Consideration of Certain Prior
Housing-Production Related Votes
Santa Monica City Council
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Background
• On October 28, 2025, Mayor Pro Tem (MPT) Zwick
announced that he would be voluntarily recusing
himself from any item related to housing-production
related matters
• As part of that voluntary recusal stance, MPT Zwick
further asked that the City preemptively submit a public FPPC request, seeking formal guidance regarding how
his employment with the Housing Action Coalition
(HAC) could impact his role as a member of the Santa
Monica City Council • Based on information that MPT Zwick supplied, the City prepared and submitted a 16-page FPPC advice letter on
November 10
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
MPT Zwick Consistently Sought Legal Guidance • These actions by MPT Zwick were consistent with his prior approach in contemplating impacts that his role with HAC could have on his position as a City Councilmember • June 2025: Before applying to work with HAC, MPT Zwick consulted with the City Attorney’s Office • July 2025: MPT applied for the HAC position
• August 15, 2025: MPT Zwick was offered the position w/ HAC • Throughout August 2025: MPT Zwick had follow-up consultations with the CAO and with HAC • Safeguards were put in place to ensure that Santa Monica would be excluded from MPT Zwick’s portfolio of responsibilities • HAC agreed to cease all advocacy work in Santa Monica • August 18, 2025: MPT Zwick accepted the position with HAC • September 8, 2025: MPT Zwick began employment with HAC • October 2025: Interim City Attorney and staff, at MPT Zwick’s request, reassessed possible HAC – City Councilmember role conflicts, resulting in the submittal of the FPPC advice letter Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
FPPC Advice Letter Response
• FPPC responded to the request for advice on December 8 • The FPPC concluded that based on the “Nexus Test,” MPT Zwick would have to prospectively disqualify himself from participating in any housing-production related City Council determination
• Of note, the FPPC did not make any finding of past violations, nor did the FPPC determine that prior votes taken were unlawful
• Further, the FPPC did not make any finding of concealment / bad faith, and no enforcement action was outlined in the FPPC response
• Finally, the “Nexus Test” used by the FPPC only applies starting from the time when MPT Zwick commenced his employment with HAC
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
FPPCs Response to Questions Asked
1. Due to his employment with the Housing Action Coalition, does City Councilmember Zwick have a conflict of interest under the Act that would require him to resign his position as a City Councilmember? • FPPC Conclusion: No
2. Does Councilmember Zwick have a conflict of interest under the Act that would require him to recuse from specific upcoming housing production decisions? • FPPC Conclusion: Yes
• Affordable Housing Production Program (AHPP) • SB 9/450 and SB 1123 • Airport Conversion Project • Surface Parking Lot Upzoning
3. Regarding the City’s pending litigation related to its Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance and extension, does Section 1090 prohibit the City from entering into a settlement agreement, if it is considered, due to a Councilmember’s employment with the Coalition? • FPPC Conclusion: No
4. Does City Councilmember Zwick have a conflict that would require him to recuse from decisions related to housing production or from all housing decisions?
• FPPC Conclusion: Must be determined on a case-by-case basis Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
City Response to FPPC Determination
• In response to the FPPC advice letter, the City Council directed that staff assess the totality of events and coordinate actions to reconsider any necessary prior votes taken
• Staff analyzed the issues, consulted with outside legal firms, and identified that the City Council should proactively consider any prior policy approval votes that fit the following 2 criteria:
1. Past housing-production related votes that MPT Zwick participated in
2. Timing of those votes occurred between August 12 – October 28 Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
5 Items Identified for Consideration
• The analysis conducted identified five (5) affirmative policy approval votes which met the 2-part criteria
1. August 12, 2025 – Adopt Resolution of Intent: SB 9 / 450 + SB 1123 • Approved via 6 – 1 vote
2. August 12, 2025 – Introduce & Adopt Emergency Ordinance for AHPP • Approved via 6 – 1 vote
3. September 9, 2025 – High-Rise Definition + Single Stair Provisions • Approved via 6 – 1 vote
4. September 30, 2025 – Building Code Updates
• Approved via 7 – 0 vote
5. September 30, 2025 – Direction to Extend + Amend AHPP Program • Approved via 5 – 1 – 1 vote
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Repeal of EIZO for SB 1123 Also Identified
• As that assessment was conducted, it was identified that one item which met both criteria for consideration related to the initiation of a process to consider SB 9 / SB 450 + SB 1123
• Given that factor, a prior approved Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance (EIZO) approved in July related to SB 1123 is being recommended for repeal as part of Item 11.C
• Current litigation exists – unrelated to MPT Zwick’s employment with HAC – challenging the adoption of the EIZO
• The EIZO goes beyond what State law explicitly requires • No applications have utilized the EIZO
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Re-Ratify Building Code
• Outside of the repeal of the SB 1123 EIZO, for the other identified 5 items, staff is recommending that 1 item be ratified (related to the Building Code), and that the 4 other items be re-voted on
• Re-Ratification of Building Code (Item 11.C)
• Given permit processing considerations, coupled with the fact that the State is in the process of reviewing the previously adopted Building Code, staff is recommending that the prior approval of the Building Code be re-ratified Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Re-Vote on Other 4 Items
• For the other 4 identified items, staff is recommending that the City Council re-vote on those matters
• In these instances, it is the City Council’s prerogative through the re-vote process to either approve or deny each identified items
• These items reflect all of the identified affirmative housing-production policy approval votes taken by the City Council during the requisite time-period
• Given that these actions implemented a housing-production related policy that could be utilized by the public, the re-vote is recommended to remove any potential future procedural arguments • The items to be re-voted on include:
1. Resolution of Intention: SB 9 / SB 450 + SB 1123 (Item 11.C)
2. High-Rise Definition & Single Stair AMMR (Item 11.C)
3. AHPP Pilot Program Ordinance (Item 10.A)
4. Amending & Extending AHPP Program (Item 10.A)
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Correspondence Received From Public
• During the past few days, the City has received numerous emails regarding this matter, focused on the following areas
• Assessing other housing-production related items where re-votes may have to occur • Reviewing the 2024 vote on a DDA w/ Hollywood Community Housing • Not exceeding State law with respect to SB 9 / SB 450 + SB 1123 • The Council’s direction in this matter has been to ensure that we engage good governance practices and revote on all items consistent with the FPPCs recent ruling • If other items are identified as required for reconsideration, those matters will be brought back • The City Council can also direct that other prior approved matters be assessed for reconsideration • While the Hollywood Community Housing matter is not on the agenda this evening, the matter is being assessed by staff
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Resolution of Intention – SB 9 / SB 450 + SB 1123
• The ROI being considered can either be adopted or denied by the City Council • Of note, SB 9 / SB 450 & SB 1123 are State laws that must be implemented by the City, even if the City does not adopt amendments to the Municipal Code • The ROI is drafted very broadly and does not contemplate any specific amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
• Instead, if approved, the ROI would start a public process by asking the Planning Commission to assess and make recommendations related to two areas of the City’s Zoning Ordinance: • Clean up potential inconsistencies that make the City’s current SB 9 regulations more expansive than State law
• Consider how to implement SB 1123 locally
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Next Steps
• Staff recommends that the City Council consider:
• Re-ratifying the prior approval of the Building Code (Item 11.C) • Re-voting on: • Resolution of Intention: SB 9 / SB 450 + SB 1123 (Item 11.C) • High-Rise Definition & Single Stair AMMR (Item 11.C) • AHPP Pilot Program Ordinance (Item 10.A) • Amending & Extending AHPP Program (Item 10.A) • Repealing the prior approval of the SB 1123 EIZO (Item 11.C) Item 11-C
January 13, 2026
Item 11-C
January 13, 2026