKEDCHOICES.COM: Quick Explainer
 Detailed Results (Round 2)
- Voters (Snell, Hall, Raskin, Zwick) who voted for the first-round winner (Susman, Matthew B.*) have their second choices added to the 2nd round vote.
- NOTE: Being that these are second choices, their vote-value (or weight) is less than the first-round choices (0.4175 in this scenario)
- For voters (Zernitskaya, Negrete, Torosis) who selected one of the two remaining candidates as their first choice, their votes still hold the vote-value (or weight) of 1.

4.K.b
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Ranked Choices Explainer (6955 : Council Rules Reso) RANKEDCHOICES.COM: Quick Explainer

RESULTS PAGE (MULTI-SEAT APPOINTMENT)
Scenario B: Four candidates for two seats
 Results Summary
 Detailed Results (Round 1)
- Quota (circled in red): Minimum number of votes needed to be elected - Only one candidate (Kennedy, James G.) exceeded the quota (threshold) and was elected to one of two open seats

4.K.b
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Ranked Choices Explainer (6955 : Council Rules Reso) RANKEDCHOICES.COM: Quick Explainer
 Detailed Results (Round 2)
- Voters (Torosis, Negrete, Raskin) who voted for the first-round winner (Kennedy, James G.*) have their second choices added to the 2nd round vote.
- NOTE: Being that these are second choices, their vote-value (or weight) is less than the first-round choices (0.2233 in this scenario)
- For voters (Zernitskaya, Snell, Zwick, Hall) who selected one of the two remaining candidates as their first choice, their vote still holds the vote-value (or weight) of 1.

1. Explain the WIGM system
a. How it compares to the other system
b. Where it’s used
c. Provide math

2. Voting process
a. Candidate list is announced by clerk
b.
c. Council selects nominees (EXPLAIN A NOMINEE COULD THEORETICALLY WIN, SO BE SURE)

4.K.b
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Ranked Choices Explainer (6955 : Council Rules Reso) RANKEDCHOICES.COM: Quick Explainer
Weighted Inclusive Gregory Method (WIGM)
The number of voters who chose a candidate as their first choice is added to the number of voters who chose the candidate as their second, third, etc. choice, with each count given approximately 2/3 of the weight given to the previous count. Then all the columns are added together to arrive at a tiebreaker value for each candidate.  Explainer

1. After voters cast their ballots, ranking their preferred candidates for election, the tabulation of votes takes those rankings into account. The process can involve multiple rounds of counting but is pretty simple:

2. We determine how many votes are needed to win an election, whether it’s a single-winner or multi-winner election. We call that number the threshold (quota).

3. We count the first-ranked candidates on all ballots to see which candidates meet the threshold (quota). Any candidate who has so few votes that she/he cannot mathematically meet the threshold at any point is eliminated.

4. Any candidate who meets the threshold is a winner, and if the number of winners equals the number of seats to be elected, we’re done.

5. Otherwise, we look at the winners’ ballots again but this time at the second-ranked candidates on those ballots, and we transfer votes to candidates who are not yet winners and who haven’t been eliminated—but we transfer those votes only to the extent that the winners had more than enough votes to win. So, if Winner A received 20% over the threshold, the votes transferred to the second-ranked candidates are only 20% of a whole vote.

6. This process repeats through as many rounds of counting as necessary until the number of winners equals the number of seats to be filled.

4.K.b
Packet Pg. 303 Attachment: CC-Council Rules Ranked Choices Explainer (6955 : Council Rules Reso) 1 February 25, 2025
(NOT APPROVED)

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 25, 2025
A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Negrete at 5:31 p.m., on Tuesday, February 25, 2025, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA.

Roll Call: Present: Mayor Lana Negrete
Mayor Pro Tem Caroline Torosis (Arrived at 5:46 p.m.)
Councilmember Jesse Zwick
Councilmember Dan Hall
Councilmember Ellis Raskin
Councilmember Barry Snell
Councilmember Natalya Zernitskaya
Also Present: Interim City Manager Elaine Polachek
City Attorney Douglas Sloan
City Clerk Nikima S. Newsome
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:31 p.m., with all members present except Mayor Pro Tem Torosis. Councilmember Hall led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.

STATEMENT OF

ACCOUNTABILITY
(LAND

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)
The City of Santa Monica is located on the land of Tovangaar. With great respect, the City acknowledges the Gabrieleño/Tongva as the First People of this ancestral and unceded territory of Kuruvungna, a village that we know as Santa Monica. We honor their elders, past and present, and the Gabrieleño descendants who are part of the Gabrieleño /Tongva tribes.

We recognize that these peoples are still here, and as settlers and kuyam (guests), we recognize our responsibility and obligation to care for their land in partnership with them. The City of Santa Monica commits to work in partnership with the Gabrieleño/Tongva people to uplift their voices and visibility on their ancestral land.

The City of Santa Monica Statement of Accountability (Land Acknowledgement) was read into the record by Councilmember Zernitskaya.

LEVINE ACT Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308), any party to a

4.L
Packet Pg. 304 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 2 February 25, 2025
DISCLOSURE permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is required to disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $500 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.

No Councilmembers recused themselves from items on the agenda pursuant to the Levine Act.

GENERAL PUBLIC
INPUT:
(Mayor Pro Tem Torosis
arrived at 5:46 p.m.)
Members of the public Francisco Juarez, Daniel Alonzo, Tania Fischer, Manuel Lares, Judith Serlin, John C Smith, Eddie Glaeser, Elizabeth Noble, Oscar de la Torre, and Johnathan Foster commented on various local issues.

PUBLIC INPUT FOR

CLOSED SESSION,

SPECIAL AGENDA

ITEMS AND CONSENT
CALENDAR ONLY:

No members of the public commented on Special Agenda items.

Denise Barton, John C. Smith, and Jonah Breslau commented on Consent Calendar Items.

Members of the public Vincenzo Flores, Tara Barauskas, Denise Barton, Brittany De Guzman (time donated by Tony Ponce), Diana Flores (time donated by Raquel Hernandez), Greg Morena (time donated by Emma Hernandez), Hugo Murillo (time donated by Enrique Jimenez), Teresa Olmedo, David Luis (time donated by Saturino Garcia), Oscar de la Torre, Carlos Jimenez, Maria Loya, Sylvia Luis, Freddy Luis (Council suspended rules to permit extra time), Zakiya, Matt Sawaya, Magali Rivera (time donated by Mireya Rivera), Alexander Jimenez, Tsegaw Debarcho, Kiana Achoy (time donated by Juan Rivera), and Andrew Hoyer commented on Closed Session.

PROCLAMATIONS/

COMMENDATIONS/

SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS

3.A. Proclamation: Women's History Month, was presented.

3.B. Proclamation: Kidney Disease Awareness Month, was presented.

CONSENT CALENDAR: All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.

At the request of Councilmember Raskin, Item 4.E was removed from the Consent Calendar.

4.L
Packet Pg. 305 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 3 February 25, 2025
Motion by Councilmember Raskin, seconded by Councilmember Zernitskaya, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Item 4.E., reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Zernitskaya, Snell, Raskin, Hall, Zwick Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, Mayor Negrete
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

EMERGENCY SOLID

WASTE DISPOSAL

SERVICES

4.A. Receive and File Emergency Procurement and Approval Agreement with Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts for Emergency Solid Waste Disposal Services, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15301 and 15308 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;

2. Receive and file emergency procurement report on emergency procurement with Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts – Puente Hills Material Recycling Facility for emergency landfill disposal services for the Public Works Department. The emergency procurement was made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (g) and is for a total amount not to exceed $1,800,000 (including a 20% contingency) through March 31, 2025; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement with Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts – Puente Hills Material Recycling Facility for landfill disposal services for the Public Works Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (g) and is for a total amount not to exceed $38,022,585 (including a 20% contingency) for 5 years, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

STREET SWEEPER

REPLACEMENT

PROJECT

4.B. Approve Acceptance of Environmental Protection Agency Grant and Purchase of Street Sweepers for the Resource Recovery and Recycling Division, was approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15302 (Replacement or Reconstruction) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines;

4.L
Packet Pg. 306 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 4 February 25, 2025

2. Authorize the City Manager to accept a grant awarded in the amount of $945,000 from the United States Environmental Protection Agency for the Clean Heavy-Duty Vehicles Grant Program for the City of Santa Monica Street Sweeper Replacement Project in the Public Works Department, and to accept all grant renewals;

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute all necessary documents to accept the grant, all grant renewals, and modifications;

4. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Municipal Maintenance Equipment (“MME”), a California-based company, for the purchase of three Ravo Electric R5-eSeries sweepers for the Public Works Department, Resource Recovery and Recycling Division. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section

2.24.250 (c) and is for a total amount not to exceed $2,428,833 including a 10% contingency;

5. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Mar-co Equipment Company for the purchase of one Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Tymco Model 600 sweeper for the Public Works Department, Resource Recovery and Recycling Division. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (c) and is for a total amount not to exceed $185,987 including a 10% contingency with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and

6. Authorize budget amendment as outlined in the Financial Impacts & Budget Actions section of this report (requires 5 votes).

If the grant is not received, pending the outcome of the Presidential Executive Order:

7. Authorize the Procurement Manager to issue a purchase order with Mar-co Equipment Company for the purchase of two Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Tymco Model 600 sweepers for the Public Works Department, Resource Recovery and Recycling Division.

This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250 (c) and is for a total amount not to exceed $996,976 including a 10% contingency with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.

ZONING ONRDIANCE

CONSISTENCIES

4.C. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the Text of Section 9.31.195 of the Zoning Ordinance for Consistency with the Amended Safety Element, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

BUILDING CODE 4.D. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending the

4.L
Packet Pg. 307 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 5 February 25, 2025
CONSISTENCIES Text of Section 8.12.040 of the Building Code for Consistency with the Amended Safety Element, was adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.

PROHIBITION AGAINST

CAMPING IN PUBLIC
PLACES

4.F. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition Against Camping in Public Places, was presented and approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

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

2. Introduce for First Reading an Ordinance to Amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 4.08.095, Prohibition Against Camping in Public Places, to omit from the definition of “camp facility” certain items.

FIRES EMERGENCY

PROCLAMATION AND

SUPPLEMENTS

4.E. Adoption of Resolution Ratifying Regional Fires Emergency Proclamation and Supplements, was 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; and

2. Adopt the proposed resolution ratifying the Executive Order issued by the Director of Emergency Services declaring the existence of a local emergency in the City of Santa Monica and the Supplements to that Order.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: how are the suspension of tenant protection laws being monitored and how are we ensuring that the suspension is benefiting those displaced by the fires; have the number of listings gone down; who is monitoring price gouging; how long is the suspension in place under the emergency order; would there be a possibility of implementing a self attestation to ensure the benefit is only being used by someone displaced by the fires; and are we actively monitoring or does someone have to report the issue.

Motion by Councilmember Raskin, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, to adopt the staff recommendation, with direction to staff. The motion was approved by the following vote:

4.L
Packet Pg. 308 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 6 February 25, 2025
AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Hall, Raskin, Snell, Zernitskaya Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, Mayor Negrete
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Direction to staff to amend the emergency order to phase out suspension of the tenant protection laws for short term rentals and that short term renters are given the same protections as long-term renters in addition to providing support to local restaurants impacted by the fires.

CLOSED SESSIONS On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 7:44 p.m., to consider Closed Sessions and returned at 10:17 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:

5.A. Public Employee Appointment - Gov. Code § 54957(b): consider public employee appointment; title: City Manager/Interim City Manager; Gov. Code § 54957.6: conference with labor negotiator; City negotiator: Mayor/Personnel Director; unrepresented employee: City Manager/Interim City Manager
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

5.B. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code § 54956.8:
properties: 2019 - 2219 5th Street; owner of record: Ocean Park Villas, L.P.; City negotiators: Heather Averick, Director of Housing and Human Services, and Natalie Verlinich, Housing Manager; owner negotiators: Angel Herrera and Mark Wagner; under negotiation: price and terms of payment for sale or option
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

5.C. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code § 54956.8:
properties: 2033-2101 Virginia Avenue; owner of record: Community Corporation of Santa Monica; City negotiators: Heather Averick, Director of Housing and Human Services, and Natalie Verlinich, Housing Manager; owner negotiator: Tara Barauskas; under negotiation: price and terms of payment
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.

CITY MANAGER
REPORT
The City Manager Report was presented by Interim City Manager Elaine Polachek

4.L
Packet Pg. 309 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 7 February 25, 2025

REPORT ON COUNCIL
TRAVEL
Mayor Negrete reported that she traveled to Santa Barbara for the ICA Winter Seminar.

PUBLIC INPUT ON

REMAINING AGENDA
ITEMS:

Members of the public Denise Barton, John C. Smith, Michael Masucci, Marc Verville (time donated by Tricia Crane), Jeff Gordon, Paul Slye (time donated by Rev. Nathan Rugh), Om Bleicher, Michelle Edgar, Robert Berman, Lois Lambert, Denny Zane, Francisca Vergara, Andrew Hoyer, Michael Soloff, and Harvey Eder commented on Item 11.A.

Members of the public Kelly Delich, Denise Barton, and Harvey Eder commented on Item 11.B.

Member of the public Denise Barton commented on Item 16.C.

Member of the public Andrew Hoyer commented on Item 16.D.

Member of the public Conner Webb commented on Item 16.E.

Member of the public Harvey Eder commented on Item 16.F.

STAFF

ADMINISTRATIVE
ITEMS:

AFFORDABLE HOUSING

DEVELOPMENT

11.A. Adoption of Resolution and Approval of Release of Request for Proposals for City-Owned Sites Designated for Affordable Housing Development in the City's 6th Cycle Housing Element and Declaration of Sites as "Exempt Surplus Land" in Accordance with the Surplus Land Act, was presented and adopted.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Declare City-owned properties located at Bergamot Station Arts Center located at 2500 Olympic (APNs 4268-013-919 and 4268-014- 900) as “surplus land” within the meaning of the Surplus Land Act (Government Code sections 54220 et. seq.)(“SLA”), adopt a resolution declaring the Bergamot Station Arts Center as surplus land, authorize the City Manager or his or her designee to advance the Notice/Request for Proposal (RFP) by June 30, 2025 and take implementing actions necessary to comply with the SLA and the City’s Housing Element.

2. Declare two City-owned properties located at 1333 4th Street (APNs 4291-011- 909 and 4291-011-910) and 1324 5th Street (APNs 4291- 011-900, 4291-011-901, 4291-011-902, 4291-011-903, 4291-011- 904, 4291-011-905 and 4291-011-908) as “surplus land” within the meaning of the SLA, adopt a resolution declaring the 4th/5th and Arizona as surplus land, authorize the City Manager or his or her designee to advance the Notice/Request for Proposal (RFP) by June 30, 2027 and take implementing actions necessary to comply with the SLA and the City’s Housing Element.

4.L
Packet Pg. 310 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 8 February 25, 2025

3. Declare City-owned property at 1234 4th Street (currently operated as a public parking structure, Parking Structure 1,(PS1) as “exempt surplus land” within the meaning of the SLA; authorize staff to begin the process of obtaining necessary permits, including a Coastal Development Permit, for demolition of PS1 if demolition is approved by the California Coastal Commission, authorize staff to proceed with developing bidding documents for the demolition to prepare the site for a future 100% affordable housing development.

4. Adopt the findings stated in the Environmental Review section of this staff report, including, without limitation, a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15312 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a finding of no possibility of significant effect on the environment pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption), and a finding that the development of affordable housing on City-owned property was previously analyzed in the 6th Cycle Housing Element
Environmental Impact Report.

Questions asked and answered of staff included is there any reason why both loans can’t expire in 2028; would the City retain ownership of the land; why is it not an option to possibly selling PS1 at any use; if we were to want to keep our options open in that regard, would it be wise to list it as surplus instead of exempt surplus; is there an option to deviate from the previous Council’s decision in regard to 4th/5
th and Arizona and Bergamot Station; is
the City obliged to transfer units to other sites if they can't build an exact number of units; why is the staff recommendation to look at Bergamot Station before the 4th/5th and Arizona site; what are the limitations on what we can include in the RFP as preferences at Bergamot; could the City we put in a preference for a project that would allow existing gallery and other arts and cultural use tenants to return when it's redeveloped; could it be included to permit flexibility to include market rate units to help subsidize some of the other things that we would want in that type of project; is Bergamot fully leased and what are the current revenues from the site; if the recommended process and timing is approved to issue the initial RFP for Bergamot by June 2026, what would happen then; how long would it be open and when would anything happen on the site; under the RFP process, would the city retain ownership of the land, or would that be transferred to whoever would develop it; if both tenants at 4th/5th and Arizona were to extend their leases through 2030, how could that affect our commitment to meeting RHNA goals and staying compliant with our housing element; if we allowed the tenants to extend their leases through 2030, would we possibly have a shovel ready project or something by the time the leases end; what is the City’s history with permitting parking by parishioners of St. Augustine by the Sea and what is the City’s obligation; how would city staff be able to allocate additional resources to handle the both RFPs for Bergamot and 4 th/5th and
Arizona at the same time; the tradeoffs that you would have to be made if we

4.L
Packet Pg. 311 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 9 February 25, 2025
wanted to advance both of these and on a similar time frame; what potential risks would the city face if it waited until 2027 to release the 4 th/5th
and
Arizona RFP, especially considering market conditions and funding uncertainties; given our need for revenue, could 4th/5th and Arizona be structured as mixed-use development to allow for revenue generating uses at that site; have we measured the staffing need and the need to delay 4 th/5th
two years with the need for future downtown economic development and activation of our downtown area; what impact would a delayed RFP have on future activation of our downtown area; can a phased approach be used with these two RFPs to ensure that both projects move forward simultaneously, but on somewhat of a staggered timeline, so that we're not competing for the same tax credits; instead of selling PS1, could we put PS1 out to an RFP, as is, without investing any additional money; could we put out PS1 to RFP, see what comes back and maintains the ownership of the land, but give site control, or some sort of long term ground lease to a third party who would either maintain and generate some revenue, would redevelop, would tear down, so the city would not have to pay to seismically retrofit or demolish; does staff think that a creative developer would come forward with a revenue generating option for the site that would absolve the city of any financial obligation on this site; in order to dispose of PS1 would we have to list it as surplus first, and theoretically, one way of testing the market, as opposed to a study, what is the current height limit on 4th/5th and Arizona we haven't discussed, in terms of the sites in question, there's a lot of uses that we are looking to see and hoping to see, commercial, affordable, and it's going to be difficult to do all those, especially potentially within our current envelope and zoning, and I'm just curious, am I the height limit currently on the fourth and fifth in Arizona site; would there be any value in indicating in the RFP that, in addition to some of the things that have been mentioned around how we'd like to see a detailed financial plan, we’d like to see revenue generating uses that we could also say that we would welcome projects that exceed the current limits, height limits, or development standards, if that would make a better project; and is PS1 only seismically safe until 2027.

Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to, viewing any of the current uses as surplus; the prioritization of projects; engagement with the stakeholders in downtown Santa Monica; the need to be cognizant of tradeoffs between immediate financial return from these lease holds and the bang for the buck we get from revitalizing downtown; merit in moving forward with the 4
th/5th and Arizona site first; trying to use
a staggered approach; having more revenue from the sites while we find a good potential project in light of the city's current budgetary issues; desires for items to be included in the RFP for Bergamot, such as, a preference for right of return, or at least right of first refusal for current tenants, looking at how we could potentially temporarily relocate them so we don't lose those arts and cultural resources within the city, allowing for some flexibility so that we could have some market rate to help subsidize some of the things

4.L
Packet Pg. 312 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 10 February 25, 2025
that we would like to see, allowing for creative uses that make it a really great community gathering spot; combining PS1 and the 4th/5th and Arizona project as surplus land and putting it out for RFP together to allow some flexibility, but to give preference to the Bergamot Station RFP; the importance of being realistic with these very important complex projects; the lack of availability for state grants or local sources of funding to assist with completing these projects; needing to have to involve interesting commercial revenue generating uses on the sites; listing all of these projects as surplus and putting them out as soon as possible this year, as opposed to waiting; and getting revenue for the next three years by extending both bank leases through 2028.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Snell, to designate 4
th/5th and Arizona, Bergamot Station, and PS1 as surplus sites and to issue notices of availability for all three aforementioned properties and development teams can but are not required to link, PS1 and 4th/5th and Arizona, with direction to staff that priority be given to artist housing at Bergamot Station and right to return and relocation assistance for existing tenants.

Substitute motion by Councilmember Raskin, seconded by Councilmember Snell, to declare 4th/5
th and Arizona, PS1, and Bergamot Station as surplus
land; to prioritize the downtown sites if it is necessary to stagger the processes; to offer the possibility of linking 4
th/5th and Arizona and PS1,
but do not as requirement; to maximize affordable housing and revenue generating commercial on all of the sites; and a preference at Bergamot Station for a right of return and commercial arts serving purposes at Bergamot. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Snell, Raskin, Hall, Zwick
Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, Mayor Negrete
NOES: Councilmember Zernitskaya
ABSENT: None
Councilmember Zernitskaya changed vote to yes to make the vote unanimous.

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH

STRATEGY
(Councilmember Hall was
excused at 12:52 a.m.)
(Councilmember Hall
returned at 12:54 a.m.)

11.B. Approval of First Modification to Contracts with Social Emotional Wellness Initiative, St. Joseph Center and Family Service of Santa Monica for Behavioral Health Strategy – Adult Crisis and StepDown Services and Youth Behavioral Health Programming Recommendations, was presented and approved.

Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

4.L
Packet Pg. 313 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 11 February 25, 2025

1. Receive reports: Adult Crisis & Children and Youth Behavioral Health Care Study and the Strengthening the System of Intensive Behavioral Healthcare Services for Adults in Santa Monica and Service Planning Area 5.

2. Adopt and approve Transitional Approach 3 – Decentralized Expansion from the Strengthening the System of Intensive Behavioral Healthcare Services for Adults in Santa Monica and Service Planning Area 5 report to build out behavioral health services locally.

3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to agreement #11439 in the amount of $400,000 with Social Emotional Wellness Initiative to provide behavioral health support for children and youth in the City’s after school programs (Police Activities League (PAL), CREST, and Virginia Avenue Park (VAP)).This will result in a four-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $995,194, with future funding contingent upon Council budget approval.

4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to agreement #11440 in the amount of $388,254 with St. Joseph Center to expand the capacity of behavioral health services for youth ages 10-24 enrolled in the Youth Resource Team (YRT) program. This will result in a four-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $6,907,777, with future funding contingent upon Council budget approval.

5. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a first modification to agreement #11431 in the amount of $900,000 with Family Service of Santa Monica to increase the capacity of behavioral health services available to children birth – 5th grade and to expand substance use treatment services for middle and high school-aged youth. This will result in a four-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $3,617,970, with future funding contingent upon Council budget approval.

6. 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.

Questions asked and answered of staff included: what are the specific next steps and what funding is needed for adult services; when are the beds expecting to come online; why is the decentralized model being recommended for adult services; are we working with regional representatives; will there also be access for housed residents; are conversations being had about locating sites in Santa Monica; is the City working with ClareMatrix; what are the rules concerning how someone can be delivered to services outside of the City; and how many detox beds will be available and the price per bed.

4.L
Packet Pg. 314 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 12 February 25, 2025
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to, implementing metrics that can be placed on a public facing dashboard; finding a location; providing a space for youth offsite from schools; that wouldn’t require parental consent; concerns regarding uniformed officers; and getting more advocacy at the County and State level.

Motion by Mayor Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Zernitskaya, to adopt the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Hall, Raskin, Snell, Zernitskaya Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, Mayor Negrete
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:

In accordance with Council Rule 6(x), all Councilmember Discussion items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.

Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, seconded by Mayor Negrete, to remove Item 16.D. to be considered separately.

Motion by Councilmember Hall, seconded by Councilmember Raskin, to remove Items 16.C., 16.D., and 16.F. to be considered separately.

The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote, with all members present.

Items 16.C., 16.D., and 16.F. were removed and considered separately in accordance with Council Rule 6(x)

CLEAN BEACHES &

OCEAN PARCEL TAX

CITIZENS OVERSIGHT

COMMITTEE

16.A. Recommendation to accept James Kennedy's resignation from the Clean Beaches & Ocean Parcel Tax Citizens Oversight Committee and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy, was heard.

Motion by Councilmember Hall, seconded by Councilmember Raskin, to accept resignation with regret.

The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote, with all members present.

TRANSIENT

OCCUPANCY TAX

ADVISORY COMMITTEE

16.B. Recommendation to rescind the January 28, 2025, appointment of Dennis Puri to the Transient Occupancy Tax Advisory Committee; and, continue the appointment to a future meeting, was heard.

4.L
Packet Pg. 315 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 13 February 25, 2025
Motion by Councilmember Hall, seconded by Councilmember Raskin, to rescind the appointment.

The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote, with all members present.

GENDER-AFFIRMING

HEALTHCARE

16.C. Request of Councilmembers Hall and Zernitskaya that in order to reaffirm our commitment to the protection of Transgender, Gender Diverse, and Intersex persons, the Council direct the City Attorney to draft a resolution banning the use of City resources and personnel to aid the federal government or other states in blocking gender-affirming healthcare, was heard.

Motion by Councilmember Zernitskaya, seconded by Councilmember Hall, to approve the item; including not expending any other city resources that could be used for tracking gender diverse or transgender individuals.

The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote, with all members present.

CAMPAIGN

CONTRIBUTION LIMITS

16.D. Request of Councilmembers Hall, Raskin, and Zernitskaya that in order to promote free and fair elections, the Council direct Staff to return with options to raise the individual contribution limit during political campaigns, was heard.

Motion by Councilmember Hall, seconded by Councilmember Raskin, to approve the item. The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Zernitskaya, Snell, Raskin, Hall, Zwick Mayor Negrete
NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Torosis
ABSENT: None
Mayor Pro Tem Torosis explained that her no vote is because she intends to run for re-election in 2026.

TRANSIT

INFRASTRUCTURE

16.E. Request of Councilmember Zwick, Hall, and Zernitskaya that, to align with the Westside Cities Council of Governments (WSCCOG) initiative to evaluate and design bus rapid transit (BRT) and related bus infrastructure on priority corridors in the subregion including Santa Monica Boulevard west of Beverly Hills and Caltrans’ efforts to implement bus lanes on Santa Monica Boulevard between Centinela Avenue and the 405, the City Council direct the City Manager to present transit priority measures and tradeoffs, including bus lanes, as part of the planned study session about the Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study in summer 2025, was heard.

4.L
Packet Pg. 316 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) 14 February 25, 2025
Motion by Councilmember Hall, seconded by Councilmember Raskin, to approve the item.

The motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote, with all members present.

GIFT RESOLUTION AND

GRATUITY ORDINANCE

16.F. Request of Mayor Negrete and Councilmember Snell that the City Manager and City Attorney survey other cities and bring amendments to the Gift Resolution and Gratuity Ordinance to create exceptions for attending City of Santa Monica economic development and cultural events in which Councilmembers are expected to attend to represent the City, was heard.

Motion by Mayor Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Snell, to approve the item, with direction to staff to look into the gift policies of other cities.

The motion was approved by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers Zwick, Snell, Zernitskaya
Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, Mayor Negrete
NOES: Councilmembers Hall, Raskin
ABSENT: None
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 1:40 a.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Nikima S. Newsome Lana Negrete
City Clerk Mayor

4.L
Packet Pg. 317 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Feb 25, 2025 5:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 5.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Conference with labor negotiator – Gov. Code § 54957.6: agency designated representatives: Interim City Manager Elaine Polachek, Human Resources Director Dana Brown, and Human Resources Manager Sarah Rebensdorf; bargaining units: Administrative Team Associates (ATA), AFSCME Local 4819- Management Team Association (MTA), California Teamsters Local 911 (IBT), Municipal Employees Association (MEA), Public Attorney’s Legal Support Staff Union (PALSSU), Public Attorney’s Union (PAU), Santa Monica Fire Executive Management Association (FEMA), Santa Monica Firefighters Local 1109 (LOCAL 1109), Police Officers Association (POA), Supervisory Team Association (STA) and SMART TD - International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers - Transportation Division, Local 1785 (SMART TD)
Prepared By: Andrew Cabello, Legal Assistant
Approved Forwarded to Council

5.B
Packet Pg. 318
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: March 11, 2025
Agenda Item: 5.C
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Douglas Sloan, City Attorney, City Attorney's Office Subject: Conference with real estate negotiator pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8: Property: 1855 Main Street, Santa Monica, California (Civic Auditorium) (APN 4290-013-901); City Negotiators: Jennifer Taylor, Economic Development Manager, and Nia Tang, Economic Development Administrator; Owner of Record: City of Santa Monica; Persons to be negotiated with: Tim Sexton, Revitalization Partner Group, LLC; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment for lease
Prepared By: Esterlina Lugo, Deputy City Clerk
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comment

5.C
Packet Pg. 319
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate 1 David Yakobson
From: Arthur Jeon <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 12:32 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Cc: Phil Brock; Douglas Sloan; City of Santa Monica; Clerk Mailbox; Jeanette Gant; Micah Akerson; Erika Aklufi; Danielle Noble; Ramon Batista; [email protected]; Roberto Lucio; Thomas McLaughlin; Jose Rodriguez; Annette Farmer; Maryanne LaGuardia; Albin Gielicz; Alisha Brady; [email protected]; Arati Desai Wagabaza; Lori Brown; John Smith; John Alle; Evan Meyer; [email protected]; Luke Cain; Peter Bosen; [email protected]; Elaine Golden-Gealer; Eric Sedman; Michele Aronson; Aisling Winders; Julia Ladd; Peter TRINH; Anuj Gupta; [email protected]; dominic gomez; Jenna Grigsby; Attorney Mailbox; Shawn R. Kehoe; Andrew Thomas (Downtown Santa Monica); SMDP Editor; Susan Cline; [email protected]; Michele A Wittig; [email protected]; Attorney Mailbox; Joe; Jenny Rush; Stan Epstein; Gary Tsai; [email protected]; Zina Josephs; Leah; Lauren Howland; [email protected]; Matthew Hall; Richard Drapkin; [email protected]; Planning Commission Comments; Dawn Fairchild; [email protected]; councilmtgitems; [email protected]; Dan Charn.; [email protected]; Gerardo Leyva; Carlos Jaen; Brandon Capiro; Kelly Simon; Mario Fonda-Bonardi; Jing Yeo; Albin Gielicz; Scott McGee; Gerardo Leyva; Ryan Gradle; Roy Brown; Frank Marnell; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Kim Pieper; Third District; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Robert Coleman; [email protected]; [email protected]; Alyssa G; [email protected]
Subject: Priorities: Performative versus Performance

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
You have inherited a city on the brink, with a lot of problems (we’re broke!). And, of course, with a lot of potential, if we keep our priorities straight.

But as you consider levying a staggering bond tax ($460 million) on residents, you are also inexplicably deciding to launch a task force to "explore both monetary and non-monetary reparations options.” To be paid with what money? Not to mention each member of this 'task force' will be paid $2500 for their opinions. Ha!
You have also managed to find money to hire a consulting firm to conduct a “cannabis equity assessment” to explore “barriers faced by marginalized communities in the cannabis industry.” I know, it sounds like a joke, but it’s not. And how much did that consulting firm cost? I realize the money spent on these two pieces of performative virtue signaling is a drop in the bucket of debt that is drowning us. But the energy, time, and attention include real opportunity costs, as they will drawn from staff, our new city manager, and the council. They will distract us from our ongoing crisis: we are broke, and our downtown is still overrun by addicts openly using and dealing drugs. These two Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 323 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 2 initiatives signal to residents that your priorities are in the wrong place, and worse, that you are not serious people.

Here are two opportunities to show leadership and that you understand our real problems and opportunities:

1. Civic Auditorium: Approve the public/private partnership (agree to the revised Exclusive Negotiating Agreement) and start the process of restoring a world-class performing arts center. It will bring people from all over the world and help revitalize the city. This is a no-brainer.

2. Pali High at the Sears Building: Thousands of kids being dropped off by doting parents will activate that dead zone, bring foot traffic to the promenade, and naturally flush out the addicts that have taken over that area of our downtown, courtesy of our misplaced shelter, (which should be moved ASAP). Do whatever you can to enable Pali high to come to the Sear’s Building.

Finally, I challenge you to take a walk at dusk on Santa Monica Blvd., the street named after our city, without the hair on your neck standing up and your heart breaking. The city, with declining downtown revenues from both hotels and retail, will not recover until this issue is solved. Many of us have been saying this for years, and it has, unfortunately stayed true—because reality just doesn’t care what you believe.

Show the city that you understand our problems by prioritizing what’s critical first. Solve the problems we have, not your personal agenda to right every wrong in the world through questionable means. That’s a luxury we can’t afford.

Sincerely,
Arthur Jeon
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 324 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 1 David Yakobson
From: Lisa L Olson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 5:23 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: Save the OUR CIVIC AUDITORIUM SENT TO YOU FROM A 72 YEAR OLD SANTA

MONICA NATIVE

EXTERNAL
TO EVERYONE LISTED ABOVE:

I was born here in 1952 and I remember all the events we used to enjoy before the City closed the Civic Center! Is it possible even some of you sitting on our City Council have NEVER attended an event there? Yet you want to close it without ever enjoying an event there.

Please save our Civic Auditorium it is worth saving and we do not need another Homeless Shelter or Nail Salon (Montana Avenue) We need something to bring people back into our town to spend money not to attack people and take advantage of our obvious vulnerabilities!
BRING BACK OUR CIVIC AUDITORIUM SO WE CAN locally enjoy all the various cultural shows like we used to do! I miss the vintage textile show, jewelry gem show, cat show and various rock and roll concerts do not dismantle the things that can bring revenue into our City coffers we already cannot fund our Pension requirements and if you keep doling money out for all the sexual abuse and not figure out any way to (except by the continual overtaxing of local business owners and residents) than I believe you will fail at bringing our city financially back to stand on its own.

Sincerely,
Lisa L Olson
310-6725-7117
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 325 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 2 David Yakobson
From: Rosemary Ford <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 4:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, built by master architect Welton Becket in 1959, is an iconic mid-century building that played a pivotal role in Santa Monica's cultural life. The Civic Auditorium, with an innovative mixed-use program, combining a concert hall, theater, trade show, and convention center, the Civic was designed to serve a broad segment of the community. Thus, along with Santa Monica Conservancy, I endorse RPG's efforts to revitalize this iconic building as a community asset.

RPG has the proven ability to restore and finance the Civic by revitalizing this landmark property to its rightful position as an important economic engine for the city as a magnet for new business and tourism, as a compelling 21st century performing arts venue for people of all ages, and as a point of civic pride for residents showcasing how historic rehabilitation, neighborhood legacy, community partnerships, sustainability, and business can all operate together to shine a positive and exciting light on Santa Monica.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Rosemary Ford
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 326 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 3 David Yakobson
From: Susan Lewis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 3:41 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: Subject: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Save the Civic Auditorium
Honorable Mayor & Council,
51 years ago I drove from Orange County and saw my first live concert at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium—Paul Simon. Two years later I moved to Ocean Park and literally walked to shows. Then was able to enjoy scores of concerts from all the top stars of the day: Bowie, Iggy Pop, Queen, the Go-Gos, Blondie, Beach Boys, The Nutcracker, and on and on. It was a sad day when the Civic closed and I stopped seeing music in my home town. I still see music but I must drive across town, and deal with traffic, the expense of dinner, price of show itself which is always in the hundreds of dollars, and parking.

I would much rather spend the money to help my local economy, right here at home in Santa Monica.

When it is restored to a world-class venue, it will be the best PR the City can have, a source of pride, enjoyment and revenue for Santa Monica residents. Plus it will help fill restaurants, eateries, and shops from Main Street to Santa Monica Place.

Please support the RPG proposal and sign the ENA. It is the right thing to do and the smart thing to do.

Susan Lewis
Santa Monica home and business owner for 38 years.

E: [email protected]
M: 310-466-7899
www.lewiscommunications.net
press: www.aboutthegear.com
ASC Associate Member
WiM 2024 Icon Award
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 4 David Yakobson
From: Larry Arnstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 3:16 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: "3/11/25 agenda 5-C - Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
You Can Do it! So please Do!!
Larry Arnstein
1601 Hill St.

Santa Monia, CA 90405
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 5 David Yakobson
From: Ed Fraiman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 3:04 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Supporting RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, built by master architect Welton Becket in 1959, is an iconic midcentury building that played a pivotal role in Santa Monica's cultural life. The Civic Auditorium, with an innovative mixed-use program, combining a concert hall, theater, trade show, and convention center, the Civic was designed to serve a broad segment of the community. Thus, along with Santa Monica Conservancy, I endorse RPG's efforts to revitalize this iconic building as a community asset.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely yours,
Ed Fraiman and Eriko Kobayashi
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 6 David Yakobson
From: Carla Finnerman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 1:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium is in your hands. Please vote to sign the ENA so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. Lifelong resident, Carla Finnerman

EXTERNAL
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 7 David Yakobson
From: Robin Danar <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 1:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SAMO Civic

EXTERNAL
"The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium is in your hands. Please vote to sign the ENA so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers."
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 8 David Yakobson
From: Dan J. <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 12:03 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: regarding Item 5.C and in general support for saving the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Members of City Council,
I am writing in support of saving the Civic Auditorium, and signing the ENA to convert the facililty into a world-class performing-arts center. There are many people here, both over and under 50 years of age, who understand the significance of this building to the community. Please do the right thing and save the facility for the benefit of the community, and the region.

Thank you,
Daniel Jansenson
_______________________
Daniel Jansenson Architect
telephone: 310.451.5907
1424 4th St. 221
Santa Monica, CA 90401
www.danjansenson.com
www.linkedin.com/in/danieljansenson
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 332 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 1 David Yakobson
From: Mike Bone <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 2:39 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 3/11/25 Agenda Item 5C: Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Hello -
I appreciate your help. My letter below was not included in the public record. Could you please add it? I have lowered the quote level for convenience.

Thank you.

Mike Bone
[email protected]
Mobile 310 795 3231
Begin forwarded message:

From: Mike Bone <[email protected]>
Subject: The Santa Monice Civic
Date: March 10, 2025 at 2:40:41 PM PDT
To: "To: Lana Negrete" <[email protected]>, Caroline Torosis <[email protected]>, Ellis Raskin <[email protected]>, Barry Snell <[email protected]>, Dan Hall <[email protected]>, Natalya Zernitskaya <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Cc: Nia Tang <[email protected]>, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, "Susan Cola [email protected]" <[email protected]>, [email protected] I spent my entire professional life in the music industry. Concerts and records.

Sadly records has gone away, but the live business is stronger than ever.

People want the LIVE experience. You can not download it….it doesn’t look great on the TV and the whole “let’s go to the movie theater to see a concert DOES NOT WORK.

People want to see it live.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 333 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 2 We are lucky in Santa Monica, where I have lived for 33 years. We have a venue that COULD be one of the greats again IF you do the right thing and let people that know the business run the Santa Monica Civic.

Back in the day, I have seen many concerts at the Civic and I am not just speaking about Stairway of the Stars.

There is not another mid size room on the West Side of LA. The Civic could be a very busy venue and an economic driver for the City IF you are not short sighted.

Don’t go for the quick infusion of cash….go for the long dollar….a venue that provides tax revenue from restaurants and hotels income from concerts as well as the city being a landlord for this majesty historic venue. A busy Santa Monica Civic will be an economic driver for us.

Hey, the T.A.M.I. Show was filmed at the Santa Monica Civic.  The Beach Boys
 The Supremes
 The Rolling Stones
 James Brown
 Marvin Gaye
 Lesley Gore
 Chuck Berry
 Smokey Robinson & The Miracles
Mike Bone
[email protected]
310 795 3231 mobile
“Sometimes dreams are best left where they came from, your sleep.” Chris Blackwell Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 334 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 1 David Yakobson
From: Louise Steiner <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members, please do the right by voting for the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and approve a lease with the Revitalization Partner Group, so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers.

The Civic Auditorium is a cultural & architectural treasure that must be saved & enjoyed by not only SM residents but tourists as well.

I have lived near & have wonderful memories of the Civic for over 45 years.

It is a precious thing to me.

Thank you, Lou Steiner
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 335 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 2 David Yakobson
From: Karen Croner <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 11:55 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 5C - 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council
How exciting that you have the opportunity to revive Santa Monica in a way that will bring great revenue to the city!
You can proudly save the Santa Monica Civic so that there will be a new draw to the city that will bring life and arts to Santa Monica. If you want to get people to move here, you need to provide a draw. The numerous
empty apartments are a sign the city needs more of a cultural identity - and to have fabulous music and shows
in OUR civic center will be something you can take great pride in. It will attract folks from all over, will help the
tourist business. Win win for all. And certainly an achievement that will help you in your future political careers!
You have the chance to do real good here. Imagine all the amazing bands and acts that will come play here!
And folks will go to the restaurants, repopulate downtown, the city will come alive! It’s so exciting! Please vote to sign the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and approve a lease with the Revitalization Partner Group,
so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers.

Karen Croner
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 336 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 4 David Yakobson
From: Bob Taylor <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 11:49 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Honorable Mayor & Council,
You well know that, as the Save The Civic coalition has stated, with overwhelming support of residents; "The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium is in your hands. Please vote to sign the ENA so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers.” The Civic had proven itself for more that fifty years as a ‘go to’ venue and can once again be that missing cog in the wheel of Santa Monica economics. Please support the RPG proposal and sign the ENA.

Optimistically thanking you in advance for doing the right thing.

Bob Taylor,
Ocean Park resident
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 337 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 5 David Yakobson
From: Esther Chung <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 11:48 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems
Subject: Our historic Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayors and Council Members,
Please vote to sign the ENA so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers.

Sincerely,
Esther Chung
1247 Eucld St.

Santa Monica, CA 90404
l
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 338 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 6 David Yakobson
From: Jaleh MIRHASHEMI <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 11:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall
Cc: Elaine Polachek; Christopher J. Smith; Ramon Batista; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; Jenna Grigsby; Erika Aklufi; Sofia Klatzker; Jenny Rogers; Douglas Sloan; Susan Cola; Steven Johnson; Maryanne LaGuardia; John Smith; Lori Brown; Barry Rosenbaum; [email protected]; Susan Cline
Subject: City Council Meeting - 3/11/25 - Item 5.C. Closed Session - Santa Monica Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Negrete, Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, and Esteemed Councilmembers:

We have been waiting very long to renovate and reopen our Santa Monica's landmark Civic Auditorium. Reviving the Civic Auditorium as a destination for performing arts and a cultural center like it was in the past, is a dream for the Santa Monica residents and many others.

The Revitalization Partners Group (RPG), LLC has submitted their Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with you. Considering that they offer to save our public land with no need for any public funds, it would be a great opportunity for our city. The reopening of the Civic Auditorium would have a great impact on our city's economy as well.

The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium is in your hands. Please VOTE TO SIGN THE ENA with the RPG to revitalize and reopen the Civic Auditorium without any delay.

Please move forward this once-in- a- lifetime opportunity/deal. THANK YOU! THANK YOU! Sincerely,
Jaleh Mirhashemi
Co-Chair, Civic Center Task Force
Resident, 24 years
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 339 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 7 David Yakobson
From: Info Save the Civic <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 10:29 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; [email protected]; Susan Cola; councilmtgitems; [email protected]
Subject: Fwd: Response to Councilmember Zwick

EXTERNAL
-
Februray 27, 2025
Jesse Zwick’s column opposing restoring the Civic Auditorium, delisting it as a landmark, and selling the land, is divisive, ageist, and heartbreaking. All the more so because as a Councilmember he’s supposed to represent all Santa Monicans, even those over fifty for whom he has such contempt. (Why “save a building to which no one under 50 has the faintest attachment?”)
Zwick’s position seems to be: Why place any cultural value on historic achievements in music, literature, art, dance if they outdate you and weren’t part of your own life? If that’s the standard that defines our shared experience what would make the cut?
And if, hopefully, he’s just being provocative, and thinks SOME historical places are worthy, why wouldn’t publicly owned and celebrated ones be at the top of the list? Zwick forcefully opposes having our Civic leased and restored as a cultural and economic resource in favor of something he knows the City cannot do: sell the “asset” for “likely close to $100 million.”
As Zwick and the previous Council understood, demolishing the Civic – which is on the National Register of Historic Places - would be the only way the City could cash out on the land on which it sits, which was publicly known when the school district was vying to turn the Civic into a gym a year ago.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 340 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 8 Any attempt to demolish the Civic and sell the land, including the soccer field, would unleash an epic legal battle that would drag on for years.

The fastest way for the City to shore up its finances would be to seize the opportunity that’s before the Council: keep the Civic publicly owned and move quickly to restore it into a world-class venue without ANY public cost.

That’s why City leaders (and former ones) embraced this moment: A reborn Civic would be an economic engine for a thriving downtown, bringing back restaurants, hotels, and other small businesses throughout the area.

Here are some other misleading arguments Zwick used to oppose the restoration of the Civic:
· Claiming that some Santa Monicans believe the Civic is “worth preserving at any cost;” (the public support for restoring the Civic is based on private enterprise bearing the entire cost and the city reaping revenues from its rejuvenation);
· Conflating “pressing (city) needs” with “some costs are simply too high to bear;” (our City isn’t being asked to “bear” any costs – there’s a consortium of entertainment heavyweights that proposes to “bear the costs);” and · Asserting that this is “such a large giveaway of public resources” and that City leaders would be “giving away for free” the “asset best poised to dig our city out of its current financial hole;” (No public resources are being given away: the Civic project envisions a long-term lease of our public land, and the Civic Auditorium would remain publicly owned as it should, providing economic benefits to our City for many years to come).

One wonders which side Councilmember Zwick would have been on fifty years ago when a majority of short-sighted councilmembers voted to demolish the historic Santa Monica Pier and replace it with a floating hotel (overturned by voters).

Hopefully, this Council will be on the right side of history.

Save the Civic Steering Committee
###
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 341 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 9 David Yakobson
From: John Cyrus Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 10:28 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; councilmtgitems; Elaine Polachek
Subject: 3-11-25 ITEM 5C CIVIC

EXTERNAL
https://smdp.com/opinion/why-saving-the-civic-may-save-the-city/ The following is an editorial published recently in the SM Daily Press in response to an editorial by a Councilmember, on why the Civic may SAVE the city, if you give it a chance.

Thank you,
John Cyrus Smith
[email protected]
Dear Editor,
If you ever want to know how Santa Monica City Council members feel about a certain issue, you’d be wise to look beyond the latest Council meeting agenda for answers.

I say this because our new Council (which includes four new members and three others with less than a full term on the job) has given the group trying to save and renovate the Civic Auditorium only until Friday, February 28th, to make a deal, but they never mentioned it at all during Tuesday’s Council meeting three days before.

But I did, right off the bat. Item 1: Public Input. That’s when anyone can comment for two minutes on any item or issue not listed on the agenda.

And I packed a lot in those two minutes, briefly reminding our younger Council newbies about the Civic’s storied past, but focusing more on how its potential second life could help revitalize a downtown which struggled even before the pandemic and continues to languish because of public safety issues, a financially-strapped mall, a Promenade past its prime and now the Palisades Fire.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 342 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 10 I told them how other Councils had made Civic mistakes, how the city never really marketed it all that well and how red tape and rising costs made it increasingly harder for promoters to rent it, fill it and still turn a profit. I learned all this as a member of the original ‘Save the Civic’ group in 2012, when experts with the Urban Land Institute concluded the city should “Set the dream and renovate the Civic as a cultural icon.” I was also there at City Council the night the Santa Monica Symphony’s late conductor, Guido Lamell, brought his violin to City Hall and played his case for the Civic’s saving. But his beautiful song, that Council and that effort, ultimately failed.

Other Councils lacked the foresight to re-direct the money that built the Broad/SMC theater complex at the ‘nowhere’ location of 11th & Santa Monica Boulevard, and renovate the Civic instead. City Hall also failed to save our only bowling alley and all those yummy restaurants and shops across the street on Pico that could have created and enhanced a re-opened Civic experience. Who wouldn’t wanted to have a nice dinner downtown, see a show at the new Civic, then go for a short stroll near the beach before heading home?
A renovated Civic Auditorium could be just what our city needs to resurrect and revitalize our downtown core. Imagine performers such as Sting doing a two or three-week engagement, followed by five nights of the Foo Fighters unplugged or a run of Beyonce at the Beach performances.

The five entities that make up RPG, the Revitalization Partners Group behind this current restoration effort, include concert pros such as ‘Live Nation’ and the ‘Azoff Group.’ RPG says they can re-create the Civic, preserve much of its landmarked features and bring in world-class entertainers at no cost to the city.

This week one City Council member penned an editorial against the idea under the headline, ‘Save the Civic or Save the City?’
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 343 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 11 Why can’t we do both? Maybe the CIVIC can save the CITY.

Bottom line: The current Council should give these new negotiations a fighting chance. Let’s see the numbers and a detailed proposal. Let’s see what RPG can come up with. Did you know two of the RPG principals lost their homes during the fires? But that didn’t stop them from also quickly putting together the Fire Aid Concert that raised $100 million dollars for fire relief. Sounds exactly like the kind of people we need to help the Civic earn its new future as Southern California’s premiere beachside concert venue.

Voters have long forgotten the mistakes of past Council members who failed to close a deal, but they will remember this current Council as either the one that made the biggest mistake of all and killed the Civic forever… or the council that made history and saved it.

Sincerely,
John C. Smith,
Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commissioner

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 344 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 12 David Yakobson
From: John Cyrus Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 10:20 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; councilmtgitems; Elaine Polachek
Subject: 3-11-25 ITEM 5C CIVIC -- VIDEO -- THE LAST PERFORMANCE AT THE CIVIC

AUDITORIUM

EXTERNAL
I HAVE ATTACHED this video and hope you'll share it. What a moment it was... May of 2013, the very last live musical performance at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. A Tchaikovsky concert performed by the Santa Monica Symphony, under the direction of the late Maestro Guido Lamell. I remember meeting him and suggesting he bring his violin to the City Council meeting and "play" his case for keeping the Civic alive and open. He played wonderfully in Chambers that night, to rousing applause, but to no avail. Here we are now, a dozen years later. Give the Civic a chance at a new future! https://studio.youtube.com/video/SY2jUCRSTnM/edit
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet. 27 SM SYMPHONY.MOV
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.

For the record…I was a member of the original Save the Civic group founded in November 2012 as a coalition of concerned community members and local business leaders working towards the common goal of restoring and enhancing the Civic Auditorium’s place as a vibrant cultural and community hub.

John Cyrus Smith
[email protected]

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 345 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 13 David Yakobson
From: Lori Nafshun <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 10:13 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Jennifer Taylor; Nia Tang; [email protected]; Susan Cola; councilmtgitems
Subject: 3/11/25 Agenda Item 5C: Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Honorable Council Members,
All of the variables for the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium are in place for success.

The Civic is:
• Walking distance from the light rail
• Walking distance to the beach
• Walking distance to the pier
• Walking distance to shops and restaurants.
• The Civic is an Architecturally Significant Building
The Group of experts (RPG) who want to restore and operate the Civic (at no expense to taxpayers):
• have solid financial backing.
• have solid concert experience.
• have the passion, as seen with The Forum.

Your predecessors in 2013 knew they did not have the necessary funding to do what was necessary to revitalize the Civic, but chose to maintain the structure until such time as the funding was available.

For my children, the idea of being able to ride their bikes to a venue to see concerts, instead of having to drive east for over an hour, is a dream come true. Like many their age, they spend a lot of their earned money on live music performances.

Post Covid, people, sadly, are visiting movie theaters and dining out less.

The overall gross for the top 100 touring artists in North American venues is $6.18 billion in 2024. The concert business is thriving.

We can benefit from those tax dollars and potential ticket fees.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 346 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 14 This is what the public wants. It’s part of our Civic Center. It belongs to us.

Stay the course!
Sincerely,
Lori Nafshun
655 Ashland Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 347 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 15 David Yakobson
From: Mario Fonda-Bonardi <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 9:42 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic Center Auditorium Item 5C
Attachments: Civic Auditorium 2.0..pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
Please approve the Civic Center Auditorium ENA with RPG to ensure our City's artistic, cultural, entertainment and tourist based future. For additional background please find attached an article that appeared 2/1/25 in the Santa Monica Mirror. Your support for this initiative is greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Mario Fonda-Bonardi AIA
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 348 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) Photo by https://customrodder.forumactif.org/
Bring Back The Music
On January 28th, 2025 the City Council did a wise thing and agreed to continue the process, for 30 days, of negotiating an agreement to revitalize the abandoned Civic Center Auditorium. These negotiations had been moving forward for months (as expected for such a monumental endeavor) between the City of Santa Monica and the music consortium RPG (Revitalization Partners Group). That group was proposing to the City that it would enter into a long term lease and provide the landmarked building with substantial improvements including seismic upgrading, handicap accessibility, a modern sound system, acoustic and seating improvements, and other significant upgrades. When completed RPG would then operate it as a signature 21st century music venue.

This is a deal the City can’t and shouldn’t refuse. We now have a perfect storm for resurrecting this underperforming City asset. All the pieces are now in place to reactivate this building as a musical Mecca for the following reasons:

Location, location, location
This approximately 2500 seat 1958 auditorium is perfectly located as a music destination. First, it is at the end of two significant transit arteries (the 10 freeway and the expo line) making it easy access for the entire 10 million person metropolis. It is also just 20 minutes from LAX likewise making it easy access for visiting performing stars and their adoring fans.

Second it is surrounded on three sides by seven adjacent major hotels again providing easy accommodations for visitors and performers. Third the City’s beach culture and known close by amenities (eg the Pier, the 3rd Street promenade etc.) will enhance and improve the visitor’s and performer’s experience adding to their desire to attend musical events here. Fourth there are no nearby mid size performing arts venues (the Broad Auditorium seats only 500 people).

And finally the High School’s Barnum Hall and Greek theater are nearby (but far enough away Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 349 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) to avoid sound interference) so that simultaneous music events could occur in a music festival format drawing a larger audience base. There is virtually no midsize music venue with all these significant advantages in the LA basin.

A credible partner
The City ran the Civic Auditorium for 55 years before it closed in 2013 because the City did not have a way to raise the millions of dollars ($50M to$150M were being discussed) to do all the necessary improvements. Also the City did not have the staff and skill set to manage and market a 21st Century music venue. After an extensive search and testing various alternatives its taken a dozen years to find a credible partner who can manage such a turn around for this important building. RPG is the best and probably only credible partner that the City can find.

RPG are a demonstrably successful music team that has years of experience in revitalizing old venues for new music uses. As an example of their capabilities, while two of their principals lost their homes in the Palisades Fire, in just two weeks they still managed to stage Fire Aid, a dual venue televised fundraising extravaganza that raised $100 million and counting for the victims of the fire. Such civic spirit combined with decades of connections with hundreds of performers even at a time of grievous personal loss, is an incredible testament to their qualifications and stamina needed for this project. We are fortunate to have them onboard.

A significant landmark
If the building has so many expensive deficiencies why not just tear it down and sell the land? The City is broke and needs the money so why not just cash out now? Such an approach would make sense if this was, for example just an ordinary warehouse or office building in some forgotten corner of the City, but this highly visible building has one of the most distinguished pedigrees of any building in Santa Monica. There are 6 criteria for a landmark in Santa Monica; but a building qualifies as a landmark if it meets only one of the criteria. Most buildings meet only one or two criteria. However this building checks ALL six of the boxes:

1. It signifies an important cultural element of the City: Hundreds of important cultural icons and groups played here from Frank Sinatra, to the Supremes, to the Beach boys, to U2, to Billy Joel, to the Rolling Stones, to Ella Fitzgerald, to Bruce Springsteen, to Prince, the list goes on and on and on. If you saw the entire list of all music stars that have performed here it would blow your mind.

2. It has artistic or aesthetic value: while a simple overall shape, the detailing and shape of the dynamic front spires, canopy and screen wall capture the exuberance and optimism of midcentury modern architecture.

3. It is identified with historic events or personages (see item#1 above): in the early sixties this building, among its many roles hosted the Academy Awards: it was the sexiest auditorium in the late 50’s and early 60’s to have such a signature event. It also symbolizes a boom period of Santa Monica history when we could still invest in symbolic and real support for the arts.

4. It is valuable for the study of architectural trends, construction methods, aesthetic considerations of its time: the movable stage was revolutionary and was a significant multipurpose element, the entrance esplanade had a distinctive 50’s reflective pool (now covered), and the sculpted swooping side and arched roof are also symbolic (and low cost) ways of trying to break out of the box which has finally been fully achieved by subsequent architects like Frank Gehry among others.

5. It is associated with a famous architect: Welton Becket’ (1902-1969) whose firm is the architect of record for auditorium and he lived for a time in Santa Monica. His assistant Louis Naidorf was still alive last year at age 96 and worked on the auditorium as chief architect.

Becket’s firm designed countless buildings including the futuristic Theme Restaurant at LAX, Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 350 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) the Capital Records Building in Hollywood (the first circular office building), the Mark Taper forum, the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion etc.etc. At its time Becket and Associates was one of the largest architectural firms in the world.

6. It is a unique location and an established visual feature: its a cultural icon facing down its commercial counterpart, Santa Monica Place, at the other end of Main Street. It maintains pride of place anchoring confidently the South corner of our public Civic Center Complex.

Because it is such a super qualified distinguished landmark for our City, it is not surprising the it is also a Nationally Registered Landmark which brings with it potential tax advantages for the renovation process. This is an architectural gem of value not just to Santa Monica, but to our whole country.

A beloved Icon
Everyone who has lived in Santa Monica for any length of time has some connection to this building. If you love live music you may have had the awesome experience of seeing one or many of your stars perform there. If you were a music student in the public schools music programs, you might played in the annual school musician extravaganza called Stairway to the Stars. If you loved sports you might have seen the American Fencing National championships there. If you loved cats you might have gone to a cat show there. If you were interested in ecology you might have browsed at an ecological products fair there. If you were interested in going to college you might have attended a college fair in this auditorium. If you were interested in Civic issues you might have participated in a meeting or workshop in the meeting rooms next to the main hall (while the main hall was closed for seismic reasons the adjacent meeting rooms were considered seismically safe for use in the last 12 years). In other words everyone has had an important experience of this building in its countless capacities. By providing so many rewarding experiences to so many, for two thirds of a century, it has become beloved by virtually all its visitors and residents. To lose this building would obliterate all those positive memories.

While there are negative memories for the Black neighborhood that was destroyed to make the Civic center complex (see the April Banks sculpture at Bel Mar Park), the destruction of one cultural asset is not righted by destroying another cultural asset.

Too valuable to abandon
Some say the City is too poor to rehabilitate this cultural asset. That’s the beauty of the RPG proposal: the City does not have to pony up any money for the rehab since the RPG is funding the entire rehab. But even with no cash investment today, the City will still get all the long term benefits of increased parking fees, sales taxes, hotel occupancy taxes, business taxes and advertising value, from the increased business activity of having a functioning iconic music venue in its center. Those who are considering selling the land and demolishing it (if at all legal) would have to consider, not just the irreparable loss of this icon, but also the destructive impact to all landmarks, as they now would be all consequently endangered. Destroying a nationally registered landmark when a viable path for its rehabilitation is already here, would be snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, and will make Santa Monica a cultural pariah. The resurrection of the Civic Auditorium is supported by many individuals and groups including but not limited to Save the Civic and the Santa Monica Conservancy.

So this is a significant local and national landmark, at a great location, with a credible rehabilitation partner, and beloved by all: it is now time for the City Council to finish the job ASAP: conclude the negotiations with RPG and start the process envisioned in the negotiated Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 351 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) agreement to bring the Civic back to life. We are so close to giving this building a new life. Now is not the time to vacillate: Its time to Bring Back the Music.

By Mario Fonda-Bonardi AIA
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 352 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 16 David Yakobson
From: phillis dudick <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 8:54 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Elaine Polachek; Douglas Sloan; councilmtgitems
Subject: AGENDA ITEM 5C /MARCH 11, 2025

EXTERNAL
Honorable Mayor Negrete Honorable Councilmembers:

As a strong supporter of the Civic, I urge Council to
to sign the ENA with RPG. We now have, perhaps, a rare opportunity to work with a group of extreme stature and expertise in the entertainment community willing to put its resources together to Save the Civic.

No bond measure for taxpayers, no cost to the City budget, and Santa Monica will still own its land.

Once again the iconic Civic, restored and revitalized, can rise to become the center for the performing arts on the Westside, for residents of all ages, guests, and a great enhancement for tourism.

Let us seize the moment!
Sincerely,
Phillis Dudick
Santa Monica Resident

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 353 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 17 David Yakobson
From: Brian O'Neil <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 8:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan.Hall. @santamonica.gov; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya Cc: PNA; Brian ONeil; Tony Huizar; Maria Loya
Subject: 3/11/25 City Council Item 5C- Approve signing the ENA with RPG to restore the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
March 11, 2025
To: City Council Members
From: Board of Directors, Pico Neighborhood Association (PNA) Re: 3/11/25 Item 5C -- City Council must approve signing the ENA with RPG to restore the Civic Auditorium and help in the revitalization of Santa Monica Dear Mayor Negrete and City Council members,
The Pico Neighborhood Association (PNA) Board of Directors asks the City Council to move forward with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with Revitalization Partner Group (RPG) to restore the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. We urge the Council to agree to the revised ENA and direct the City to pursue this process so that Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, begin the revitalization of our downtown, and create badly-needed future revenue streams controlled by our City.

Why?
· A revitalized world-class concert and performing arts center would provide the City with a revenue stream for decades. The economic multiplier effect for Santa Monica would be huge as a restored concert and performing arts venue in the heart of our city would attract people from all over the region and beyond, generating economic activity (and tax dollars!) for hotels, restaurants, etc., enhancing our City’s destination status.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 354 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 18 · A partnership with RPG would mean the Civic would remain owned by the residents of Santa Monica. Keeping public spaces public encourages residents to participate in their communities which is vital at a time when people feel increasingly isolated.
· Publicly owned venues for music and the arts are rare and important and should not be sold off or used for other purposes.
· A restored Civic would make our City a cultural and arts destination for Santa Monicans, Southern Californians and beyond, a source of pride for the people of our great City.
· Traffic makes it all but impossible for Santa Monicans to visit venues like the Hollywood Bowl or Greek Theater. Why not have a vibrant home for music and the arts right here in our city?
· Don’t sell our public land out; keep the history and future revenue stream under Santa Monica control.

For all of the above reasons, please move forward with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with Revitalization Partner Group (RPG) to restore the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium!
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 355 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 19 David Yakobson
From: Tom Larmore <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 8:53 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; [email protected]; Dan Hall; [email protected]; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council Meeting 3/11 - Agenda Item 5C - Santa Monica Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
I haven’t had a chance to review the proposed ENA mentioned in the description of this Agenda Item so I cannot comment on its specific terms. However, I am extremely skeptical of any effort to restore this building and bring it back to life as a performing arts center. This might be a good idea if the building didn’t require millions of dollars to repair and if the City was not in a severe budget crunch. The City has made several attempts over the last 15 to 20 years to bring this building back to a useful purpose, all to no avail. I would much prefer that the City follow Councilmember Zwick’s approach which will put the City in a strong financial position. The City created the mess we’re in due to a lack of appropriate procedures and oversight in connection with the PAL disaster and should now use its assets to resolve the problem rather than threaten to divert tax revenues away from our public schools and/or impose a new tax on residents .

Tom Larmore

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 356 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 20 David Yakobson
From: Byrnadette Di santo <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 8:34 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
byrnadette di santo
Sent from my iPhone
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 357 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 21 David Yakobson
From: Michele Modglin <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 7:49 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
michele modglin
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 358 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 22 David Yakobson
From: Cheryl Clark <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 7:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Cheryl Clark
Sent from my iPad
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 359 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 1 David Yakobson
From: Annspun <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 11:00 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item (5C ) SM City Council Meeting , Tuesday 3/11/25

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I have been a resident of Santa Monica for 48 years
and I have fond memories of attending many
concerts and special events at the now deceased Civic
Center.

It brought a bit of the outside world into our small community.

Now in my 70’s, all my friends, associates, children
and grandchildren are excited to experience a
revitalization of our Civic Center for all the right
reasons.

I am writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. (Item 5 C on 3/11 SM City Council Agenda)
Sincerely,
Ann Greenspun
Past SM Chamber Chair
Past Bayside District Boardmember
Past SMMEF Board Member
Past Samohi PTSA President
Current SMNOMA Boardmember
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 360 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 2 David Yakobson
From: Sue Ferrell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 10:48 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:

This message is a plea to vote for the city to sign the negotiating agreement and approve a lease with the Revitalization Partner Group. Operation of the venue will increase spending in the city, leading to increased tax revenue, and provide a convenient entertainment venue for local residents and performers (such as the Santa Monica Orchestra). Please do not miss this opportunity to revitalize our historic Civic Auditorium at no cost to the city.

Elizabeth Ferrell
Harvey Ferrell
33815th Street
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 361 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 3 David Yakobson
From: S SSC <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 10:29 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Sumeet Chugh
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 362 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 4 David Yakobson
From: Harpriya Chugh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 10:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]
Harpriya chugh
Sent from my iPhone
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 363 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 5 David Yakobson
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 10:22 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Cc: Elaine Polachek; Douglas Sloan
Subject: 3/11/2025 - City Council Item 5.C -- City Council must approve signing the ENA with RPG to restore the Civic Auditorium and help in the revitalization of Santa Monica

EXTERNAL
March 10, 2025
Dear Mayor Negrete and City Council members,
The Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) Board of Directors asks the City Council to move forward with the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with Revitalization Partner Group (RPG) to restore the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. We urge the Council to agree to the revised ENA and direct the City to pursue this process so that Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center and begin the revitalization of our city.

Why?
 A revitalized world-class concert and performing arts center would provide the City with a revenue stream for decades. The economic multiplier effect for Santa Monica would be huge as a restored concert and performing arts venue in the heart of our city would attract people from all over the region and beyond, generating economic activity (and tax dollars!) for hotels, restaurants, etc., enhancing our City’s destination status.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 364 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 6  A partnership with RPG would mean the Civic would remain owned by the residents of Santa Monica. Keeping public spaces public encourages residents to participate in their communities which is vital at a time when people feel increasingly isolated.
 Publicly owned venues for music and the arts are rare and important and should not be sold off or used for other purposes.
 A restored Civic would make our City a cultural and arts destination for Santa Monicans, Southern Californians and beyond, a source of pride for the people of our great City.
 Traffic makes it all but impossible for Santa Monicans to visit venues like the Hollywood Bowl or Greek Theater. Why not have a vibrant home for music and the arts right here in our city?
 Don’t sell our public land out; keep the history and future revenue stream under Santa Monica control.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 365 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 7 David Yakobson
From: amy thompson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:52 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Amy Thompson
350 25th street
Sent from my iPhone
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 366 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 8 David Yakobson
From: Dannie Charney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:43 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Ellis Raskin; councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Clerk Mailbox
Subject: Item 5.C. SAVE THE CIVIC- YES DO IT FOR REAL DO IT

EXTERNAL
RE: Item 5.C Closed Session
C. Conference with real estate negotiator pursuant to Government Code § 54956.8: Property: 1855 Main Street, Santa Monica, California (Civic Auditorium) (APN 4290-013-901); City Negotiators: Jennifer Taylor, Economic Development Manager, and Nia Tang, Economic Development Administrator; Owner of Record:

City of Santa Monica; Persons to be negotiated with: Tim Sexton, Revitalization Partner Group, LLC; Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment for lease.

The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium is in your hands. Please vote to sign the ENA so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers. IT'S A NO BRAINER ..

- A revitalized world-class concert and performing arts center would provide the City with a revenue stream for decades. The economic ripple effect for Santa Monica would be huge as a restored concert and performing arts venue in the heart of our city would attract people from all over the region and beyond, generating economic activity (and tax dollars!) for hotels, restaurants, etc., enhancing our City’s destination status.

DON'T WE NEED THIS?
- A partnership with RPG would mean the Civic would remain owned by the residents of Santa Monica. Keeping public spaces public encourages residents to participate in their communities which is vital at a time when people feel increasingly isolated.

AZOFF FOR GOD'S SAKE - LET US BE GRATEFUL HE WANTS TO DO THIS - HE HAS

VISION - HOPE YOU DO BEYOND HOUSING

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 367 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 9 - Publicly owned venues for music and the arts are rare and important and should not be sold off or used for other purposes.

- A restored Civic would make our City a cultural and arts destination for Santa Monicans, Southern Californians and beyond, a source of pride for the people of our great City.

- Traffic makes it all but impossible for Santa Monicans to visit venues like the Hollywood Bowl or Greek Theater. Why not have a vibrant home for music and the arts right here in our city?

If Councilmembers vote to end negotiations, this will be a tragic missed opportunity and a huge loss for all of us.

NO EXCUSES HERE COUNCIL - YOU ARE WAY OVER YOUR HEADS- DO

SOMETHING RIGHT - THIS IS AZOFF- DO IT

THANK YOU,

DANIELLE CHARNEY

OY IT'S ABSURD YOU WOULD EVEN

BEGIN TO THINK YOU CAN DO BETTER

THAN AZOFF- LOL

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 368 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 10 David Yakobson
From: AG Designs <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:41 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Alicia
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 369 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 11 David Yakobson
From: Ellen Mark <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:32 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Ellen Mark
Sent from my iPhone
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 370 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 12 David Yakobson
From: karen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:29 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Santa Monica Conservancy
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Karen Bailey
Santa Monica Resident
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 371 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 13 David Yakobson
From: Matt Goldenberg D.O. <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:27 PM
To: Matt Goldenberg
Subject: Save the Civic!

EXTERNAL
The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium is in your hands. Please vote to sign the ENA so we can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers.

Matt G.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 372 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 14 David Yakobson
From: Gabriella Landay <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:15 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
> Dear Mayor Negrete and City Council Members,
>
> The future of our historic Civic Auditorium is now in your hands. >
> As a lifelong Santa Monica resident, I was fortunate to experience the Civic Auditorium in my youth, both performing there and enjoying professional bands. It’s time for future generations to have the same opportunities right in their own backyard.
>
> I urge you to approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and move forward with a lease agreement with the Revitalization Partner Group. This will allow Santa Monica to have a world-class performing arts center, without any cost to taxpayers.
>
> Thank you.

Gabriella Landay
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 373 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 15 David Yakobson
From: Marc Verville <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 9:07 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: SMCC 2025-03-11 Agenda Item 5.C. - City Council must approve signing the ENA with RPG to reactivate the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
Given the dire financial situation the City outlined in last Saturday’s (03-08-2025) Budget Workshop, I strongly urge you to sign the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with Revitalization Partner Group, LLC (RPG) to restore the Civic Auditorium’s functionality as a live entertainment destination venue.

The absolute need for this proactive step could not be more compelling. The fact that the City is using one-time funds to balance out its General Fund budget is indicative of just how much the City’s financial situation has deteriorated. Use of one-time revenues to fund ongoing expenditures was called out as an indicator of financial weakness as far back as 2012 in the LA County Grand Jury report on Santa Monica. That report was the genesis of the City’s 2015 launch of the Audit Subcommittee.

It is time for the City to seriously prioritize revitalization of the General Fund’s commerciallybased revenue growth after years of passively harvesting essentially stalled revenues from depreciating assets built by prior City leadership over the past 6 decades. The only revenuegenerating strategy to date has been the increase of tax rates and growing applicability of new taxes on this sector, hastening the slowdown of growth and sowing the seeds of eventual revenue decline. This decline will have been hastened by the City-initiated disposal of these irreplaceable assets based on the circular logic of declining utilization.

There have been statements made that selling the land could generate $100 million. That present value would be justified by the Civic driving an incremental $5.7m per year in net General Fund revenue through the City’s visitor-driven commercial ecosystem. And that would hold even if the Civic delivered only $1 per year in direct Civic revenue. A direct revenue deal that would kick in later in the lease period plus any additional growth above the $5.7m would create value for the City in excess of $100 million when viewed over a 30 timeframe.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 374 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 16 The Civic needs to be viewed as a cornerstone of the City’s visitor economy. In that, it would be a primary feeder into the other iconic revenue-generating visitor assts that include:
 Promenade dining and entertainment
 SM Place shopping
 A globally branded and historic pleasure pier
 Comprehensive hotel opƟons
All these assets are contained within a one mile geographic footprint that includes year-round Mediterranean weather and 245 acres of world class beach.

To maximize the economic benefits of this Civic Center asset, the City’s counter-productive siloed asset management policies must be abandoned and a professional portfolio management policy implemented for all the above assets.

The financial crisis the city finds itself in has been years in the making. Make no mistake, it is policy-driven and represents a complete failure of economic leadership. To that point, the City cannot ignore a key driver of the abandonment of Santa Monica as a visitor destination: the City’s ineffective and inappropriate homeless policies, and indifferent approach to safety and illegal narcotic flows into the city. These must be replaced with policies that ensure repeat visitor confidence and perceived safety in spending time and money in downtown and the larger Santa Monica commercial environs. Downtown comprises only 4% of the city’s land area but generated 34% of its taxable transactions as recently as 2012. It is likely now below 20% and declining.

The Homeless Strategy Plan in this meeting’s Item 11.A. mentions the transient nature of the City’s homeless crisis but does nothing to address it. That cannot stand. We now know the cost of the City’s ineffective and inappropriate homeless policies along with it’s indifferent approach to safety – and that is a commercial-driven General Fund revenue opportunity cost could be in the neighborhood of between $50 and $100 million annually. That is a flatly unacceptable and irresponsible cost. Nowhere is any commercial visitor opportunity cost mentioned in the Homeless Strategic Plan. How can this Council effectively manage the City’s finances when such critical information is completely absent? The signing of the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with Revitalization Partner Group, LLC (RPG) to restore the Civic Auditorium can only be the beginning of the revitalization process. Failure to sign this agreement will be the largest step so far (along with the surplusing and demolition of parking infrastructure) to ensure that the City cuts off all viable paths to economic recovery, placing itself and its residents on an unrecoverable financial path.

Respectfully,
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 375 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 17 Marc L. Verville
Chair, Audit Subcommittee
Sunset Park
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 376 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 1 David Yakobson
From: Elliot Makhani <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:59 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Brandon Fields; Justin Cortez; [email protected] Subject: Proposal for Installation of Antibacterial Fixtures in Public Restrooms

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I hope this message finds you well. My name is Elliot Makhani, and I serve as the Co-CEO of Titan64, a firm specializing in the design of antibacterial metal alloys. Our mission is to enhance public health through innovative solutions.

At Titan64, we have developed a range of bathroom fixtures made from a proprietary antibacterial steel alloy designed to significantly reduce the transmission of pathogens. Our product line includes toilets, sinks, shower assemblies, and hand dryers, all engineered with the utmost consideration for hygiene and user safety.

We are eager to partner with the City of Santa Monica to upgrade the public bathroom facilities with our state-of-the-art fixtures. We believe that our technology can play a pivotal role in promoting health and safety in public spaces.

Could you please inform us about the process for securing a slot at an upcoming city council meeting? We are keen to present our proposal and discuss how we can contribute to the city’s public health initiatives.

Thank you for considering our proposal. We look forward to the opportunity to collaborate with the City of Santa Monica.

Warm Regards,
Elliot Yedidiah Makhani
Co-CEO, Titan64
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 377 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 18 David Yakobson
From: Justine Gilman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 8:00 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; councilmtgitems; Jesse Zwick; [email protected]
Subject: Save the Civic support for RPG

EXTERNAL
Vote to save the SM Civic Auditorium
A revitalized world-class concert and performing arts center would provide the City with a revenue stream for decades. The economic ripple effect for Santa Monica would be huge as a restored concert and performing arts venue in the heart of our city would attract people from all over the region and beyond, generating economic activity (and tax dollars!) for hotels, restaurants, etc., enhancing our City’s destination status. - A partnership with RPG would mean the Civic would remain owned by the residents of Santa Monica. Keeping public spaces public encourages residents to participate in their communities which is vital at a time when people feel increasingly isolated. - Publicly owned venues for music and the arts are rare and important and should not be sold off or used for other purposes. - A restored Civic would make our City a cultural and arts destination for Santa Monicans, Southern Californians and beyond, a source of pride for the people of our great City. - Traffic makes it all but impossible for Santa Monicans to visit venues like the Hollywood Bowl or Greek Theater. Why not have a vibrant home for music and the arts right here in our city? THE TIME TO ACT IS NOW. Please send an email to Council TODAY urging them to move forward with RPG. And please forward this to your friends. We also encourage you to post on any social media you have access to. The clock is ticking. If Councilmembers vote to end negotiations, this will be a tragic missed opportunity and a huge loss for all of us. Save the Civic Steering Committee
Justine Gilman, Ed.D.

Raise and live in Santa Monica
310-493-8312
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 378 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 19 David Yakobson
From: Carol Dickinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 7:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 5.C, March 11 2025 Meeting--Restore the Civic!

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Negrete, Mayor Pro Tem Torosis and City Council Members, I urge you to vote to sign the ENA with RPG to restore the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. Please bring back the glory days when we were a cultural and arts destination for all Southern Californians. Santa Monica will have new life and vitality as the result of this action!
Sincerely,
Carol Dickinson
1030 25th Street
Santa Monica 90403
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 379 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 20 David Yakobson
From: Liz Bell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 7:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
(This is a good letter from the conservancy and I support this item ) I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Lizbeth Bell
1434 18th St
Sent from my iPhone
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 380 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 21 David Yakobson
From: Christie Savage <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 7:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I remember my mom driving my brother and I to see the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium when it was built. It was a REALLY BIG DEAL!!! Of course, throughout the years I’ve attended conferences, concerts, the International Gem Show, and even a Cat Show, taking it for granted that the iconic auditorium would always be there - and hopefully it will be!
I fully support RPG’s request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement as noted in Item 5C on the March 11th agenda.

As you know, The Santa Monica Civic Auditorium, built by master architect Welton Becket in 1959, is an wonderful mid-century building that played a pivotal role in Santa Monica's cultural life. The Civic Auditorium, with an innovative mixed-use program, combining a concert hall, theater, trade show, and convention center, the Civic was designed to serve a broad segment of the community. Thus, along with Santa Monica Conservancy, I endorse RPG's efforts to revitalize this iconic building as a community asset.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Christie Savage
Sent from my iPad
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 381 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 22 David Yakobson
From: Steven Dubnoff <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 7:07 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Steven Dubnoff
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 382 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 23 David Yakobson
From: Nancy Morse <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 6:57 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: councilmtgitems; Elaine Polachek; Douglas Sloan
Subject: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
To: City Council
From: Nancy Morse
Re: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium Please vote to sign the ENA submitted by RPG so Santa Monica can have a world-class performing arts center, at no cost to taxpayers.

Revenues from performances will be a needed addition to city coffers.

The attraction of visitors from out of town will be a financial boon for surrounding businesses.

This will revitalize the civic center, which I think was the plan when it was built.

A partnership with RPG would mean the Civic would remain owned by the residents of Santa Monica, and will add to citizen’s pride in the city.

Once public spaces are no longer in public ownership or control, it is nearly impossible to get it back. That is a loss to citizens.

Erasing the lands previous history should not be justification to erase the auditorium’s recent history.

Thank you.

Nancy Morse
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 383 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 24 David Yakobson
From: jay nickels <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 6:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Thus, along with Santa Monica Conservancy, I endorse RPG's efforts to revitalize this iconic building as a community asset.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Jay Nickels, Architect
Yahoo Mail - Email Simplified
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 384 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 25 David Yakobson
From: Jamielle Stanley <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 6:07 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Jamielle Stanley
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 385 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 26 David Yakobson
From: Vincent Landay <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 6:01 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: 3/11/25 agenda item 5-C – Save the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Negrete and City Council Members,
The future of our historic Civic Auditorium is now in your hands.

As a lifelong Santa Monica resident, I was fortunate to experience the Civic Auditorium in my youth, both performing there and enjoying professional bands. It’s time for future generations to have the same opportunities right in their own backyard.

I urge you to approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement and move forward with a lease agreement with the Revitalization Partner Group. This will allow Santa Monica to have a world-class performing arts center, without any cost to taxpayers.

Thank you.

V
…………………………………………………………………………………….…...

Vincent Landay. ”Memento Vivere"
……………………………………………………………………………………………
This message was sent from my personal gmail account.

Please refer any business inquires to: [email protected] Thanks a bunch!
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 386 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 27 David Yakobson
From: JULIE G CAMPAGNA <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 5:58 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Negrete:

I am writing to ask that you vote to sign the ENA for the Civic Auditorium.

I understand the partnership with RPG would keep the Civic's ownership with Santa Monica and bring much needed economic activity to the city.

Thank you for your consideration,
Julie Campagna
115 Marguerita Avenue
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 387 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 28 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 5:53 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: Put Life Back into the Civic Auditorium

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
The only thing Santa Monica is lacking is an excellent live performance venue. Oh, wait! We do have that. The Civic Auditorium. Please do what you can to bring the Civic back to life. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Eve Lichtgarn
440 18th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90402
310 395-7006
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 388 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 1 David Yakobson
From: Sanjeev Jain <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:43 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems; councilmtgitems Subject: re: Strong Support for RPG Proposal! (Agenda Item 5C)

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Negrete, Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, and Esteemed City Council members, WOW! WHAT AN OPPORTUNITY!
As a Santa Monica resident, 30+ year arts professional, and Member of the Santa Monica Arts Commission, I strongly urge you to vote to sign the ENA and approve a lease with RPG. This historic deal will bring new life to the iconic Civic Auditorium space, create a cultural hub for our community, attract much-needed revenue to DTSM, and demonstrate that the City cares about arts and culture.

Here's why:
- A restored Civic would create a much-needed cultural and arts destination for Santa Monicans, for Southern Californians, and beyond.
- A revitalized world-class concert and performing arts center would provide the City with a revenue stream for decades. The impact on hotels, restaurants, and other small businesses is needed.
- Hosting world-class musicians in Santa Monica would offer wonderful educational opportunities for our young people. Connections to SMMUSD, SMC, LAUSD, UCLA, USC, etc. students could be made
- A partnership with RPG would mean the Civic would remain owned by the residents of Santa Monica.
- The architecture and history of the Civic Auditorium are significant. We must acknowledge and embrace this.
- The Civic Auditorium is located close to important transportation lines, making it accessible to many. This will encourage public transportation and reduce impact on local streets.
- The Civic Auditorium's location complements Santa Monica's most important cultural and environmental assets--our Beach & Pier, Farmer's Market, and Promenade. A dynamic arts/entertainment venue will help relight the DTSM area.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 389 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 2 - News of a positive outcome with RPG, would demonstrate the City's strong support for the arts.
- RPG are pros working at the highest levels of their industry who have deep roots in LA and strong global ties. Their recent arts-driven fundraiser for fire victims demonstrated that they care about LA.

To end negotiations with RPG would be a tragic mistake and a huge loss for the City.

The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium and our Cultural Community is in your hands! Don't mess this up--we're behind you!
Sincerely,
Sanjeev Jain
23-year resident
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 390 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 3 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Civic aud''s future

EXTERNAL
If the work done with the Civic Aud would lead to a performance space at no cost to the city witth a part of the income from the shows at some time in the future, then I like the idea.

Otherwise Council member Zwick seems to have the right idea Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 391 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 4 David Yakobson
From: Susan Jain <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:33 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: re: Strong Support for RPG Proposal! (Agenda Item 5C)

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Negrete, Mayor Pro Tem Torosis, and Estemed City Council members, WOW! WHAT AN OPPORTUNITY!
As a Santa Monica resident, 30+ year arts professional, and Member of the Santa Monica Arts Commission, I strongly urge you to vote to sign the ENA and approve a lease with RPG. This historic deal will bring new life to the iconic Civic Auditorium space, create a cultural hub for our community, attract much-needed revenue to DTSM, and demonstrate that the City cares about arts and culture.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 392 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 5 - News of a positive outcome with RPG, would demonstrate the City's strong support for the arts.
- RPG are pros working at the highest levels of their industry who have deep roots in LA and strong global ties. Their recent arts-driven fundraiser for fire victims demonstrated that they care about LA.

To end negotiations with RPG would be a tragic mistake and a huge loss for the City.

The fate of our historic Civic Auditorium and our Cultural Community is in your hands! Don't mess this up--we're behind you!
Sincerely,
Susan Pertel Jain, PhD
20+ year resident
Santa Monica Arts Commissioner
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 393 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 6 David Yakobson
From: Evelyn Lauchenauer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:22 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems; Elaine Polachek; Douglas Sloan Subject: Civic Auditorium-Tuesday 3/11/25 Council Agenda Item 5c—Please Vote Yes

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I have such great memories of my high school and college days, going to Warren Miller ski films like "Winter Fever" and "Steep and Deep," as well as dog shows, arts and craft fairs, and Samohi's "Stairway to the Stars." Looking ahead to 2026 and beyond, it would be amazing to have even more events like these. Let's make it happen!
I strongly encourage the Council to vote in favor of signing the ENA and move forward with negotiations to revitalize the Civic Auditorium into a world-class venue. The group leading this effort has exceptional and rare experience in building and managing cultural venues like this.

This is a rare opportunity that feels like a clear win-win for our local businesses, residents, and the City itself. An iconic cultural venue in the heart of Santa Monica would not only boost our local economy but also provide a reliable revenue stream for the City.

Plus, it would give us a much-needed space for local music and arts—a place we can all be proud of.

Best of all, this would come at no cost to the City while ensuring that this valuable public property remains in public hands for the future.

Thank you for considering this.

Evelyn Lauchenauer
Santa Monica Resident
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 394 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 7 Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 395 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 8 David Yakobson
From: David Paden <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:05 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
[Your Name] David W Paden
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 396 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 9 David Yakobson
From: Justine Lavelle <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:04 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Save the Civic!!!

EXTERNAL
As a person who has gone to JAMS, Samohi, and UCLA and lived in Santa Monica the majority of my life — deep roots in Santa Monica - and even have seen concerts at The Santa Monica Civic Center it is imperative to save this historic building! What we all believe it should be as DogTown locals with a deep history for our city is a revitalized world-class concert and performing arts center would provide the City with a revenue stream for decades.

The economic ripple effect for Santa Monica would be huge as a restored concert and performing arts venue in the heart of our city would attract people from all over the region and beyond, generating economic activity (and tax dollars!) for hotels, restaurants, etc., enhancing our City’s destination status.

A partnership with RPG would mean the Civic would remain owned by the residents of Santa Monica.

Keeping public spaces public encourages residents to participate in their communities which is vital at a time when people feel increasingly isolated. - Publicly owned venues for music and the arts are rare and important and should not be sold off or used for other purposes.

Sincerely,
Justine
OWNER | CREATIVE DIRECTOR
J u s t i n e La V e l l e

FIRST CUT MARKETING
[email protected]
2940 Neilson Way
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 397 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 10 David Yakobson
From: Thomasine Rogas <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 4:01 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Thomasine H. Rogas
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 398 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 11 David Yakobson
From: Younes Atallah <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 3:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support RPG's Request for an ENA - Restoring the Santa Monica Civic

EXTERNAL
To Santa Monica City Council,
I'm reaching out to address Item 5C on the March 11th agenda, writing to support RPG's request for an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement.

Please support RPG in restoring the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium.

Sincerely,
Younes Atallah
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 399 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 12 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2025 3:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council 3/11/25 -- agenda item 5-C -- Santa Monica Civic Auditorium Attachments: Civic Auditorium - 3-11-2025 - Z's letter to City Council.docx

EXTERNAL
March 10, 2025
To: Mayor Negrete and City Council members
From: Zina Josephs
RE: 3/11/25 item 5-C – Santa Monica Civic Auditorium
Writing only for myself, I hope the Council will go forward with the Revitalization Partner Group ENA and lease agreement and bring the Civic Auditorium back to life! It occurs to me that some of the City Council members may not have been living here before 2013 and/or may have never attended an event at the Santa Monica Civic. So, here are some of my personal memories of the Civic Auditorium plus some additional information:

1) I remember watching these TV broadcasts from the Civic of the Academy Awards:
“Home of the Academy Awards”: https://calisphere.org/item/0d8424127112a8e39250eede23132c7c/ 1961: The 33rd Annual Academy Awards at Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. Best Actor in a Supporting Role goes to Peter Ustinov. Shirley Jones accepts the Oscar for Best Actress in a Supporting Role. Greer Garson announces the award for Best Actor. Burt Lancaster receives the award for his leading role in “Elmer Gantry.” Yul Brynner announces Elizabeth Taylor as the winner of Best Actress for her role in “Butterfield 8.” Audrey Hepburn announces the winner for Best Picture. Billy Wilder, the producer of the film “The Apartment,” accepts the Oscar.
1962: The 34th Annual Oscars held at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. Rita Moreno receives the award for the best supporting actress. The best actor award goes to Maximilian Schell and best actress award to Sophia Loren. The best picture award goes to “West Side Story.” 1964: The 36th Academy Awards at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. Gregory Peck announces the Best Actress award for Patricia Neal…Frank Sinatra announces the winner of Best Picture. “Tom Jones” gets the Best Picture award…Anne Bancroft announces the winner of the Best Actor award. Sidney Poitier receives Best Actor award for his performance in “Lilies of the Field.” He is the first African American to receive the Best Actor Award.

Item 5-C
March 11, 2025
Item 5-C
March 11, 2025

5.C.a
Packet Pg. 400 Attachment: Written Comment [Revision 2] (6982 : 5.C. Closed Session: Real Estate Negotiation, Civic Auditorium) 13 1966: Santa Monica History Museum: The 38th Academy Awards ceremony, hosted by Bob Hope, was held at the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. It was the first Academy Awards to be broadcast live in color.

Santa Monica City CouncilMarch 11, 2025

Santa Monica City Council
March 11, 2025