Agenda packet, first session — Santa Monica City Council, January 27, 2026 (part 4 of 5)

Synthetic turf should be viewed as a necessary tool that allows the Parks & Recreation vision to succeed while serving the needs of the entire community.

Thank you for your leadership, consideration, and continued commitment to Santa Monica’s families and youth.

Sincerely,
Michelle Bergren
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1081 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 49 David Yakobson
From: Andrew Wilder
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 10:48 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Oliver Chi; Rick Valte; Peter James; Tony Lopez; Amber Richane; Christopher Dishlip
Subject: Item 11.C - 2025 PRVP - SUPPORT 5 acres per 1,000 residents Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
I write to express unqualified and enthusiastic support for the 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan, including Staff’s recommended edits in Item 11.C.k.

In September 2025, the Airport Commission voted to support the PRVP and recommended a goal of 5.0 park acres per 1,000 residents, excluding beach acreage. In doing so, the Commission recognized that the City’s efforts to increase housing must be matched by a commensurate increase in parks and open space.

The Commission further noted that without additional park acreage, Santa Monica’s current average of approximately 1.5 acres per 1,000 residents will decline as population grows—potentially shifting the City’s park-need classification to "high." Public comment before the Commission strongly supported a 5- acre target, which the Commission determined to be a reasonable and achievable goal.

We respectfully urge you to receive and approve the 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan. I commend City Manager Oliver Chi and his staff for their leadership, and would also extend my sincere appreciation to the PRVP team - especially Tony Lopez - for producing an excellent planning document that will guide Santa Monica’s park planning and expansion efforts for decades to come in a manner that is achievable, measurable, and inspiring.

Thank you very much!
Sincerely,
Andrew Wilder, Vice-Chair
Santa Monica Airport Commission
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1082 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 50 David Yakobson
From: Eric schwart <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 11:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Item 11.c Parks and Recreation Vision Plan

EXTERNAL
My son plays soccer for autobahn and we should have turf fields. They are so much easier to maintain and are always ready to go
Eric schwartz
Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1083 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 51 David Yakobson
From: Steve Marmalstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 12:21 PM
To: Oliver Chi; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems
Cc: Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Eric Johnson; Noe Mendoza; Tony Lopez; Amelia Feichtner; Linda Cogswell; Christopher Dishlip; Peter James; Amber Richane Subject: Item 11.c – Parks and Recreation Vision Plan

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing as a Santa Monica parent and community member to express my support for the City’s Parks & Recreation Vision Plan and its goal of improving and sustaining our shared recreational spaces.

At the same time, I respectfully urge the City to ensure that the adopted plan maintains and protects adequate playable field access for youth sports programs, regardless of field type. Santa Monica already faces a significant shortage of playable field hours, and thousands of children rely on city fields each week for soccer, baseball, softball, lacrosse, flag football, and other sports.

Given Santa Monica’s limited space and exceptionally high demand, synthetic turf fields are essential to achieving the goals of the Parks & Recreation Plan. Turf fields allow for consistent playability, significantly greater usage, and fewer weather- and maintenancerelated closures. Without them, available field hours would be dramatically reduced.

A reduction in playable field access would directly impact youth participation, after-school and weekend programming, equity of access for community-based organizations, and the City’s ability to meet current and future recreational demand.

Synthetic turf should be viewed as a necessary tool that allows the Parks & Recreation vision to succeed while serving the needs of the entire community.

Thank you for your leadership, consideration, and continued commitment to Santa Monica’s families and youth.

Sincerely,
Steve Marmalstein
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1084 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 52 David Yakobson
From: Suzanne Hunt <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 9:12 PM
To: Oliver Chi; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems
Cc: Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Eric Johnson; Noe Mendoza; Tony Lopez; Amelia Feichtner; Linda Cogswell; Christopher Dishlip; Peter James; Amber Richane Subject: Item 11.c – Parks and Recreation Vision Plan

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing as a Santa Monica resident, parent and community member to express my support for the City’s Parks & Recreation Vision Plan and its goal of improving and sustaining our shared recreational spaces.

Given Santa Monica’s limited space and exceptionally high demand, synthetic turf fields are essential to achieving the goals of the Parks & Recreation Plan. Turf fields allow for consistent playability, significantly greater usage, and fewer weather- and maintenance-related closures. Without them, available field hours would be dramatically reduced.

Synthetic turf should be viewed as a necessary tool that allows the Parks & Recreation vision to succeed while serving the needs of the entire community.

Thank you for your leadership, consideration, and continued commitment to Santa Monica’s families and youth.

Sincerely,
Suzanne Hunt
Santa Monica Resident, Parent, and Community Member
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1085 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 53 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 10:02 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Oliver Chi; Tony Lopez; Amber Richane; Peter James; Christopher Dishlip; councilmtgitems
Cc: Nicole Faries; Casper Caparian; April Anderson
Subject: Agenda Item 11.C. Draft 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan Attachments: Jan 27 Item 11.C SMMPTA Letter.pdf

EXTERNAL
Please find attached a letter from SMMPTA Council regarding Item 11.C. for the public record.

Thank you.

Santa Monica-Malibu Council of PTAs
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1086 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) January 25, 2026
Re: January 27, 2026 - City Council Meeting - Agenda Item 11.C. 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
The Santa Monica–Malibu PTA Council reaffirms its prior positions in staunch support of the Great Park Coalition and Measure LC, and public policy goals to dramatically expand parks, open space, and safe places for outdoor play in our city. As the 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan is considered, we support the City’s continued focus on expanding and improving parks and open space.

The mission of both National PTA and California State PTA is to positively impact the lives of all children and families by promoting environments that support their health, safety, and wellbeing. Access to safe outdoor spaces for play, physical activity, and connection with nature is a core component of healthy child development.

This need is especially acute in Santa Monica, where approximately 75 percent of residents live in multi-family housing, and many children lack access to private yards or safe outdoor space at home. Measured against regional averages and widely accepted parkland standards, Santa Monica has far less parkland per resident than comparable communities, making public parks and open space essential infrastructure for children and families.

Expanding equitable access to parks and open space helps ensure that all children, regardless of neighborhood, housing type, or family income, have the opportunity to play, be active, and thrive.

For these reasons, the PTA Council supports efforts to increase parkland, open space, and safe play opportunities that advance the health and well-being of Santa Monica’s children and families.Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Nicole Faries, President
Patti Braun, Vice President Organization
April Anderson, Vice President, Health and Safety
Casper Casparian, Legislative Advocacy Chair
Santa Monica–Malibu Council of PTAs
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1087 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 54 David Yakobson
From: Amanda Carey <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 1:42 PM
To: Oliver Chi; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems
Cc: Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Eric Johnson; Noe Mendoza; Tony Lopez; Amelia Feichtner; Linda Cogswell; Christopher Dishlip; Peter James; Amber Richane Subject: Item 11.c – Parks and Recreation Vision Plan

EXTERNAL
Hi Mayor and Councilmembers,
I’m a Santa Monica parent of three kids, all of whom play soccer. While grass fields sound ideal, frequent closures due to rain and wear mean canceled practices and lost opportunities for kids to play.

Turf fields provide reliable, year-round access and help ensure our children can stay active and engaged. Please prioritize solutions that maximize field availability for Santa Monica families.

Thank you,
Amanda Carey
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1088 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 55 David Yakobson
From: Blake Carey <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 1:42 PM
To: Oliver Chi; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems
Cc: Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Eric Johnson; Noe Mendoza; Tony Lopez; Amelia Feichtner; Linda Cogswell; Christopher Dishlip; Peter James; Amber Richane Subject: Item 11.c – Parks and Recreation Vision Plan

Synthetic turf should be viewed as a necessary tool that allows the Parks & Recreation vision to succeed while serving the needs of the entire community.

Thank you for your leadership, consideration, and continued commitment to Santa Monica’s families and youth.

Sincerely,
Blake Carey
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1089 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 56 David Yakobson
From: Guthrie Paterson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 6:42 PM
To: Oliver Chi; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems
Cc: Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Eric Johnson; Noe Mendoza; Tony Lopez; Amelia Feichtner; Linda Cogswell; Christopher Dishlip; Peter James; Amber Richane Subject: Item 11.c – Parks and Recreation Vision Plan

Given Santa Monica’s limited space and exceptionally high demand, synthetic turf fields are essential to achieving the goals of the Parks & Recreation Plan. Turf fields allow for consistent playability, significantly greater usage, and fewer weather- and maintenance-related closures. Without them, available field hours would be dramatically reduced.

Synthetic turf should be viewed as a necessary tool that allows the Parks & Recreation vision to succeed while serving the needs of the entire community.

Thank you for your leadership, consideration, and continued commitment to Santa Monica’s families and youth.

Sincerely,
Guthrie Paterson
+1-310-409-3001
[email protected]
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1090 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 57 David Yakobson
From: Karen Melick
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 3:23 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Agenda item 11 c Building Our Community's Aquatic Future: A Vision for the Airport Site
From: Michael Flaherty <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 1:51 AM
To: Caroline Torosis <[email protected]>; Jesse Zwick <[email protected]>; Lana Negrete <[email protected]>; Dan Hall <[email protected]>; Ellis Raskin <[email protected]>; Barry Snell <[email protected]>; Natalya Zernitskaya <[email protected]>
Cc: Joelle Simmons <[email protected]>; Karen Melick <[email protected]>; Noe Mendoza <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Building Our Community's Aquatic Future: A Vision for the Airport Site

EXTERNAL
Building Our Community's Aquatic Future: A Vision for the Airport Site To: City Council
From: The Santa Monica Aquatics Advisory Committee
Our Shared Vision
As representatives of Santa Monica's vibrant aquatics community—including swimmers of all ages, competitive teams, adaptive programs, and institutional partners—we're excited to advocate for including a new aquatics facility in the preferred airport land use scenario.

Our diverse coalition includes:
 Youth swim teams: Team Santa Monica (TSM) and H2O Swimming  Adult programs: Southern California Aquatics (SCAQ)
 Adaptive programs: Swim With Heart (SWH), One With the Water, and 4 Love of Water  Partners: Santa Monica College (SMC) and Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District (SMMUSD) The Opportunity Before Us
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1091 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 58 Strong Community Support: Throughout Phases 1 and 2 of the airport planning process, an aquatics facility consistently ranked as a top priority—14th overall and 4th among Active Recreation uses, outperforming many amenities already included in all three scenarios. Santa Monica's aquatics continues to attract visitors from greater Los Angeles and beyond.

Proven Demand: Our current Swim Center welcomes 450 daily visitors on average, surging to nearly 1,000 during peak summer months. Last season alone, over 5,000 children participated in swim lessons and water safety programs—with registration filling within minutes of opening. Santa Monica Swim Center boasts one of the most diverse aquatic programs in the nation.

Historical Foundation: This vision builds on decades of thoughtful planning, from the original Great Park concept in the early 20th century to the City's 1997 Parks and Recreation Master Plan, which explicitly recommends developing a recreational pool in a park setting.

The Economic Case for Investment
Proven Regional Success: Communities throughout California have demonstrated the significant economic impact of world-class aquatic facilities. The Rose Bowl Aquatic Center has consistently turned a profit since 1990, while Irvine recently invested in expanding their William Woollett Jr. Aquatics Center with a third 50- meter pool and 4,000-seat capacity. Mission Viejo's Marguerite Aquatics Center renovation supports one of the nation's most successful swim clubs, and Mt. San Antonio College's new $8.7 million facility is considered the premier events venue in the western United States.

Comprehensive Economic Impact Needed: We respectfully request that the City commission a comprehensive economic impact analysis examining both direct benefits to Santa Monica residents and broader economic benefits to the business community. This analysis should evaluate:
 Revenue generation from facility operations and events  Hotel occupancy and tourism impact from regional/national competitions  Local business revenue from visiting teams, families, and spectators  Sales tax generation and long-term economic multiplier effects  Job creation and ongoing employment opportunities
 Potential growth opportunities for strategic partners (SMC, SMMUSD) National Model: Facilities like the Greensboro Aquatic Center demonstrate exceptional economic integration—their $8.3 million expansion was funded entirely through hotel occupancy revenues, proving that aquatic facilities can generate substantial economic returns that extend far beyond the facility itself.

The Benefits We'll Create Together
Community Health & Safety: Our beachside community has a long aquatic tradition. Expanding swim education addresses a critical safety need while serving everyone from infants to seniors through recreational and competitive programming.

Economic Vitality: A state-of-the-art aquatics complex will attract regional and national events, bringing visitors who support local restaurants, hotels, and shops. The National Artistic Swimming Team has already expressed interest in basing operations here, and LA28 has identified training opportunities. The venue will attract premier programming and events that generate significant economic activity.

Inclusive Access: A park-based facility will provide the welcoming, family-friendly environment our community deserves—complementing rather than competing with our existing Swim Center.

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1092 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 59 Expanded Programming: Additional capacity means more opportunities for youth development, adult fitness, senior wellness, and adaptive programs that currently face waiting lists and increasing demand.

Building a Coalition for the Future
We're eager to collaborate with the City on innovative funding models and public-private partnerships that can make this vision a reality and ensure sustainable financial success. The economic analysis we're requesting will provide the data-driven foundation needed to structure these partnerships effectively.

By including an aquatics facility in the preferred scenario and CEQA analysis, and by commissioning the comprehensive economic impact study, we take essential next steps toward fulfilling decades of community planning and investment.

The time is now to create the accessible, inclusive aquatic destination Santa Monica has long envisioned—a facility that will serve our community for generations to come while generating significant economic benefits for our entire city!
Thank you for your partnership in building our shared future.

Sincerely,
The Santa Monica Aquatics Advisory Committee
--
Thank you for your support.

GO SHARKS!
Mikey Flaherty
www.swimwithheart.org
310-625-2974
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1093 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) 60 David Yakobson
From: Jerry Rubin <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 8:45 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.C on City Council January 27 meeting. 💚

EXTERNAL
Fear Mayor and Council Members,
곒곓곔곕뱑뱍뱎뱏뱒뇪뇫뱐We certainly need much more park space. Please support the vision fully and enthusiastically. Team up with Mother Nature! Onward! TOGETHER!
Thank you again…TREE-MENDOUSLY!
Jerry Rubin
310-399-1000
Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.m
Packet Pg. 1094 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan) City Council
2025 Parks & Recreation
Vision Plan
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1095 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation • Recommended Actions • Review the 2025 Parks & Recreation Vision Plan (PRVP) • Review comments and staff recommendations Purpose of Today's Meeting
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1096 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation

1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption
pursuant to Section 15262 of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines; and

2. Receive and approve the 2025 Parks and
Recreation Vision Plan.

Recommended Actions
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1097 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation We did it!
The update to the 1997 Parks and
Recreation Master Plan began in 2018. • 2018-2019 outreach reached 2,000+ participants
• 2020 Draft paused due to Covid-19
Pandemic
• 2024-2025 outreach to committees,
commissions, and neighborhoods
• 2025 CoSM Community Interest and
Opinion Survey (Community Recreation
and Arts Needs Assessment and Level of
Service)
• 2025 Draft live in July 2025 for public
comment, including 10 public meetings
www.santamonica.gov/parks-and-recreation-vision-plan
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1098 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Where are we
Now?
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1099 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Network Refresher • Approximately 144 park acres • 1.55 acres / 1,000 residents (93,076 pop.) • 72% live within ½ mile of a park • County average 3.3 acres / 1,000 residents • County average is 49% living with a ½ mile of a park • 2016 LA Countywide Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment defines Santa Monica as
Moderate in terms of overall park need • Acreage + distance to parks + population served • 2022 Needs Assessment Plus notes many
neighborhoods in Santa Monica in need of
regional serving recreation
Graphic from Countywide Parks Needs Assessment Interactive Map Viewer Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1100 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Where we left off • The 1997 Parks and Recreation Master Plan recommended a targeted growth of park
acreage from 112.7 park acres to a range of
143.8 – 170 park acres.
• In 2025, park acreage is 144.
• The Summer 2025 public outreach
roadshow helped establish this Plan’s
recommendation for a new goal.

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1101 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation What is the
2025 Vision??
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1102 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation City as Habitat
A Vision for nourishing habitat for people, plants, animals, and program, continuing the City’s commitment in striving to
prevent harm to the natural environment and human health.

A Vision that addresses community open space need through acquisition, expansion, and improvements, enhancing resilience and reinforcing sustainability initiatives.

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1103 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation • Act in support of Water Self
-sufficiency,
Zero Waste, Carbon Neutrality
• Enable open space to grow with the City • Position the City to respond quickly and responsibly to opportunities that
enhance our parks as settings for habitat
• Maintain open dialogue with the
community on nature advocacy
• Reaffirm the Sustainable Rights Ordinance
City as Habitat Goals
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1104 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation The Plan Structure
User friendly
Chapter 1: Vision & Network
Chapter 2: Community Voices
Chapter 3: Actions
Chapter 4: Implementation
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1105 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision & Network: Park Inventory
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1106 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Community Voices • 2018-2019: 2,000 + participants • 2025 survey: 600+ participants • 96% of respondents visit a parks, arts, or recreation facility in a typical year (81% national average)
• 49% of respondents participate in a city program in
a typical year (36% national average)
• Safety
• Top program priorities • Arts and culture events • City-sponsored events • Beach House events• Top priorities • Walking loops/trails • Community parks • Large regional parks • Neighborhood parks • Aquatics facility • Pocket Parks • Community gardens Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1107 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation 8 Principles
5 Strategies
32 Actions
Act on
the
Vision!
8 Principles

1. NOURISH Existing Parks & Park Facilities

2. EXPAND New Park Land & Open Space

3. RAISE New Park Facilities

4. IDEATE Santa Monica State Beach

5. CONNECT Open Space & The Community

6. GATHER Recreation & Arts Programming

7. SUSTAIN Parks & Facilities Sustainability & Maintenance

8. SUPPORT Funding & Meaningful Partnerships
5 Strategies

1. Strengthen Access to Parks, Facilities, and the Beach

2. Rethink Streets with Park Potential

3. Foster Social Interaction

4. Optimize Existing Parks and Beach Experiences

5. Create New Park Land
Actions
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1108 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation City as Habitat - Actions at a glance
• The Vision
• Reaffirming the Sustainable Rights Ordinance and advancing, through actions, citywide goals to achieve water self-sufficiency, zero waste, and carbon neutrality.
• Action 1.1.3
• Demonstrate potential to increase species biodiversity and canopy coverage, in accordance with the Urban Forest Master Plan, in existing parks and open spaces.
• Action 1.2.2
• Develop a CIP Refurbishment Plan to address maintenance of high-use amenities, including general site components, and determine opportunities to integrate sustainable alternatives. • Action 2.1.8
• Integrate cultural landscapes within new parks and identify opportunities to expand restoration, preservation, and rewilding.

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1109 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation How do we
implement the Vision?
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1110 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Implementation
City as
Habitat
What
amenities
make up our
inventory
What does it
cost to
maintain that
inventory
What are the
gaps in our
level of
service
How do we
pay for what
we need
The 2025 PRVP defines the
implementation process • Define our inventory • Determine costs to maintain our inventory
• Identify gaps in level of service
(amenity, hours of service, and
acreage)
• Daylight a need for funding streams
to address the gaps
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1111 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation What does it cost to maintain the inventory
Existing Amenities and Components Action Matrix
• Interdepartmental collaboration
• Defines 5/10/20-year work plans
• Community benefit prioritization
• Estimated and exponential costs
• Example: 5-year work plan for playground maintenance
- $2.8m
• Approach allows for flexibility
• Does not include administration and assumes
staffing requirements are met
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1112 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation • CoSM stands at half the County
Average of park acres per 1,000.
• To meet the County Average, 134
additional park acres are needed in
2025.
• To meet 5-year population
projection, 165 additional park acres
are needed.

Determining Level of Service - Acres
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1113 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Level of Service & Acreage Considerations
• CoSM: 1.55 acres/1,000 residents
• County assessment classification of ‘moderate’ park need with many areas of the city at high/very high need • Classification based on acreage + population + distance to parks • County average: 3.3 acres/1,000 residents
• Determining the county average does not include the beach, only parks, as not all cities in the county have a beach. • Common planning standard: 5.0 acres/1,000
• 2025 NRPA recommendation: 6-10 park acres / 1,000 residents. • The NRPA does include the beach as it provides for recreation • Adding the SM State Beach acreage of 202.9 acres to the current inventory of 144.31 would bring the CoSM average to

3.72 acres/1,000. (1.55 + 2.17)
• Adding all 192 acres of SMO to the current inventory of 144.31 acres would bring the CoSM’s average to 3.61 acres/1,000. (1.55 + 2.06)
• “Park and recreation agencies are as diverse as the communities they serve, what works well for one agency may not be best for all”.

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1114 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Funding Sources • General Fund • CIP• Bi-annually. • Varies per project. • General Fund allocation. • Park Improvement Program (a CIP) • $250k/annually • Development Impact Fee • Expansion or acquisition of parkland. • Amount based on development project. • Uncommitted balance as of January 2025 - $875,440.
• Grant Funding • Measure A allocation approximately $300,000 annually. • Balance as of July 2025
- $1.6m.
• Measure A M/S annual allocation approx. $91k • Balance as of July 2025 - $742,475. • CDBG grant matching.

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1115 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation The Vision is Actionable
In 2025 and 2026 we are tracking various
grant funding sources. • Prop 4 Statewide Park Program • Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership • Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy • California Wildlife Conservation Board • California Natural Resources Agency • Urban Greening • Youth Community Access • Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation Program
• Measure A Competitive Grant Cycle
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1116 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation What have we
heard in this process?
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1117 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation The Public Roadshow
Comments • Integrate 2025 City Council priorities • 5.0 park acres/1,000 (not including the beach acreage)
• Level of Service and how we compare • More pickleball, courts and fields to accommodate tournaments, and a city-owned aquatics facility
• Increasing overall feeling of safety at parks,
recreation and arts facilities
• Bringing CAAP actions forward • Prioritizing accessibility to and through parks • Natural grass and phasing out artificial turf • Attachment K “2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan Staff Recommended Edits”
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1118 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Natural Grass and
Artificial Turf at City-Owned
Sports Fields
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1119 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Proposed Policy for City-Owned Sports Fields*
• No new City-owned artificial turf sports fields will be installed in the City of Santa Monica • Existing City-owned grass fields will be maintained as grass fields • Existing City-owned artificial turf fields will be maintained and replaced as artificial turf fields
• The City will explore options to work with independent and industry experts to develop a request for information for artificial turf and durable natural alternative materials that continue to meet the City’s needs for environmental and human health, safety, playability, maintenance, and cost
*This proposed policy would not apply to any public agencies or private entity, other than the City of Santa Monica. It would not be applicable to any public school, private school, or school district (either in relation to fields, properties, or facilities).

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1120 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Existing Sports Field Inventory
Diamond Sports Fields (11) • Baseball (7) • Los Amigos Park (1) • Gandara Park (1) • Memorial Park (3) • Clover Park (1) • Marine Park (1) • Softball (4) • Memorial Park (3) • Marine Park (1) • Clover (informal use)Rectangular Sports Fields (2) • Historic Belmar Park* • Airport Park* • Gandara Park (informal use) • Clover Park (informal use) • Marine Park (informal use) *Artificial Turf
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1121 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Grass and Artificial Turf Sports Fields
Grass Sports Fields
• Natural materials
• Lower surface temperatures
• Lower up-front installation cost and
replacement cost (if needed)
• Relatively high impact absorption
• Water use mitigated with surplus of the
City’s advanced treated recycled water
• Higher maintenance demands, including
mowing, fertilizing, irrigation, aerating,
resting, and sports lines
• Prone to closure due to weather
Artificial Turf Sports Fields
• Consistent ‘all weather’ playing surface
• Higher surface temperatures mitigated
with watering fields if needed
• Infill material and synthetic turf materials
• Higher up-front installation cost and
replacement costs
• Lower maintenance demands, but
requires specialized equipment for
grooming, cleaning, infill replacement. and
trained specialists for repairs
• Relatively high impact absorption with
appropriate underlayment
• Increased friction requiring appropriate
footwear to decrease lower extremity
injury
• End of life disposal may be mitigated with
recyclable materials
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1122 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Boards and Commissions
Recreation and Parks Commission
• No new City owned artificial turf sports
fields will be installed in the City of Santa
Monica
• Existing grass fields will be maintained as
grass fields
• Existing two artificial turf fields will be
replaced as artificial turf fields, unless
grass fields can be installed without
decreasing capacity
• The City will explore options to work with
independent and industry experts and
develop a request for information for
sustainable artificial turf and natural
alternative materials that continue to
meet the City’s needs for environmental
and human health, safety, playability,
maintenance, and cost
Commission on Sustainability, Environmental
Justice and the Environment
• Do not support the use of artificial turf
• No new City-owned artificial turf sports
fields will be installed in the City of Santa
Monica
• Existing City-owned grass fields will be
maintained as grass fields
• When existing artificial turf fields reach the
end of their useful life the City will go out to
bid to replace them with durable, natural
alternative grass materials that meet the
City’s needs
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1123 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation Proposed Policy for City-Owned Sports Fields*
• No new City-owned artificial turf sports fields will be installed in the City of Santa Monica • Existing City-owned grass fields will be maintained as grass fields • Existing City-owned artificial turf fields will be maintained and replaced as artificial turf fields
• The City will explore options to work with independent and industry experts to develop a request for information for artificial turf and durable natural alternative materials that continue to meet the City’s needs for environmental and human health, safety, playability, maintenance, and cost
*This proposed policy would not apply to any public agencies or private entity, other than the City of Santa Monica. It would not be applicable to any public school, private school, or school district (either in relation to fields, properties, or facilities).

Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1124 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation City as Habitat
Enable open space to grow with the City
Position the City to respond quickly and responsibly to opportunities that enhance our parks as settings for habitat Support Water Self-sufficiency, Zero Waste, Carbon Neutrality Maintain open dialogue with the community on nature advocacy Reaffirm the Sustainable Rights Ordinance
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1125 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation

1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15262 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and

2. Receive and approve the 2025 Parks and Recreation Vision Plan.

Recommended Actions
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1126 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation City Council
2025 Parks & Recreation
Vision Plan
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026
Item 11-C
January 27, 2026

11.C.n
Packet Pg. 1127 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 1] (7203 : 11.C 2025 Parks and Recreation City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 11.D
1 of 34
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rick Valte, Public Works Director, Public Works, Architecture Services Subject: Approval of the Revised Plan for Phases 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached resolution certifying the attached Environmental Impact Report for the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project;

2. Adopt mitigation measures set forth in the Environmental Impact Report; and

3. Approve the revised plan and direct staff to proceed with design development and construction documents for Phases 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project.

Summary
The Santa Monica parks system includes 30 parks encompassing more than 144 acres.

Within this parks system, there are small neighborhood parks such as Ozone Park and Euclid Park, and larger community parks such as Clover, Virginia Avenue, and Memorial Park. Each of these parks features amenities that together form a rich range of opportunities for various types of sports, play experiences, gardening, picnicking, walking, and relaxing. Memorial Park, established in the 1950s and geographically located in the heart of Santa Monica, is important to the overall parks system, as it serves as the primary park for baseball and softball as well as being the home of the City’s only public gymnasium, skate park, and tennis/pickleball courts. The Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project (Project) would combine Memorial Park and the adjacent City-owned former Fisher Lumber site into a 13.2-acre newly renovated and expanded community park to meet increasing demand for recreational activities. The Project would also integrate components of the Pedestrian Action Plan

11.D
Packet Pg. 1128
2 of 34
and Bicycle Action Plan. An extensive community outreach process guided the development of a master plan layout and park program for the future renovation and expansion of Memorial Park that would include additional diamond sports fields and other highly desired community amenities. Additionally, the expanded Memorial Park is identified for a potential underground stormwater harvesting tank (Phase 0) in support of the City’s water self-sufficiency and sustainable infrastructure goals by increasing locally produced water and providing a drought-resilient water supply.

Staff recommends the Council adopt the draft resolution certifying the Project Environmental Impact Report, review and approve the Revised Plan for Phases 1 and 2, and provide direction to staff to proceed with final design.

Background
The Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project (Project) would combine the

10.3-acre Memorial Park and the adjacent 2.9-acre, City-owned former Fisher Lumber site into a 13.2-acre, newly renovated and expanded community park in the heart of Santa Monica. This Project responds to the growing demand for recreational activities and the longstanding goal of expanding and redefining Memorial Park, first established in Santa Monica’s 1997 Parks and Recreation Master Plan. In 2004, the City purchased the Fisher Lumber site specifically for this purpose. At that time, the Public Landscape Division (PLD) was headquartered at the Santa Monica Airport but was displaced by the construction of Airport Park. On May 10, 2005, Council approved the interim relocation of PLD operations to the former Fisher Lumber site.

11.D
Packet Pg. 1129
3 of 34
Figure 1: Project Location
On March 22, 2016, Council adopted and formally selected the expansion of Memorial Park as one of the City’s highest-priority park projects and incorporated it into the Los Angeles Countywide Comprehensive Parks & Recreation Needs Assessment Report.

On January 23, 2018, Council awarded an agreement with AHBE Landscape Architects to develop a feasibility study, master plan layout, and phased construction approach that would meet the project objectives of maximizing fields with a focus on diamond sports; considering community programs such as the Police Activities League (PAL), gymnasium, and fitness facilities; integrating the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plans and appropriate buffering along busy streets; and considering the park’s relationship to the surrounding neighborhood and City context. On October 15, 2019, Council reviewed the master plan layout, directed staff to seek design proposals for Phases 1 and 2 of the Project, and provided Additional Items for Design Consideration (Attachment A) to be considered by the selected design team. Subsequently, on February 11, 2020, Council awarded a design-build agreement with W.E. O’Neil

11.D
Packet Pg. 1130
4 of 34
Corporation; however, due to the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Project was suspended, and the agreement was never executed.

Figure 2: Existing Memorial Park and Approved Memorial Park Master Plan

Figure 3: Original Phases 1 and 2 (2019-2020)

11.D
Packet Pg. 1131
5 of 34
As the City began to recover from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, staff returned to Council on September 27, 2022, to present a “reduced Phase 1” scope of work as a way to advance the Project with a reduced budget and increased construction costs. Of the original $30 million Project budget—comprised of approximately $5 million in City Capital Improvement Program (CIP) funding, $5 million from Santa MonicaMalibu Unified School District (SMMUSD) Measure SMS bonds, and $20 million from the Santa Monica College (SMC) Measure V bond—only the $20 million from the SMC bond measure remained available. Council directed staff to restart the Project and proceed with the revised phasing, re-engage with SMC and SMMUSD, and study possible temporary relocation sites for PLD operations (Phase 1 implementation of the Project requires the temporary relocation of PLD operations until a permanent location that adequately meets the space and logistical needs of this critical work unit can be identified).

The reduced scope of Phase 1 aligns with the project objectives outlined in the development of the feasibility study and master plan layout for an expanded and redeveloped park. However, due to funding limitations, the remaining scope of the original Phase 1—including Combo Field 3/4, an interim use at future field 5, the Community Hub building, and playground would now be included in Phase 2. This change would leave the park without a playground until Phase 2 is complete.

11.D
Packet Pg. 1132
6 of 34
Phase 1
Combo Field 1/2
Surface Parking Lot
Elevated Tennis/Pickleball Courts
Improved 14th St Entrance
New Colorado Ave Entrance
Dog Run
Mobility/Streetscape Improvements:
8’-wide sidewalk, parkway, plantings on 14th St
Shared use bike path, parkway, plantings on
Colorado Ave
Phase 2
Combo Field 3/4
Interim Use at Future Field 5
Improved 16th St Entrance
Community Hub Building
Playground
Mobility/Streetscape Improvements:
8’ wide sidewalk, parkway, plantings on 16th St
Figure 4: Reduced Phases 1 and 2 (2022 - Present)
On August 22, 2023, Council directed staff to seek design proposals for Phases 1 and 2 of the project and authorized a payment agreement with SMC for Phase 1 design and pre-construction services, not to exceed $2.75 million. Additionally, Council approved the appropriation of $500,000 of Park and Recreation Impact Fee resources for Phase 2 design and approved the reinstatement and fifth modification of an agreement with WSP (formerly Wood Environmental and Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. and AMEC Environment & Infrastructure, Inc.) for environmental consulting services related to the project. On August 27, 2024, Council approved the appropriation of an additional $200,000 in Park and Recreation Impact Fee resources for Phase 2 design and awarded a design agreement with SWA Group (SWA) in an amount not to exceed $4,405,000 (including a 15% contingency), broken down as follows:

11.D
Packet Pg. 1133
7 of 34
• Phase 0 design (including pre-construction and construction administration) services are funded with Clean Beaches and Ocean Parcel Tax Funds in an amount not to exceed $2,492,000 (including a 15% contingency); • Phase 1 design (including pre-construction) services are funded through a payment agreement with SMC in an amount not to exceed $1,213,000 (including a 15% contingency); and
• Phase 2 design (including pre-construction) services are funded with a combination of Park and Recreation Impact Fee and Clean Beaches and Ocean Parcel Tax Funds in an amount not to exceed $700,000 (including a 15% contingency).

On January 28, 2025, Council approved a seventh modification to the agreement with WSP for additional analysis of project design and material options, as well as preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). A sixth modification, using contingency was executed in November 2024 to complete a required Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA).

Potential Phase 0 – Underground Stormwater Harvesting Tank The expanded Memorial Park is identified as a potential stormwater harvesting site in the Watershed Management Plan (WMP) for the Central Santa Monica Bay Jurisdictional Groups 2 & 3 (J2/J3) Watershed, which was approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in April 2023 as part of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit, under Order No. R4-2021-0105. The WMP identifies the Memorial Park Regional Project as a multi-benefit stormwater project consisting of several storm drain diversions and pumping systems that would convey runoff from approximately 135 acres of draining area in the Pico-Kenter sub-watershed, within city limits, to a proposed underground tank beneath the Memorial Park fields. This tank would have a maximum capacity of 3 million gallons (3 MG) for storage, capture, and reuse and/or infiltration.

Previous feasibility studies have identified and evaluated preliminary diversion strategies and analyzed site location and sizing for the underground tank at Memorial

11.D
Packet Pg. 1134
8 of 34
Park. The City’s efforts in stormwater and watershed management are centered around compliance with state and federal permits and mitigating contaminants entering Santa Monica Bay. The Memorial Park Regional Project represents a major step towards achieving that goal.

Phases 1 and 2 - Approved Master Plan
The master planning process involved a thorough examination of existing conditions and park program elements, along with an extensive community outreach effort. While this process produced a single, cohesive, and well-supported master plan layout that addresses long-standing issues at Memorial Park—including, but not limited to, inadequate field functionality, restrictive perimeter and edge conditions, poor connections to the surrounding neighborhood, and the misuse of restrooms and other amenities ̶Council identified several programmatic and dimensional considerations still requiring refinement. As a result, Council approved the master plan layout and authorized the design of Phases 1 and 2, with conditions requiring the selected design team to work through fifteen Additional Items for Design Considerations (Attachment A)—hereafter referred to as “Council Considerations”—to develop a proposed Revised Plan for Council approval before advancing to final design.

With Council authorization from September 2022, staff reengaged SMC and SMMUSD and is actively negotiating Fiscal and Use Agreements for capital improvement construction costs and the associated joint-use programming for the implementation of phases 1 and 2. If successfully negotiated, the Fiscal and Use Agreements would fund the bulk of the construction costs of phases 1 and 2. The ability to proceed with construction is therefore contingent upon the City’s ability to finalize agreement(s) with SMC and/or SMMUSD.

Discussion
Following the execution of a design consultant agreement in spring 2025, SWA initiated the design process to evaluate Phases 1 and 2 of the master plan layout, identify design alternatives based on the Council Considerations, and ultimately develop a Revised Plan for Council input and approval. An interdepartmental group, comprised of staff from

11.D
Packet Pg. 1135
9 of 34
Public Works (PW), Recreation and Arts Department (RAD), Department of Transportation (DOT), Community Development Department (CDD), and the Fire Department, collaborated to review design alternatives and reach consensus on a proposed Revised Plan, accommodating alterations to the master plan layout where feasible and appropriate.

The design team presented a range of alternatives for review by the interdepartmental group. Each alternative explored and sought to address the Council Considerations within the context of the project objectives, phasing, existing conditions, site constraints, and feasibility. Collectively, these alternatives—focused on the underground tank, site plan, streetscape, community hub and on-site parking, and the interim use—provided the basis for developing and refining the proposed Revised Plan (see Attachment B for detailed descriptions and comparison of all alternatives).

Proposed Revised Plan
The proposed revised master plan layout was developed and refined using the alternatives mentioned above, in parallel with an evaluation of impacts on the tree canopy, 16th Street right-of-way (ROW), and parking. The proposed Revised Plan (Attachment C) focuses on refinements to program elements within Phases 1 and 2 and is shown below in comparison to the original master plan layout. The proposed Revised Plan does not include refinements to program elements in future phases—such as Fields 6 and 7, the skate park, or community recreation center—as these were not studied as part of the current revision.

11.D
Packet Pg. 1136
10 of 34
Figure 5: Approved Original (left) vs. Proposed Revised (right) Master Plan Layouts The following provides detailed information on each major program element of the proposed Revised Plan.

Sports Fields
Relevant Council Considerations (refer to Attachment A; descriptions abbreviated):
[1] California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) baseball field, [2] National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) softball field, [3] field amenities/elements, [14] sun/shade in positioning fields, [15] natural turf vs. synthetic turf The master plan established seven diamond sports fields (e.g., baseball, softball, etc.) at Memorial Park to provide one additional field beyond what currently exists and to allow for greater flexibility—including the ability to play simultaneous games on combination (or “combo”) fields—something the existing fields cannot currently accommodate. Combo fields 1/2 and 3/4 are included in Phases 1 and 2, respectively.

As part of Phase 2, future Field 5 will serve as an interim use until Fields 5, 6, and 7 are constructed in Phase 3.

The proposed Revised Plan considered a CIF baseball field at combo field 1/2 and an NCAA softball field at Combo Field 3/4. Combo Field 1/2 could accommodate a single regulation high school baseball game with a portable pitcher’s mound, adjustable bases,

11.D
Packet Pg. 1137
11 of 34
and backstop distance 25’ (non-CIF) or adult softball game on Field 1. Combo Field 3/4 could accommodate a single collegiate softball game or adult softball game on Field 3.

Additionally, in alignment with the Master Plan, each combo field could be divided with temporary fencing to accommodate simultaneous games for girls’ fast pitch-softball and youth baseball and softball.

Although fields 1 through 4 were originally proposed to be artificial turf in the master plan, per City Council direction natural grass was explored for the combo fields as well.

An interdepartmental team—including staff members from the Recreation and Arts and Public Works Departments—carefully analyzed the impacts of natural grass and artificial turf sports fields on environmental and human health, player safety, durability and playability, required maintenance, and life-cycle costs.

After carefully considering these factors, staff arrived at a policy that proposes:
• No new City-owned artificial turf sports fields will be installed in the City of Santa Monica.
• Existing City-owned grass fields will be maintained as grass fields. • Existing City-owned artificial turf fields will be replaced as artificial turf fields. • The City will explore options to work with independent and industry experts to develop a request for information on sustainable artificial and durable natural alternative materials that continue to meet the City’s needs for environmental and human health, safety, playability, maintenance, and cost.

Therefore, fields 1 through 4 will feature natural grass. Fields 1 through 4 would also feature portable mounds and adjustable bases for high school baseball and little league, covered dugouts, bullpens, batting cages, shaded spectator seating, scoreboards, and LED sports lighting, with the option to use portable public address systems and score booths or tables. Portable score booths or tables could be set up behind home plate or in the bleachers. Of important note, if only Phase 1 is implemented, Field 1 will temporarily serve as the NCAA softball field for SMC use (pending a negotiated fiscal

11.D
Packet Pg. 1138
12 of 34
and use agreement) until Phase 2 is completed, after which it will be designated as the high school baseball field for SMMUSD use (pending a negotiated fiscal and use agreement).

Ultimately, site constraints and the field dimensions and elements required for high school baseball, NCAA softball, girls’ fast-pitch softball, youth baseball and softball, and adult softball made it infeasible to rotate Combo Fields 1/2 and/or 3/4. As a result, the ability to address the Council Consideration regarding sun/shade through field rotation or repositioning was limited. That said, because the original Master Plan layout accounted for required field dimensions and sun/shade when recommending a pinwheel orientation for the combo fields, staff concludes the original layout for the combo fields remains both practical and effective. However, the Revised Plan does propose repositioning future Field 5 to create more usable space at the community hub center of the park and along the perimeters of the combo fields, to maximize opportunities for community and field elements/amenities.

Tennis/Pickleball Courts
Currently, the existing tennis and pickleball courts lack many amenity components necessary for programs to thrive. The court lighting is nearing the end of its lifespan, with frequent bulb replacements causing court closures. Pedestrian circulation occurs within the fence line, often interrupting play. This leads to longer wait times for drop-in users. When the courts are at full capacity, there are just as many—if not more—users waiting along the sidelines to play in areas without seating and shade.

Courts striped for both tennis and pickleball—allowing for either four tennis courts or sixteen pickleball courts—would be built on an elevated platform above a new surface parking lot and accessible via stairs and an elevator. The courts would feature LED sports lighting, dedicated equipment storage, spectator seating, and shaded areas. A centralized attendant and single-entry location would support an organized check-in process, improved participant experience, and enable efficient management of court reservations and programming.

Community Hub and Amenities

11.D
Packet Pg. 1139
13 of 34
Relevant Council Considerations (refer to Attachment A; descriptions abbreviated):
[4] off-leash dog run, [5] grouping fitness equipment, [6] shade for playground, [9] passive recreation at future field 5, [10] more community amenities, including barbecue grills
The master plan located the community hub centrally within the park and included a universally accessible playground alongside a one-story building housing restrooms, concessions, storage, a trash room, and a small office for field monitor staff. The community hub’s location—adjacent to the diamond sport fields, elevated tennis/pickleball courts, skate park, and interim use area at future Field 5—would make it the active center of the park. The master plan also included a walking loop trail with fitness equipment along the park’s perimeter.

The proposed Revised Plan considered and incorporated an approximately 2,800 SF off-leash dog run; one grouping of 3-4 fitness equipment stations; playground shade provisions through a combination of trees and built elements; an interim use at future Field 5 that is flexible space for both passive and active recreation; table tennis; picnic seating; barbecue grills; and a potential green roof and overlook at the Community Hub building. The playground is anticipated to feature safety surfacing made from natural cork and primarily non-plastic play equipment, with the exception of slides. While metal could serve as an alternative material, it is not recommended due to its tendency to retain heat—thereby increasing the risk of injury and discomfort for users—and its susceptibility to rust, which requires frequent ongoing maintenance.

Future Field 5 is envisioned to serve as flexible lawn and practice field space until Phase 3 construction. Fencing would be removed, and a strategically placed planting barrier creates a natural buffer —helping to define the space, reduce noises, and visually soften the landscape—making the park more inviting and balanced while reinforcing the flexible space’s role as a multi-use community gathering space.

Tree Canopy

11.D
Packet Pg. 1140
14 of 34
Relevant Council Considerations (refer to Attachment A; descriptions abbreviated):
[13] tree assessment
Due to the overall park reconfiguration proposed by the master plan, opportunities to preserve existing trees are extremely limited. To mitigate this impact, the master plan proposed replacing removed trees at a ratio consistent with the City's Urban Forest Master Plan.

The design team conducted a comprehensive inventory of trees within Memorial Park and assessed those located in Phases 1 and 2. Of the 96 trees within Phases 1 and 2, the Revised Plan proposes to preserve 10 existing trees, relocate 4 existing trees, and plant 110 new trees, resulting in a total of 124 trees. Tree Counts are subject to change as design progresses through design development (coordination with utilities, planting, equipment, etc.).

In accordance with the City’s restitution policy, 423 restitution trees to replant are required to offset the removal of 82 trees in Phases 1 and 2. Any restitution trees that cannot be accommodated on-site will be planted in other designated areas throughout the City, with priority given to replanting with 1/4 mile of Memorial Park.

Proposed species of new trees include Carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides) along Colorado Avenue, California Sycamore (Platanus racemosa) along 16th Street; Paperbark Tree (Melaleuca quinquenervia) along 14th Street; and Silverleaf Oak (Quercus hypoleucoides), California Bay (Umbellularia californica), Channel Island Oak (Quercus tomentella), Western Redbud (Cercis occidentalis), and Coast Life Oak (Quercus agrifolia) within the park.

Existing Preserve or
Relocate
Proposed New Revised Plan
(phases 1-2)
On-site (Park) 42 6 57 63
On-site (Palms) 24 1 0 1

11.D
Packet Pg. 1141
15 of 34
On-site subtotal 66 7 57 64
Off-site (Colorado) 21 0 40* 40*
Off-site (16th) 2 2 4 6
Off-site (14th) 7 5 9 14
Off-site subtotal 30 7 53 60
Total 96 14 110 124
*14 proposed trees will be within park property.

Mobility and Streetscape Improvements
Relevant Council Considerations (refer to Attachment A; descriptions abbreviated):
[7] rotating fields 3 and 4 for Expo access, [8] 14th Street drop-off area more pedestrianfriendly For those choosing to walk, bike, or use public transit to access Memorial Park, the master plan considered and enhanced the pedestrian and bicyclist experience. The master plan layout included a new entry point from Colorado Avenue, in addition to enhancing access from 14th Street, 16th Street, and Olympic Boulevard; a new Class I shared use bike path connecting to the regional Exposition Corridor Bike Path; 4’-wide planted buffers between 8’-wide perimeter sidewalks and field activity within the park; and street trees and parkway planters to provide shade and comfort.

The proposed Revised Plan explored the option of rotating Combo Field 3/4 and making the 14th Street entrance friendlier to pedestrians to address the Council Consideration for enhanced permeability and entry at park’s northeast corner. However, as previously mentioned, site constraints and the field dimensions and elements required for high school baseball, NCAA softball, girls fast pitch softball, youth baseball and softball, and adult softball made it infeasible to rotate Combo Fields 1/2 and/or 3/4. Nevertheless, the proposed Revised Plan aims to address the Council Considerations to create a more inviting experience through the following design strategies:
• Improvements to the14th Street entrance improvements include a planted center island with trees in the surface parking lot and a planting bed at the west end of the structure to soften and green the appearance. This project

11.D
Packet Pg. 1142
16 of 34
also reduces vehicle access from two driveways, per the master plan, to one driveway—helping to reduce conflict points, improve sidewalk continuity, and increase space for pedestrian amenities. There is also an opportunity to incorporate artwork on the parking structure west façade and/or court fencing. • Expand the sidewalk at the northeast corner into 16th Street as much as possible, while maintaining required vehicle and emergency access. • Set the Combo Field 3/4 fencing as far from the northeast corner as feasible, per the field dimensions and provide a rounded or chamfered corner. • Consider alternatives to tiered bleachers for spectator seating at the northeast corner of Combo Field 3/4, to support better sightlines and circulation. • Integrate clear and cohesive wayfinding and signage elements to enhance visibility and ease of navigation to the Colorado Avenue mid-block promenade entry to the park.
• Establish pedestrian-friendly dual promenades with welcoming entries that encourage movement and gathering, via overhead string lights and opportunities for banners and/or flags.
• Strengthen visual connectivity into the park through thoughtful sightline design—potentially incorporating an art mural—to attract and engage visitors. • Locate bike parking at entrances and throughout the park.

Figure 6: Colorado Avenue Entry and Promenade Rendering

11.D
Packet Pg. 1143
17 of 34
The streetscapes within Phases 1 and 2 follow the master plan layout, with refinements as needed based on ongoing City input and adjustments to the park’s site plan and program elements. The proposed Revised Plan streetscapes maintain general alignment with the master plan layout in terms of streetscape configuration; however, certain components have been scaled back due to space constraints. Comparisons of streetscape refinements relative to the original master plan layout are shown below. • Colorado Avenue: Streetscape design features a 12’-6”-wide eastbound travel lane per Fire Department input, a 4’-wide planted parkway with street trees, a 12’-wide shared use bike/pedestrian path, a secondary row of trees where feasible, and a planting buffer of variable width.

Figure 7: Colorado Avenue Master Plan (top) vs. Proposed Streetscape Design (bottom)

11.D
Packet Pg. 1144
18 of 34
• 14th Street: Streetscape design proposes retaining the existing 10’-wide northbound travel lane, 9’-wide bike lane, 7’-wide metered parking, and 7’- wide planted parkway with street trees, along with adding a new 8’-wide sidewalk. Maintaining the 7’-wide planted parkway allows preservation of 5 of the 7 existing trees, whereas reconstructing a new 4’-wide planted parkway per the master plan would necessitate removing all 7 existing trees.

Additionally, a separate project led by DOT will implement a two-way cycle track on the east side of 14th Street, further enhancing the overall bicycle infrastructure in the area (cycle track not shown in the proposed streetscape design section below).

Figure 8: 14th Street Master Plan (top) vs. Proposed Streetscape Design (bottom)

11.D
Packet Pg. 1145
19 of 34
• 16th Street: Streetscape design seeks to maximize off-site parking by proposing angled parking in areas where further park expansion into 16th Street is not necessary to meet project objectives (angled parking allows for more parking spaces within the same curb length compared to parallel parking). This approach strikes a balance between the need to expand park space to achieve project objectives and the need to provide adequate parking.

Figure 9: 16th Street Master Plan (top) vs. Proposed Streetscape Design (bottom) Parking

11.D
Packet Pg. 1146
20 of 34
Relevant Council Considerations (refer to Attachment A; descriptions abbreviated): [12] parking loss on 16th Street
The master plan estimated the covered parking lot would increase on-site parking inventory by 49 spaces, for a total of 128 spaces to be used exclusively by park patrons, and would include a safe and convenient passenger drop-off area. The footprint of Memorial Park would be expanded into portions of 16th Street and Colorado Avenue, resulting in a reduction of 37 off-site metered parking spaces adjacent to the park.

The proposed Revised Master plan expands the covered parking lot to be adjacent to the community hub building, increasing the number of on-site parking spaces. As mentioned above, it also proposes angled parking along 16th Street where feasible.

Existing on- and off-site parking spaces currently total 212 spaces. After completion of future phase improvements, the Revised Plan’s parking spaces would total 201 spaces.

Parking counts are subject to change as design progresses through design development (coordination with utilities, planting, equipment, etc.).

Existing Master Plan
(all phases)
Revised Plan
(phases 1-2)
Revised Plan
(all phases)
On-site (PLD) 28 - - -
On-site (Park) 79 128 142 142
On-site subtotal 107 128 142 142
Off-site (Colorado) 19 - - -
Off-site (16th) 42 24 36 18
Off-site (14th) 22 22 19 19
Off-site (Olympic) 22 22 22 22
Off-site subtotal 105 68 77 59
Total 212 196 219 201
16th Street Right-Of-Way

11.D
Packet Pg. 1147
21 of 34
Relevant Council Considerations (refer to Attachment A; descriptions abbreviated):
[11] closing some or all of 16th Street
16th Street between Colorado Avenue and Olympic Boulevard, currently operates as a one-way northbound street, featuring sidewalks and driveways on both sides, with angled parking along the west side and parallel parking along the east side. Within this segment, portions of the ROW have varying status. The portion of the 16th Street ROW adjacent to Memorial Park has been vacated, with ownership now divided among the City of Santa Monica, SMMUSD, and private property owner. In contrast, the portion of the 16th Street ROW north of Memorial Park is not vacated and remains held in trust for public transportation and utility uses.

Figure 10: Status of 16th Street ROW
Staff considered but did not pursue closing all of 16th Street to expand the park beyond what is proposed in the master plan for the following reasons:
• Closing 16th Street and eliminating vehicular and emergency access would impact properties on the east side of the street, particularly those currently relying solely on 16th Street for access. Alternative access would need to be

11.D
Packet Pg. 1148
22 of 34
established, likely via 17th Street—a heavily used corridor that already accommodates a cycle track and rapid bus lane. Proceeding with this change would require traffic impact studies and initiation of a formal street vacation process, both of which would extend the project timeline and add to overall project costs.
• Park improvements are limited to City-owned property due to legal, funding, maintenance, and liability reasons. Therefore, expanding the park into the full 16th Street ROW would require the acquisition of private property, including property owned by SMMUSD. For SMMUSD to sell property, it must first be declared as surplus and follow a formal disposition process. Acquiring both private and SMMUSD property would significantly extend the project timeline and increase costs.

Staff also evaluated the option of closing some of 16th Street while maintaining vehicular access and limiting park expansion beyond what is proposed in the master plan to City-owned property. However, the decision was made that maximizing off-site parking, while still meeting the project objectives, would provide the most benefit. The proposed Revised Plan includes some expansion into the unvacated portion of 16th Street to maximize the use and flexibility of Combo Field 3/4. To expand Combo Field 3/4 into the unvacated portion of 16th Street, the City would proceed with a 4-6 month summary vacation process requiring coordination with utility companies, City departments, and adjacent property owners and Council approval of a resolution.

Sustainability
This project advances sustainability by replacing impermeable parking lots and aging facilities with increased capacity for park programs and amenities that promote health, wellness, and social connection, while also improving the park’s ability to filter, capture, and infiltrate urban runoff. While much of the park will continue to support active recreation and team sports—with specific requirements for field design and surface materials—the project strategically enhances the interstitial spaces between those facilities to integrate natural systems, balancing recreational needs with native landscaping and sustainable water management practices. Tree canopy and Low

11.D
Packet Pg. 1149
23 of 34
Impact Development (LID) strategies—such as water-efficient irrigation systems, drought-tolerant plantings, and permeable surfaces—are essential for reducing urban heat, conserving water, and supporting long-term ecological health. Through naturebased, multi-benefit design, Memorial Park will deliver lasting environmental, health, and community outcomes. If constructed, Phase 0 would provide an additional treatment and water supply element of the Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP), expanding the treatment and water supply capacity, increasing locally produced water, and providing a drought resilient water supply.

Figure 11: Proposed Location for Phase 0 Stormwater Tank

METHODS

VEGETATION / GREEN
SPACE
100% of the planting areas that are outside the sport facilities are native or climate-appropriate species. Tree plantings are also constrained by the site conditions but are planted in spaces that accommodate their growth, to the greatest extent feasible.

INCREASE OF

PERMEABILITY
Impermeable uses – parking & tennis courts – are smartly stacked to reduce the combined footprint and provide shade, thus improving stormwater & urban heat island conditions. Impermeable asphalt surfaces & buildings are replaced with permeable vegetated ball fields. An

11.D
Packet Pg. 1150
24 of 34
estimated 67.8% of paved area is removed (inclusive of removed buildings). Proposed paved non-sport surfaces within the park integrate permeable materials, such as unit pavers and decomposed granite.

PROTECTION OF

UNDEVELOPED

MOUNTAINS &

FLOODPLAINS
The site has been previously developed & does not include native vegetation that could be preserved. Enhancing a previously developed site with new amenities helps relieve pressure on development of greenfield sites. The project improves the City’s existing drainage system by capturing urban run-off for storage, reuse, and infiltration, diverting flow from channels that discharge to the ocean.

STORMWATER TANK The phase 0 stormwater tank captures runoff and filters pollutants, capturing the 85th percentile 24-hour storm event from the entire project parcel. The project will help the City achieve its 2026 goals for the Santa Monica Bay Bacterial TMDL.

ENHANCEMENT OF SOIL 100% of the planting areas that are outside the sport facilities are native or climate-appropriate species. These planting areas may include the use of mulch and compost that is locally generated, where feasible.

NEW PHOTOVOLTAIC

ELEMENTS
The project offers opportunities for roof-mounted PV systems and/or PV shade structures with good sun exposure and the installation of new EV chargers under solar carports.

Following a preliminary assessment of the project’s potential to meet the prerequisites for LEED SITES certification, the project team is targeting Gold Certification. Additional analysis will be conducted during the design development phase.

Summary of Key Changes
Below is a summary of proposed refinements and revisions for Council consideration.

Master Plan Revised Plan
Phase 0
Underground
Stormwater Tank
Not included Proposed location within Phase 1
Phase 1
Combo Field 1/2 Will consider grass vs.
turf, bullpens, batting
cages, and seating for
secondary field in the
design phase
Incorporates high school baseball field, natural grass, bullpen, batting cages, and seating at both fields
Surface Parking Lot Increase dedicated
park inventory by 49
spaces for a total of
128 on-site spaces
Expands surface parking lot to maximize on-site
spaces, increases inventory by 63 spaces for a total of 142 on-site spaces
Note: Removes pathway between surface parking lot
and community hub building; however, creates
opportunities for mural art that can be seen from
Colorado Avenue entrance and access to Community
Hub rooftop.

Elevated
Tennis/Pickleball Courts
Courts striped for
tennis and pickleball
Incorporates centralized attendant and single-entry
location and additional storage space
Improved 14th St
Entrance
Two driveways for
vehicle access
Reduced from two driveways to one driveway
Dog Run Not Included Incorporates approx. 2,800 SF dog run 14th St Streetscape New 4’-wide parkway Maintain 7’-wide parkway to preserve existing street

11.D
Packet Pg. 1151
25 of 34
and 8’-wide
sidewalk/walking loop
trees, where feasible
Colorado Ave
Streetscape
Shared use
path/walking loop with
double row of trees,
jogging path, and
planting buffer
Due to right-of-way and site constraints, the shared
use path width has been reduced from 12’-6” to 12’
and streetscape does not include a jogging path
Phase 2
Combo Field 3/4 Will consider grass vs.
turf, bullpens, batting
cages, and seating for
secondary field in the
design phase
Incorporates NCAA softball field, natural grass,
bullpen, batting cages, and seating at both fields
Note: Requires summary vacation for field elements
Interim Use at Future
Field 5
Practice field Flexible space for both passive and active uses in the interim, rotates future Field 5
Community Hub
Building
Include restrooms,
concessions, storage,
small office
Additional opportunity for green roof and overlook
accessible via elevated tennis/pickleball courts
Playground Universally accessible
and feature ample
integrated shade
Incorporates shade
16th St Streetscape Convert angled parking
to parallel parking
Proposes angled parking in areas where further park
expansion into 16th Street is not necessary to meet
project objectives
Engagement
Prior to master plan layout approval, the Field Sports Advisory Council (FSAC) voted to formally support transmittal of the proposed master plan to the Recreation and Parks Commission (RPC) on June 6, 2019. On July 18, 2019, RPC voted unanimously to support the master plan layout and programmatic concepts with recommendations for further consideration during the design and implementation phase—these recommendations are captured in the Council Considerations. On July 24, 2019, the Urban Forest Task Force (UFTF) expressed informal support for the plan and agreed to further review of preliminary tree species palette.

With the initiation of the design phase in spring 2025, a project website was launched to provide project information, updates, and news:
https://www.santamonica.gov/memorial-park-redevelopment-and-expansion-project Throughout the design phase, staff presented to RPC (5/15) and met with SMC, SMMUSD, Metro, and RPC ad hoc committee to share progress and obtain input. Staff presented the proposed Revised Plan to the Urban Forest Task Force (11/5); the Field Sports Advisory Council (11/5); the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental

11.D
Packet Pg. 1152
26 of 34
Justice and the Environment (11/17); Mid City Neighbors (11/18); and RPC (11/20), with members from each group expressing support for the proposal. The UFTF specifically supported a net increase in trees, a tree-shaded shared use path, and grass fields, and voted unanimously to endorse the proposed Revised Plan.

Construction Budget and Funding
The construction budget for phase 0 is between $20-$25 million. At the time of this report, approximately $10 million has been budgeted for construction from the City’s Clean Beaches and Ocean Parcel Tax Fund and the Stormwater Parcel Tax Fund and the City is seeking grant funding as described below.

Given rising costs and ongoing uncertainty, the construction budgets for Phases 1 and 2 were updated in early 2025, prior to the commencement of design, to align with realistic expectations for the scope of work. The construction budget for phases 1 and 2 is $40 million—$25 million for phase 1 and $15 million for phase 2. At the time of this report, neither phase is fully funded for construction. The City is continuing to engage with SMC and SMMUSD and is actively seeking grant funding, as described below.

Since then, preliminary cost estimates for these phases, based on the proposed Revised Plan and additional design phase input, indicate even higher construction costs. As a result, pending Council approval of the proposed Revised Plan, the construction budgets would need to be updated again.

Phase Current
Construction
Budget (2025)
Projected
Construction Budget
(2026)
Funding Secured Funding
Shortfall
0 $20-$25 million $20-$25 million $10 million $10-$15
million
1 $25 million $34-$40 million
(up to 15% value
engineering)
$18 million*
(pending final
agreement with SMC)
$16-$22
million

11.D
Packet Pg. 1153
27 of 34
2 $15 million $18-$21 million
(up to 15% value
engineering)
$0 $18-$21
million
Total $60-65 million $73-$86 million $28 million $45-$58 million
*Of the $2.75 million allocated from the $20 million SMC bond measure funds for phase 1 design and preconstruction services, staff expect to use only $2 million, preserving $18 million for construction.

Phases 0 and 1—or Phases 0,1, and 2—would only be constructed as a single project if sufficient grant awards and funding for all included phases are secured. Should funding be available exclusively for Phases 1 and 2, construction would proceed without Phase

0. If only Phase 1 is funded, it would advance independently of Phase 0, with the construction of Phase 0 deferred to coincide with Phase 2 as funding permits.

Grant Funding
On March 11, 2025, the City submitted a grant application for Round 8 of the Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership Program (ORLP). Unfortunately, the ORLP Round 8 was placed on hold and its future status is unknown.

On July 31, 2025, the City submitted a funding request in the amount of $11.75 million through the Measure W Safe Clean Water Program administered by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD). The request represents approximately 50% of the total project cost for Phase 0, with the remaining portion anticipated to be covered through local matching funds and other funding sources. Funding approval and grant administration under the Measure W Safe Clean Water Program typically follows a 12- to 18-month timeline. During the first six months, applications are reviewed and scored by various committees. Over the following six months, project funding recommendations will be developed and advanced. The final six months generally involve the investment planning process, approval by the Los Angeles County Flood Control District (LACFCD) and Department of Public Works (LACDPW) Board of Supervisors, and distribution of awarded funds through a funding transfer agreement.

11.D
Packet Pg. 1154
28 of 34
On July 29, 2025, Council adopted a resolution authorizing the application for grant funds from the California Department of Parks and Recreation Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Grant Program. On August 1, 2025, the City submitted a grant application for $6 million in LWCF funding to move forward with Phase 1.

On October 30, 2025, the City submitted a grant application for the 2025 Measure A Competitive Grant Program. The City requested $4 million in Measure A funding to help finance the elevated tennis/pickleball courts.

Below is a summary of grants pursued along with the anticipated award recommendation, final approval, and funding availability timelines.

Grant
Program
Funding
Requested
Applied Anticipated
Award Reco.

Anticipated
Final
Approval
Funds
Available
ORLP
(federal)
$15 million 3/11/2025 N/A – Grant
Paused
N/A – Grant
Paused
N/A – Grant
Paused
Measure W
(local)
$11.75
million
7/31/2025 Spring 2026 Summer 2026 Fall 2026
LWCF
(federal)
$6 million 8/1/2025 Jan 2026 Mar 2026 Summer 2026
Measure A
(state)
$4 million 10/30/2025 Mar 2026 Summer 2026 Winter
2026/27
Total $21.75 million
Alternatives
Given the remaining shortfall, even if all grant funding were awarded, Council may also consider the following alternative actions:
• Direct staff to further reduce the scope of work for each phase to align with current construction budgets—This approach is not recommended, as further

11.D
Packet Pg. 1155
29 of 34
scope reductions could result in unresolved issues at the site until future phases are implemented.
• Direct staff to update construction budgets as necessary and delay project implementation until additional funding is secured—This approach is not recommended, as construction costs would continue to rise during the delay, increasing the overall project expense.
• Eliminate elevated pickleball/tennis courts and associated structure from the proposed Revised Plan, proceed with on-grade courts in place of future Field 5, and consider incorporating the future Field 5 development as part of the Airport Conversion Project—This approach is recommended to bring the project closer to the current total construction budget of $40 million for phases 1 and 2. This alternative would maintain six total fields at Memorial Park while increasing overall playability with the addition of the combo fields. Recognizing the master plan’s objective to add a seventh field at Memorial Park, this alternative includes consideration of incorporating the future Field 5 development into the Airport Conversion Project.

PLD Relocation Update
On August 13, 2024, an Information Item describing the evaluation of possible relocation sites and scenarios, identifying the City Yards as the only feasible temporary relocation site, and serving as the final summary report closing out the PLD Relocation Process was posted. To meet scheduling requirements for design, permitting, and the timely relocation of PLD operations, staff proceeded with City Yards as the interim site selection. It is important to note that this relocation is intended to be temporary, and that identifying and securing a permanent home for PLD operations will need to be addressed in the future. The following progress has been made:
• A tent structure is proposed to protect PLD equipment and Street Services vehicles at the Flap Happy portion of City Yards. A design and engineering team has been brought on to complete the design and documentation set for

11.D
Packet Pg. 1156
30 of 34
the site and infrastructure, and to provide any additional information needed for permitting and construction bidding.
• The remainder of the operation will be accommodated within the existing City Yards facilities.
• To create the necessary space, Resource Recovery and Recycling (RRR) bins that were located at the City Yards have now been moved to the Airport under a lease agreement and the Fire Department Training Facility footprint has been reduced.

Next Steps
If directed to proceed, staff will move forward with final design and anticipates returning to Council in spring 2026 with the following:
• Request adoption of a resolution for the summary vacation of 16th Street. • Provide an update on the development of fiscal and use agreements. • Final construction scope and funding strategy based on available resources • Projected ongoing operations and maintenance costs associated with Phases 1 and 2.

Staff also recognizes and shares the concerns regarding displaced programming during construction and would provide an update to Council prior to any impacts. Internal discussions are underway to explore options and develop a plan that minimizes impacts and disruptions. Community Recreation staff have begun identifying alternative locations for programs during construction. As planning progresses, staff will continue to engage stakeholders, share information, and provide updates.

Final design and permitting are anticipated to be completed by fall 2026, with construction anticipated to begin winter 2026/27 following a competitive bidding process.

Environmental Review

11.D
Packet Pg. 1157
31 of 34
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to analyze the potential environmental impacts resulting from the implementation of the Project based on direction provided during the community outreach process of the development of the master plan. Pursuant to Section 15082 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was published on February 27, 2025, for a 30-day comment period. Additionally, a public scoping meeting was held on March 12, 2025, at Memorial Park to present the project and receive comments on the scope of the EIR.

On September 19, 2025, a Noice of Completion and Public Availability of the Draft EIR was published, commencing a 45-day public comment period for the Draft EIR. The environmental issues studied in detail in the Draft EIR include:
• Air Quality
• Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
• Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The Final EIR, which was published in November 2025, contains all comments and responses to comments received during the comment period as well as minor changes to the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR was available for a 45-day public review period, during which two comment letters were received. Responses to all comments received are included in the Final EIR. EIR Table ES-2 includes a summary of the environmental impacts that could result from the proposed project. All impacts were determined to be less than significant or can be mitigated below a level of significance through implementation of feasible mitigation measures. Accordingly, all mitigation measures identified in the EIR are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

Based on the analysis provided in the EIR, there are no significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the project. Although there were no significant impacts identified, in accordance with CEQA, the EIR studied three alternatives to the project,

11.D
Packet Pg. 1158
32 of 34
which are intended to reduce the environmental impacts of the projects. The alternatives studied respond to public comments and include:
• Alternative 1 – No Project Alternative
• Alternative 2 – Real Grass Turf Fields and Non-Plastic Playground Equipment • Alternative 3 – Reduced Development Alternative
In general, the environmentally superior alternative as defined by CEQA should minimize adverse impacts to the project site and its surrounding environment. Of the alternatives considered, the No Project Alternative is environmentally superior since it does not create new impacts; therefore, it is the environmentally superior alternative when compared to the proposed Project and other alternatives. However, the No Project Alternative would not fulfill the project objectives regarding improvements to park and recreational amenities, addressing community needs, strengthening community programs, integrating active transportation components into the design of the park, or promoting sustainability.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 states that if the environmentally superior alternative is the No Project Alternative, an EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative from among the other alternatives. Of the other alternatives considered, Alternative 2 (Use of Natural Grass Turf and Non-Plastic Playground Equipment) is considered to be the environmentally superior alternative. This alternative is currently the selected project for Council consideration. Alternative 2 would replace the two artificial turf combo fields with two real grass combo fields. As such, this alternative would minimize potential impacts related to Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and MM HAZ-1 through MM HAZ-7 would no longer be required.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
05/10/05 (Attachment E) Approved Relocation of Public Landscape Division Operations to the Fisher Lumber Site on an Interim Basis 03/22/16 (Attachment F) Memorial Park Expansion Selected as High-Priority Park Project and Incorporated into the LA Countywide Parks & Recreation Needs Assessment Report

11.D
Packet Pg. 1159
33 of 34
01/23/18 (Attachment G) Design Agreement with AHBE Landscape Architects for the Memorial Park Feasibility Study and Master Plan
10/15/19 (Attachment H) Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Master Plan Layout and Park Program Review
02/11/20 (Attachment I) Design-Build Agreement with W.E. O’Neil Corporation for Memorial Park Expansion
09/27/22 (Attachment J) Memorial Park Expansion Study Session on Restarting the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project with
a Reduced Initial Phase Aligned with Master Plan
05/23/23 (Attachment K) Resolution Authorizing Land and Water Conservation Fund Grant Program Application
08/22/23 (Attachment L) Payment Agreement with SMC to Proceed with Solicitation for Design Services
08/27/24 (Attachment M) Design Agreement with SWA Group for the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project
01/28/25 (Attachment N) Seventh Modification to Environmental Consulting Agreement for CEQA Documentation for the Project
07/29/25 (Attachment O) Resolution Authorizing Land and Water Conservation Fund Grant Program Application
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. Currently, none of the phases are fully funded for construction.

The only project funds available include $10 million for Phase 0 and up to $20 million from the SMC bond measure for Phase 1 (pending final agreement). Based on Council direction, staff would return with a recommended award and funding request, including grant awards, for construction.

Prepared By: Linda Cogswell, CIP Project Manager
Approved Forwarded to Council

11.D
Packet Pg. 1160
34 of 34
Attachments:

A. Memorial Park Additional Considerations
B. Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT)
C. Memorial Park Proposed Revised Plan (DRAFT)
D. EIR Certification Findings and Proposed Resolution
E. May 10, 2005 Staff Report
F. March 22, 2016 Staff Report (Web Link)
G. January 23, 2018 Staff Report (Web Link)
H. October 15, 2019 Staff Report (Web Link)
I. February 11, 2020 Staff Report (Web Link)
J. September 27, 2022 Staff Report (Web Link)
K. May 23, 2023 Staff Report (Web Link)
L. August 22, 2023 Staff Report (Web LInk)
M. August 27, 2024 Staff Report (Web Link)
N. January 28, 2025 Staff Report (Web Link)
O. July 29, 2025 Staff Report (Web Link)
P. Memorial Park Final EIR (Web Link)
Q. Memorial Park Final EIR - Appendix I (Web Link)
R. Memorial Park Final EIR - Appendix II (Web Link)
S. Written Comments
T. PowerPoint Presentation

11.D
Packet Pg. 1161

CITY OF SANTA MONICA

ARCHITECTURE SERVICES
Additional Items for Design
Considerations.

The Memorial Park Expansion Project
SP 2509
The Following items represent additional program and dimensional considerations to be considered by the selected design-build team during project phase 1, as directed by the City Council during their October 15, 2019 meeting:

1. Incorporation of a premier California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) baseball field;

2. Incorporation of a NCAA tournament level softball field;

3. Inclusion of elements such as bullpens, warm up areas, dugouts, seating, public address systems, and score booths at all fields;

4. Incorporating of an off-leash dog run;

5. Clustering the proposed outdoor fitness equipment in groupings;

6. Incorporating shade for the playground;

7. Consider the possible access from the Expo station and whether rotating fields 3 and 4 might provide an opportunity for permeability and entry for Expo pedestrian traffic;

8. Consider making the entrance on 14th Street, where the drop-off is located to make more of a pedestrian experience;

9. Consider making area designated as field #5 (masterplan phase 2) more flexible to include passive recreational use prior to construction of masterplan phase 2;

11.D.a
Packet Pg. 1162 Attachment: Memorial Park Additional Considerations (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment

10. Consider the addition of more community amenities, including barbecue grills;

11. Study the possibility of closing all or additional portions of 16th Street and expanding the park into that space;

12. Analyze and document the parking loss impacts on 16th Street;

13. Analyzing the tree canopy, relocating existing trees, and planting new trees where possible;

14. Examining aspects of sun and shade affecting players’ vision in determining positioning of the fields;

15. Conducting further analysis of natural turf vs. synthetic turf;

11.D.a
Packet Pg. 1163 Attachment: Memorial Park Additional Considerations (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment DRAFT June 25, 2025 1
Memorial Park
Redevelopment & Expansion
Schematic Design Alternatives
DRAFT 06/25/2025

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1164 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
Master Plan & Council Considerations
Promenade &
Entry Experience
Central Zone
Streetscape
Ball Fields
Colorado Ave
14th St
16th St (Alternatives)
Interim Landscape (Alternatives)
Playground
Community Hub
Covered Parking & Tennis/ Pickleball courts
Exercise Station & Wellness Trail
Promenade and Entry Experience
Art Activation
Considerations are addressed in the
Schematic Design Alternatives.

Remaining considerations will
be addressed in the subsequent
Preliminary Schematic Design.
* -
-
-
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
14th St
16th St

1. Incorporation of a premier California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) baseball field;

2. Incorporation of a NCAA Tournament level softball
field;

3. Inclusion of elements such as bullpens, warm up areas, dugouts, seating, public address systems, and score
booths at all fields;

14. Examining aspects of sun and shade affecting
players’ vision in determining positioning of the fields;

15. Conducting further analysis of natural turf vs.
synthetic turf; (see appendix)

13. Analyzing the tree canopy,
relocating existing trees, and planting
new trees where possible;

11. Study the possibility of closing all or additional
portions of 16th Street and expanding the park into that space;

12. Analyze and document the parking loss impacts on
16th Street;

4. Incorporating of an off-leash dog
run;

6. Incorporating shade for the playground;

9. Consider making area designated as field #5
(masterplan phase 2) more flexible to include passive
recreational use prior to construction of masterplan
phase 2;

5. Clustering the proposed outdoor
fitness equipment in groupings;

7. Consider the possible access
from the Expo station and whether
rotating fields 3 and 4 might provide an
opportunity for permeability and entry
for Expo pedestrian traffic;

8. Consider making the entrance on
14th Street, where the drop-off is
located to make more of a pedestrian
experience;

10. Consider the addition of more
community amenities, including
barbecue grills;

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1165 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
Site Plan Alternatives
Each of the Site Plan Alternatives presented in this section shares a common approach for the following program elements:
- Viability for either artificial or natural turf for the ball fields - Space allocation for community amenities, such as barbecue grills - Space allocation for a playground
- Space allocation for a dog run
- Space allocation for exercise station grouping(s)
- Footprint area for the surface parking, elevated tennis/pickleball courts, and Community Hub building - 15’-wide travel lane on Colorado Blvd, as requested by the fire department The primary differences will be highlighted in the following pages.

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1166 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2
DRAFT June 25, 2025
Site Plan Alt 1 - Ball Fields Test Fit
(NOT RECOMMENDED BY SWA TEAM)
– Challenges have been identified in
implementing Alt 1. Other accommodations
would need to be addressed and discussed
before the SWA team could consider
recommending this option.

PROS:
- Dugouts, bullpens, batting cages, & spectator
bleachers for all fields.
- Current standard Little League R-200’ for Field 2,
Field 4, and future Field 5.

CONS: - Limited circulation spaces for pedestrian &
maintenance access.
- Loss of 20’ promenade towards Colorado.
- Compromised spectator bleacher locations for
Field 3.
- Field 2 and 4 spectator seating adjacent to
streetscape and intersections.
- Reduces playground and Community Hub
footprint area.
- Impact to 16th Street entry experience between
future Field 5 & 6.
- Impact to future Field 6 location & sidewalk
width on Olympic Blvd.

Addressing Ball Field Council Considerations
Proposed:

Field 1: NCAA Softball
Field 2: Current Standard Little League
Field 3: High School Baseball
Field 4: Current Standard Little League
Futrure Field 5: Current Standard Little League
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
14th St
16th St
Program Area
Ballfield
Area of Concern
Dugouts
Bullpens
Bleachers
Shared Bullpens
& Batting Cage

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1167 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
PROS:
- Provide dugouts, bullpens, batting cages,
and bleachers for 4 out of 5 fields
- Better circulation spaces for pedestrian &
maintenance access compared to Alt 1.
- Current standard Little League R-200’ for
Field 2, Field 4, and future Field 5.
- Additional space available for community
amenities compared to Alt 1.

CONS:
- Insufficient space for dugouts and
spectator bleachers for Field 2.
- Spectator seating adjacent to the
streetscape and intersection in Field 4.
- Impact to 16th Street entry experience
between future Field 5 & 6.
- Loss of 20’ promenade towards Colorado.

Dual Softball + Current Standard Little League;
Optimizing Diamond Field sizes
Proposed:

Field 1: NCAA Softball
Field 2: Current Standard Little League
Field 3: High School Softball
Field 4: Current Standard Little League
Future Field 5: Current Standard Little League
Site Plan Alt 2 - Ball Fields Test Fit
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
14th St
16th St
Program Area
Ballfield
Area of Concern
Dugouts
Bullpens
Bleachers
Shared Bullpens
& Batting Cage
Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1168 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park PROS:
- Provide dugouts, bullpens, batting cages,
and bleachers for all fields.
- Best circulation spaces for pedestrian &
maintenance access. 20’ promenade towards
Colorado.
- Current standard Little League R-200’ for
future Field 5.
- Additional space available for community
amenities compared to Alt 1.

CONS: - Reduced dimension R-185’ for Field 2 and
Field 4 from Master Plan. Capable to have
R-200’ Little League Baseball in Field 2 if Field
1 is not in use; capable to have R-200’ Little
League Baseball in Field 4 if Field 3 is not in
use.
- Impact to 16th Street entry experience
between future Field 5 & 6.

Dual Softball + Promenade
Access from Colorado
Proposed:

Field 1: NCAA Softball
Field 2: Master Plan R-185’ dimension Field
Field 3: High School Softball
Field 4: Master Plan R-185’ dimension Field
Future Field 5: Current Standard Little League
DRAFT June 25, 2025
Site Plan Alt 2A - Ball Fields Test Fit
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
14th St
16th St
Program Area
Ballfield
Dugouts
Bullpens
Bleachers
Shared Bullpens
& Batting Cage
Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1169 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park PROS:
- Additional spaces for community amenities.

Extended Central Space, playground size
increased.
- Better entry experience at 16th and
Colorado.
- Keep Master Plan entry experience between
field 5&6 for future phases.

CONS: - Shared softball field for NCAA & High School,
loss one adult field.
- Loss of 20’ promenade towards Colorado.

Community Amenities + Entry Experiences
Proposed:

Field 1: Shared NCAA & High School Softball
Field 2: Current Standard Little League
Field 3: Current Standard Little League
Field 4: Current Standard Little League
Future Field 5: Current Standard Little League
DRAFT June 25, 2025
Site Plan Alt 3 - Ball Fields Test Fit
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
14th St
16th St
Program Area
Ballfield
Dugouts
Bullpens
Bleachers
Shared Bullpens
& Batting Cage
Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1170 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Site Plan Alt 2A: Dual Softball + Promenade
Access from Colorado
Site Plan Alt 3: Community Amenities +
Entry Experiences
DRAFT June 25, 2025
Site Plan Alt Overview
Site Plan Alt 1: Addressing Ball Field Council
Considerations
Site Plan Alt 2: Dual Softball + Current
Standard Little League;
Optimizing Diamond Field
sizes
Program Area
Ballfield
Area of Concern
Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2
Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2
Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2
Future Phases
- Not in Scope
Phase 1 Phase 2

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1171 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
Streetscape
The streetscapes within Phase 1 and 2 will be designed to follow the Master Plan with refinements as needed based on subsequent City input and development of the park’s program layout. The Site Plan Alternatives in the following section incorporate typical design conditions for Colorado Avenue and 14th Street. The Site Plan Alternatives influence 16th Street, with three alternatives accommodating angled parking and one alternative with parallel parking.

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1172 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
Colorado Ave
Existing Section

BALL FIELD
(E) Colorado Yards
4’ MIN. BALL FIELD

TRAVEL LANE

TRAVEL LANE
(per fire department input)
11’-0”
Proposed Schematic Design Section
Master Plan
Edge
15’ Eastbound
Edge
Property Line
Varies
Master Plan Section
Section 11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1173 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Colorado Avenue Plan View
0 10’ 20’ 50’ 100’
N

10.31.2025
Streetscape Design: Colorado Ave
Existing Section Master Plan Section
Proposed Schematic Design Section
Note: Utilities shown are existing per plan survey.

Depths and diameters are not to scale. DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1174 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Alternate Study
Colorado Avenue Plan View
0 10’ 20’ 50’ 100’
N

10.31.2025
Streetscape Design: Colorado Ave - Alternate Study for Increased Tree Proposed Schematic Design Section
Alternate Study Section
Note: Utilities shown are existing per plan survey.

Depths and diameters are not to scale. DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1175 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park

BALL FIELD
4’ MIN.
(E)

BALL FIELD
DRAFT June 25, 2025
14th Street
Existing Section
Proposed Schematic Design Section
(per Master Plan)
Master Plan Section
Section

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1176 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 0 10’ 20’ 50’ 100’
N

10.31.2025
Streetscape Design: 14th St
Existing Section Master Plan Section
Proposed Schematic Design Section 14th Street Plan View Note: Utilities shown are existing per plan survey.

Depths and diameters are not to scale. DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1177 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 0 10’ 20’ 50’ 100’
N

10.31.2025
Streetscape Design: 14th St - Alternate Study for Keeping Existing Trees Alternate Study Section
14th Street Plan View
Alternate Study
Proposed Schematic Design Section
Note: Utilities shown are existing per plan survey.

Depths and diameters are not to scale. DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1178 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Master Plan Section
Section
DRAFT June 25, 2025
16th Street
Existing Section
Proposed Schematic Design Section - Alt 1, 2, 2A
22 Parking Spaces 8 Parking Spaces
Proposed Schematic Design Section - Alt 3
20’
12’ 8’
12’ 8’ 12’ 8’
20’ 20’

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1179 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 16th Street Plan View
0 10’ 20’ 50’ 100’
N

10.31.2025
Streetscape Design: 16th St
Existing Section Master Plan Section
Proposed Schematic Design Section
Note: Utilities shown are existing per plan survey.

Depths and diameters are not to scale. DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1180 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
Interim Landscape Alternatives
The following two alternatives each propose a response to Council Consideration #9: Consider making area designated as field #5 (masterplan phase 2) more flexible to include passive recreational use prior to construction of masterplan phase 3.

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1181 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
Interim Landscape Alt 1
Event Lawn
34,500 SF
Movie Night
Farmers Market
Health & Wellness
Recreation Activities
Design Study: Phase 2 use & design of “Field 5” space as interim phase Flexible Event Lawn
- Replace existing ball field with open event lawn;
- Provide recreational programming to activate the space. - Minimizes cost for interim improvements and future redevelopment; - Depends on City recreation programming to activate the space.

Public Art Installation

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1182 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Design Study: Phase 2 use & design of “Field 5” space as interim phase DRAFT June 25, 2025
Interim Landscape Alt 2
(E) Field 3
Planting Barrier
Lawn Area
13,200 SF
Existing Field 3 Simple barrier
Group Classes
- Minimizes cost for interim improvements;
- Partially transfers demolition scope from Phase 2 to Phase 3; - May require additional maintenance resources compared with Alt 1.

Partial Ball Field Preservation
- Preserve existing ball field infield and backstop for practice & warm-up; - Plant buffer area with drought-tolerant plants & rocks - Can also support recreational programming for additional activation.

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1183 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park DRAFT June 25, 2025
Community Hub
+ Tennis Court Alternatives
This section includes two site plan options for the on-site parking and community hub building layout. Each option includes the same preliminary designs for the on-structure tennis/pickleball courts, 14th Street entry experience, and passenger drop-off/pick-up (for one school bus or regular passenger vehicles).

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1184 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Overview
DRAFT June 25, 2025
Community Hub + Tennis Courts - Alt 1
Skate Park
Youth Fast Pitch
Softball
Ball Field
Community Hub
Courts
Support Program
(Elevator, Storage,
Attendant)
Enclosure/Security
to Courts

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1185 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Overview
DRAFT June 25, 2025
Skate Park
Youth Fast Pitch
Softball
Ball Field
Community Hub
Courts
Community Hub + Tennis Courts - Alt 2
Support Program
(Elevator, Storage,
Attendant)
Enclosure/Security
to Courts

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1186 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park REVISED July 29, 2025
Alternatives Comparison
DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1187 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park

12.22.2025
Revised Design Alternative | Preliminary Site Plan Sketch Ball Fields
Program Areas
Limit of Work/ Phasing
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
14th St16th St
Dog Run
Promenades & Entry Experience
Future Phase Little
League Fields
Central Zone
Community Hub & Tennis/Pickleball Courts
Streetscape
1 1
1 2
2 22
2 3
3 4
4 5
5 6
6 6
Field 1: NCAA Softball (phase 1)/
6 Slow Pitch Adult Softball/
High School Baseball (phase 2)
(backstop distance 25’)
Field 2: Girls fast pitch/
Little League Baseball 193’ radius
(portable mound)
Field 3: High School Softball/
Slow pitch adult Softball/
(becomes NCAA Softball in phase 2)
Field 4: Girls fast pitch/
Little League Baseball 198’ radius
(portable mound)
Future Field 5: Little League (2025 standard
dimensions)
The Revised Design Alternative reflects
feedback on the four alternatives, based
on the preferred “2A” site plan with layout
adjustments to accommodate adult
softball and with parking structure option
2, adjacent to the community hub to
increase surface lot spaces.

DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1188 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park

12.22.2025
Program Area: Ball Fields
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
14th St16th St
0 50’ 100’
N
Note: Ball field layouts asshown extend outside the park property line and would require
vacation of a portion of the
16th Street right-of-way.

Ballfield
Dugouts
Bullpens
Bleachers/ Spectator Seating
Shared Bullpens & Batting Cage
Scoreboards
FIELD Field 1 Field 2 Field 3 Field 4 General
Batting Cage Screens
✔✔
Portable fencing
✔
Training aided items (tees, ball baskets)
✔
Portable NFHS Baseball Pitching Mound (for field)
✔✔
Portable NFHS Baseball Pitching Mound (for bullpens)
✔✔
Base anchors & caps ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
Portable Little League Baseball Pitching Mound (for field) ✔✔
NCAA Softball & NFHS Bases
✔✔
Little League Bases
✔✔
Padding for backstops
Scoreboards ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
Bat racks (all dugouts), Helmet racks (all dugouts), Padding for backstops, Foul poles, Fence toppers, Fencing, Netting, Backstops, Dugout seating, Portable score tables
✔
Field 1: NCAA Softball (phase 1)/
Slow Pitch Adult Softball/
High School Baseball (phase 2)
(backstop distance 25’)
Field 2: Girls fast pitch/
Little League Baseball 193’ radius
(portable mound)
Field 3: High School Softball/
Slow pitch adult Softball/
(becomes NCAA in phase 2)
Field 4: Girls fast pitch/
Little League Baseball 198’ radius
(portable mound)
Future Field 5: Little League (2025 standard
dimensions
DRAFT

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1189 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Alternatives Comparison Table - Site Plan
Site Plan Alt 2A:

Dual Softball + Promenade
Access from Colorado.

Revised Site Plan Alt:

Optimizing Ball Fields Layout for
Better Playability.

Site Plan Alt 3:

Community Amenities + Entry
Experiences.

Site Plan Alt 1:

Addressing Council
Considerations.

Site Plan Alt 2:

Dual Softball + Current Standard
Little League;
Optimizing Diamond Field sizes.

Council Consideration
Considerations are addressed in the Schematic
Design Alternatives.

Remaining *considerations will be addressed in
the subsequent Preliminary Schematic Design.

1. Incorporation of a premier California
Interscholastic Federation (CIF) baseball
field;
Yes.

Yes.

Yes.
**** *
Yes.

Yes. A single parking entry/
exit provided to minimize the
impact on pedestrians.

No.

Space constraints due to
ball field alternatives.

No.

Space constraints due to
ball field alternatives.

No.

Space constraints due to
ball field alternatives.

No.

Space constraints due to
ball field alternatives.

Yes.

Yes. A shared NCAA and High
School Softball field provided.

Yes. Entry experience
emphasized for Expo
pedestrian traffic.

Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes.

No.

High School Softball
provided.

No.

High School Softball provided.

No.

High School Softball provided.

No.

High School Baseball provided,
reduced dimensions.

No.

Loss of dugouts and
bleachers in Field 2 due to
space constrains.

2. Incorporation of a NCAA Tournament
level softball field;

3. Inclusion of elements such as
bullpens, warm up areas, dugouts,
seating, public address systems, and
score booths at all fields;

4. Incorporating of an off-leash dog run;

6. Incorporating shade for the
playground;

9. Consider making area designated
as field #5 (masterplan phase 2) more
flexible to include passive recreational
use prior to construction of masterplan
phase 2;

5. Clustering the proposed outdoor
fitness equipment in groupings;

8. Consider making the entrance on 14th
Street, where the drop-off is located to
make more of a pedestrian experience;

7. Consider the possible access from the
Expo station and whether rotating fields
3 and 4 might provide an opportunity
for permeability and entry for Expo
pedestrian traffic;
DRAFT REVISED July 29, 2025

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1190 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Alternatives Comparison Table - Site Plan
Council Consideration
Considerations are addressed in the Schematic
Design Alternatives.

Remaining *considerations will be addressed in
the subsequent Preliminary Schematic Design.

Yes. 8,700 SF Yes. 16,900 SF Yes. 15,600 SF Yes. 20,700 SF Yes. 1,800 SF No.

City staff has determined
closure is not feasible for
Phase 1 & 2.

No.

City staff has determined
closure is not feasible for
Phase 1 & 2.

No.

City staff has determined
closure is not feasible for
Phase 1 & 2.

No.

City staff has determined
closure is not feasible for
Phase 1 & 2.

No.

City staff has determined
closure is not feasible for
Phase 1 & 2.

Yes. 22 Parking spaces
provided.
20 parking spaces lost.

Natural or synthetic turf is
viable.

Yes. 22 Parking spaces
provided.
20 parking spaces lost.

Yes. 8 Parking spaces
provided.
34 parking spaces lost.

10. Consider the addition of more
community amenities, including
barbecue grills;

11. Study the possibility of closing all or
additional portions of 16th Street and
expanding the park into that space;

12. Analyze and document the parking
loss impacts on 16th Street;

13. Analyzing the tree canopy, relocating
existing trees, and planting new trees
where possible;
** ***

14. Examining aspects of sun and shade
affecting players’ vision in determining
positioning of the fields;

15. Conducting further analysis of natural
turf vs. synthetic turf;
No.

Space constraints due to ball
field alternatives.

No.

Space constraints due to ball
field alternatives.

No.

Space constraints due to ball
field alternatives.

No.

Space constraints due to ball
field alternatives.

No.

Space constraints due to ball
field alternatives.

Site Plan Alt 2A:

Dual Softball + Promenade
Access from Colorado.

Revised Site Plan Alt:

Optimizing Ball Fields Layout for
Better Playability.

Site Plan Alt 3:

Community Amenities + Entry
Experiences.

Site Plan Alt 1:

Addressing Council
Considerations.

Site Plan Alt 2:

Dual Softball + Current Standard
Little League;
Optimizing Diamond Field sizes.

DRAFT REVISED July 29, 2025

11.D.b
Packet Pg. 1191 Attachment: Memorial Park Alternatives Assessment (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park

12.22.2025
Proposed Revised Plan (Schematic Design)

PROPOSED - DRAFT

11.D.c
Packet Pg. 1192 Attachment: Memorial Park Proposed Revised Plan (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 0 50’ 100’ 200’
N

12.22.2025
4 5
2 3
6 14th St
16th St
Schematic Site Plan
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
11 2
2 2
Ball Fields
Bike Parking
Master Plan Future Phases
Program Areas
Site Amenity 1
Promenades & Entry Experience
Surface Parking
2 Dog Run
Mural Art Wall Opportunity
Ground Level Parking
3 Central Zone
Fire Access Route
4 Community Hub & Tennis/Pickleball Courts
Fitness Area
5 Streetscape
Table Games
Spectator Seating
Picnic Area
Playground
Future Ball Field 5/Interim Practice Field
6 6
6 Phase 1 Phase 2
Note: Ball field layout requires
summary Right of Way vacation.
1 1
5 1
14 2
9 9
3 10
10 6
7 8
8 88
8 8
123456789
10 11
4 5
6 1
2 Phase 2 Phase 2
5 1
9 9
10 10
6 8
8 Ball Fields
Program Areas 12 Promenades & Entry Experience 3 Dog Run 4 Central Zone 56 Streetscape 11 2

PROPOSED - DRAFT

11.D.c
Packet Pg. 1193 Attachment: Memorial Park Proposed Revised Plan (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Reservoir
(below grade)
Location A
(below grade) Location C
(below grade)
Location B
(below grade)
130’ x 130’ 130’ x 130’
130’ x 130’
180’ x 94’
130’ x 130’
180’ x 94’
130’ x 130’

12.22.2025
Phase 0 Stormwater Reservoir | Location Options
Colorado Ave Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd Olympic Blvd
Note: If needed, should Phase 0 not occur
with Phase 1.
14th St
16th St14th St16th St
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 1 Phase 2
Access hatch
Access hatch
Access hatch
Access hatch
Access
hatch
Access
hatch
Access hatch Access hatch
0 50’ 100’ 200’
N
0 50’ 100’ 200’
N
Phase 1 Proposed Location Phase 2 Proposed Location Options s ha s ha

PROPOSED - DRAFT

11.D.c
Packet Pg. 1194 Attachment: Memorial Park Proposed Revised Plan (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park

12.22.2025
Schematic Site Plan | Phase 1 Build Only
0 50’ 100’ 200’
N
14th St
1 2
3 5
Phase 1 Phase 2
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
16th St
5 Phase2
Ball Fields
Program Areas 12 Promenades & Entry Experience 3 Dog Run 4 Central Zone 56 Streetscape 1 1
1 2
3 6
7 8
Bike Parking
Site Amenity
Surface Parking
Mural Art Wall (Opportunity)
Ground Level Parking
Fire Access Route
Fitness Area
Table Games
Spectator Seating
Interim Planting Area
123456789
5 9
226
6 8
8 4
8 2
Community Hub & Tennis/Pickleball Courts

PROPOSED - DRAFT

11.D.c
Packet Pg. 1195 Attachment: Memorial Park Proposed Revised Plan (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park

12.22.2025
Schematic Site Plan | Phase 1 & 2 Build
0 50’ 100’ 200’
N
14th St
11 2
2 3
4 5
Phase 1 Phase 2 1
2 4
5 Phase2
2 16th St
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
Ball Fields
Program Areas 12 Promenades & Entry Experience 3 Dog Run 4 Central Zone 56 Streetscape Ball Fields
Program Areas 12 Promenades & Entry Experience 3 Dog Run 4 Central Zone 56 Streetscape 1 5
1 14
2 9
9 3
10 10
8 8
11 2
6 26
6 Bike Parking
Site Amenity
Surface Parking
Ground Level Parking
Fire Access Route
Fitness Area
Table Games
Spectator Seating
Picnic Area
Playground
123456789
10 11
8 88
2 8
Mural Art Wall (Opportunity)
Community Hub & Tennis/Pickleball Courts
Future Ball Field 5/Interim Practice Field

PROPOSED - DRAFT

11.D.c
Packet Pg. 1196 Attachment: Memorial Park Proposed Revised Plan (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park

12.22.2025
Schematic Site Plan | With Master Plan Future Phases
0 50’ 100’ 200’
N
14th St
11 3
4 5
Phase 1 Phase 2
16th St
Colorado Ave
Olympic Blvd
1 3
Phase1
1 4
5 Phase 2 Phase 2
Ball Fields
Program Areas 12 Promenades & Entry Experience 3 Dog Run 4 Central Zone 56 Streetscape Ball Fields
Program Areas 12 Promenades & Entry Experience 3 Dog Run 4 Central Zone 56 Streetscape 1 5
1 14
2 9
9 3
10 10
8 8
11 2
6 26
6 Bike Parking
Site Amenity
Surface Parking
Ground Level Parking
Fire Access Route
Fitness Area
Table Games
Spectator Seating
Picnic Area
123456789
10 11
8 88
2 22
8 Playground
Mural Art Wall (Opportunity)
Community Hub & Tennis/Pickleball Courts
Future Ball Field 5

PROPOSED - DRAFT

11.D.c
Packet Pg. 1197 Attachment: Memorial Park Proposed Revised Plan (DRAFT) (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 1 City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER ______ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

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

CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND

ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE

MEMORIAL PARK REDEVELOPMENT AND EXPANSION PROJECT
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”) requires that cities consider the environmental consequences of their actions before approving a “project”; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Preparation (“NOP”) of an EIR for the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project (“Project”) was published and circulated on February 27, 2025 with the public review period ending on April 1, 2025; and WHEREAS, a public scoping meeting for the EIR was held in person on March 12 2025; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion / Notice of Availability (“NOC/NOA”) for a Draft EIR (“Draft EIR”) was published on September 19, 2025 in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15105, the Draft EIR was circulated for a 45-day period, which ended on November 3, 2025; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts that could result from the Project and three alternatives; and

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1198 Attachment: EIR Certification Findings and Proposed Resolution (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 2 WHEREAS, the Final EIR, which includes responses to written comments on the Draft EIR, was published in January 2026; and
WHEREAS, on January 27, 2026 the City Council, received public testimony and written submittals, including the City staff report and the Final EIR, and engaged in a deliberative process; and
WHEREAS, after considering all such oral and written testimony in its decisionmaking process, the City Council desires to consider approval of Alternative 2 (Use of Natural Grass Turf and Non-Plastic Playground Equipment), which is described fully and analyzed in the Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, the City Council as Lead Agency has reviewed and considered the contents of the Final EIR in its decision-making process, and independently determined that the Final EIR has been prepared in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA guidelines;

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

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby certifies that:
1) The Final EIR for the Project was completed in full compliance with State law and the CEQA Guidelines, there was adequate public review of the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR adequately analyzes and discloses all potentially significant environmental impacts; and
2) The Final EIR was presented to the City Council, and the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR, including all comments on the Draft EIR and responses to comments, in its

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1199 Attachment: EIR Certification Findings and Proposed Resolution (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 3 decision-making process prior to acting on the Project; and 3) The Final EIR reflects the independent judgement and analysis of the City.

SECTION 2. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15128, Section 4 of the Final EIR and the Initial Study (Appendix A of the Final EIR) determined that the following environmental impacts were not considered potentially significant: aesthetics and shadow/shade effects, agriculture and forestry resources, biological resources, construction effects, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials (airport hazards, emergency response and evacuation plans, and wildland fires), hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, neighborhood effects, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation, utilities and service systems, and wildfire.

SECTION 3. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and 15092, and as analyzed in the Final EIR, the City Council finds that the following Project impacts would be less than significant without mitigation: air quality, cultural resources (historic resources), greenhouse gas emissions, and hazards and hazardous materials (hazardous emissions near schools).

SECTION 4. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15092, and as analyzed in the Final EIR, the City Council finds that the following Project impacts could be reduced to a less than significant level with the implementation of mitigation measures established in Section 10 of the Final EIR: cultural and tribal cultural resources (archaeological resources, buried human remains, and tribal cultural resources) and hazards and hazardous materials (routine use, accidental conditions, and hazardous materials sites).

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1200 Attachment: EIR Certification Findings and Proposed Resolution (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 4 SECTION 5. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091 and 15092, and as analyzed in the Final EIR, the City Council finds that Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable impacts that cannot be feasibility avoided or mitigated to below a level of significance.

SECTION 6. The Final EIR found that Alternative 2 (Use of Natural Grass Turf and Non-Plastic Playground Equipment) is the environmentally superior alternative.

Alternative 2 would replace the synthetic turf fields with natural grass turf fields and replace the plastic playground equipment with non-plastic materials, such as engineered wood fiber, wood chips/bark, pea gravel, sand, and/or metal parts. As such, Alternative 2 would avoid the use of Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) and microplastics that have potential to degrade over time, resulting in potential contamination of water and soil and potential adverse effects on human health. Under this alternative, all other components of the Project would be implemented and impacts regarding air quality, cultural and tribal cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, and hazards and hazardous materials (hazardous materials sites) would be the same as those described for the Project.

Alternative 2 has the potential to increase water demands compared to the Project and the other alternatives, due to the increased irrigation needs for the natural grass fields. However, when compared to the existing conditions and the City’s non-potable water supply, the impacts would be insignificant. Alternative 2 would meet the primary Project Objectives except for the community’s need for year-round field space. For example, the use of natural grass likely would periodically prevent the use of the fields during the rainy season, as saturated grass fields can lead to muddy and unsafe playing conditions. However, these

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1201 Attachment: EIR Certification Findings and Proposed Resolution (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park 5 conditions would be similar to existing conditions with the existing natural grass fields at Memorial Park.

SECTION 7. The preceding findings, although based primarily on conclusions in the Final EIR, have not attempted to describe the full analysis of each environmental impact contained in the Final EIR. Instead, the findings incorporate by reference the discussions and analyses in the Final EIR and supporting reference documents supporting the Final EIR’s determinations regarding the nature and severity of the impacts of the Project and mitigation measures designed to address those impacts. In making these findings, the City Council ratifies, adopts, and incorporates into these findings the analysis and explanation in the Final EIR and ratifies, adopts, and incorporates in these findings the determinations and conclusions of the Final EIR.

SECTION 8. Consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the documents which constitute the record of proceedings for approving this Project are located in the Community Development Department, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, California.

The custodian of these documents is Rachel Kwok, Environmental Planner.

SECTION 9. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution, and thenceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________
Heidi von Tongeln
Interim City Attorney

11.D.d
Packet Pg. 1202 Attachment: EIR Certification Findings and Proposed Resolution (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park IF
Council Meeting: May 10, 2005
MAY I 0 2005
Santa Monica, California
To: Mayor and City Council
From: City Staff
Subject: 160114th Street- Interim and Long Term Uses
Introduction
This report recommends that the Santa Monica City Council approve staff's recommendation for interim uses on the recently acquired property located at 1601 14th Street ("the site"), authorize staff to proceed with applicable planning approvals and support in concept the preparation of a long-term plan for the entire block for community recreation facilities as well as the potential for incorporation of a below-grade City water reservoir.

Backaround
On October 12, 2004, the City Council authorized the acquisition of the three- acre site adjacent to Memorial Park. Existing improvements on the site include a 18, 525 sf building, and four shed- type structures ranging in size from 5, 200 sf to 5, 800 sf. The remainder of the site is paved. ( Attachment A). The Big Blue Bus is storing up to 30 buses at the site until July 2005.

Discussion
Interim Use of Site
On an interim basis staff proposes to relocate the Open Space Management Division' s Public Landscape, Community Forest and Park Operations from the Santa Monica 1 iF
MAY 1 0 ' 2.005

11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1203 Attachment: May 10, 2005 Staff Report (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Airport to the site. These functions currently occupy a 6800 sf hangar and an adjacent 46, 000 sf storage yard at the Airport which construction of Airport Park will displace.

The site will serve as an interim location for Public Landscape, Community Forest and Park Operations until a permanent location is available.

To ready the site for interim use, Building A, a shed- like building located at the eastern end as shown on the attached site plan ( Attachment A) would be retrofitted with large doors and used for storage of plant materials, custodial supplies and related equipment.

A modular trailer unit will be placed on the site to provide offices, showers and restrooms for Open Space Management functions. Exterior site work will provide surface parking for staff vehicles ( 40 spaces) and city vehicles ( 66 spaces).

Necessary planning approvals include. an Administrative Approval and Architectural Review Board review. Improvements will be completed in time to allow construction of Airport Park in fall 2005. One- time costs for these improvements are estimated at between $ 300, 000 and $ 350, 000. Rental costs for the modular trailer unit, estimated at 76, 000 for three years, and on- going utility costs for the site estimated at $ 26,400 annually, will approximate the rent paid by Open Space Management to the Airport Fund for the current site and therefore can be absorbed within the division' s current budget.

Community members have expressed interest in exploring the possibility of using a portion of the site for overflow parking for Memorial Park use. A Conditional Use Permit would be required for this to occur on a regular basis. Based upon a preliminary review 2 11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1204 Attachment: May 10, 2005 Staff Report (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion of the site conditions, approximately 28 spaces are available with access from 14th Street and these spaces could be segregated from the balance of the site using existing fencing. Staff will evaluate this idea and if feasible will apply for a Conditional Use Permit.

Long Term Use
The site is located adjacent to Memorial Park. The entire block, totaling 13.4 acres, bounded by 14th and 16th Streets, Colorado Avenue and Olympic Boulevard, is owned by the City. Memorial Park occupies 10.4 acres of the block. Two baseball fields, one large multi- use sports field, four lighted tennis courts, a dog run, a children' s play area, a gymnasium, and community meeting rooms, staff offices, the Police Activities League, the new Santa Monica skatepark, public restrooms, and concession stands are located at the site. Memorial Park is heavily used by youth sports groups and City classes and leagues including Little League, Bobby Sox, Santa Monica Adult Softball League, and AYSO.

The City' s Open Space Element and The Parks and Recreation Master Plan stress the need for additional parkland and identify Memorial Park as an important open space resource in the City. Policy 1. 3 of the Open Space Element targets the acquisition of a minimum of 5 acres of new parkland, giving priority to accessible locations within the geographic heart of the community. Policy 3. 2 calls for the open space role of Memorial Park to be redefined to improve its connection to the community and to provide stronger linkages with other key resources in the City. Parkland acquisition priorities stated in 3 11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1205 Attachment: May 10, 2005 Staff Report (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion the Parks and Recreation Master Plan include acquiring sites in central locations that are accessible by the broadest cross section of residents, are adjacent to existing parks or schools, are in excess of one acre and adjoined on at least two sides by streets.

New parks are to be targeted for multiple uses, not for the exclusive use of a single recreational activity. The Master Plan further identifies the need for additional sports fields to meet existing and future demand.

To maximize the utility of a costly property acquisition, additional public uses that might be compatible have been considered by staff. The interests of the community in securing reliable, independent water led to consideration of constructing a water reservoir on the site. While further engineering analysis is required, staff believes that construction of park improvements above an underground reservoir is feasible and will be the subject of further analysis as planning for the site proceeds.

The acquisition of this site adjacent to Memorial Park is an exceptional opportunity to engage the community in a long- range planning process for phased improvements to the entire block to accommodate recreational and underground water reservoir needs.

The resulting plan would identify phased capital improvements to achieve the plan' s goals. Prior to embarking on such a process, City staff will focus on the full range of funding strategies available to support the permanent improvements and develop a planning timeline for Council consideration.
4 11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1206 Attachment: May 10, 2005 Staff Report (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Environmental Review
The proposed interim improvements are categorically exempt ( 15303 Class 3c)) under the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) in that the proposed modular unit would be a small building designed for an occupant load of 30 people or less.

BudQetlFinanciallmpact
Funds for interim improvements will be proposed for Council consideration in the context of the FY2005- 06 City budget.

Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the interim uses proposed for the site as described above, and authorize staff to initiate the planning process for these interim improvements.

Prepared by: Barbara Stinchfield, Director
Karen Ginsberg, Assistant Director
Elaine Polachek, Open Space Manager
Department of Community and Cultural Services
Attachments:

A. Site Plan
5 11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1207 Attachment: May 10, 2005 Staff Report (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion

11.D.e
Packet Pg. 1208 Attachment: May 10, 2005 Staff Report (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion 1 David Yakobson
From: Joan Moschovakis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 1:27 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Subject: Council Agenda Item 11D(Jan27,2026)Support Natural Grass at Memorial & Adopt a "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
 Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

I urge the Council to solidify this leadership by formalizing a city-wide policy that prohibits any future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf installations. Memorial Park has shown that natural grass is the preferred choice for our residents. By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Joan Moschovakis
721 24th Street
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1209 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Joan Moschovakis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 1:27 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Subject: Council Agenda Item 11D(Jan27,2026)Support Natural Grass at Memorial & Adopt a "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Joan Moschovakis
721 24th Street
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1210 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Jordan Levinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:43 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
Thank you for your work on improving Santa Monica’s parks and recreation facilities. I support the Memorial Park Redesign and appreciate the City’s long-term vision.

I’m writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that the City Council ensures pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction. Memorial Park is currently the only public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a huge number of people. This community at Memorial has changed my life - it has positive impacts on my mental and physical health, and has created intergenerational friendships that are so important in fostering community.

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Jordan Levinson
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1211 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Flo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:49 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Preserving Our Pickleball Community During the Court Closures

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I’m writing to express my deep concern about the planned closure of the pickleball courts for at least two years, without any temporary replacement options proposed.

As a Santa Monica property owner and long-time member of the pickleball community, I’ve spent the past six years playing regularly on these courts and experiencing firsthand how much they mean to so many people. What began as a sport has become a cornerstone of my daily life and a vital source of connection, health, and community. The courts are not just lines on asphalt. They are a gathering place where people of all ages, backgrounds, and abilities come together.

During especially difficult moments, including the recent fires in Pacific Palisades, the pickleball courts became a place of grounding and support. They offered a sense of normalcy, human connection, and emotional relief at a time when many of us needed it most. This community did not form by accident; it has grown organically over years of shared time, effort, and care.

From a health perspective, pickleball is my primary form of exercise. I play at least five times a week, and for many players — especially older adults — it is their main source of cardio, mobility, and social interaction. The sudden loss of the courts without alternatives will have a real and immediate impact on both physical and mental well-being.

Equally important are the friendships that have formed over time. Long-standing relationships, daily routines, and informal support systems will be abruptly dissolved if no replacement is offered. Without a temporary solution, many players will be left without a place to go, fragmenting a community that has taken years to build.

I fully understand and respect the need for long-term planning and improvements. However, a twoyear closure without any replacement courts feels unnecessarily disruptive when temporary solutions could preserve access, continuity, and community. Other cities have successfully implemented temporary or shared-use courts during transitions, and I strongly encourage Santa Monica to explore similar options.

I urge the City Council to consider the human impact of this closure and to work with the pickleball community to identify temporary replacement courts so that this vibrant, inclusive, and healthy community can continue to thrive.

Thank you for your time, your service, and your consideration.

Kind regards,
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1212 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 Florence Foote
Santa Monica Property Owner and Pickleball Player
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1213 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: ROBYN SYMON <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:05 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: PIckleball courts AGENDA ITEM 111.D
Importance: High

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
Memorial Park has a very large pickleball community with more than 7000 members. This is not just a place to play pickleball but it has become a true community with strong bonds.

I urge you to require temporary replacement pickleball courts during the long 18 -24 months of reconstruction.

Thank you!
Robyn Symon
Santa Monica Resident
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1214 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Yvonne Kawano <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Sincerely,
Yvonne Kawano, Sunset Park
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1215 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Nikki Kolhoff <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi; Heidi von Tongeln; Caroline Torosis
Subject: 1/27/26 City Council - Item 11D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy & Annex SMMUSD Property

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

In addition, in order to increase fields spaces desperately needed by our city, regardless of field type, I urge you to add to the plan that the City will work with SMMUSD to convert their former headquarters land on 16th Street to one or more rectangular fields and park space. SMMUSD does not need this land, and it is public land that should be used for the public benefit, not a private housing complex. Furthermore, it aligns with the LUCE to expand park and recreation space near public transportation. If you can't make this small expansion now, using vacant and available public land adjacent to the existing Memorial Park, why would anyone trust you with the Airport land? Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Regards,
Nikki Kolhoff
Santa Monica Resident and Voter
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1216 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Ralph Mechur <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:54 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: agenda item 11D

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
I'm writing in support of the Memorial Park plan as proposed, including the installation of natural grass on the fields, if there is a strong commitment to maintain and manage them as needed to be safe.

Unfortunately grass fields in Santa Monica have generally not been properly maintained or managed and become a mix of dirt and tufts of grass and often full of divots and gopher holes, which leads to serious accidents resulting in sprain, broken bones and an inability to control balls.

Please ensure that a first-class maintenance and control of use program is part of the future of the park.

Additionally, please ask staff to review and report back on the use of artificial turf in other locations of the City. Many homeowners and apartment properties are installing artificial turf. If using the most environmentally positive turf is not acceptable in our public spaces, should what is typically lesser quality product be installed anywhere in Santa Monica. Most property drains to the streets and to our Ocean. Our pets ingest debris from turf installed on yards and parkways (which are public property).

Sincerely,
--
Ralph Mechur
1109 Centinela Ave.

Santa Monica, CA 90403
m: 310-721-1254
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1217 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Neve Garcia-Langley <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

As a concerned community member and part of Samohi's student environmental club, Team Marine, I urge the Council to solidify this leadership by formalizing a city-wide policy that prohibits any future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf installations. Memorial Park has shown that natural grass is the preferred choice for our residents. By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Neve Garcia-Langley
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1218 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Brian Sweeney <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:54 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, and Honorable Council Members:

I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community in choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

I also urge the Council to solidify this leadership by formalizing a city-wide policy that prohibits any future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf installations and adopts the following edits to staff's proposal:
· No new City-owned artificial turf sports fields will be installed in the City of Santa Monica. · Existing City-owned grass fields will be maintained as grass fields. · Existing City-owned artificial turf fields will be replaced as artificial turf fields. with durable natural alternative materials that meet the city's needs. [Edit #1] · The City will explore options to work with independent and industry experts to develop a request for information on sustainable artificial and durable natural alternative materials that continue to meet the City’s needs for environmental and human health, safety, playability, maintenance, and cost. [Edit #2]
1) Edit #1:

In the Memorial Park EIR Resolution, City staff writes, "The Final EIR found that Alternative 2 (Use of Natural Grass Turf and Non-Plastic Playground Equipment) is the environmentally superior alternative. Alternative 2 would replace the synthetic turf fields with natural grass turf fields and replace the plastic playground equipment with non-plastic materials, such as engineered wood fiber, wood chips/bark, pea gravel, sand, and/or metal parts. As such, Alternative 2 would avoid the use of Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) and microplastics that have potential to degrade over time, resulting in potential contamination of water and soil and potential adverse effects on human health."
Are we really then still planning to install artificial turf even though we know and admit we know that it will contaminate our water and soil and have adverse effects on human health? We're going to install it again and have little kids play on it? How does that comport with the City's obligations under the Sustainability Rights Ordinance?
I'm hopeful that's not the case, and that Council will make the right decision for human health and the environment.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1219 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 2) Edit #2:

There is no such thing as sustainable artificial turf, and there never will be. It's a fossil fuel product. Just because it's painted green doesn't make it's "green" in the environmental sense.

And not only is it a fossil fuel product, but it's also not recyclable. The State of California is currently suing the Exxon facility where turf manufacturer TenCate claimed it was sending these plastic carpets for falsely claiming what they're doing is recycling: https://oag.ca.gov/news/pressreleases/attorney-general-bonta-sues-exxonmobil-deceiving-public-recyclability-plastic.

So where do these plastic rolls end up when inevitably degrade past the point of their useful "life"? TenCate now claims to send carpet rolls to Louisiana's Cancer Alley, where, it has been confirmed by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality that they are not "recycling" old plastic turf carpets.

Is Santa Monica really going to send our garbage to Cancer Alley? What about environmental justice or leadership on sustainability? And even if we accept burning as recycling (ridiculous), the end result is methane spewed into the air -- is that what we as a community want to contribute to? And if anyone has any doubt that these products are not sustainable, please take a look at the City's already-adopted policy on artificial
turf: https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/OSE/Categories/Landscape/Why_Artificial_Tu rf_is_not_rebated.pdf. Artificial turf. We already don't rebate for artificial via our "Cash for Grass" program because "[a]rtificial turf does not support bio-diversity;...does not foster soil health; [p]roduction of (virgin) synthetic turf components are associated with significant greenhouse gas emissions...;is not easily recycled...; can be a contributor to the heat island effect...;.has no ability to sequester carbon...; [and] any existing chemicals may runoff directly into storm drains and waterways without the beneficial filtration that live vegetation or mulch provides..." Note that these problems are even worse with more "modern" turf because it contains significantly more plastic threading.

How can the City claim, then, that it's even possible have "sustainable" artificial turf? And how could we install artificial turf again after recognizing these issues? The healthy and environmentally-responsible answer, of course, is that we can't, and I'm confident -- that with your leadership -- we'll make the right decision for health and safety and our environment.

Thank you all so much for your consideration.

Best wishes,
Brian Sweeney
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1220 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Cynthia Rose <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Caroline Torosis
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Support Agenda Item 11D: Natural Grass at Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project with a "No New Turf" Policy
Attachments: 2026-01 Agenda Items 11C and 11D_CC SaMoSSA.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and City Council:

Please find attached our letter in support the City of Santa Monica’s Natural Grass in the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project with a "No New Turf" Policy. --
Cynthia Rose
Co-Chair
Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance
SaMoSafeStreets.org
I acknowledge with respect and gratitude the Tongva, Kizh, and Chumash Peoples on whose traditional territory I live and work.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1221 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and

January 27, 2026
RE: Agenda item 11C and 11D

Support the City of Santa Monica’s Park and Recreation Vision Plan Draft, Support Natural Grass at Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project with a "No New Turf" Policy Dear Mayor Torosis and City Council:

We are writing to you today as climate and environmental advocates to share our enthusiastic input as residents, community leaders and on behalf of the Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance to express our strong support for the City of Santa Monica’s Park and Recreation Vision Plan (PRVP) - and its recognition of the “City as Habitat.” We are, however, strongly opposed to any artificial turf in Santa Monica including as proposed in the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project.

We appreciate the tremendous amount of data and analysis collected and included in the PRVP as well as the high level of community engagement and outreach. This plan is highly anticipated and a long time in the making.

We are excited to see the affirmations and visions it presents. Our City is indeed a Habitat. In accordance with the Precautionary Principle, which guides our Sustainable City Plan, the highest priority must always be “do no harm” to our ecosystem and environment as well as to our community. We applaud the Memorial Park Project having removed synthetic turf from the design and making fields 1 through 4 to be natural grass! Significantly, regarding the question of artificial turf versus grass issue, we strongly oppose any planned implementation of artificial turf. Artificial turf has stifling effects on biodiversity and our delicate ecosystem, and negatively impacts our environment, its inhabitants and, in particular, our vulnerable youth. Installation of artificial turf is in direct conflict with our City’s environmental and sustainability commitments and goals established and affirmed in our adopted Sustainable City Plan, Sustainability Rights Ordinance (SRO), and the Climate Action and Adaptability Plan. Plastic, fake grass unequivocally fails to uplift Santa Monica’s aspiration to meet the Living Community Challenge that “Imagine communities that function like a forest ecosystem.” Grass provides oxygen and breaths; plastic suffocates us and our environment.

Saying we need turf for playing access is a false choice. We don’t have to choose between access and grass.

We now know with new grasses and new maintenance methods we can indeed have durable, hardy, water-smart fields. Let’s choose healthy access to sports fields for our community.

As supporters of more green space and nature for our growing population, we are delighted to see the confidence to aim BIG. The City’s park and playing field acreage must reflect the City’s and community’s commitments to ambitious sustainability leadership and aspirations to benefit current and future generations with connections to the natural environment, including the grass beneath our feet. As we know the national average is 10.6 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents; our city offers a mere 1.4 acres— park poor by any calculation. This lack of healthy and natural green space negatively impacts our Southern California ecosystem and harms the health of Santa Monicans. Any installation of artificial turf harms this connection and degrades our environment. As we AIM BIG with a minimum of 5 park acres/1000 residents in our Park Vision, we must also embrace the goal to take us forward toward a healthier future without degrading our environment with chemically laden, plastic artificial turf.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1222 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and As the PRVP expands our ambition to increase park system acreage and we embark on the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project, it is imperative that the playing fields are grass and not synthetic, artificial turf for both the safety and health of the children, youth or adults who would use the fields for sports and play and to ensure that the natural ecosystems are not polluted by microplastics, potential PFAs or other toxins. Additionally, serious risk to athletes playing on artificial turf has been reported in the National Library of Medicine—increased Lower Extremity Injury Rates on Artificial Turf Versus Natural Grass Surfaces. This artificial turf also creates heat islands exacerbating climate crisis conditions and undermining our climate resilience. In fact, the heat of the turf can be as high as 200º F, causing burns to athletes or others playing. These temperatures are unhealthy and uninviting for anyone or anything living. Healthy connections and healthy play need healthy fields.

As we expand and add to our parks, it is imperative that we not ignore the harm incurred by implementing artificial turf into our ecosystem (City Habitat). The vitality of our natural resources presents us with a fundamental obligation to care for them as the health of the ecosystems ensures our personal and public health. The installation of artificial turf transgresses the SRO and indeed would violate it. The City has a legal commitment to protect Nature and a commitment and obligation to protect our community. We cannot immerse ourselves in Nature with artificial turf that simultaneously degrades our ecosystem and natural habitat. We must maintain our connections to Nature that are healing and beneficial to our physical and mental well-being.

We must maintain and not destroy the synergy of natural ecosystems and the City as Habitat for health and human physical and cognitive health.

In summation we urge the City Councilmembers to:
• Adopt the goal of a minimum of 5 park acres/1000 residents in the PRVP. • Reject the “false choice narrative” of more access to fields with artificial turf over natural grass. • Completely fulfill the ambitions of the PRVP, the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project by adopting the recommendations of the Sustainability Commission (Nov 17th) 1) No new artificial sports fields will be installed in the city; 2) Existing grass fields will be maintained as grass fields; and 3) When existing artificial turf fields reach the end of their useful life, the city will replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

We urge the City Council to formally adopt a moratorium on synthetic turf on public land. Commit to investing in innovative and the proven approach solution of a regenerative, organic field maintenance program to transitioning our existing turf fields and ensuring that all city fields moving forward are durable, highly playable, and truly safe. Let's uphold our commitment to a living "City as a Habitat.

Sincerely,
Cynthia Rose Cris Gutierrez
Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Street Alliance Co-Chair, Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance SaMoSafeStreets.org
The Santa Monica Safe Streets Alliance is a collaboration of local advocacy and community organizations and multigenerational community members that together work to promote and support the implementation of our community’s shared goals of complete streets that are designed to be vibrant, safe, equitable, sustainable and welcoming to everyone.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1223 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Added key points on Artificial Turf vs. Grass:
1) Installing new turf is in direct opposition of the City's sustainability goals and adopted policy on artificial turf. The City does not rebate for artificial turf installations via its "Cash for Grass" program because artificial turf "(1) does not support bio-diversity...(2) does not foster soil health...(3) production of (virgin) synthetic turf components are associated with significant greenhouse gas emissions...(4) artificial turf is not easily recycled....(5) artificial turf can be a contributor to the heat island effect...[and] (6) artificial turf can lead to significant runoff..." from the Santa Monica's Office of Sustainability and the Environment (OSE) Why Artificial Turf is not Rebated
Note: all of these negative impacts exist with any synthetic turf product regardless of what the fossil fuel/ plastics industry tells us re their testing some new formulations claiming they do not contain or shed PFAS.

E&E News by POLITICO’ Our community has been deceived': Turf wars mount over PFAS Across the country, bitter fights are playing out over synthetic grass surfaces. Some towns already have buyer's remorse after finding PFAS in their turf.

As California installs more artificial turf, health and environmental concerns multiply Retail and marketing data suggest California is home to more synthetic turf than any other place in the world — with schools making up one of the largest sectors. Yet, Californians consistently say they want less plastic, PFAS and other contaminants in their environment. What gives? California is now poised to ban products containing PFAS with Senate Bill 682 – we can preclude the harm to humans and our environment by banning Artificial Turf in Santa Monica. California Lawmakers Approve Bill to Ban PFAS in More Consumer Products - SM Mirror 2) We must recognize that there's nothing green about carpeting the earth with plastic. Beverly Hills recently banned new installations of synthetic turf on people's front lawns (and will be requiring that existing installations are replaced within the next 15 years). Los Angeles Councilmember Bob Blumenfield has also moved to have Los Angeles consider banning new synthetic turf installations on city property (as well as remove and replace at LAUSD property.) Santa Monica has always been a leader with a proud history of sustainability and environmental leadership. We must not fall back or slide backwards: we need to remain in the forefront of protecting our environment, ecosystem and our CHILDREN.

In 2025 the Santa Monica City Council began the discussion to consider “Make Polluters Pay” with a resolution to support AB 1243 / SB 684. Banning artificial turf in Santa Monica would mean we would not have to go after the polluters to pay for the harm they do. We'd preclude the harm in the first place.

LA passed a resolution already. Los Angeles City Council Supports Resolution to Make Polluters Pay; Local Elected Officials from Across the State Express Support for Polluter Pays Climate Superfund Act - Last Chance Alliance
"According to the Synthetic Turf Council, the average athletic field uses 400,000 pounds of infill and 40,000 pounds of artificial turf carpet. In addition, https://archive.ph/o/ro1Jc/https://dtsc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/ sites/31/2024/09/Artificial-Turf-Workshop-Slides_DTSC_Accessible.pdf [from CalEPA] that an average synthetic turf field loses between 2,000 and 3,000 pounds of microplastic fibers every year." 3) Regardless of what the plastics/fossil industry professes–synthetic turf has not been proven recyclable.

Attorney General Bonta Sues ExxonMobil for Deceiving the Public on Recyclability of Plastic Products “The first-of-its-kind lawsuit seeks to hold one of the largest petrochemical companies in the world accountable for misleading the public on plastic’s recyclability and polluting California’s environment and communities SAN FRANCISCO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the filing of a lawsuit against ExxonMobil for allegedly engaging in a decades-long campaign of deception that caused and exacerbated the global plastics pollution crisis.”
4) Santa Monica prides itself on critical inquiry and self-expression. By contrast, synthetic turf manufacturers are suing scientists for independently researching their products. 5) Synthetic turf actually has a higher upfront cost than natural grass alternatives (Interestingly, at the May SMMUSD Board Meeting, Carey Upton said they have roughly the same cost over the life cycle of the synthetic turf.)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1224 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:37 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems; Oliver Chi
Cc: Recreation and Arts Department; John Cyrus Smith; John Smith; Barry Rosenbaum; [email protected]; Karen Melick; Maryanne LaGuardia; Steven Johnson; Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Sonam Makker; Noe Mendoza; Jon Kean; Maria LeonVazquez; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Jennifer Smith; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Sion Roy; [email protected]
Subject: City Council 1/27/2026 - Items 11C and 11D and City Staff Recommended Ban on New Artificial Turf Installation - SUPPORTED by Wilmont Board

EXTERNAL
Date: 1/27/2026
SUBJECT: Support of Items 11C and 11D AND SUPPORT for the City Staff Recommended Ban on New Artificial Turf Installation
Dear Mayor Torosis, Council Members and City Manager Chi, The Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) is reaffirming our continued commitment and support of the 12/28/2025 letter
that we previously sent to your attention supporting an immediate prohibition of new installation of artificial turf on locally owned public
land in Santa Monica. The letter was co-signed by Friends of Sunset Park, North of Montana Association (NOMA), Pico Neighborhood
Association, Santa Monica Mid City Neighbors, Santa Monica Northeast Neighbors and this Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition
(Wilmont) board.

This wide consensus serves to support the strong community support for grass playing fields. We encourage you to adopt the
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1225 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 recommendations in Agenda Items 11C and 11D and support the city staff recommended ban on new artificial turf installation.

Please take the important next step and direct City staff to develop a comprehensive plan to properly maintain the current GRASS fields
and to develop new GRASS playing fields to support the amount of playing fields that are needed in Santa Monica.

Wilmont and other neighborhoods rely on our schools (i.e. Lincoln Middle School and Roosevelt) for access to safe and
environmentally friendly playing fields and we encourage you to also work with the SMMUSD and SMC to explore ways to extend
the prohibition of artificial turf installation to our schools as well.

Many thanks,
The Board of Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont) CC: Members of Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commission, SMMUSD Board of Education and SMC Board of Trustees
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1226 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: Holly Silvers <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:34 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy Attachments: Silvers-Granelli Turf vs Grass.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
My name is Holly Silvers-Granelli. I am a resident and business owner in Santa Monica. I am a Physical Therapist and hold a PhD in applied physiology and biomechanics. I and am the current research director for Major League Soccer and sit on the medical board for the NFL, US Soccer Federation and FIFA. I have published extensively on injury mitigation in sports. Every athlete we have polled categorically prefers natural grass over artificial turf fields.

NFL players overwhelmingly favor grass. The NFLPA has repeatedly called for all-grass fields, and survey reporting around the league cites that 90% of athletes preferring grass.

I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Please see my attached letter that I constructed to scientifically support this endeavor. Keep kids safe, injury free and playing under optimal conditions!
Sincerely,
Holly Silvers-Granelli, PhD, MPT
Research Director - Major League Soccer/FIFA Female Football Initiative Sunset Park - Homeowner and Business owner
Mom of two Grant Elementary Students
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1227 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and

SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA FIELD SPORTS ADVISORY COUNCIL
To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Holly Silvers-Granelli. I am a resident and business owner in Santa Monica.

I am a Physical Therapist and hold a PhD in applied physiology and biomechanics. I and am the current research director for Major League Soccer and sit on the medical board for the NFL, US Soccer Federation and FIFA. I have published extensively on injury mitigation in sports. Every athlete we have polled categorically prefers natural grass over artificial turf fields. NFL players overwhelmingly favor grass. The NFLPA has repeatedly called for all-grass fields, and survey reporting around the league cites that 90% of athletes preferring grass.

A recent NFL study demonstrated that playing on synthetic turf resulted in a 16% increase in lower extremity injuries per play than that on natural turf (IRR, 1.16; 95% CI,

1.10-1.23). The authors concluded that there is a biomechanical mechanism that is consistent with the notion that synthetic turf surfaces have a causal impact on lower extremity injury. (Mack, 2019) A study performed in youth football investigating the role of surface with respect to concussion rate found that during forward, backward and side falls, there is a significantly greater impact deceleration on synthetic turf compared to the natural grass surfaces (P < .05). This means that the impact of falling (head to ground) is more deleterious on synthetic surfaces compared to grass. (Villaneuva, 2024).

The injury rates of inner thigh injury in MLS are higher on turf and require more time to recover. Injuries occurring on grass were associated with a 9.6-day shorter return to play (RTP) than those on artificial turf (β = -9.56; P = .010) (Forsythe, 2025). A recently published systematic review suggests a higher rate of foot and ankle injuries on artificial turf, both old-generation and new-generation turf, compared with natural grass. (Gould, 2023)
Artificial turf is an important risk factor to consider for knee ligament injuries in NCAA football. Injury rates for PCL tears were significantly increased on artificial turf as compared with natural grass. Lower NCAA divisions (II and III) also showed higher rates of ACL injuries during competitions on artificial turf versus natural grass. (Loughran, 2019)
YOUTH SPORTS: Turf-related abrasions are well-documented in youth and high school sports, especially soccer, football, and field hockey. They are less frequent on natural grass because the surface is softer and cooler. Studies of high school football show Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1228 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and players are 2–3x more likely to sustain skin abrasions on turf compared to grass. (Mainly superficial, but can be painful and limit play.)
Abrasion (“Turf Burn”): Turf burns are common on turf compared to grass: Turfrelated abrasions are well-documented in youth and high school sports, especially soccer, football, and field hockey. They’re less frequent on natural grass because the surface is softer and generally cooler. Studies of high school football show players are 2–3x more likely to sustain skin abrasions on turf compared to grass. (Mainly superficial, but can be painful and limit play.) (Ekstrand, 2019) Infection Risks: MRSA & staph concerns: Turf burns can act as an entry point for infection. Several epidemiologic reports in youth/high school football teams link turf abrasions with MRSA outbreaks, especially when fields or equipment hygiene is poor. (Begier, 2004) Risk factors include Turf abrasions are not being cleaned properly, sharing pads/equipment, warmer, humid climates (where turf retains heat and sweat more than grass)
Sports and Performance: Deceleration & Cutting: Biomechanical loading:

Deceleration maneuvers generate higher peak ground-reaction forces on turf than grass, meaning joints (especially knee/ankle) experience greater stress when stopping quickly which increases risk. Controlled lab studies confirm that turf surfaces provide greater rotational traction, which increases mechanical load at the knee/ankle compared to grass.

Athlete Self-Regulation / Behavior Changes: Soccer & rugby players: Athletes report avoiding full-commitment slides, hard cuts, and maximal accelerations on turf because they perceive the surface as riskier (more abrasions, higher joint stress).

Qualitative interviews highlight that players describe “changing playing style to reduce injury risk” when on artificial turf. In NFL players, equipment and performance reports show athletes often adjust footwear (shorter studs/cleats) and modulate intensity on turf to minimize perceived non-contact injury risk. This regulation may impact the injury data that is reported. Athletes inherently change behavior to mitigate their risk on artificial turf. They cut, decelerate and rotate more slowly, therefore minimizing their risk profile.

This letter does not address the ecological and environmental impacts of turf. It would behoove our community to continue to support natural grass surfaces, particularly in a climate that can support this year round. We can decrease injury risk, infection risk and Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1229 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and long term osteoarthritis risk to our recreation athletes. Artificial turf is not a maintenance free surface, nor should it be reflected as such.

Holly Silvers-Granelli, PhD, MPT
Director of Research, Major League Soccer
References:

Begier EM, Frenette K, Barrett NL, Mshar P, Petit S, Boxrud DJ, Watkins-Colwell K, Wheeler S, Cebelinski EA, Glennen A, Nguyen D, Hadler JL; Connecticut Bioterrorism Field Epidemiology Response Team. A high-morbidity outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among players on a college football team, facilitated by cosmetic body shaving and turf burns. Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Nov 15;39(10):1446-53. doi:

10.1086/425313. Epub 2004 Oct 26. PMID: 15546080.

Ekstrand J, Nigg BM. Surface-related injuries in soccer. Sports Med. 1989 Jul;8(1):56-62. doi: 10.2165/00007256-198908010-00006. PMID: 2675255.

Forsythe B, Hand C, Bohn C, Hand F, Chang J, Khazi-Syed D, Borque K, McCullough K.

Adductor Injuries in Major League Soccer: A 10-Year Analysis of Injury Rate and Return to Play, and Performance Metrics by Player Position. Orthop J Sports Med. 2025 Aug 19;13(8):23259671251360436. doi: 10.1177/23259671251360436. PMID: 40843097; PMCID: PMC12365463.

Gould HP, Lostetter SJ, Samuelson ER, Guyton GP. Lower Extremity Injury Rates on Artificial Turf Versus Natural Grass Playing Surfaces: A Systematic Review. Am J Sports Med. 2023 May;51(6):1615-1621. doi: 10.1177/03635465211069562. Epub 2022 May

20. PMID: 35593739.

Loughran GJ, Vulpis CT, Murphy JP, Weiner DA, Svoboda SJ, Hinton RY, Milzman DP.

Incidence of Knee Injuries on Artificial Turf Versus Natural Grass in National Collegiate Athletic Association American Football: 2004-2005 Through 2013-2014 Seasons. Am J Sports Med. 2019 May;47(6):1294-1301. doi: 10.1177/0363546519833925. Epub 2019 Apr 17. PMID: 30995074.

Mack CD, Hershman EB, Anderson RB, Coughlin MJ, McNitt AS, Sendor RR, Kent RW.

Higher Rates of Lower Extremity Injury on Synthetic Turf Compared With Natural Turf Among National Football League Athletes: Epidemiologic Confirmation of a Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1230 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Biomechanical Hypothesis. Am J Sports Med. 2019 Jan;47(1):189-196. doi:

10.1177/0363546518808499. Epub 2018 Nov 19. PMID: 30452873.

Villanueva NC, Chun IKH, Fujiwara AS, Leibovitch ER, Yamamoto BE, Yamamoto LG.

Impact Deceleration Differences on Natural Grass Versus Synthetic Turf High School Football Fields. Hawaii J Health Soc Welf. 2024 Jan;83(1):4-9. PMID: 38223462; PMCID:

PMC10782390.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1231 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 4 David Yakobson
From: Alon Peled <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Alon Peled
Sunset park
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1232 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 David Yakobson
From: alina Bezdikian <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:02 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Hello Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for your continued work on removing artificial turf from Santa Monica, specifically from the Memorial Park plan. Hopefully, that stance will also be taken with any new sports fields installed in the city. Please replace all artificial turf fields with grass fields and maintain that grass or other natural alternative materials. Artificial turf is unhealthy and does not fit with a green Santa Monica.

Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a sustainable future for Memorial Park. Let's have a city-wide policy for prohibiting artificial turf.

Thank you,
Alina Bezdikian
Pico Neighborhood
[email protected]
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1233 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: dario seastedt <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Pickleball Courts

EXTERNAL
Hello,
Please do not close the pickleball courts without any replacements.

Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1234 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Santa Monica Forward <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:26 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox
Cc: [email protected]; Bradley Ewing; [email protected] Subject: Agenda Item 11-D, Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project Needs to Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A “No New Turf” Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and City Council Members:

Santa Monica Forward supports the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. However, in accordance with those fields as designated, it is important to put into place a city-wide policy that prohibits any new synthetic turf installations. Over the last year, residents have been helping City leaders to understand why their choice of natural grass is the preferred choice especially in Santa Monica where being a national and an international sustainability leader has been meaningful for more than thirty years.

We urge the Council to adopt the full Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment recommendation of November 17, 2025: 1) No new artificial sports fields will be installed in the city; 2) Existing grass fields will be maintained as grass fields; and 3) When existing artificial turf fields reach the end of their useful life, the city will replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

Saying we need artificial turf for access is a false choice. We don’t have to choose between access and grass. New grasses and new maintenance methods can give us durable, hardy, water-smart fields.

Let’s choose healthy access to sports fields for our community.

We urge you to approve the Memorial Park Project incorporating the recommendation of the Sustainability Commission.

Thank you,
Sam Shapiro-Kline and Brad Ewing
Co-Chairs, Santa Monica Forward
--
We are working for a diverse, progressive, sustainable and equitable Santa Monica.

SantaMonicaForward.org
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1235 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: Alex Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:38 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Request for replacement temporary pickleball courts- Agenda Item 11.D

EXTERNAL
Dear Sir or Madam:

I kindly request that you make available temporary replacement pickleball courts if you are going to go ahead with your plans to reconstruct the Memorial Park courts. I have been playing pickleball there for many years and will need a place to continue playing while this project finalizes. Agenda Item1 1.D Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Alex H. Lee
CFO
Collective Concepts

TJS LLC
Multi Strategy Digital

The information contained in this transmission is confidential and intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by return email or by telephone at 213.760.3113
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1236 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Carol Dickinson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:07 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SUPPORT NATURAL GRASS AT MEMORIAL AND ADOPT A "NO NEW TURF POLICY

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
Thank you for choosing natural grass for Memorial Park. Please support a policy of no new taxpayer spending on fake grass. When turf fields need to be replaced, please replace them with natural grass. This is essential for the health of our children.

Sincerely,
Carol Dickinson
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1237 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Connie O'Neill <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 4:54 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council Agenda Item 11D (Jan 27, 2026): Support Natural Grass at Memorial & Adopt a "No New Turf" Policy
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Connie O'Neill, Northeast Neighbors
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1238 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Elisabeth Green <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 6:03 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Gleam Davis; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Kevin McKeown Fwd; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: I oppose agenda item D, redevelopment of Memorial Park Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
As a Santa Monica renter who has used Memorial Park for years, I oppose the Revised Plan to the City’s Recreation and Parks redevelopment of Memorial Park for the following reasons and make the following demands.

1. Maintain in place all of the old growth pine trees at Memorial Park. The old growth pine trees provide environmental value because of their Paris Agreement Article 6 compliant additional carbon removals.

Require any developer to quantify those Paris Agreement Article 6 compliant additional carbon removals in any environmental impact statement and show how they plan to plant trees to maintain the quantity of carbon removal. The current posted EIR omits all such information. Note the callous disregard for the services provided by the old growth pine trees, including shade, wildlife habitat, carbon removals, and absorbing harmful airborne particles and gaseous pollutants, on page 27. I have seen wild hawks hunting from the old growth pines at Memorial Park. The cruelty of forcing the vulnerable wildlife to locate different habitat is intolerable.

2. Enlarge the existing fenced-in, leash-free dog area. Or, finish fencing in one of the existing baseball fields and leave a gate unlocked for unleashed pets.

3. Maintain all of the buildings where they are. Repurpose them. Every environmental impact statement should quantify the greenhouse gas emissions due to construction and other planned activities. The current posted EIR states that the planned construction will emit more than a ton of poisonous carbon monoxide per week into the air we breathe, on page 32. Carbon monoxide poisons red blood cells, causes fatigue, and stays in the bloodstream. I would rather leave the park the way it is than to breathe carbon monoxide.

4. Any development of Memorial Park should be zero emissions using solar-powered tools. At the very least, the City should hire only those humans who have each offset her own lifetime greenhouse gas emissions.

5. Convert the lumber buildings into parking structures. Removing a row of parking spaces on 16th Street removes parent’s ability to watch their kids play from their cars.

6. Repair the existing electric vehicle charging station. Deliver dozens or hundreds more solar-powered charging stations. Make it a priority to enforce EV charging station parking signs every time any citizen calls in a violation. Accept as evidence photos of the displayed charging time and videos of the actions of unplugging and replugging to reset the timer to evade the automatic fine for exceeding the three hour time limit.

7. Memorial Park needs an outdoor strength training area for adults, perhaps like the one reserved for children where police officers chase away adults who work out there when children are not present.

Consider adding the kind of circuit training equipment that was installed at Reed Park.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1239 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 8. The City of Santa Monica should either leave public restrooms unlocked at night or open them earlier in the morning. Or, leave plastic bags outside next to trash cans or next to the bathrooms with a sign saying please tie your excrement securely in the plastic bag so that flies don’t transfer bits of your excrement to food within a radius of a mile or however far the local flies travel.

9. No concession stand should be allowed to increase the risk of obesity or incidents of children buying or nagging their parents to buy food. Why do posted signs prohibit leaving food at parks? The City is not building a professional ballpark but only a field to practice professional ball.

10. Put only solar-powered charging stations on top of any parking structure. Putting tennis courts on top of a parking structure will require players to (1) breathe the exhaust fumes of cars in the parking structure, and, (2) take the elevator or stairs to retrieve a lost ball.

Elisabeth Green
1223 Wilshire Blvd #1656
Santa Monica, California 90403
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1240 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 4 David Yakobson
From: John Grienenberger <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Subject Line: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During the redesign of Memorial
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
My family and I have lived in Santa Monica since 2013. We are homeowners and business owners.

My kids grew up in the Santa Monica Public school system. I’m not kidding when I say that Pickle Ball has changed my life. It helped me to lose 30 pounds, make a bunch of new, great friends, and improve a bunch of my old friendships. I also support three businesses in Santa Monica in the Pickleball domain. I’m a member at Pickletown, I used to be a member and still play sometimes at Pickle Pop, and I support the Santa Monica Pickleball Center. These businesses have been important new additions to our city.

Thank you for your work on improving Santa Monica’s parks and recreation facilities. I support the Memorial Park Redesign and appreciate the City’s long-term vision.

I’m writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction.

Memorial Park is currently the only place in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large community.

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
John Grienenberger
_____________________________________________
John Grienenberger, PhD
Executive & Clinical Director
Community West
Youth and Young Adult
Mental Health and Wellbeing
www.communitywesttreatment.com
310-699-6658
[email protected]
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1241 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 _____________________________________________

CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING: This communication may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable state or federal law. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying of the communication is strictly prohibited. If you received the communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message and deleting the message and any accompanying files from your system.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1242 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 6 David Yakobson
From: Lynn Bowers <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 8:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item 11.D
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
I am a member of the Santa Monica Pickleball Club and have enjoyed playing Pickleball for over 4 years at Memorial Park. Memorial Park is where I learned to play. Hundreds of people of all ages and skill levels play every day at Memorial Park. Many like me are Santa Monica residents. I am asking that the City Council help the Santa Monica Pickleball Club find courts for club members to have Pickleball Open Play, Round Robins etc. while the renovations at Memorial Park take place beginning in 2027.

Thank you…Lynn Bowers, Santa Monica resident for 27 years Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1243 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 7 David Yakobson
From: Nicole R. <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 8:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Nicole R.

Subject: Item 11.D, please provide pickleball replacement courts during Memorial Park construction
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
Please provide pickleball replacement courts for our City residents during the upcoming Memorial Park construction. All players enjoying pickleball and tennis based court activities need to have equal opportunities to continue playing in our City of Santa Monica as I can attest to the enormous boost to mental and physical health that these sports provide.

Sincerely hope the Council can approve and support this request.

Thank you,
Nicole Rostoker
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1244 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 8 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:22 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Lana Negrete; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Tony Lopez; Oliver Chi; [email protected] Subject: FOSP: City Council 1/27/26 item 11-D: Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Plan
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
January 26, 2026

To: Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers
From: Board of Directors, Friends of Sunset Park
RE: 1/27/26 agenda item 11-D – Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Plan

The FOSP Board supports the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Plan, especially this part:

"Although fields 1 through 4 were originally proposed to be artificial turf in the master plan, per City Council direction natural grass was explored for the combo fields as well.

No new City-owned artificial turf sports fields will be installed in the City of Santa Monica… Therefore, fields 1 through 4 will feature natural grass." You may recall that a couple months ago, you received the letter below:

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1245 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 9 The Boards of the neighborhood organizations listed below are in full SUPPORT of the Artificial Turf Ban Resolution passed by the Santa Monica Democratic Club on Wednesday, November 11, 2025.

We look forward to seeing an immediate prohibition of net new installation of artificial turf on locally owned public land in Santa Monica incorporated into the upcoming Santa Monica Parks and Recreation Vision Plan. Grass fields are especially relevant to the Santa Monica Neighborhood Organizations because the playing fields at our local schools, are among the only outdoor play areas in many of our neighborhoods, and in some cases are the only recreational fields, due to our severe shortage of parks. We have heard throughout our neighborhoods that children and parents want grass fields.

The Neighborhood Organizations thank and appreciate the Santa Monica Democratic Club, and its President Jon Katz, for taking up this important issue. Their recently passed, “Resolution Calling for Ban on Artificial Turf on Public Land in Santa Monica,” speaks very clearly to the serious environmental, health and safety concerns that our communities have about artificial turf. This is following the precedent set by the Westside Regional Alliance of Councils on the Westside of Los Angeles who recently voted to support the transition away from the use of synthetic turf and artificial grass.

In solidarity, the Boards of
Friends of Sunset Park
North of Montana Association
Pico Neighborhood Association
Santa Monica Mid City Neighbors
Santa Monica Northeast Neighbors
Wilshire-Montana Neighborhood Coalition
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1246 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 10 David Yakobson
From: David Kramer <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 1/27/2026 Agenda Item 11.D - Please Offer Replacement Pickleball Courts Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
In reference to Agenda Item 11.D for the Tuesday Jan 27th meeting.

I’d like to express the importance of providing replacement/ temporary pickeball courts during the 2027 construction at Memorial Park.

Out of all the outdoor programs the city of Santa Monica offers, pickleball at memorial park is by far the most popular. We want our tax dollars going towards things we can use today as well as in the future. Shutting the courts down with no replacement does not accomplish this.

I have personally made new friends, business contacts and overall improved my personal heath due to the memorial park courts. There are hundreds of people that have made the same meaningful connections and benefit from them every day just like me.

We need our city to see the reality of situations and find solutions to problems just like this. Ignoring the lack of pickleball courts while construction is happening is not finding a solution, it’s ignoring reality.

Please don’t let this incredible community loose its home. There’s no guarantee will come back.

Best,
David Kramer - Resistant and tax payer
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1247 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 11 David Yakobson
From: Larisa MS <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:51 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

I’m writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction. Memorial Park is currently the only public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large community.

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Larisa Robedillo
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1248 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 12 David Yakobson
From: John Cyrus Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 3:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; [email protected]; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Ellis Raskin; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Mayor Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Oliver Chi; John Cyrus Smith
Subject: Item 11.D. SUPPORT Revised Memorial Park Expansion plan Attachments: MEMORIAL PARK NOW AND FUTURE.PNG
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor, Councilmembers,
--Two weeks ago I spoke at Council and told you that Commissioners and staff had come up with an easy way to shave millions off the cost of the Memorial Park Expansion project and finally get it started, and challenged the Council to act to get the Memorial and Airport Park expansions underway. --Bottom line: By eliminating the proposed one-story structure with ground-level parking and tennis/pickleball courts on top, staff says we can cut about $15-20 million from the price of Memorial's Phase One.
--The Rec and Park Commission's Memorial Park Ad-hoc committee met with staff in December and everyone agreed this was the smartest, best and financially prudent way to push this project forward. --I emphasize this because the staff report our commission saw less than two weeks ago is rather long and somewhat confusing, and it never really mentions this breakthrough until the very end, in option three.

Now some quick points:
--The city strategy has always been to add new baseball fields at Memorial Park, as well as new soccer/football fields as part of the Airport Park Expansion, which Council approved in 2017. --Council approved the Memorial Park Expansion in 2019. Both still exist only on paper. --The 2019 Memorial cost estimate was $30 Million for Phase 1 and 2, which consisted of the parking/courts structure plus TWO combo baseball fields instead of the current one. We were going to pay for it all with $20 million from the 2016 SMC Bond Measure, plus $5 million each from the city and SMMUSD.
--Staff says costs have SOARED several times since then, with the parking/courts structure the most expensive item.
--If we kill the structure and simply slide the courts to the EAST side of the park, we can fund most of Phase One and finally get going, with a little help from grants, the city and the school district, and with little disruption of play.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1249 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 13 But let's think bigger...
--We've spent about $2 million of the SMC bond money on design/build plans, so we have $18 million left for Memorial. The district HAS YET to contribute anything, let alone the $5 million they pledged in 2019. --I think SMMUSD can and should do better. IF Council asks the school district to MATCH the $20 million SMC is contributing, we could put $10 million towards Memorial and dedicate the other $10 million to get the long-delayed Airport Park Expansion going. (There are easy ways to save millions on that project design as well.)
--Keep in mind, the city paid for the fields SaMoHi uses at Historic Belmar Park. Shouldn't the district return the favor and help the city pay for new fields all can enjoy? The reason park projects take so long here is because we don't work well enough together. It's time we did. --One final point: If you have questions about anything pertaining to these two park expansions, I can provide honest, short and accurate answers, either at Council or anytime you wish.

Thank you,
John Cyrus Smith,
Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commissioner
[email protected]
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1250 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1251 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D 14 David Yakobson
From: Cris Gutierrez <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:29 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; Lana Negrete; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; councilmtgitems
Cc: Oliver Chi; Teague Weybright
Subject: 11 D-- Modified support for Memorial Park Revised Plan: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, and City Council Members:

The Santa Monica Community Gardens Advisory Committee (CGAC) is pleased to support, with a modification, the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project that establishes Fields 1- 4 to be natural grass. At our 9/2/25 meeting, however, the CGAC unanimously passed, by 13 - 0, the following motion: "The Community Gardens Advisory Committee opposes artificial turf in the City of Santa Monica.” The City Council can now modify the revised Memorial Park Project to establish a city-wide policy that prohibits any new synthetic turf installations. Memorial Park has shown that natural grass is the preferred choice for our residents. That should not surprise anyone as natural grass helps nourish our living soil across the city and protect our personal and public health.

In accordance with our 2025 and Parks and Recreation Vision Plan (PRVP) and expanding our park system acreage, it is imperative that the playing fields are grass and not synthetic, artificial turf. Natural grass fields are required for both the safety and health of the children, youth or adults who would use those fields for sports and play and to ensure that the natural ecosystems and Earth’s systems, from watershed to soil, air to climate, are not polluted by microplastics, potential PFAs, other toxins or increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Natural grass in the ecosystem add oxygen, potentially more than trees, and enable carbon sequestration. Artificial turf suffocates life forms in the soil and coexisting natural resources. Artificial turf also creates heat islands exacerbating Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1252 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 15 climate crisis conditions. In fact, the heat of the turf can be as high as 200º F, causing burns to athletes or others playing. Healthy play needs healthy fields.

It is important to recall that in 2013, the City, after a three-year effort — including years of study and consideration by the original Task Force on the Environment — now the Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment — along with the Office of Sustainability & Environment, involving consultations with the City Attorney, and engaging community organizing — the City Council voted unanimously to establish the Sustainability Rights Ordinance (SRO) that now heads up our Municipal Code Article 12, which states:
“The City of Santa Monica Sustainability Code is created and exists for the purpose of codifying Santa Monica’s commitment to achieving sustainability by among other things: (a) restoring, protecting and preserving our natural environment and all of its components and communities including, but not limited to, the air, water, soil, and climate upon which all living things depend; (b) creating and promoting sustainable systems of food production and distribution, energy production and distribution, transportation, waste disposal, and water supply; and (c) to the full extent legally possible, subordinating the short-term, private, financial interests of corporations and others to the common, long-term interest of achieving environmental and economic sustainability.”
Installation of artificial turf transgresses the SRO and would violate it. The City’s legal commitment to protect Nature is an obligation to protect our community. Immersion in Nature is healing and beneficial to physical and mental well-being. The synergy of natural ecosystems, habitat health with human physical and cognitive health is evident.

The PRVP attempts to reaffirm the deep and profound ecological consciousness reflected in the SRO, declaring a commitment to a living "City as a Habitat.” The Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project takes much of that into consideration but needs a key modification, which the City Council can champion and solidify tonight.

The Precautionary Principle demands no less. At this time when so much of our ecosystems and personal or public wellbeing are being put at undue risk because of political or corporate challenges, pressures and demands, this Council’s leadership matters deeply. Long-term ecosystem and communal health must prevail as primary concerns. New regenerative practices and hardier variants of natural grass are available, and Santa Monica should lead the way in piloting efforts to incorporate those into maintaining the natural fields. Just as we did with building our City Hall East/Living Building, our City needs to be a sustainability solutions-driven leader and live up to the public's trust.

We urge you to have confidence as you consider the Memorial Park Project and uphold Santa Monica’s SRO and the integrity of being a Sustainable City and advance the recommendation of the Sustainability Commission to move to establish no more artificial turf installations in Santa Monica.

Sincerely,
Community Gardens Advisory Committee

Cris Gutierrez - Chair (Main Street CG)
Ken Hansen - Vice Chair (Park Drive CG)
Martha Bardach (Ishihara)
Alina Bezdikian (19th Street)
Tim Bowler (Main Street CG)
Nancy Desser (Euclid Park CG)
Linda Glasser (Marine Park CG)
Antony Lewis (Main Street CG)
Susan McCorry (Main Street CG)
Cordula Ohman (Main Street CG)
James Renn (Marine Park CG)
Cynthia Rose (Park Drive CG)
Traci Takahara (Main Street CG)
Frankie Lou Thorn (Park Drive CG)
Billy Yost (Main Street CG)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1253 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 16 Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1254 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Marisela Herrera <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 4:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Marisela Herrera- Pico Neighborhood ]
Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1255 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Michon Herman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 4:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely, Michon Herman, Sunset Park
Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1256 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: Maura Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 5:10 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Maura Smith
2604 28th Street #7
Santa Monica CA 90405
1-27-26
Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District
1717 4th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Dear SMMUSD Board Members:

As a dedicated grandparent at Grant Elementary and an engaged member of the Santa Monica community, I am writing to vehemently oppose the proposed removal of natural grass and the installation of artificial turf at any SMMUSD schools. This decision carries profound consequences for our children’s health, environmental sustainability, and the district’s fiscal responsibility. The evidence against artificial turf is compelling and multifaceted, warranting a thorough reconsideration of this plan.

The bottom lines are:
 As studies about the dangers of plastic exposure continue to mount, we should be exposing our kids to less, not more, plastic;  As temperatures rise due to climate change, we should be creating cooling green spaces for kids to play, not replacing natural grass with plastic that overheats in high temperatures;  As SMMUSD and the City work to improve sustainability, we should not be generating additional plastic waste; and
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1257 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 4  As LAUSD works systematically towards “Green Schoolyards for All,”SMMUSD students must not be left behind.

The health risks associated with artificial turf are significant, particularly for children, whose developing bodies are uniquely susceptible to environmental toxins. The Children’s Environmental Health Center at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai has issued an unequivocal statement discouraging artificial turf use due to unresolved safety concerns. Their team of pediatricians, epidemiologists, and toxicologists highlights critical gaps in safety data, noting that no comprehensive studies confirm the long-term safety of these surfaces for children (Children’s Environmental Health Center, 2017).

Despite the District’s claims that the TenCate turf is made from “nontoxic” materials, it is still made of plastic, and scientists have recently raised alarm bells at the harms of exposure to microplastics in the environment (particularly for children). The fact that kids are also regularly exposed to microplastics through things like plastic toys and toothpaste does not make plastic grass any less harmful – if anything, this is a reason not to further increase our kids’ exposure to these harmful plastics by replacing natural grass with plastic grass.

Beyond chemical exposure, artificial turf poses severe heat-related risks. Studies demonstrate that turf surfaces can reach temperatures exceeding 160°F on sunny days, far hotter than natural grass, which typically remains below 100°F (Devitt et al., 2007). A 2019 study from the University of Nevada found that artificial turf temperatures can be 35–60°F higher than grass, increasing the risk of heat stress, dehydration, and burns, particularly in young children with less developed thermoregulatory systems (Brigham Young University, 2019). The American Academy of Pediatrics emphasizes that children are more vulnerable to heat-related illnesses, making these conditions especially concerning for school settings (AAP, 2011).

Natural grass, by contrast, provides a cooler, safer surface that supports active play without these risks. Even though Santa Monica Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1258 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 fortunately has cooler temperatures overall than the rest of Los Angeles, with climate change, the number of very hot days is increasing. Now is not the time to be moving away from cooling natural grass and towards plastic grass that will get dangerously hot for kids on (increasingly frequent) hot days – particularly if the main purpose of plastic grass is to increase the overall amount of time kids can play on the grass.

Environmentally, artificial turf is a significant liability. Microplastics and infill particles from turf fields are also dispersed into soil, waterways, and homes, contributing to widespread environmental pollution. A 2021 study published in Environmental Science & Technology estimated that artificial turf fields release 1–4 tons of microplastics annually per field, exacerbating the global microplastic crisis (Cheng et al., 2021). Furthermore, the production and disposal of artificial turf generates substantial carbon emissions, undermining SMMUSD’s sustainability goals. Even for apparently “recyclable” plastics, recent reporting has revealed that less than 10% of new plastics ever produced have been recycled, and most “recyclable” plastics end up incinerated or in landfills. Natural grass fields, conversely, sequester carbon, improve soil health, and support local biodiversity, aligning with California’s environmental priorities.

Financially, choosing artificial turf over natural grass diverts critical district funds away from educational priorities and essential infrastructure improvements. While the exact size of the proposed fields remains unspecified, artificial turf installation is consistently more expensive, costing $10–$20 per square foot, with ongoing maintenance at $0.15–$0.30 per square foot annually (Synthetic Turf Council, 2022). These fields require replacement every 8–10 years and incur significant disposal costs, as most turf materials are nonrecyclable and sent to landfills at $1–$2 per square foot (TURI, 2020).

In contrast, natural grass fields, maintained with modern, waterefficient irrigation and drought-resistant varieties, cost $0.10–$0.20 per square foot annually and can remain functional indefinitely with proper care (Sports Turf Management Association, 2023). By opting Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1259 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 6 for grass, SMMUSD can avoid the recurring capital expenditures of turf replacement, freeing up millions over decades to invest in enriched academic programs—such as STEM initiatives, arts education, and special needs support—and critical infrastructure upgrades, including safer classrooms, improved accessibility, and energy-efficient facilities. Alternatively, if SMMUSD is concerned about overuse of natural grass fields, the district could invest these additional funds into converting existing asphalt and other hard surfaces into green space.

Relatedly, this plan would leave SMMUSD students significantly worse-off than their counterparts in LAUSD, which is actively working to convert hard surfaces into green spaces without increasing their reliance on artificial turf. The LAUSD school board in 2022 approved an initiative that “aims to ensure that at least 30 percent of the existing hard-surface schoolyard space across all District schools is converted into safe and sustainable green space by 2035.” (Source:

LAUSD Green Schoolyards for All Plan, April 2024.) LAUSD specifically excludes “synthetic turf” from its definition of a “green element,” instead opting for surfaces such as natural grass, dirt, mulch, and trees.

Finally, our kids deserve the experience of playing on natural grass.

I’m sure that when you were a school-aged child, you played on natural rather than plastic grass. You may recall the experience of watching worms emerge after a rainstorm or following trails of ants.

Sterile plastic grass neither supports biodiversity nor exposes our kids to the natural world.

The evidence overwhelmingly supports retaining and restoring natural grass fields. Grass provides a safe, non-toxic surface for children to play on, promotes environmental stewardship, and aligns with SMMUSD’s commitment to fiscal prudence. The district has an opportunity to model sustainable practices by investing in droughtresistant grass varieties and water-efficient irrigation systems, which have proven effective in California’s climate (California Department of Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1260 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 7 Water Resources, 2022). Such investments would reinforce the district’s role as a leader in environmental education and community health.

In light of these well-documented health, environmental, and financial concerns, I urgently request that the SMMUSD Board of Education reject the installation of artificial turf at all district schools. Instead, I advocate for the restoration and sustainable maintenance of natural grass fields, a solution that prioritizes the well-being of our children, protects our environment, and ensures responsible use of taxpayer resources.

Thank you for your attention to this critical matter and for your commitment to our community’s future.

Sincerely,
Maura Smith
References

1. American Academy of Pediatrics. (2011). Policy statement: Children and heat stress. Pediatrics, 128(6), e1829.
o Description: Highlights children’s heightened vulnerability to heatrelated illnesses, relevant to the risks of high temperatures on artificial turf surfaces.
o Available at:
https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/128/6/e1829/30982

2. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. (2010). Toxicological profile for styrene. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. o Description: Identifies styrene and other chemicals in crumb rubber infill as carcinogens and health hazards, supporting concerns about artificial turf safety.
o Available at: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp53.pdf

3. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. (2023). Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and your health. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
o Description: Links PFAS in artificial turf to health risks, including cancer and immune dysfunction, emphasizing risks for children. o Available at: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/pfas/health-effects/index.html

4. Brigham Young University. (2019). Synthetic turf surface temperature study.

Provo, UT: Brigham Young University.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1261 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 8 o Description: Reports artificial turf surface temperatures 35–60°F higher than natural grass, increasing heat stress risks. o Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/facpub/ (Note: Specific study may require institutional access or direct inquiry from BYU’s Department of Plant and Wildlife Sciences.)

5. California Department of Water Resources. (2022). Drought-resistant turfgrass and water-efficient irrigation systems. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Water Resources.
o Description: Promotes sustainable grass varieties and irrigation systems suitable for California’s climate, supporting natural grass field maintenance.
o Available at: https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-AndEfficiency/Turf-Replacement-Program

6. Cheng, H., Hu, Y., & Reinhard, M. (2021). Environmental and health impacts of artificial turf: A review. Environmental Science & Technology, 55(3), 1313–1325.
o Description: Estimates artificial turf fields release 1–4 tons of microplastics annually, contributing to environmental pollution concerns.
o Available at: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.0c04665 (Note:

Full access may require subscription or institutional login.)

7. Children’s Environmental Health Center, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. (2017). Artificial turf: A health-based perspective. New York, NY:

Mount Sinai.
o Description: Formal statement discouraging artificial turf use due to safety data gaps and health risks for children, based on expert analysis.
o Available at: https://icahn.mssm.edu/research/children-environmentalhealth/resources (Note: Specific report may require direct inquiry from Mount Sinai’s CEHC.)

8. Devitt, D. A., Young, M. H., Baghzouz, M., & Bird, B. (2007). Surface temperature, heat loading, and spectral characteristics of synthetic turf fields. Journal of Turfgrass Management.
o Description: Documents artificial turf surface temperatures exceeding 160°F, posing significant heat stress risks for children. o Available at:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J099v12n01_06 (Note:

Full access may require subscription or institutional login; contact University of Nevada, Las Vegas, for further details.)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1262 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 9 9. International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2008). IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans: 1,3-Butadiene, ethylene oxide, and vinyl halides (Vol. 97). Lyon, France: World Health Organization. o Description: Classifies butadiene and related compounds in turf infill as carcinogenic, supporting health risk arguments.
o Available at: https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications

10. Sports Turf Management Association. (2023). Natural grass athletic field maintenance guidelines. Lawrence, KS: STMA.
o Description: Estimates natural grass maintenance costs at $0.10– $0.20 per square foot annually with sustainable practices, supporting cost-effectiveness of grass fields.
o Available at: https://www.stma.org/resources/technical-resources/

11. Synthetic Turf Council. (2022). Guidelines for synthetic turf performance and maintenance. Forest Hill, MD: Synthetic Turf Council. o Description: Provides cost estimates for artificial turf installation ($10– $20 per square foot) and maintenance ($0.15–$0.30 per square foot annually), highlighting high costs.
o Available at: https://www.syntheticturfcouncil.org/page/Guidelines

12. Toxics Use Reduction Institute. (2020). Athletic playing fields:

Choosing safer options for health and the environment. Lowell, MA:

University of Massachusetts Lowell.
o Description: Documents chemical leaching from artificial turf into groundwater and ecosystems, along with disposal costs ($1–$2 per square foot).
o Available at:
https://www.turi.org/TURI_Publications/TURI_Methods_and_Policy_R eports/Athletic_Playing_Fields_Choosing_Safer_Options_for_Health_ and_the_Environment_2020

13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2016). Federal research action plan on recycled tire crumb used on playing fields and playgrounds.

Washington, DC: USEPA.
o Description: Notes the presence of volatile organic compounds and hazardous substances in alternative turf infills, with insufficient safety data.
o Available at: https://www.epa.gov/chemical-research/federal-researchaction-plan-recycled-tire-crumb-used-playing-fields Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1263 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 10 David Yakobson
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 5:56 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council 1/27/2026 - Support Items 11C and 11D

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and City Councilmembers,
I’m writing to urge you to support items 11C and 11D.

I strongly support the City’s commitment to building the Great Park at the Santa Monica Airport and to banning new artificial turf in Santa Monica. These policies protect public health, reduce environmental harm, and ensure our public land is used in ways that benefit the whole community.

Please vote in favor of Items 11C and 11D and continue advancing these important priorities.

Many thanks,
Elizabeth Van Denburgh
[email protected]
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1264 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 11 David Yakobson
From: Natalie A <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:09 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Not to mention there is absolutely non way that synthetic grass is non toxic, and we will see health-related lawsuits connected to the use of fake grass, in the future for sure. Let's avoid those! Sincerely, Natalie Antoci (Wilshire/Montana area in Santa Monica) Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1265 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 12 David Yakobson
From: Kiki Parker <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan, but I'm also writing as a concerned community member and part of Samohi's student environmental club, Team Marine.

Synthetic turfs pose many threats to both human and environmental health. The crumb rubber and chemical products easily spread their negative effects through the environment: they are carried by athletes' shoes, stick to clothes, and travel through wind and waterways. The synthetic turf product is not recyclable, unlike how the industry may claim it is. Synthetic turf stuffs landfills and households with harmful products that don't go away. Please support a safer and more sustainable option with natural grass and a "No New Turf" policy.

Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Lanikai Parker
Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1266 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 13 David Yakobson
From: Harry Leshner <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 8:14 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Council Agenda Item 11C/D (Jan 27, 2026): Support Sustainability Council's No Plastic Grass Recommendation

EXTERNAL
Council Members,
I am writing to submit public comment for the upcoming Council Meeting on the 27th of January, 2026 regarding agenda items 11 C and D.

Thank you for removing plastic turf from the Memorial Park plan. I now urge you to adopt the full Sustainability Commission recommendation:
1) No new artificial sports fields will be installed in the city; 2) Existing grass fields will be maintained as grass fields; and 3) When existing artificial turf fields reach the end of their useful life, the city will replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

In response to anyone who is concerned that without artificial plastic field turf they will lose access to fields, I hope you can assure them the city is committed to maintaining and expanding access to fields, and feels it can do so by promoting grass while also being good stewards of the city’s finances and of the environment.

Thank you,
Harry Leshner, Santa Monica Resident
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1267 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 14 David Yakobson
From: Hana Leshner <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 8:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Parks Vision Plan, Natural Grass at Memorial, & A "No Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I am writing today as a Santa Monica resident to express my support for the proposed Parks Plan and to urge the Council to take a definitive stand on the future of our green spaces.

First, I want to thank the staff for their extensive work and dedication in developing this plan. Their vision for our city’s open spaces is vital to our community’s well-being. I specifically want to thank staff for removing artificial turf from the Memorial Park plan—this is a significant win for our environment and the health of our residents.

I now urge the City Council to adopt the Parks Plan, approve the Memorial and go one step further by formally adopting the Sustainability Commission’s recommendations regarding artificial turf:

1. No new artificial sports fields will be installed in the city;

2. Existing grass fields will be maintained as grass fields; and

3. When existing artificial turf fields reach the end of their useful life, the city will replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

Our community is looking to you to prioritize sustainability and public health. By codifying these recommendations, you will ensure that Santa Monica remains a leader in environmental protection and provides safe, natural spaces for our children to play.

Thank you for your leadership and for protecting the future of our parks.

Sincerely,
Hana Leshner
Santa Monica Resident
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1268 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 15 David Yakobson
From: Isabel <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 9:12 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

I urge the Council to solidify this leadership by formalizing a citywide policy that prohibits any future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf installations. Memorial Park has shown that natural grass is the preferred choice for our residents. By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Isabel Cardoso Ferreira (Formerly Burrows), Sunset Park Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1269 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 16 David Yakobson
From: Judisma Siddhi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:04 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for listening to the community and choosing natural grass for the new Memorial Park fields. As a concerned community member and part of Samohi's student environmental club, Team Marine, I urge you to now formalize this commitment by passing a city-wide policy that prohibits all future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf.

By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living.

No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Judisma Siddhi
Mid-City, Santa Monica

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1270 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 17 David Yakobson
From: Judisma Siddhi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:06 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living.

No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Judisma Siddhi
Mid-City, Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1271 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 18 David Yakobson
From: Green Mother Zen <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 5:31 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Thank you so much for your attention to this!
Sincerely,
Ms. Frankie Lou Thorn
Sent from GreenMotherZen 곒곓곔곕
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1272 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 19 David Yakobson
From: Goldberg, Jay <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 5:47 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: RE: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Stop the artificial turf!
Support Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass.

Enough “artificial” and let the kids feel reality.

Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Not to mention there is absolutely non way that synthetic grass is non toxic, and we will see health-related lawsuits connected to the use of fake grass, in the future for sure. Let's avoid those! We are spending so much to (re)build the schools…and the money should go to maintaining them.

We can’t keep building capacity while we are struggling to provide the basics….art, music, teacher’s aids
Sincerely, Jay (Wilshire/Montana area in Santa Monica, father of Franklin students) ___________________________________________________
Jay Goldberg
Mortgage Loan Officer
Purchases and Refinancings | Private Wealth Mortgage | Residential Construction | Home Equity | Lot Loans M: 310-600-1988 | [email protected]
NMLS #261023
U.S. Bank
1401 Wilshire Blvd, Skysuite
Santa Monica, CA 90403
U.S. BANCORP made the following annotations
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1273 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 20 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains information that is, or may be, covered by electronic communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error, and then immediately delete it. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1274 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 21 David Yakobson
From: L Glass <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 7:34 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C&D. Support natural grass at Memorial Park and a “No New Turf” policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Linda Glasser ( Sunset Park)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1275 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 22 David Yakobson
From: Ayse Reyering <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 7:51 AM
To: Karen Melick; [email protected]; councilmtgitems; Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Caroline Torosis; Oliver Chi
Subject: Concerned Soccer Mom - Turf Fields Item 11 c. and d., Parks & Rec Vision Plan

EXTERNAL
Hi All,
I'm a working mom whose son just wants to play soccer all day, every day, all year round. We've found a great organization where he can do that - however, it's come to my attention that the City of Santa Monica is discussing a major decision that will directly impact my son, among hundreds of other kids' sport programs - grass fields v. turf fields.

Like many of you, we would love natural grass fields. However, the reality is that grass fields simply cannot support year-round play. With heavy use, wear and tear, and rain damage, grass fields would require frequent closures and long recovery periods—sometimes for months at a time.

This would significantly reduce field availability and limit opportunities for our children to play, practice, and grow through sports.

Turf fields provide a practical solution. Turf allows for consistent, year-round use, even after rain, and creates more reliable space for all youth organizations to share. Most importantly, it ensures that our kids don’t lose valuable playing time due to field closures beyond our control.

We are asking for your help. The City needs to hear from families who care about access, inclusion, and opportunities for our children.

Thank you for standing with us and for advocating for what allows our kids to play, stay active, and thrive as a community.

With appreciation,
The Reyering family
--
Ayse Reyering |
Amazon Studios
Sr. Post Production Executive
(cell) 715-252-1356
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1276 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 23 David Yakobson
From: Bryce Schatzow <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely, Bryce Schatzow (Santa Monica)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1277 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 24 David Yakobson
From: Jamie Lloyd-Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
James Lloyd-Smith
Sunset Park resident
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1278 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Martha Bardach <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 3:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Keep Memorial Park GREEN and PLASTIC FREE!

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I urge you to now formalize a commitment to choose natural grass for the improved Memorial Park playing fields. This is the wish of the community!
It is essential to pass a city-wide policy that prohibits all future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf.

As the community has made clear, we need to keep Santa Monica’s public lands living and plasticfree. In addition of course, we must protect our health, our budget, and our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance.

Sincerely, Martha Bardach, East of Yale, South of Colorado! martha bardach
310/454-2443/h
310/874-3929/c
[email protected]
If you want to change the system…
you have to work hard to elect the people who run it!
놾놿뇀뇁뇂뇃
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1279 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Sarah Mourra <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Concerns

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Sarah Mourra MD (sunset park)
2260 26th street Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1280 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Glenn Man <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 3:22 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Memorial Park Pickleball courts

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica Council members,
I’m writing on behalf of the pickleball community in Santa Monica. We strongly recommend establishing a plan for replacement pickleball courts in the event that the current Memorial Park courts are closed for renovations or new construction. Our community has grown significantly, and we rely on accessible public park space to support this rapidly expanding sportSimilar to the courts at John Adams Middle School, which include tennis courts with pickleball striping, we respectfully request that the City consider adding pickleball court options across additional Santa Monica public schools and parks.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Best Regards
Glenn Man SM Resident
1707 Centinela Ave SM CA 90404
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1281 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Antony Lewis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 3:41 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Memorial Park Grass

Sincerely,
Antony Lewis, 90405
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1282 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Steven Johnson
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:05 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Barry Snell; Lana Negrete; Oliver Chi
Cc: Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Eric Johnson; Noe Mendoza; Christopher Dishlip; Amelia Feichtner; Linda Cogswell; Amber Richane; Peter James; Tony Lopez; Federico Bianchi; ASA; Karen Melick; Maryanne LaGuardia; John Smith; Barry Rosenbaum; Sonam Makker; Shannon Parry
Subject: Item 11d - Memorial Park Expansion Plan
Attachments: RPC Letter - 11d Memorial Park Expansion.pdf; RPC Letter - 11d Memorial Park Expansion.pdf
Mayor Torosis, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, Esteemed Councilmembers, Please find attached the Recreation & Parks Commission letter in support of Item 11d, the Memorial Park Expansion Plan, agendized for presentation tomorrow night at Council.

You’ll learn that the estimates have exploded for the previously proposed design, but that there is a straightforward staff option included in this presentation that reduces cost, limits disruption and accelerates the timeline over previous proposals.

The Recreation and Parks Commission hope that you will approve Option 3 with the following key directives:
 Remove the parking structure with elevated courts entirely from the project  Shift final surface level tennis/pickleball courts east  Preserve surface parking as outlined in the current design, but simply without the structure  Ask for a new phased approach that will reduce downtime for current baseball, softball and court sports programming
We also want to share our deep appreciation for senior project manager Linda Cogswell and the support of both Public Works and Recreation staff for diligently moving this now ten-years-old project substantially forward these past two years.

Thank you.

Steven Johnson
Chair, Recreation & Parks Commission
City of Santa Monica
(310) 429-0475

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1283 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1284 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 • (310) 458-8411 • [email protected] santamonica.gov • @cityofsantamonica • @santamonicacity Monday, January 26, 2026
Re: Item 11.d Memorial Park Expansion Project
Dear Mayor Torosis, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, and Esteemed Councilmembers, On Tuesday, you'll be getting the latest updates for the Revised Plan for Phases 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project.

Begun in earnest in 2016, with multiple robust community engagement meetings through 2018, the expansion project sputtered for years, backburnered by the one-two punch of the pandemic, and the City’s financial challenges. An encouraging restart was begun following City Council’s August 2024 approval to move forward with design.

You’ll learn in Tuesday’s presentation that the working plan in place for the past ten years has been priced out of reach for even a modest Phase 1 implementation.

At the conclusion of the presentation, you’ll be offered some options. You’ll learn that the parking structure with courts on top explode the cost, while actually reducing parking and accessibility.

Staff's presentation will give you the full history and context of how we got to where we are today.

The Recreation and Parks Commission hope that you will approve Option 3 with the following key directives:
• Remove the parking structure with elevated courts entirely from the project • Shift final surface level tennis/pickleball courts east • Preserve surface parking as outlined in the current design, but simply without the structure • Ask for a new phased approach that will reduce downtime for current baseball, softball and court sports programming
Under the currently proposed staff policy, these existing baseball and softball fields, currently grass and dirt, will remain natural playing surfaces, especially if we win grants to install our SWIP and integrate the park into our run-off recycling network.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1285 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 • (310) 458-8411 • [email protected] santamonica.gov • @cityofsantamonica • @santamonicacity It’s important to note that City-sponsored pickleball finds its home at Memorial Park due to this location being set apart from most residences. Other tennis courts that could be adapted for pickleball play, including Douglas, Marine, Reed and Ocean View, are too close to homes given the higher decibel levels of the popular sport.

In a phased approach that prioritizes keeping pickleball up and running at Memorial, the Commission recommends that during the Phase 1 buildout of the new combo fields, a temporary set of pickleball courts be laid out in the northeast parking lot of the Fisher Lumber site.

Tennis activities, especially revenue-producing weekly joint use by Crossroads School, could be accommodated at other sites during construction, and should be prioritized at these locations.

It is also understood that Phase 1 construction would also remove two existing fields at memorial, but those baseball and softball games could be relocated to other parks temporarily as well.

Cost Less, Way Faster, Less Disruption
In other words, what we propose is:

Phase 0: SWIP
Phase .5: temporary pickleball courts on the northeast half of the Fisher site Phase 1: northwest combo field 1
Phase 1.5: permanent tennis/pickleball courts in new final location Phase 2: northeast combo field 2
Sincerely,
City of Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commission
Steven Johnson, Chair
Karen Melick, Vice Chair
Maryanne LaGuardia
John Cyrus Smith
Barry Rosenbaum
Sonam Makker
CC: Oliver Chi, Jenny Rogers, plus City Staff, FSAC Chairs Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1286 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 • (310) 458-8411 • [email protected] santamonica.gov • @cityofsantamonica • @santamonicacity Monday, January 26, 2026
Re: Item 11.d Memorial Park Expansion Project
Dear Mayor Torosis, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, and Esteemed Councilmembers, On Tuesday, you'll be getting the latest updates for the Revised Plan for Phases 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project.

You’ll learn in Tuesday’s presentation that the working plan in place for the past ten years has been priced out of reach for even a modest Phase 1 implementation.

Staff's presentation will give you the full history and context of how we got to where we are today.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1287 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401 • (310) 458-8411 • [email protected] santamonica.gov • @cityofsantamonica • @santamonicacity It’s important to note that City-sponsored pickleball finds its home at Memorial Park due to this location being set apart from most residences. Other tennis courts that could be adapted for pickleball play, including Douglas, Marine, Reed and Ocean View, are too close to homes given the higher decibel levels of the popular sport.

Tennis activities, especially revenue-producing weekly joint use by Crossroads School, could be accommodated at other sites during construction, and should be prioritized at these locations.

It is also understood that Phase 1 construction would also remove two existing fields at memorial, but those baseball and softball games could be relocated to other parks temporarily as well.

Cost Less, Way Faster, Less Disruption
In other words, what we propose is:

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1288 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Justine Lavelle <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:42 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Sincerely, Justine R. LaVelle
[email protected]
M: 816-258-2182
2940 Neilson Way, Santa Monica,
CA 90405 #301
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1289 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: diana hinek <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:50 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Diana Hinek
Ocean Park Neighborhood
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1290 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: Traci Takahara <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:52 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" and a 1000 llbs of unrecyclable plastic in landfills every two years!

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
 Synthetic Turf doesn't stand up to heavy-use public spaces.  It looks ugly after being in the sun.
 Needs frequent replacement. High schools have found it unmanageable. I imagine soccerfields will too!
 Protect our well water and soil from contamination!
I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the Santa Monica Community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Traci Takahara,
Sunset Park Resident
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1291 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 4 David Yakobson
From: Chris Lefevre <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:55 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

I urge the Council to solidify this leadership by formalizing a city-wide policy that prohibits any future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf installations and replaces all existing installations with natural grass. Memorial Park has shown that natural grass is the preferred choice for our residents. By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Chris Lefevre
Ocean Park Neighborhood (90405)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1292 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 David Yakobson
From: Bianca Bloomfield <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 2:10 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass.

Sincerely,
Bianca Bloomfield, Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1293 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 6 David Yakobson
From: Ishara Bailis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 3:21 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Natalya Zernitskaya; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Items 11 C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & a NO NEW TURF Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for listening to the community and choosing natural grass for the new Memorial Park Fields.

I urge you to now formalize this commitment by passing a city-wide policy that prohibits all future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf.

And when existing artificial turf fields reach the end or their useful life, the City replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

It’s critical to protect our health - for everyone, of all ages.

To protect our environment as a living “City as a Habitat” and follow the 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance by keeping Santa Monica’s public lands living and plastic-free.

Thank you very much.

Warm regards,
Ishara
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1294 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Jonathan Chan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & 11D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial Park and Adopt a No New Turf Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am writing to support the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan. City staff have removed synthetic turf from the design, which is a practical improvement and a clear response to public feedback.

I encourage the Council to treat this as a policy decision, not a one-off. Please adopt a citywide standard to avoid new City funded synthetic turf or plastic grass installations on public land. A uniform standard improves decision quality and consistency by ensuring projects are evaluated on measurable factors, including heat, user safety, maintenance requirements, environmental impacts, and full lifecycle costs.

This approach supports the intent of Santa Monica’s 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and reduces the City’s long-term exposure to replacement and disposal obligations. It also reduces the risk of adding additional plastic material sources to the local environment.

Memorial Park can be the first application of a consistent standard that benefits the entire city. I respectfully ask you to approve the revised plan and direct staff to return with a citywide policy that prioritizes non-plastic, durable groundcover solutions.

Sincerely,
Jonathan Chan
Sunset Park
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1295 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Eileen Gibson Funke <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 1:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Memorial Park has shown that natural grass is the preferred choice for our residents. By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living.

Sincerely,
Eileen Funke, Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1296 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: J. D. <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:40 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council Agenda Item 11D (Jan 27, 2026): Support Natural Grass at Memorial & Adopt a "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for removing turf from the Memorial Park plan.

I now urge you to adopt the full Sustainability Commission recommendation:
1) No new artificial sports fields will be installed in the city; 2) Existing grass fields will be maintained as grass fields; and 3) When existing artificial turf fields reach the end of their useful life, the city will replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

Let's uphold our commitment to a living "City as a Habitat." Sincerely,
John Dahl
Yale Street
Northeast Neighbors
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1297 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Adam DeBenedittis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Please Finish the Job

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and city council
I wanted to start with thanking you all for the Memorial Park Fields victory a massive win for our environment.

Thank you for your time,
Adam Debenedttis
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1298 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: Marin Babb <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:56 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for a Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates fields as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and sustainable path.

I urge you to formalize a city-wide policy that prioritizes natural grass in lieu of synthetic turf. Let's keep Santa Monica's public land green and living.

Best,
Marin Babb
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1299 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 4 David Yakobson
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:12 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Barry Snell; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin
Cc: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 11D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
As a Santa Monica resident and regular park user in the city with my kids, I am writing in my personal capacity to express my enthusiastic support for a Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Jacob Wasserman
90403
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1300 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 David Yakobson
From: Linda Brown <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
I am a single mother to a 17-year-old son, and if you’ve ever tried to connect with a teenage boy, you know how fleeting and precious real, uninterrupted time together can be. In February, I discovered pickleball. I knew nothing about the sport, though I had played tennis on and off my whole life. I brought my son with me to try it—and he was immediately hooked.

Since then, pickleball has become the one place where my son and I truly meet. Every week, we spend three hours together laughing, playing, and socializing—no phones, no distractions. Afterward, we go to lunch together. I cannot adequately express how meaningful this has been for our relationship. At this age, that kind of connection is rare, and pickleball has given us something that has genuinely brought us closer.

What makes the timing especially urgent is this: over the next 18–24 months, I will lose my son to college—and to life. This is the last window I have to spend this kind of consistent, meaningful time with him before he moves on into adulthood. Losing pickleball during this period would mean losing one of the few spaces where that connection naturally happens.

As a single parent with limited finances, pickleball has also been accessible in a way few activities are. Being able to play for $3 per person has been a silver lining during an otherwise challenging time. Beyond my relationship with my son, I have also built a community of friends through these courts—something I never had before. This community has become an essential part of my life and emotional support system.

For these reasons, the potential loss of pickleball access during the Memorial Park Redesign is deeply concerning. Losing this outlet for 18–24 months would have a severe impact on my family life, my mental well-being, and my sense of community.

I support the Memorial Park Redesign and appreciate the City’s long-term vision. I am writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that the City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during construction. Memorial Park is currently the only public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large and dedicated community.

I respectfully request that the City Council direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city locations so this vital resource is not lost during construction.

Thank you for your leadership, your time, and for considering the very real human impact of this decision.

Sincerely,
Linda Salomone
------------------------------------------------------------- Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1301 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 6 Linda Salomone

INDIE PR
[email protected]
(cell) 310-995-9956
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1302 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 7 David Yakobson
From: Daniel Galamba <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:18 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Barry Snell
Subject: January 27, 2026 City Council Agenda Item 11D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial and Adopt a "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council,
Thank you for removing turf from the Memorial Park plan. I now urge you to adopt the full Sustainability Commission recommendations: 1) No new artificial sports fields will be installed in the City; 2) Existing grass fields will be maintained as grass fields; and 3) When existing artificial turf fields reach the end of their useful life, the City will replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

Let's uphold our commitment to a living "City as a Habitat." Sincerely,
Dr Daniel Galamba
_
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1303 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Jessica Herman Goldman <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy Inbox

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
• We know how it felt to keep our toddlers off of playground equipment, turf, and sandboxes until extraordinary measures could be taken to clean them effectively after the Palisades fire. While grass regrows and refreshes, artificial turf may have to be replaced after a fire — or after accumulating enough road dust.
• We know microplastics and nanoplastics are an increasing problem in our health and children’s health.

We know heat and friction will cause plastics to volatilize.

I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Benjamin Goldman
Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1304 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Benjamin Goldman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

We know heat and friction will cause plastics to volatilize.

I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Benjamin Goldman
Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1305 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: andrea pasquini <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:28 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Andrea Pasquini - Northeast Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1306 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 4 David Yakobson
From: NewVine Music <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:27 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely, Giorgi Antinori - Ocean Park Neighborhood
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1307 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 David Yakobson
From: Caitlin Lili <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:18 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Caitlin Lili
Sunset Park Neighborhood
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1308 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 6 David Yakobson
From: Noma Boardmember <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:15 AM
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi Cc: Recreation and Arts Department; John Cyrus Smith; John Smith; Barry Rosenbaum; [email protected]; Karen Melick; Maryanne LaGuardia; Steven Johnson; Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Sonam Makker; Noe Mendoza; [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] Subject: Support of Items 11C and 11D AND SUPPORT for a Ban on New Artificial Turf Installation (Recommended by the City Staff)

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

Date: 1/26/2026
To: Mayor Torosis, Members of Santa Monica City Council and City Manager Chi.

SUBJECT: Support of Items 11C and 11D AND SUPPORT for the City Staff Recommended Ban on New Artificial Turf Installation
Dear Mayor Torosis, Council Members and City Manager Chi, We are writing on behalf of Santa Monica’s North of Montana Association (NOMA). We are affirming our continued commitment and support of the letter that we previously sent to your attention (please see below, dated 12/8/2025). That letter supported an immediate prohibition of new installation of artificial turf on locally owned public land in Santa Monica. The letter was co-signed by Friends of Sunset Park, North of Montana Association (NOMA), Pico Neighborhood Association, Santa Monica Mid City Neighbors, Santa Monica Northeast Neighbors and Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont).

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1309 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 7 This wide consensus serves to support the strong community support for grass playing fields. We therefore encourage you to adopt the recommendations in Agenda Items 11C and 11D.

Please take the important next step and direct City staff to develop a comprehensive plan to properly maintain the current GRASS fields and to develop new GRASS playing fields to support the amount of playing fields that are needed in Santa Monica.

NOMA and other neighborhoods rely on our schools (i.e. Roosevelt and Franklin) for access to safe and environmentally friendly playing fields and we encourage you to also work with the SMMUSD to explore ways to extend the prohibition of artificial turf installation to our schools as well.

In Appreciation,
The Board of NOMA
CC: Members of Santa Monica Recreation and Parks
Commission, SMMUSD Board of Education and SMC Board
of Trustees
smnoma.org
[email protected]
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Noma Boardmember <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Dec 8, 2025 at 9:04 AM
Subject: SUPPORT of an Artificial Turf Ban for ALL Santa Monica Public Land To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Dan Hall <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Oliver Chi <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, John Cyrus Smith <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

To: Members of Santa Monica Recreation and Parks Commission, City Manager Chi, Members of Santa Monica City Council, SMMUSD Board of Education and SMC Board of Trustees, The Boards of the Neighborhood Organizations listed below are in full SUPPORT of the Artificial Turf Ban Resolution passed by the Santa Monica Democratic Club on Tuesday, November 11, 2025.

Grass fields are especially relevant to the Santa Monica Neighborhood Organizations because the playing fields at our local schools are among the only outdoor play areas in many of our neighborhoods, and in some cases are the only recreational fields, due to our severe shortage of parks.

We have heard throughout our neighborhoods that children and parents want grass fields.

This is following the precedent set by the Westside Regional Alliance of Councils on the Westside of Los Angeles who recently voted to support the transition away from the use of synthetic turf and artificial grass and the LAUSD School Board who voted to prohibit new artificial turf installations at early education, elementary, and middle schools.

We would welcome an opportunity to further discuss the goals and desires of our neighborhoods and would be pleased if any (or all) the individuals in receipt of this email were to reply to set up a brief time for a discussion and ongoing dialogue.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1311 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 9 In solidarity,
The Boards of:

Friends of Sunset Park
North of Montana Association (NOMA)
Pico Neighborhood Association
Santa Monica Mid City Neighbors
Santa Monica Northeast Neighbors
Wilshire Montana Neighborhood Coalition (Wilmont)
smnoma.org
[email protected]
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1312 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 10 David Yakobson
From: Jessica Herman Goldman <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:05 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely, Jessica Goldman, Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1313 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 11 David Yakobson
From: Jeff Altrock <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:03 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
Jeff Altrock, Northeast Santa Monica Neighborhood

JEFF ALTROCK
818.679.7217 (c)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1314 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 12 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:40 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Items 11C & D

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I’m writing to say thank you truly for listening to the community and choosing natural grass for the new Memorial Park fields. Fields 1 through 4 being real grass is a huge win for our health, our environment, and for the kind of city Santa Monica wants to be.

What’s been especially moving to witness is how many diƯerent parts of our community came together around this, parents, athletes, environmental advocates, neighbors, people who don’t always agree on everything. New coalitions formed and relationships were built. It’s been a powerful reminder that we actually have far more in common than what separates us especially when we’re focused on our kids, our parks, and our shared future! Now it’s time to finish the job! By saving Memorial Park from plastic, you’ve proven that natural grass is the better choice for our premier parks. This should now be the standard, not the exception. I urge you to formalize this leadership by adopting a citywide policy of no new taxpayer spending on synthetic turf. Synthetic turf is not a real solution. It wears out every 8–10 years, has to be fully ripped out and dumped, and leaves us with PFAS, microplastics, extreme heat, and long-term costs we keep pretending don’t exist. It’s not cheaper, it’s just a plastic subscription we keep renewing. We already have major maintenance liabilities at Airport and Belmar. Let’s not add more. Let’s invest in living, cooling assets instead.

Santa Monica has a real opportunity to lead here — not follow! Other cities are already moving away from plastic fields. California should be setting the standard, and Santa Monica should be showing what it looks like to align our infrastructure with our values, our climate commitments, and our Sustainability Rights Ordinance.

So please:
• Make Memorial Park the precedent
• Adopt a clear policy of no new turf
• Maintain grass fields as grass
• And replace turf with living surfaces at end of life
Let’s make sure no other neighborhood has to fight this same battle again. Thank you for choosing living parks over plastic, and for proving Santa Monica can still lead!!! Sincerely,
Amy Wiwuga
Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1315 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 13 David Yakobson
From: Eric Salsa <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:40 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Call to action- Items 11C & D: Support Natural Grass at Memorial & A "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1–4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

I urge the Council to go further by adopting a city-wide policy that prohibits any future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf installations. The marketing claims around artificial grass often leave out important facts. The NFL Players Association has cited higher injury rates on turf and has called for a return to natural grass fields. Turf manufacturers also promote “recyclability,” but large-scale, proven recycling systems for these products do not yet exist.

Memorial Park can set the standard for healthier play, honest sustainability, and protection of our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s (already limited) public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass.

Regards,
Eric Salsa
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1316 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 9 David Yakobson
From: Corinne Koutsouros <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:58 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Ban plastic turf in all of Santa Monica

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
We are falling behind in LA County’s lead to ban plastic turf. In a city that prides itself with LEED certified workers and green buildings we need to be leaders in all aspects and keep nature real.

I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely,
Corinne Koutosuros
Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1317 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 10 David Yakobson
From: Corinne Koutsouros <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:42 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Ban plastic turf I. All of Santa Monica

I am writing to express my enthusiastic support for the revised Memorial Park Redevelopment plan that designates Fields 1-4 as natural grass. Thank you for listening to the community and choosing a cooler, safer, and truly sustainable future for this landmark park.

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1318 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 8 David Yakobson
From: Alissa Keegan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:58 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Thank you and no-turf city wide

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for listening to the community and choosing natural grass for the new Memorial Park fields. I urge you to now formalize this commitment by passing a city-wide policy that prohibits all future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf. While investigative journalism like the NYT (see link below) is publishing articles on the health hazards of turf and the additional cities and countries banning its use, let's please not let Santa Monica fall behind in 2026. I don't want my little kids growing up playing on plastic at Franklin School, which is breaking ground on reconstruction with plans to replace our only neighborhood dog poop-free grass with plastic.

I urge you to protect Santa Monica's reputation as a progressive, family- friendly and vote in the interest of our children and the environment.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/17/climate/artificial-turf-grass-lawsuit-defamationhealth-risk.html?unlocked_article_code=1.HVA.-X9b.bY24R70QFLmk&smid=url-share Sincerely,
Alissa Keegan MD/PhD
Wilshire Montana Neighborhood
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1319 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: James duBois <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 11:25 AM
To: councilmtgitems

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass! Sincerely,
James duBois
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1320 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: mmoody <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 9:35 AM
To: councilmtgitems

Sincerely,
Sally Hibbard
918 25th St., Santa Monica
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1321 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Matt Goldenberg D.O. <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 8:00 AM
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Recreation and Arts Department; John Cyrus Smith; John Smith; Barry Rosenbaum; [email protected]; Karen Melick; Maryanne LaGuardia; Steven Johnson; Jenny Rogers; Micah Akerson; Sonam Makker; Noe Mendoza
Subject: SUPPORT Items 11 C and 11D AND SUPPORT for an Artificial Turf Ban

EXTERNAL
Mayor Torosis, City Council Members and City Manger Chi, I’m engaged, as the co-chair of NOMA, and the father of two daughters, because we have no city controlled playing fields and little park space in our neighborhood, outside of their school.

I’m also speaking for the 70% of renters and for condo owners, because I was born in Santa Monica and raised in a townhome and Lincoln Middle School was my childhood backyard.

I am strongly in favor of the staff recommendation to prohibit new Artificial Turf on City controlled land.

As Santa Monica densifies, our public and open spaces will become even more limited.

Therefore, I encourage you to take two additional steps tonight to eliminate the need for our community to have to choose between grass playing fields and access to enough playing fields:

First, please direct the City staff to bring back a plan to create enough grass playing fields, so that no one has to fear losing access to fields in Santa Monica.

Second, please work with SMMUSD to increase access to well-maintained GRASS playing fields on ALL public land in Santa Monica, including our schools.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1322 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 Thank you,
Matt Goldenberg
NOMA Co-Chair
SAMO, Class of 2002
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1323 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Sara McGinnis <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 5:52 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: PICKLEBALL

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to respectfully urge the City Council to consider providing temporary replacement pickleball courts during the reconstruction period.

The existing pickleball courts have become an incredibly important and well-used community space. On any given day, they are filled with players of all ages and abilities—retirees, working adults, families, and beginners—gathering not just for recreation, but for connection. These courts have helped foster a strong sense of community, encouraged healthy lifestyles, and provided a welcoming, inclusive outlet for residents across our city.

With reconstruction underway, the loss of access to these courts has left a significant gap for a large and active group of community members. Pickleball is one of the fastest-growing sports in the country, and our city is clearly experiencing that growth firsthand. Providing temporary courts would demonstrate the City’s continued commitment to resident wellness, recreation, and community engagement during this transition.

Even a short-term solution would go a long way in supporting the many residents who rely on this space as a regular and meaningful part of their daily lives.

Thank you for your time, consideration, and continued investment in the well-being of our community. I truly appreciate your leadership and hope you will give this request serious consideration.

Sincerely,
Sara McGinnis
Kindergarten Teacher
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1324 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Karen Chen <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 1:45 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Pickleball replacement courts for Memorial Park

EXTERNAL
Hi,
I am a resident of Santa Monica, and an avid player of Pickleball after discovering it here at Memorial Park! Thankful that Memorial and Johns Adams Middle School painted lines to accommodate the popularity of pickleball - it’s brought so many people outside of Santa Monica here to play and stimulate going to eat after etc.

Are you able to ensure replacement pickleball courts available during the Memorial Park renovation to continue its popularity and accessibility!
Thank you!
Karen Chen
Santa Monica resident (Montana Ave)
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1325 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: David Misch <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 5:15 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Artificial grass

EXTERNAL
To The Mayor and City Council:

Thank you for choosing natural grass for the new Memorial Park fields. I urge you to formalize this commitment by passing a city-wide policy that prohibits all future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf. This will help protect our health, our budget, and our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance by keeping Santa Monica’s public lands living and plasticfree.

David Misch, Northeast Neighbors
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1326 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: Benjamin Gribnau <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 11:04 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Jams Pickleball courts
Attachments: processed-7769615F-AFF3-4089-9893-D3EDBA588D36.jpeg; processed-51776368- D0A2-48DA-9B48-06BC39137947.jpeg; processed-5613260A-7572-4A31-BD64- D0871BCCC6D4.jpeg; processed-D0965EC7-4F54-4A0E-AB58-F1943BDEFCF6.jpeg

EXTERNAL
Hello,
We’ve been informed that there will be construction on the pickleball courts for approximately two years, and that there is currently no backup plan in place for the community to play in the interim. I’m at JAMS right now, and there are over 60 people here today (see photos below).

Can you please implement a temporary backup plan during the construction period so that everyone continues to have places to play on Saturdays and Sundays? Thank you,
Local community member
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1327 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1328 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project) Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1329 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project) Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1330 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project) Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1331 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project) 4 David Yakobson
From: KIM NORMAN <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 1:10 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Replacement pb courts

EXTERNAL
All,
Did you ever consider what all these people were doing before Pickleball? For years we talked about getting out there and staying in shape. Get plenty of exercise and eat right. It’s good for the mind they said.

Well now we have that outlet and it is imperative that a replacement be found for all our sanity!! Let’s put it this way it keeps us off the streets and isnt that what we want? As an example the volleyball courts on the beach provide a release for all the people who work all week . I know because I play with my daughter’s friends on the beach on Sundays and they all play because it’s therapy, it’s the community aspects that is so important.

If you break that consistency if you break that bond you break the connection and the community falls apart.

Please consider our request to keep this community intact.

Regards,
Kim Norman
801 ocean ave
Sent from my iPhone
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1332 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 7:22 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council Agenda Item 11D (Jan 27, 2026): Support Natural Grass at Memorial & Adopt a "No New Turf" Policy

I urge the Council to solidify this leadership by formalizing a city-wide policy that prohibits any future taxpayer spending on new synthetic turf installations.Memorial Park has shown that natural grass is the preferred choice for our residents. By committing to living soil across the city, we uphold our 2013 Sustainability Rights Ordinance and protect our watershed from microplastics.

Let’s keep Santa Monica’s public land green and living. No more public dollars for plastic grass!
Sincerely, Amani Spielman, Northeast
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1333 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 1 David Yakobson
From: Tamay K <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 10:12 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Maintaining Pickleball Access: Agenda Item 11.D

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
Thank you for your continued work to improve Santa Monica’s parks and recreational facilities. I support the Memorial Park Redesign and appreciate the City’s long term vision for the site.

I am writing regarding the January 27 City Council meeting, Agenda Item 11.D, to respectfully request that pickleball access be maintained during the anticipated 18 to 24 month construction period.

Memorial Park is currently the only public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played. The courts are used daily by a large and diverse community, including seniors, working adults, and residents who rely on affordable, accessible recreation for physical and mental health.

If the Memorial Park courts are closed without replacement options, this community would lose access to the only public pickleball facility in the city for nearly two years. I respectfully ask City Council to direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities within existing city owned spaces during construction.

This would ensure continuity of access while still allowing the Memorial Park Redesign to move forward as planned.

Thank you for your leadership and thoughtful consideration.

Sincerely,
Tamay Kiper
Santa Monica Resident
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1334 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 2 David Yakobson
From: Jimmy Cohn <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 7:47 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Temporary pickleball courts needed

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members
As you’re all aware , the city of Santa Monica’s Memorial Park is a Mecca for pickleball players on the west side. It is the largest facility with 16 courts available on 4 tennis courts.

On MLK day this past Monday , the gentleman who runs tennis camps at different times throughout the year took over 3 tennis courts from 9 am to noon .. over 100 pickleball players were left with only an option to move to the lone available tennis courts with 4 pickleball courts for those 3 hours. How many other tennis courts were available for this single day tennis camp which may have had 2 dozen kids at most on the 3 other courts. This is one example of the need for pickleball courts in the city of Santa Monica.

It happens all too often. We are having to leave the area to play America’s fastest growing sport. Please provide temporary courts as we all know less than a year from now , we will lose Memorial Park for pickleball. There is no other city park set up or any other city tennis courts set up to accommodate the play that 7 days a week happens at memorial park.

Please help us stay local.

Thank You
Jimmy Cohn
JC Print Packaging & Display , Inc
555 S Barrington Ave
#402
Los Angeles , CA 90049
Send all samples to
JC / Insua pkg
jimmy / Albert
9121 Glenoaks Blvd
Sun Valley , CA 91352
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1335 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 3 David Yakobson
From: Megan Satterfield <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 8:27 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Urgent Request: Temporary Pickleball Courts During Memorial Park Closure

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I’m a Santa Monica resident and regular pickleball player writing with urgency regarding the possible closure of the Memorial Park pickleball courts in early 2027 for 18–24 months.

These courts are a daily gathering place for many residents, myself included. Pickleball is one of the few truly accessible, multigenerational recreational activities in our city, and losing the Memorial Park courts for this long without a replacement plan would have a real impact on community health and connection.

I respectfully urge the Council to require temporary replacement pickleball courts during the reconstruction period. Even a temporary solution would make a meaningful difference for residents who rely on these facilities year-round.

Thank you for your time and consideration of this request as part of Agenda Item 11.D.

Sincerely,
Megan Satterfield
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1336 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 4 David Yakobson
From: Steven Maizes <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 10:56 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Qqq Maizes
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Steven R. Maizes
Mortgage Banker
m: 310-467-4044
NMLS 250590
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1337 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 5 David Yakobson
From: Heidi Liang <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 2:47 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Please Maintain Pickleball Court Access During Memorial Park Redesign!

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
Thank you for your work on improving Santa Monica’s parks and recreation facilities! I just heard about the Memorial Park Redesign from the Pickleball group. I’m writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction starting in early 2027.

Memorial Park is currently the ONLY public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by many people who live locally or across town in LA. Santa Monica Pickleball Club has formed a large community, and lots of us play there to not only exercise but also socialize making new friendship. It'll be devastating if Memorial Park doesn't have the pickleball courts anymore.

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Appreciate your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Heidi
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1338 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 6 David Yakobson
From: Mackenzie Jackson <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 1:15 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Memorial Park 2027 Pickleball Court Closure

EXTERNAL
Hello!
I recently heard about the plan to remodel the Memorial Park pickleball courts in early 2027, and I wanted to provide my thoughts ahead of your meeting on the 27th.

My friends, family, and I have been using the courts multiple times a week for years, and it is one of the few places in LA with quality courts, good prices, and a sense of community. While I realize a remodel may be necessary and beneficial, I would be very sad to see that community go away for the expected 18-24 months it would take to complete the construction. Can the council please consider either relocating where folks can play to other neighboring courts at schools and parks and/or do a rolling construction plan? There are many courts at Memorial so it would be great if we could do the construction 2 tennis courts at a time (i.e. one chunk of the area at a time, separated by the existing fences).

Thank you for your consideration of this matter. I love playing pickleball at Memorial and have met many great people there that I would be devastated to not see for nearly 2 years. There are also not many other options for the community to use, so I worry that there will be no place for us to relocate to in the interim.

Warm regards,
Mackenzie Jackson
(408)613-7306
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1339 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 7 David Yakobson
From: Howard Chesley <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 3:49 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: ITEM 11.d Memorial park pickleball

EXTERNAL
I understand there is a plan for Memorial Park to remove the pickleball courts during reconstruction, and there is no plan yet to provide access elsewhere. I assume you must know how popular and important the Memorial pickleball program is to the community. Its benefits are physical and social, largely due to its "open play" program, which accommodates hundreds of players of all ages. It would be a huge and embarrassing loss to the community to be without it. Please consider what might be done. Santa Monica Airport, perhaps. I go by Reed Park and the tennis courts are foten unused in the daytime. No doubt there are other possible venues if you pursue it. Please don't give up on the hundreds of us who would miss our friends and our sport terribly if it were to disappear from SM. Thanks.

Howard Chsleyu
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1340 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 8 David Yakobson
From: Andrew Bingham <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 11:13 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Immediate Action Required: Failure to Provide Replacement Pickleball Courts (Agenda Item 11.D)

EXTERNAL
Members of the Santa Monica City Council,
I am writing to formally object to the plan to close the Memorial Park pickleball courts for 18–24 months with no replacement courts identified.

This is not a minor scheduling inconvenience. It is a failure of basic public stewardship.

Pickleball is one of the fastest-growing recreational activities in the country, with strong participation among seniors, working adults, and residents who rely on public courts as their primary outlet for physical activity and community engagement. Closing these courts without a replacement plan effectively eliminates access to a public service that thousands of residents actively use.

That is unacceptable.

From a governance standpoint, this raises serious concerns:
• Public facilities are funded and maintained for continuous public benefit, not suspended indefinitely without mitigation.
• Removing access for up to two years without alternatives violates the spirit of equitable access to public resources.
• The absence of a contingency plan reflects poor planning and disregard for stakeholder impact.

From a fiscal and liability perspective:
• Idle demand does not disappear. It shifts into conflict, informal use of inappropriate spaces, and increased strain on Parks & Recreation enforcement.
• Displacing organized recreation increases risk exposure for the City when residents seek alternatives in non-designated areas.
• Cities across California routinely provide temporary courts during construction projects. Santa Monica is not exempt from this standard of competence.

From a moral and ethical perspective:
• You are removing a proven health, wellness, and social benefit from residents while offering nothing in return.
• Seniors, retirees, and residents without access to private facilities are disproportionately harmed. • Telling constituents to “wait two years” is not leadership. It is abdication.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1341 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 9 Temporary replacement courts are not optional. They are the minimum responsible action.

Other municipalities manage this routinely by:
• Converting underutilized tennis courts
• Installing temporary striping and portable nets
• Utilizing school or underused park space
• Partnering with nearby public facilities
Santa Monica has the resources, space, and expertise to do the same. What is currently missing is the will.

I am asking — and expecting — the City Council to direct staff to immediately identify and implement temporary replacement pickleball courts before Memorial Park closes. Anything less will be viewed as deliberate disregard for a large, organized, and growing segment of your constituents.

This issue will not quietly disappear. It will be remembered — by voters, by residents, and by those who expect better from the officials entrusted to manage this city.

I urge you to act decisively and correct this failure in planning.

Sincerely,
Andrew Bingham
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1342 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 10 David Yakobson
From: Sherwin Lotfi <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 12:13 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D Memorial Park Pickleball Courts

EXTERNAL
Hi Santa Monica City Council, I'm writing with concern regarding the lack of foresight around the Memorial Park public pickleball courts - agenda item 11.D. These courts are frequented every single day by hundreds of local residents, I even personally know people who travel from areas in east and south LA for the community created at the Memorial Park courts. I've met at least a handful of people from out of state, playing at those courts, who have raved about how great the community is at the Memorial Park courts.

Please require temporary replacement pickleball courts while the Memorial Park courts are closed during reconstruction, and please consider providing an accurate and swift timeline regarding the ongoing construction. It may seem unnecessary, but providing these details and a replacement will keep the community invested, and together.

Thank you,
Sherwin Lotfi
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1343 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 11 David Yakobson
From: Bruce Janger <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 5:11 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D pickleball access

EXTERNAL
Regarding the meeting of January 27, I respectfully urge the Council to take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that all people keep their access to pickleball during the 18 to 24 months of construction at Memorial Park.

Without functioning pickleball facilities available to the public, many will be deprived of an irreplaceable source of exercise and social interaction with their fellow Santa Monicans. As people get older, many find it more difficult to compete on the tennis court. Pickleball is an alternative which provides fun and exercise for millions. The exercise is not as demanding as tennis, but this enables many to participate. It would create a significant hardship for many if they were deprived of access to public pickleball courts.

Memorial Park is just one example of a facility where the sounds of pickleball are far enough from residences that noise is not a problem. We are sure that the Council will be able to designate many other locations where noise will not be a problem.

Thank you for your attention to this issue.

Sincerely,
Bruce Janger (who love to play both tennis and pickleball) 140 Ocean Park Blvd., Unit 619
Santa Monica CA 90405
(310) 392-0680
[email protected]
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1344 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 12 David Yakobson
From: Nicole Maizes <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 1:46 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Steven Maizes
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

I’m writing regarding the January 27thmeeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction. Memorial Park is currently the only public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large community.

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Nicole D. Maizes
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1345 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 13 David Yakobson
From: mghmoffice <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 1:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Mark Gordon
Santa Monica Pickleball Club Member
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1346 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 14 David Yakobson
From: Ayumi Gibbs <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 12:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 11.D : Supporting Pickleball Access during memorial park redesign

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item 11.D for the January 27th meeting. During the 18–24 months of construction, I respectfully ask that City Council ensure continued pickleball access. Memorial Park is currently the only public location for pickleball in Santa Monica and is used daily by many residents.

I respectfully request that City Council direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities at existing city locations during the construction period.

Thank you for your leadership and thoughtful consideration.

Sincerely,
Ayumi Gibbs
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1347 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 15 David Yakobson
From: wendy sharp <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 5:30 PM
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: agenda Item 11.D- Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members
Thank you for your work on improving our park and recreation facilities. I support the Memorial Park Redesign and appreciate the City's long term vision.

I respectfully ask that you ensure Pickleball access is maintained during the 18 to 24 months of predicted construction. Memorial Park is currently the ONLY public City facility where pickleball can be played and the courts are used daily by hundreds of people.

PLEASE ask staff to identify and fund replacement facilities for the construction period.

Thank you
Wendy Sharp
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1348 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 16 David Yakobson
From: Markus <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 12:00 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Santa Monica Memorial Park Pickleball

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I am writing as a regular pickleball player at Memorial Park. I play there between two and five days a week, and I want to express serious concern about the potential closure of the courts for 18 to 24 months without a plan for temporary replacement facilities.

The Memorial Park pickleball courts are far more than recreational space. They function as a true community hub. People do not come only to play. They come to socialize, exercise, support one another, and maintain daily human connection. For many players, this is the primary place they interact with others in person.

Some people come every day. For retirees, remote workers, and older residents especially, these courts are a vital part of their mental, physical, and social well-being.

If the courts close without alternatives, an entire community will be displaced overnight.

Based on rough estimates, 16 active courts with 4 to 12 players per court represents close to 200 people using the facility daily, with a broader community that easily exceeds 10,000 residents (based on how many people interact on the facebook group) over the course of a year. I understand the city likely has more precise data, but even conservative numbers show how significant this impact would be.

To put it another way, if a school were removed for two years with no temporary location provided, we would immediately ask where those students would go and how they would continue learning and socializing. The same principle applies here. Removing a daily gathering place without replacement disrupts lives in meaningful ways.

Memorial Park is not simply a group of courts. It is a social ecosystem.

Pickleball, by its nature, fosters far more interaction than most sports. Players rotate constantly, play with strangers, talk between games, and build relationships across age groups and backgrounds. Many tennis players may use courts independently, but pickleball creates sustained, inclusive social engagement that is difficult to replicate elsewhere.

Where tennis players show up to a court with their small group of friends play, and then leave.

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1349 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 17 inbetween games they have to sit together and pass the time. For many people, pickleball serves the same purpose as a "local bar", in that it is a communal place for people to interact. But it does so at a lower cost to the user, and people don't have to get drunk to do it. They get the health benefits that improve their psychological state. If you displace a community that gets it's daily exercise, saratonin, and dopamine without an alternative you will collectively lower the happiness and satisfaction of the local community and increase depression, loneliness and isolation for all those effected.

As a City Council, you must be aware of the importance of communities and the way that they gather and all the benefits they foster. But what I would like you to consider is how strong this interaction and community spirit is in a pickleball community. They aren't parents coming to push their kids on a swing or down a slide that will barely speak to other parents and leave never to interact with those parents again. Pickleball is a close-knit sub-cultural community that spends every chance they get trying to improve their skills at a game and improve their social dynamics within that community.

I'll give you an example. I played at a local basketball court for 3 years almost every day. And I didn't know more than a few peoples names. We played almost every day and did not speak. Did not get to know each other personally. I'll give you another example, I am not friends with anyone at my Gym. I go to the Gym to work out daily and do not speak to anyone and then I go home. Outside of work, 2 of the other places I go to be around people I have not made any friends or fostered any lasting relationships in the many years that I have lived in Los Angeles.

I go to Bars but I wouldn't say that the people at the bar have become a part of my life and have become a part of my daily community.

After Discovering pickleball, my friendship circle multiplied exponentially. I have so many friends that have become my friends on social media, many have become numbers in my phone that I text daily and I hang out with outside of the pickleball courts.

I made friends that invited me to other groups both pickleball and non pickleball where I have become an integral part of those communities. There are clubs within pickleball and tournaments, there is your own santa monica pickleball club where I have played in the weekly round robins. People have their Birthday parties at Memorial park instead of having their birthday at a pizza place or a bar and bring birthday cakes and presents. It is much much more than a shared space the way my Gym or my Basketball court have been before discovering pickleball. Pickleball community is a unique and special phenomenon.

If you have not made a plan to provide an alternative for this large community you have grossly underestimated the importance pickleball has in a lot of people's lives and how important it is for all of those people to have a central place to gather and interact.

I fully understand the need for reconstruction and long-term improvements. However, I strongly urge the city to require temporary replacement pickleball courts during the construction period so this community is not effectively erased for nearly two years. Please, think about these people. Try to imagine how you are shaping their daily lives with these decisions.

Thank you for your time, your service, and for considering the real human impact of this decision.

Sincerely,
Markus
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1350 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 18 --
Markus Madlangbayan
MOVEMINT Pictures LLC
Director/Cinematographer/Editor/Motion Graphics Designer/VFX Artist 617 N Dillon st. Apt #305
Los Angeles, CA 90026
310-993-MINT
310-993-6468
https://www.movemint.tv/
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1351 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 19 David Yakobson
From: Markus <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2026 11:50 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Santa Monica Memorial Park Pickleball

EXTERNAL
If possible, I would like to revise my statement slightly and have the old email replaced with this one. The only change is estimates regarding the number of people that use the courts daily. I realized I grossly underestimated
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I am writing as a regular pickleball player at Memorial Park. I play there between two and five days a week, and I want to express serious concern about the potential closure of the courts for 18 to 24 months without a plan for temporary replacement facilities.

Some people come every day. For retirees, remote workers, and older residents especially, these courts are a vital part of their mental, physical, and social well-being.

If the courts close without alternatives, an entire community will be displaced overnight.

Based on rough estimates, 16 active courts with 4 to 12 players per court represents close to 200 people using the facility ever hour. At it's lowest, there are 8 people per court. 4 people playing and 4 people waiting to play. That's 128 people. At peak hours there are 12-16 people per court. 4 people playing and up to 3 games games wait. So 12 to 16. Let's say you have 12 people per court times 16 courts thats roughly 200 people. People usually play for 2-3hrs and leave. So every 2 to 3hrs 200 people will finish playing as a fresh set of people rotates in. if this was constant you could have up to 2400 people rotating through the courts in a 12 hour day. So at it's lowest you have 100 people there for a 3hr period, and on a busy day you could have up to 2400 people using the courts from 10am to 10pm roughly. With a broader community that easily exceeds 10,000 residents (based on how many people interact on the facebook group). We are talking about a large community of hundreds to thousands of people who use those courts on a daily basis. There is a large list of people who sign up for open plays every day. and large numbers of people that play outside of the paid hours and use the courts when they are free. I just wanted to give you an idea of how many people use the courts. A lot more than who are using your softball fields or your playgrounds because people are on the courts from open till close. So think about how many people are going to be impacted if they do not have these courts to play on.

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1352 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 20 socializing. The same principle applies here. Removing a daily gathering place without replacement disrupts lives in meaningful ways. People might not see the people they became friends with for that entire 2years.

Memorial Park is not simply a group of courts. It is a social ecosystem.

Where tennis players show up to a court with their small group of friends play for a few hours, only talking to each other, and then leave...

Pickleball players have to share their courts and play different people every 15minutes. Because games last 15minutes to 30minutes on average. It is a speed dating like environment of socialization. So the closeknit nature of the community is much higher than other sports. Both because they are forced to interact with others every 15minutes and meet new people as well as get along with people they get to know longer term as they become regulars, but also because inbetween games they have to sit together and pass the time. For many people, pickleball serves the same purpose as a "local bar", in that it is a communal place for people to interact. But it does so at a lower cost to the user, and people don't have to get drunk to do it. They get the health benefits that improve their psychological state. If you displace a community that gets it's daily exercise, saratonin, and dopamine without an alternative you will collectively lower the happiness and satisfaction of the local community and increase depression, loneliness and isolation for all those effected.

I go to Bars but I wouldn't say that the people at the bar have become a part of my life and have become a part of my daily community.

I made friends that invited me to other groups both pickleball and non pickleball where I have become an integral part of those communities. There are clubs within pickleball and tournaments, there is your own santa monica pickleball club where I have played in the weekly round robins. People have their Birthday parties at Memorial park instead of having their birthday at a pizza place or a bar and bring birthday cakes and presents. It is much much more than a shared space the way my Gym or my Basketball court have Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1353 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 21 been before discovering pickleball. Pickleball community is a unique and special phenomenon.

Thank you for your time, your service, and for considering the real human impact of this decision.

Sincerely,
Markus
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 12:00 PM Markus <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I am writing as a regular pickleball player at Memorial Park. I play there between two and five days a week, and I want to express serious concern about the potential closure of the courts for 18 to 24 months without a plan for temporary replacement facilities.

Some people come every day. For retirees, remote workers, and older residents especially, these courts are a vital part of their mental, physical, and social well-being.

If the courts close without alternatives, an entire community will be displaced overnight.

Memorial Park is not simply a group of courts. It is a social ecosystem.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1354 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 22 Pickleball, by its nature, fosters far more interaction than most sports. Players rotate constantly, play with strangers, talk between games, and build relationships across age groups and backgrounds. Many tennis players may use courts independently, but pickleball creates sustained, inclusive social engagement that is difficult to replicate elsewhere.

Where tennis players show up to a court with their small group of friends play, and then leave.

Pickleball players have to share their courts and play different people every 15minutes. It is a speed dating like environment of socialization. So the closeknit nature of the community is much higher than other sports. Both because they are forced to interact with others every 15minutes and meet new people as well as get along with people they get to know longer term as they become regulars, but also because inbetween games they have to sit together and pass the time. For many people, pickleball serves the same purpose as a "local bar", in that it is a communal place for people to interact. But it does so at a lower cost to the user, and people don't have to get drunk to do it. They get the health benefits that improve their psychological state. If you displace a community that gets it's daily exercise, saratonin, and dopamine without an alternative you will collectively lower the happiness and satisfaction of the local community and increase depression, loneliness and isolation for all those effected.

I go to Bars but I wouldn't say that the people at the bar have become a part of my life and have become a part of my daily community.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1355 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 23 I fully understand the need for reconstruction and long-term improvements. However, I strongly urge the city to require temporary replacement pickleball courts during the construction period so this community is not effectively erased for nearly two years. Please, think about these people. Try to imagine how you are shaping their daily lives with these decisions.

Thank you for your time, your service, and for considering the real human impact of this decision.

Sincerely,
Markus
--
Markus Madlangbayan
MOVEMINT Pictures LLC
Director/Cinematographer/Editor/Motion Graphics Designer/VFX Artist 617 N Dillon st. Apt #305
Los Angeles, CA 90026
310-993-MINT
310-993-6468
https://www.movemint.tv/
--
Markus Madlangbayan
MOVEMINT Pictures LLC
Director/Cinematographer/Editor/Motion Graphics Designer/VFX Artist 617 N Dillon st. Apt #305
Los Angeles, CA 90026
310-993-MINT
310-993-6468
https://www.movemint.tv/
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1356 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 24 David Yakobson
From: Robert Lemle <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2026 8:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

I’m writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D and to respectfully ask that the City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction. Memorial Park is currently the only public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large community.

Over the past few years, I have watched as the pickleball craze has caught fire. I have recently retired and generally use the Memorial Park courts 4-5 days per week. I’ve seen similar use by my fellow retirees, as pickleball allows us to remain physically competitive as we age while at the same time allowing us a space to connect, have fun and remain active. I implore you to consider this before tearing down the courts without providing us an alternative space to continue.

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during the construction.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Robert L. Lemle
> -------------------------------
> This message and any attached documents may contain confidential and/or privileged attorney-client communications or attorney work product. Use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient may be unlawful. If you received this email in error, please notify us and destroy all copies of this email. Thank you.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1357 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 25 David Yakobson
From: Tina Hou <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2026 7:25 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Temporary Replacement Pickleball Courts Request

EXTERNAL
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to express my concern regarding the potential closure of the Memorial Park pickleball courts in early 2027 for an estimated 18–24 months due to reconstruction.

Pickleball is an important recreational activity for many residents, especially seniors, and the Memorial Park courts are heavily used by the community. I am concerned that there is currently no plan in place for temporary replacement courts during this extended closure.

I respectfully ask the City Council to consider requiring temporary replacement pickleball courts so that residents can continue to stay active and engaged while the reconstruction is underway.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration. I truly appreciate the City’s efforts to support recreation and community well-being.

Sincerely,
Tina Hou
從我的iPhone傳送
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1358 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 26 David Yakobson
From: Markus <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2026 9:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Re: Santa Monica Memorial Park Pickleball

EXTERNAL
Markus <[email protected]> Thu, J
to councilmtgitems
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.

If possible, I would like to revise my statement slightly and have the old email replaced with this one.

The only change is that I know people who met at memorial park pickleball, and now they're engaged to be married.

Some people come every day. For retirees, remote workers, and older residents especially, these courts are a vital part of their mental, physical, and social well-being.

If the courts close without alternatives, an entire community will be displaced overnight.

Based on rough estimates, 16 active courts with 4 to 12 players per court represents close to 200 people using the facility ever hour. At it's lowest, there are 8 people per court. 4 people playing and 4 people waiting to play. That's 128 people. At peak hours there are 12-16 people per court. 4 people playing and up to 3 games games wait. So 12 to 16. Let's say you have 12 people per court times 16 courts thats roughly 200 people. People usually play for 2-3hrs and leave. So every 2 to 3hrs 200 people will finish playing as a fresh set of people rotates in. if this was constant you could have up to 2400 people rotating through the courts in a 12 hour day from open to close. So at it's lowest you have 100 people there for a 3hr period, and on a busy day you could have up to 2400 people using the courts from 10am to 10pm roughly. With a broader community that easily exceeds 10,000 residents (based on how many people interact on the facebook group). We are talking about a large community of hundreds to thousands of people who use those courts on a daily basis. There is a large list of people who sign up for open plays every day. and large numbers of people that play outside of the paid hours and use the courts when they are free. I just wanted to give you an idea of Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1359 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 27 how many people use the courts. A lot more than who are using your softball fields or your playgrounds because people are on the courts from open till close. And a lot of those people are there 2 to 5 days a week because pickleball becomes a lifestyle. So think about how many people are going to be impacted if they do not have these courts to play on.

Memorial Park is not simply a group of courts. It is a social ecosystem.

Many tennis players may use courts independently, but pickleball creates sustained, inclusive social engagement that is difficult to replicate elsewhere.

Where tennis players show up to a court with their small group of friends play for a few hours, only talking to each other, and then leave...

Pickleball players have to share their courts and play different people every 15minutes. Because games last 15minutes to 30minutes on average. It is a speed dating like environment of socialization.

So the closeknit nature of the community is much higher than other sports. Both because they are forced to interact with others every 15minutes and meet new people as well as get along with people they get to know longer term as they become regulars, but also because inbetween games they have to sit together and pass the time. For many people, pickleball serves the same purpose as a "local bar", in that it is a communal place for people to interact. But it does so at a lower cost to the user, and people don't have to get drunk to do it. They get the health benefits that improve their psychological state. If you displace a community that gets it's daily exercise, saratonin, and dopamine without an alternative you will collectively lower the happiness and satisfaction of the local community and increase depression, loneliness and isolation for all those effected.

I go to Bars but I wouldn't say that the people at the bar have become a part of my life and have become a part of my daily community.

I made friends that invited me to other groups both pickleball and non pickleball where I have become Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1360 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 28 an integral part of those communities. There are clubs within pickleball and tournaments, there is your own santa monica pickleball club where I have played in the weekly round robins. People have their Birthday parties at Memorial park instead of having their birthday at a pizza place or a bar and bring birthday cakes and presents. It is much much more than a shared space the way my Gym or my Basketball court have been before discovering pickleball. Pickleball community is a unique and special phenomenon.

And if you're not convinced that pickleball is a community that fosters friendships and connections, I wanted to tell you about 2 people I know that met playing pickleball. They would play as partners.

Every day. And then they began dating. They moved in together. And are now engaged. If it wasn't for Santa Monica Memorial Park pickleball, they may not have met. And that story isn't an isolated incident. People becoming couples in pickleball is a very common occurance. Maybe because people play mixed doubles. Maybe because finding the chemistry necessary to be good partners on the court translates into chemistry off the court. Maybe because becoming partners ensures a consistency and a frequency to playing together that dating if there is any attraction is a natural progression. Whatever the reason, people find love in pickleball often. People starting to date because of people is a very common thing to see. So is people forming lasting friend ships and friend groups. Because pickleball is not just a sport or a game. It is a community. To get good you have to play often. And you have to spend 15minutes playing together, and 15minutes waiting to play and there's nothing else to do but chat and get to know each other while you wait. And when you come back you remember each other and find a court and sit and sometimes play the same people all day. Imagine seeing those same people you met weekly. Without having to coordinate, you just show up and the people you have gotten to know are there. The community you have become a part of is there. And you catch up on what has happened since you last played. That's what happens when people play pcikleball. And It happens other places, but I wouldn't say it happens as frequently. Like I said, I played basketball on the same court for 3 years without making friends, and I have never met anyone at the gym. I don't know anyone who is getting engaged from meeting at a park. But I know a lot of people who have met and started dating or became friends because of pickleball at memorial park. If you played pickleball you would understand it.

Thank you for your time, your service, and for considering the real human impact of this decision.

Sincerely,
Markus
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 11:50 PM Markus <[email protected]> wrote:

If possible, I would like to revise my statement slightly and have the old email replaced with this one.

The only change is estimates regarding the number of people that use the courts daily. I realized I grossly underestimated
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1361 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 29 Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I am writing as a regular pickleball player at Memorial Park. I play there between two and five days a week, and I want to express serious concern about the potential closure of the courts for 18 to 24 months without a plan for temporary replacement facilities.

Some people come every day. For retirees, remote workers, and older residents especially, these courts are a vital part of their mental, physical, and social well-being.

If the courts close without alternatives, an entire community will be displaced overnight.

Memorial Park is not simply a group of courts. It is a social ecosystem.

Where tennis players show up to a court with their small group of friends play for a few hours, only talking to each other, and then leave...

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1362 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 30 closeknit nature of the community is much higher than other sports. Both because they are forced to interact with others every 15minutes and meet new people as well as get along with people they get to know longer term as they become regulars, but also because inbetween games they have to sit together and pass the time. For many people, pickleball serves the same purpose as a "local bar", in that it is a communal place for people to interact. But it does so at a lower cost to the user, and people don't have to get drunk to do it. They get the health benefits that improve their psychological state. If you displace a community that gets it's daily exercise, saratonin, and dopamine without an alternative you will collectively lower the happiness and satisfaction of the local community and increase depression, loneliness and isolation for all those effected.

I go to Bars but I wouldn't say that the people at the bar have become a part of my life and have become a part of my daily community.

Thank you for your time, your service, and for considering the real human impact of this decision.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1363 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 31 Sincerely,
Markus
On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 12:00 PM Markus <[email protected]> wrote:

Some people come every day. For retirees, remote workers, and older residents especially, these courts are a vital part of their mental, physical, and social well-being.

If the courts close without alternatives, an entire community will be displaced overnight.

Memorial Park is not simply a group of courts. It is a social ecosystem.

Where tennis players show up to a court with their small group of friends play, and then leave.

Pickleball players have to share their courts and play different people every 15minutes. It is a speed dating like environment of socialization. So the closeknit nature of the community is much higher than other sports. Both because they are forced to interact with others every 15minutes and meet new people as well as get along with people they get to know longer term as they become regulars, but also because inbetween games they have to sit together and pass the time. For many people, pickleball serves the same purpose as a "local bar", in that it is a communal place for people to interact. But it does so at a lower cost to the user, and people don't have to get drunk to do it. They get the health benefits that improve their psychological state. If you displace a community that gets it's daily Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1364 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 32 exercise, saratonin, and dopamine without an alternative you will collectively lower the happiness and satisfaction of the local community and increase depression, loneliness and isolation for all those effected.

I go to Bars but I wouldn't say that the people at the bar have become a part of my life and have become a part of my daily community.

Thank you for your time, your service, and for considering the real human impact of this decision.

Sincerely,
Markus
--
Markus Madlangbayan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1365 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 33 MOVEMINT Pictures LLC
Director/Cinematographer/Editor/Motion Graphics Designer/VFX Artist 617 N Dillon st. Apt #305
Los Angeles, CA 90026
310-993-MINT
310-993-6468
https://www.movemint.tv/
--
Markus Madlangbayan
MOVEMINT Pictures LLC
Director/Cinematographer/Editor/Motion Graphics Designer/VFX Artist 617 N Dillon st. Apt #305
Los Angeles, CA 90026
310-993-MINT
310-993-6468
https://www.movemint.tv/
--
Markus Madlangbayan
MOVEMINT Pictures LLC
Director/Cinematographer/Editor/Motion Graphics Designer/VFX Artist 617 N Dillon st. Apt #305
Los Angeles, CA 90026
310-993-MINT
310-993-6468
https://www.movemint.tv/
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1366 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 34 David Yakobson
From: Hector Zuniga <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 9:44 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

I’m writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that the City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction.

Memorial Park is currently the only place in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large community. I have met and befriended a variety of different people from all walks of life, what I believe to be a great representation of the diverse community that Santa Monica has offered my family and I for the 30 years that I have resided in this area.

Please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction, as pickleball, and the community that surrounds it, is a vital part of the lives of many of your constituents.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Hector Zuniga
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more Click Here.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1367 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 35 David Yakobson
From: Shari Phillips <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 8:57 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council Agenda Item 11D (Jan 27, 2026): Support Natural Grass at Memorial & Adopt a "No New Turf" Policy

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for removing turf from the Memorial Park plan. I now urge you to adopt the full Sustainability Commission recommendation: 1) No new artificial sports fields will be installed in the city; 2) Existing grass fields will be maintained as grass fields; and 3) When existing artificial turf fields reach the end of their useful life, the city will replace them with durable natural alternative materials.

Let's uphold our commitment to a living "City as a Habitat." Sincerely,
Shari Phillips
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1368 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 36 David Yakobson
From: Brand0 <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2026 10:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

EXTERNAL
Dear Council members,
I’m writing regarding the January 27th meeting’s Agenda Item 11.D to respectfully ask that City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construction. Memorial Park is currently the only place in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large community. I hope that you are able to please direct staff to identify and fund temporary or alternative pickleball facilities across existing city facilities during construction.

Thank you for everything you are doing to improve Santa Monica’s parks and recreation facilities. I support the Memorial Park Redesign and appreciate the City’s long-term vision.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

Sincerely,
Steven Brand
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1369 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 37 David Yakobson
From: Ed Dubendorf <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 9:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item 11.D – Supporting Pickleball Access During Memorial Park Redesign

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members,
Thank you for your work on improving Santa Monica’s parks and recreaƟon faciliƟes. I support the Memorial Park Redesign and appreciate the City’s long-term vision.

I’m wriƟng regarding the January 27th meeƟng’s Agenda Item 11.D to respecƞully ask that City Council ensure pickleball access is maintained during the 18–24 months of construcƟon.

Memorial Park is currently the only public facility in Santa Monica where pickleball can be played, and the courts are used daily by a large community.

I have been in Santa Monica since 2011 and I have never seen a public area uƟlized by Santa Monicans so efficiently. I’ve never been at the park for the enƟre day, but my best guess is that, on average, it is used by more than a hundred people per day, from teens to senior ciƟzens. On any given morning and evening, there is a constant flow of many dozens of players.

In addiƟon to the physical health benefits the court provides, it has also become one of Santa Monica’s most prized social gathering areas. Many friends have been gained and it has raised the sense of community. My hope is that conƟnues and is not neglected for an extended period of Ɵme.

Please direct staff to idenƟfy and fund temporary or alternaƟve pickleball faciliƟes across exisƟng city faciliƟes during construcƟon.

Thank you for your leadership and consideraƟon.

Sincerely,
Ed Dubendorf
Edward D. Dubendorf
100 Wilshire Blvd.

Suite 700
Santa Monica, CA 90401
O: (310) 917-1070
C: (810) 348-2029
F: (310) 917-1001
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1370 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and 38 This electronic message is from a law firm. It may contain confidential or privileged information. If you received this transmission in error, please reply to the sender to advise of the error and delete this transmission and any attachments.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.s
Packet Pg. 1371 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Memorial Park Redevelopment
and Expansion Project
City Council Presentation
January 27, 2026
Agenda Item 11.D
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1372 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached resolution certifying the attached Environmental Impact Report for the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project;

2. Adopt mitigation measures set forth in the Environmental Impact Report; and

3. Approve the revised plan and direct staff to proceed with design development and construction documents for Phases 1 and 2 of the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project.
• As an alternative action, direct staff to eliminate elevated pickleball/tennis courts and associated structure from the proposed Revised Plan, proceed with on-grade courts in place of future Field 5, and consider incorporating the future Field 5 development as part of the Airport Conversion Project.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1373 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan City Council Presentation • Project Background • Memorial Park Master Plan • Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP) • Design Process • Environmental Review • Construction Budgets • Alternative Actions • Proposed Revised Plan • Next Steps Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1374 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Project Background
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1375 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project
1997: Parks and Recreation Master
Plan established need to expand and
redefine park
2004: City purchased Former Fisher
Lumber site with intent to expand
Memorial Park
2005: PLD relocation to Fisher
Lumber site (interim)
2016: Incorporated into Parks Needs
Assessment as a high priority project
2016: Voters approved Measure V
providing up to $20M from SMC
Oct 2019: Council approved Master
Plan for Memorial Park
redevelopment and expansion
2020: Project suspended due to the
COVID-19 pandemic
Sept 2022: Council approved Project
restart with reduced initial phase
Aug 2024: SWA Group awarded
design contract for Phases 0, 1, 2
Mar 2025: Project kickoff
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1376 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Phase 0 - Sustainable Water Infrastructure Project (SWIP) Early Conceptual Park Layout Options
SWIP is a critical component of the City’s water sustainability strategy.

Phase 0 involves designing an underground storm water capture and reuse and/or infiltration system with a maximum capacity of 3 million gallons (3 MG).

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1377 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Design Process
Phases 0, 1, 2
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1378 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Project Team
City Team Public Works, Recreation and Arts, Department of Transportation, Community Development, Fire
Design Team SWA Group (lead), Lever, Tetratech, Lloyd Consulting Group, KPFF, P2S, Fehr & Peers, Carlberg Associates, Sweeney, Cumming Group Survey Psomas
Geotechnical Smith-Emery Laboratories
Environmental WSP
Meetings & Presentations
Public Meetings
& Presentations
Recreation and Parks Commission, Urban Forest Task Force, Field Sports Advisory Council, Mid City Neighbors, Commission on Sustainability, Environmental Justice and the Environment Stakeholder
Meetings
Santa Monica College, Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District, Metro, Recreation and Parks Commission Ad Hoc
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1379 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Master Plan Objectives
• Maximize fields with a focus on diamond sports;
• Consider community programs such as the Police
Activities League (PAL), gymnasium, and fitness facilities; • Integrate the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plans; • Integrate appropriate buffering along busy streets;
• Consider the park’s relationship to the surrounding
neighborhood and City context.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1380 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Additional Items for Design Considerations (2019):

1. Incorporation of a premier California Interscholastic Federation (CIF) baseball field;

2. Incorporation of a NCAA tournament level softball field;

3. Inclusion of elements such as bullpens, warm up areas, dugouts, seating, public address systems, and score booths at all fields;

4. Incorporation of an off-leash dog run;

5. Clustering the proposed outdoor fitness equipment in groupings;

6. Incorporating shade for the playground;

7. Consider the possible access from the Expo station and whether rotating fields 3 and 4 might provide an opportunity for permeability and entry for Expo pedestrian traffic;

8. Consider making the entrance on 14th Street, where the drop-off is located to make more of a pedestrian experience;

9. Consider making area designated as field #5 (masterplan phase 2) more flexible to include passive recreational use prior to construction of masterplan phase 2;

10. Consider the addition of more community amenities, including barbecue grills;

11. Study the possibility of closing all or additional portions of 16th Street and expanding the park into that space;

12. Analyze and document the parking loss impacts on 16th Street;

13. Analyzing the tree canopy, relocating existing trees, and planting new trees where possible;

14. Examining aspects of sun & shade affecting players’ vision in determining positioning of fields;

15. Conducting further analysis of natural turf vs. synthetic turf; SEE: Staff Report
Attachment A
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1381 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Schematic Design Process
Project Initiation – Spring 2025
Project Kick-off, Existing Data/Conditions Analysis, Site Inspection, Schedule Coordination, Survey, Geotech, Preparation of Base Map, Permits & Approvals Design Alternatives – Summer/Fall 2025
Develop design alternatives, develop and refine one Schematic Design based on feedback and coordination
Schematic Design – Fall/Winter 2025/26
Present proposed Revised Plan to RPC and City Council for input to be considered in Design Development
SEE: Staff Report
Attachments B & C
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1382 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Environmental Review
In accordance with CEQA, an Environmental Impact Report was prepared to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the project
February 27, 2025
Notice of Preparation
March 12, 2025
Scoping Meeting
September 19, 2025
Public Draft EIR
January 2026
Final EIR Certification/
Project Approval
SEE: Staff Report
Attachments P, Q & R
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1383 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Environmental Review
• Focused analysis on:
 Air Quality
 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
• EIR determined there would be no significant environmental effects • Analyzed 3 alternatives
 Alternative 1 – No Project Alternative
 Alternative 2 – Real Grass Turf Fields
 Alternative 3 – Reduced Development Alternative
SEE: Staff Report
Attachments P, Q & R
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1384 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Construction Budgets
Preliminary cost estimates for Phases 1 and 2 based on the proposed Revised Plan and additional design phase input indicate higher construction costs. *Of the $2.75 million allocated from the
$20 million SMC bond measure funds for
phase 1 design and pre-construction
services, staff expect to use only $2 million,
preserving $18 million for construction.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1385 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Pursuing Grant Funding
ORLP = Outdoor Recreation Legacy Partnership Program
Measure W = Safe Clean Water Program
LWCF = Land and Water Conservation Fund
Measure A = Safe, Clean Neighborhood Parks and Beaches Measure Competitive Grant Program Spring 2026 Summer 2026 Fall 2026 (Updates per grantor) Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1386 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Alternative Actions
Given the remaining shortfall, even if all grant funding were awarded, Council may also consider the following alternative actions:
• Direct staff to further reduce the scope of work for each phase to align with current construction budgets.

This approach is not recommended, as further scope reductions could result in unresolved issues at the site until future phases are implemented.
• Direct staff to update construction budgets as necessary and delay project implementation until additional funding is secured. This approach is not recommended, as construction costs would continue to rise during the delay, increasing the overall project expense. • Eliminate elevated pickleball/tennis courts and associated structure from the proposed Revised Plan, proceed with on-grade courts in place of future Field 5, and consider incorporating the future Field 5 development as part of the Airport Conversion Project. This approach is recommended to bring the project closer to the current total construction budget of $40 million for phases 1 and 2. This alternative would maintain six total fields at Memorial Park while increasing overall playability with the addition of the combo fields. Recognizing the master plan’s objective to add a seventh field at Memorial Park, this alternative includes consideration of incorporating the future Field 5 development into the Airport Conversion Project.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1387 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
If directed to proceed
with on-grade courts:

1. Prioritize evaluating
on-grade courts at the
future Field 5 location.

2. If challenges or
opportunities warrant
further consideration of
alternatives, then other
potential locations
would be assessed.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1388 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
If directed to proceed
with on-grade courts:

1. Prioritize evaluating
on-grade courts at the
future Field 5 location.

2. If challenges or
opportunities warrant
further consideration of
alternatives, then other
potential locations
would be assessed.

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1389 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Addt’l Design – Up to 4 months
Schematic Design – Jan 2026
Present proposed Revised Plan to City Council.

Design Alternatives – Up to 2 months
Value engineering and identifying design alternatives based on approved Revised Plan and Council direction to proceed with on-grade tennis/pickleball courts in place of future Field 5.

Schematic Design – Up to 2 months
Develop, refine, and finalize layout based on feedback
from interdepartmental group (PW, RAD, DOT, CDD, Fire).

PENDING COUNCIL

DIRECTION
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1390 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Proposed
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026 11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1391
Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan

ACTIVE LIFESTYLE COMMUNITY GATHERING MOBILITY CONNECTIONS Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1392 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Original vs. Proposed Revised Plan DRAFT
Master Plan Future Phases
Reduce number of
driveways
Incorporate
dog run
Shift structure
east
Reposition future
field 5
Preserve angled
parking
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1393 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Revised Plan Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1394 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Note: Ball field
layout within ROW
requires summary
vacation.

Revised Plan Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1395 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1396 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Dog Run DRAFT
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1397 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Tennis/Pickleball Courts – Phase 1
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1398 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Courts & Community Hub – Phase 2
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1399 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Community Hub – Phase 2
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1400 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Tree Strategy
• Trees to Protect-in-place
or Relocate: 14
• Trees to Remove: 82
• Proposed New Trees: 110
• Restitution Trees
to Replant (36” box): 423
*14 Prop ose d Na tive
Tre e s a long
C olora d o w ill b e
w ithin Pa rk Prop e rty
DRAFT
Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Note: Tree Counts are subject
to change as design progresses
through design development
(coordination with utilities,
planting, equipment, etc.).

Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1401 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Proposed Trees DRAFT
Revised Plan Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1402 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Colorado Ave
Existing Section Master Plan Section
Revised Plan Section Revised Plan at Colorado Ave
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1403 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1404 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability 14th Street DRAFT
Existing Section Master Plan Section
Revised Plan Section Revised Plan at 14th Street
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1405 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability 16th Street DRAFT
Existing Section Master Plan Section
Revised Plan Section Revised Plan at 16th Street
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1406 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan DRAFT
Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Note: Parking Counts are
subject to change as design
progresses through design
development (coordination
with utilities, planting,
equipment, etc.).

Existing
Parking Counts:

Off-site (Street): 105
On-site (PLD & Park): 107
Total: 212
Parking Strategy
Revised Plan Phase 1 & 2
Parking Counts:

Off-site (Street): 77
On-site (Park): 142
Total: 219
Revised Plan
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1407 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan SITES/LEED Preliminary Assessment
• Park Project
• Appears to meet prerequisites for SITES Certification • Certification level goal: Gold
• Analysis to be completed during Design Development
as we refine the design
• Community Hub Building
• Appears to be eligible for LEED certification
• Analysis to be completed during Design Development
as we refine the design
DRAFT
Revised Plan Sports Fields Tennis/Pickleball Courts Community Hub and Amenities Tree Canopy Mobility and Streetscape Improvements Parking Sustainability Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1408 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Next Steps
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1409 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached resolution certifying the attached Environmental Impact Report for the Memorial Park Redevelopment and Expansion Project;

2. Adopt mitigation measures set forth in the Environmental Impact Report; and

Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1410 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Anticipated Project Schedule
• Proceed with alternatives assessment, followed by final design • Plan for construction, including accommodating displaced programming • Continue community/stakeholder engagement
• Council – Spring 2026
• Request adoption of a resolution for the summary vacation of 16th Street • Provide an update on the development of fiscal and use agreements • Final construction scope and funding strategy based on available resources • Projected ongoing operations and maintenance costs associated w/Phases 1 and 2 • Complete Design Phase – Summer 2026 Fall/Winter 2026
• Complete Bidding – Fall 2026 Winter/Spring 2027
• Begin Construction Phase – Winter 2026/2027 Spring/Summer 2027 (Contingent on available construction funding)

PENDING COUNCIL

DIRECTION
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1411 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan Thank You
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026
Item 11-D
January 27, 2026

11.D.t
Packet Pg. 1412 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation [Revision 2] (7255 : 11.D Approval of Rev. Plan City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 11.E
1 of 8
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Establishment of a Santa Monica Restorative Justice Program Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council establish the Santa Monica Restorative Justice Program by taking the following actions:

1. Establish a dedicated Restorative Justice Fund by allocating the $3.5 million received by the City following adoption of the Second Amendment to the Development Agreement with the RAND Corporation.

2. Create a formal City Council established Santa Monica Restorative Justice Commission to develop Restorative Justice Program details and criteria.

3. Authorize staff to secure the services of an independent administrator to support the efforts of the Restorative Justice Commission in developing and administering the City’s Restorative Justice Program.

4. Consider a future allocation of the remaining $2 million in funding that the City will receive from the RAND Corporation, which will occur within 3 years based on the Second Amendment to the Development Agreement with RAND Corporation, to the Restorative Justice Fund.

Executive Summary:

Santa Monica has spent the past several years examining its history and policies through an equity lens, particularly with respect to land use, displacement, and exclusionary actions that, while lawful at the time, had lasting impacts on community institutions, residents, and families. This work reflects both a local commitment to equity and a broader national movement recognizing the role municipal governments have played in contributing to racialized harm.

Through this reflective process, it is clear that while historical documentation and public dialogue are necessary, they are not sufficient without an institutionalized mechanism

11.E
Packet Pg. 1413
2 of 8
for equivalently meaningful responses. Before 2022, the City did not have a structured, enduring framework to address claims of historically rooted harm caused by City action.

In the absence of such a framework, responses risk being ad hoc, inconsistent, and dependent on litigation rather than rooted in transparent policy and equitable outcomes.

It was in this context that a specific historical matter – the Ebony Beach Club and Silas White case – became an inflection point for the City.

The Ebony Beach Club (Club) matter grew out of condemnation proceedings more than six decades ago, where the Club, which was intended by Silas White to serve as a significant Black social institution in Santa Monica, lost its leasehold interest following a City condemnation action in the late 1950s. As part of the City’s historical review, staff revisited the complex circumstances surrounding that condemnation, including financial and personal impacts on the Club and its members.

Rather than resolving the matter solely through a one-time settlement, City Council directed staff to pursue a resolution that honored the historical record for the Club and also used the opportunity to put into place a broader restorative justice infrastructure that could serve all residents similarly impacted by past City actions. Restorative Justice Program concepts that were conceived as part of the settlement related to the Club included the following key considerations:
• Establishment of a Citywide Restorative Justice Program, to redress past harms caused by the City’s actions, and fund $3.5 million in one-time monies received by the City through the recent RAND deal approved in mid-2025. • Establishing a formal City Council created Restorative Justice Commission to replace the current Landback + Reparations Task Force in leading the development of Santa Monica’s Restorative Justice Program.

11.E
Packet Pg. 1414
3 of 8
• Engaging the services of a professional administrator who can provide the Restorative Justice Commission with guidance in the development and administration of the Restorative Justice Program.

Council may also recommend direction to allocate an additional $2 million in one-time funds that the City will receive at some point by mid-2028 from the RAND development agreement, recognizing that the formal allocation of these funds to the program can only occur once the funds are received by the City pursuant to the RAND development agreement and Council appropriates the funds for this use.

Ebony Beach Club Settlement Results In Restorative Justice Program Development
Through a mediated process, a settlement was reached with the family of Silas White in late 2025 to resolve matters related to the Club, which included the following terms:
• A $350,000 payment to Ms. White in recognition of her efforts to address alleged wrongs to Silas White’s efforts to create the Ebony Beach Club. • An agreement that Ms. White may file a claim under any future restorative justice administrative claims process established by the City Council to include provisions ensuring priority consideration for claimants 90 years old and above, if the Restorative Justice Program allows for direct payments to confirmed claimants as an alternative to community based-programs that do not entail a claims process.
• A commitment by the City to establish a permanent Silas White exhibit at the Main Library, in collaboration with Ms. White, to memorialize his contributions and the historical context.
• Authorization to rename a portion of Vicente Terrace as Silas White Street (excluding segments used as official mailing addresses).

11.E
Packet Pg. 1415
4 of 8
• A proclamation adopting October 12 as “Silas White Day” in Santa Monica.

Taken together, these terms reflect a hybrid resolution that addresses specific historical considerations related to the Club and Silas White, while also laying the foundation for a Citywide restorative justice program.

Comparative Landscape: How Santa Monica’s Program Stands Out In developing the proposed Restorative Justice Program, staff conducted a careful analysis of other U.S. municipal reparations / restorative justice efforts. While there is no single uniform model across the country, most current programs fall into one of the following categories:
• Incident or population specific programs – these developed programs have been established to address a specific historical injustice or housing discrimination practice.
• Advisory or symbolic reparations commissions – these types of initiatives were identified given that they were developed with little to no dedicated funding for actual implementation of any restorative justice / reparation activities. • Limited pilot or targeted funding efforts – these efforts were developed to address only one aspect of historical harm (e.g., housing remedies).

Below is a summarized comparative chart that highlights the restorative justice / reparations type programs researched and identified by staff.

Jurisdiction Reason For
Reparations
Amount
Allocated No. Claims Amount PerFamily / Person
Los Angeles
County
Bruce’s
Beach $20M 1 family $20M / family

11.E
Packet Pg. 1416
5 of 8
Evanston,
Illinois
Restorative
housing /
reparations
(1919 –
1969)
$10M from
cannabis tax
revenue
As of early 2023,
620 Black
residents applied,
16 received
payments
$25K / eligible
household for
housing assistance or
direct cash payments
Rosewood,
Florida
1923
Rosewood
Race Riots
$2.1M 9 living survivors $150K / each of the
nine survivors
Hayward,
California
Displacement
of black /
Latino
families in
1960s
$900K 1,400 families If distributed equally,
$643 / family
Palm Springs,
California
Forced
eviction of
black / Latino
families in
the 1950s –
60s
$5.91M 300+ families
If equally
compensation,
$19,700 / family
JapaneseAmerican
Internment
Unjust
internment
during WWII
$1.6B paid
out
~82,219 living
survivors
$20K / surviving
internee
Tuskegee
Syphilis Study
Black men
with syphilis
denied
treatment as
part of
government
study
$10M 600
$5K – $37.5K /
person, depending on
circumstances
Chicago,
Illinois
Burge police
torture and
abuse
$5.5M 57 individuals $100K / victim
North Carolina Forced
sterilizations $10M 220 verified recipients $50K / living survivor California Forced
sterilizations $7.5M 600 survivors eligible
$15K - $25K / living
survivor
Virgina Forced
sterilizations $400K - $1M
Fewer than 10
survivors
compensated
$25K / living survivor
From this comparative analysis, staff identified that few jurisdictions have established a general reparations / restorative justice program similar to what is being proposed in

11.E
Packet Pg. 1417
6 of 8
Santa Monica. The program envisioned for our community is intended to be capable of addressing multiple categories of historically rooted harms, supported by substantial dedicated funding, exploring independent administration and formal governance structures.

Moreover, based on this analysis, Santa Monica’s proposed program – funded initially with $3.5 million and potentially including up to an additional $2 million from the RAND development agreement– would represent one of the largest locally funded restorative justice initiatives of its kind, particularly when compared to programs limited by scope, population, or funding.

Program Funding: The RAND Transaction and Fiscal Responsibility In mid-2025, the City adopted a Second Amendment to the RAND Development Agreement. Through that updated agreement, RAND has provided the City with onetime funding in the amount of $3.5 million. Further, subject to the occurrence of certain conditions, an additional $2 million will be paid to the City, with those added dollars due to be paid to the City by mid-2028.

Given the RAND transaction and the one-time revenues being provided to the City, it is recommended that the funding received to date ($3.5 million) be sourced to seed the Restorative Justice Program. This would allow us to establish the overall initiative without drawing upon ongoing operational budgets.

This program funding structure reflects a fiscally prudent approach wherein the City leverages one-time, non-recurring funds for a discretionary but important public policy initiative, rather than relying on ongoing general fund revenues. Given the City’s existing financial circumstances, the proposed Restorative Justice Program funding model will protect core services and operational stability, while also advancing a priority initiative tied to equity, reconciliation, and historic accountability.

11.E
Packet Pg. 1418
7 of 8
Program Design and Structure Overview
As currently envisioned, the proposed Santa Monica Restorative Justice Program is designed around three pillars:

1. A Dedicated Restorative Justice Fund – The program would be established and initially seeded with $3.5 million from the RAND transaction.

2. Creating a Restorative Justice Commission – This new Council created and appointed commission would be charged with developing program criteria, eligibility standards, and oversight mechanisms for the Restorative Justice Program.

3. Independent Administration – Engaging the services of a professional administrator will be critical to support the work of the new Restorative Justice Commission in creating a fair, transparent, and legally defensible claims process.

The program’s Citywide applicability ensures that historically rooted harms tied to City actions – not limited to a single incident – can be documented, evaluated, and, where appropriate, remediated through a consistent framework grounded in equity, transparency, and legal soundness.

If approved, the creation of the Restorative Justice Fund would occur immediately, while staff anticipates the creation of the Restorative Justice Commission and engagement of the administrator would occur by March / April 2026.

Conclusion
The Santa Monica Restorative Justice Program represents a pivotal and structurally sound evolution in how the City acknowledges and addresses historically rooted harm caused by municipal action.

With strong comparative context, robust one-time funding tied to the RAND transaction, with input from a Restorative Justice Commission and independent administrator, staff

11.E
Packet Pg. 1419
8 of 8
recommends that the City Council move forward with formal establishment of the Program, allocation of identified one-time funds, and authorization of the governance and administrative structures necessary to ensure its success.

Prepared By: Oliver Chi, City Manager
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Written Comments

11.E
Packet Pg. 1420
1 David Yakobson
From: Angela D. Scott <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 12:45 PM
To: Santa Monica City Manager's Office; councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Barry Snell Subject: Item 11E - Establishment of a Santa Monica Restorative Justice Plan

EXTERNAL
To the Honorable Mayor Torosis, and Members of the Santa Monica City Council, I write to urge the City Council to ensure that appointments to the newly established Santa Monica Restorative Justice Commission meaningfully reflect the lived experiences and historical knowledge of the Santa Monica community—particularly those directly impacted by displacement, land loss, and exclusionary city actions.

Santa Monica has taken a necessary and commendable step by issuing the Black Apology and advancing Reparations and Landback work. The City has publicly acknowledged that these harms were not accidental, but the result of policies that reshaped neighborhoods, erased Black institutions, and severed generational ties to land and opportunity. The creation of a Citywide Restorative Justice Program and Commission signals an understanding that accountability must be permanent, structured, and embedded in governance—not symbolic or episodic.

For this Commission to fulfill its purpose, community membership must be intentional and substantive.

Appointing Santa Monica residents with lived experience—longstanding residents, descendants of displaced families, and individuals with deep historical and civic knowledge of the city—is essential to the integrity of this work. These perspectives are not anecdotal; they are a form of expertise grounded in history, continuity, and consequence.

The City’s own analysis emphasizes that restorative justice must move beyond ad hoc responses toward consistent, equitable, and transparent processes that are not driven solely by litigation or administrative convenience. That same principle applies to Commission appointments. Without members who understand Santa Monica’s history from the inside—who can speak to the human impact behind policy decisions—the Commission risks becoming procedural rather than reparative.

Community representation on the Restorative Justice Commission is not about exclusion or tokenism. It is about shared governance—pairing professional, legal, and administrative expertise with lived experience so that decisions are informed, credible, and trusted by the people they are meant to serve.

This balance is what transforms acknowledgment into repair.

Santa Monica now has an opportunity to demonstrate what accountable leadership looks like in practice. By appointing Commission members from within the Santa Monica community—those who carry generational memory, civic commitment, and lived experience—the City can ensure that restorative justice is not only well-designed, but genuinely rooted in the people most affected.

Item 11-E
January 27, 2026
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026

11.E.a
Packet Pg. 1421 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7502 : 11.E Restorative Justice) 2 I respectfully urge the City Council to honor the spirit of the Black Apology and Reparations commitments by making community-centered appointments to the Santa Monica Restorative Justice Commission. This is how trust is built. This is how repair becomes real.

Respectfully,
Angela
Angela D. Scott (she/her), MBA/V, Certified ScrumMaster® Candidate, Doctor of Education, Ed.D.

Organizational Change and Leadership
"You don't make progress by standing on the sidelines, whimpering and complaining. You make progress by implementing ideas." - Shirley Chisholm
I acknowledge with respect and gratitude the Tongva, Kizh, and Chumash Peoples on whose traditional territory I live and work.

Item 11-E
January 27, 2026
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026

11.E.a
Packet Pg. 1422 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7502 : 11.E Restorative Justice) 3 David Yakobson
From: Lydia Ponce <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 4:40 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item 11 E

EXTERNAL
Dear Santa Monica City Council Members,
I ask that we are gentle at this chaotic time and treat this opportunity with great care as we are dealing with healing for generational trauma. We have an heart filled opportunity for healthy restorative justice for 7 generations forward….

I did not make the meeting 1/27/26 however I wanted to share with you - I full heartedly support Gina De Baca’s comments.

I’d like to add: the experienced people who were seated on the original committee and did not live in Santa Monica, should be paid as consultants and not have a vote.

I am very thankful you are moving in a solid direction towards the overall health of our community. No I do not live in Santa Monica - however we share the love of many Santa Monica community members.

There are many residents who are related to each other from the four corners and that makes us a great Westside of Los Angeles!
Sage smoke prayers are sent with gratitude and prayers for your continued successful work with the gentle adjustments required. A new path that includes everyone represented as we have many vibrant relatives of many cultures.

May we always be willing to learn from one another,
to be a better relative.

Lydia Poncé
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026

11.E.a
Packet Pg. 1423 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7502 : 11.E Restorative Justice) 1 David Yakobson
From: Neil Comess-Daniels <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 9:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Restorative justice

EXTERNAL
Please support establishing The Restorative Justice committees It’s only fair and just.

Rabbi Neil ComessDaniels
Rabbi Neil, LA Rabbi Neil: Rabbi
Emeritus Beth Shir Shalom
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
photo Mobile 310-980-3529
Website www.larabbineil.com
Email [email protected]
Email for beth shir shalom [email protected] To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
__tpx__
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026

11.E.a
Packet Pg. 1424 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7502 : 11.E Restorative Justice) 1 David Yakobson
From: Ralph Mechur <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:41 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: agenda item 11E

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Council,
i'm writing in support of item 11E to establish the Santa Monica Restorative Justice Program and to allocate the $3.5 million to establish a fund payments and programs to be determined through the process of the forthcoming Santa Monica Restorative Justice Commission.

Sincerely,
Ralph Mechur
1109 Centinela Ave.

Santa Monica, CA 90403
m: 310-721-1254
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026

11.E.a
Packet Pg. 1425 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7502 : 11.E Restorative Justice) 1 David Yakobson
From: Wittig, Michele A <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Council Agenda Item 11.E

EXTERNAL
Mayor Torosis and Council Members,
I support the proposed Restorative Justice Program.

After it is approved, I hope you will ensure that it’s implemented with attention to inclusive community truth-telling, acknowledging wrongs, taking reparative actions, making restitution and achieving reconciliation.

For it to avoid becoming another wedge that divides us, please include diverse voices from different segments of the community, as long as they agree with the mandate.

Michele Wittig
Santa Monica resident since 1970
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026

11.E.a
Packet Pg. 1426 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7502 : 11.E Restorative Justice) 1 David Yakobson
From: Ann Hoover <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2026 11:27 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Oliver Chi
Cc: Heidi von Tongeln; Susan Cola
Subject: January 27, 2026 Council Meeting - Item 11.E. - Proposed Restorative Justice Program - SUPPORT with a few quick questions!

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis, Mr. Chi, and Councilmembers -
I have just a few questions about the proposed Restorative Justice Program, the establishment of which I commend and support -
 Will the program have an end date? - Maybe 10 years from now? - which of course could always be extended if the Council a decade from now sees a need. Without an expiration date, the city could be receiving claims indefinitely as has been the case with the Uller abuse situation. A decade seems like a pretty fair amount of time both to promote the program and give people to recognize, document, and raise issues with the City to potentially be addressed through the Restorative Justice Program. A generous period within which to raise claims but with an end date will both meet the laudable goals of the program and help frame and give closure to the city's exposure.
 Will the professional administrator be paid from the Restorative Justice Program $3.5M seed money or from the City's General Fund? From the Staff Report - 3. Independent Administration – Engaging the services of a professional administrator will be critical to support the work of the new Restorative Justice Commission in creating a fair, transparent, and legally defensible claims process.
 Annual cost of a professional administrator? About how much will a professional administrator cost per year? And will he/she need a supporting team? Or will the administrator be a business that specializes in this kind of work? What is our City envisioning here?  Other expenses? Will the City incur other expenses for this program outside of the $3.5M initial seed money for the program/the program budget and beyond the cost of a professional administrator?
I hope these questions will be raised, discussed and answered on Tuesday evening. Thank you! Best,
Ann Bowman
Resident, 29+ years
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026
Item 11-E
January 27, 2026

11.E.a
Packet Pg. 1427 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7502 : 11.E Restorative Justice) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 12.A
1 of 5
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Anuj Gupta, Director of Transportation, Department of Transportation, Transit Safety & Training
Subject: Public Hearing and Adoption of a Resolution Approving and Adopting “Yield Right-of-Way” Signage on Big Blue Bus Buses Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1904
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

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

2. Adopt a resolution approving and adopting the “Yield Right-of-Way” signage on Big Blue Bus buses
Executive Summary
Big Blue Bus (BBB), a division of the Santa Monica Department of Transportation (DOT), operates 195 transit buses across 58 square miles of greater Los Angeles, providing more than 10 million rides annually. DOT is committed to providing safe streets and a public transportation system that operates efficiently and reliably. BBB vehicles regularly experience delays and challenges when re-entering traffic after servicing bus stops, particularly on congested corridors.

California Assembly Bill 1904 (Ward), signed into law in 2024, authorizes transit agencies statewide to equip buses with yield right-of-way signage on the left rear of buses, subject to approval by the agency’s governing board and the implementation of a public education program. The legislation builds on prior pilot programs and statutory extensions that demonstrated reduced re-entry delays for transit buses.

12.A
Packet Pg. 1428
2 of 5
In response to City Council direction provided via Item 16-I at its February 11, 2025, meeting, staff evaluated options to implement a Yield Right-of-Way program for BBB.

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize the program and direct DOT to proceed with installation of yield right-of-way signage on BBB buses, along with a public education campaign to encourage motorists to yield when buses are re-entering traffic.

Background
Transit buses are frequently delayed when attempting to re-enter traffic after stopping to load or unload passengers. This condition can affect schedule reliability and create obstacles for bus operators and motorists.

In 1999, Assembly Bill 1218 (Keeley) established a three-year pilot program requiring motorists to yield to transit buses displaying a lighted yield sign when re-entering traffic.

Although several agencies were eligible to participate, only the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District (SCMTD) and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) implemented the program.

In 2003, the California Highway Patrol evaluated the pilot and reported that a majority of bus operators found the program at least somewhat effective in promoting improved operating conditions. SCMTD reported that the yield signage did support a safer merging of buses into traffic, particularly during nighttime operations, and neither agency reported significant complaints or collision trends attributable to the program.

However, no hard data on reduced collisions or safety incidents is available from these agencies’ pilot programs.

Following the pilot, Assembly Bill 1492 (Laird) in 2007 authorized SCMTD and VTA to continue using yield right-of-way signage. That legislation did not authorize law enforcement to cite motorists for failure to yield.

In 2024, Assembly Bill 1904 (AB 1904) amended California Vehicle Code Section 24617 to expand this authority statewide. The bill authorizes, but does not require, transit

12.A
Packet Pg. 1429
3 of 5
agencies to install yield right-of-way signage, provided the agency’s governing board approves a resolution after a public hearing and the agency undertakes a public education program.

Discussion
AB 1904 Requirements
AB 1904 authorizes transit agencies to equip buses with a yield right-of-way sign on the left rear of the bus. The legislation allows for either a static decal or a flashing lightemitting diode (LED) sign. If an LED sign is used, it must illuminate with a red flashing light when the bus is signaling in preparation to re-enter traffic after a stop.

The legislation does not create an enforceable duty for motorists to yield and does not authorize citations for failure to yield. Transit bus operators remain responsible for operating vehicles with due regard for safety. Participating agencies must also conduct a public education program to inform motorists about the signage and its purpose.

Response to the Council 16 Item Request
On February 11, 2025, the City Council directed the exploration of a Yield Right-of-Way program for BBB pursuant to AB 1904. Staff evaluated the following elements as part of this effort:
• Signage options for BBB buses;
• Requirements for a public hearing and Council action; • Public education obligations;
• Potential cross-jurisdictional considerations; and
• Budget considerations.

Signage Options
There are two signage options authorized under AB 1904: static yield right-of-way decals and flashing LED signs.

Staff is recommending installation of static yield right-of-way decals on the left rear of each Big Blue Bus. Installation consists of surface preparation and decal application.

12.A
Packet Pg. 1430
4 of 5
This option is cost effective, minimally complex, and can be implemented efficiently across the fleet with limited operational disruption.

Flashing LED signs provide a higher level of visibility; however, staff does not recommend their installation at this time. Implementation would require additional engineering and coordination with the bus manufacturer, electrical integration, software and multiplexing programming, hardware installation, system testing, and final acceptance. This option would require significantly greater upfront costs, longer implementation timelines, and greater ongoing maintenance. Additionally, there is no conclusive data demonstrating a corresponding reduction in collision rates.

Public Hearing and Council Action
AB 1904 requires approval by the governing board of the transit agency following a public hearing.

Public Education Program
Upon adoption of the resolution, DOT would implement a public education campaign to encourage motorists to yield to buses displaying the yield right-of-way signage.

Outreach would include information disseminated through the City and BBB websites, social media channels, and other communication platforms. BBB operators would also receive internal training and guidance on the program. The public education program may be implemented using existing resources.

Enforcement and Cross-Jurisdictional Considerations
Failing to yield to a bus displaying a yield right-of-way sign is not a violation of California law. AB 1904 does not authorize enforcement or citations. As a result, staff has not identified any cross-jurisdictional barriers to implementation.

Environmental Review
The installation of the signs is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines. This is covered by the common-sense exemption which states that CEQA does not apply, “where it can be seen with certainty that there is no

12.A
Packet Pg. 1431
5 of 5
possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.” The right-of-way signs are directional in nature and ensures safety and efficiency for transit buses. Therefore, it can be seen with certainty that this item 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. The estimated cost to install static yield right-of-way signs across the BBB fleet is approximately $6,000. Staff will return to Council if specific budget actions are required in the future.

Prepared By: Liseth Guizar, Transit Safety and Training Manager, Big Blue Bus Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. BBB Bus Yield Signage Resolution A 1
B. PowerPoint Presentation

12.A
Packet Pg. 1432
1 City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026 Santa Monica, California RESOLUTION NUMBER _________ (CCS)
(City Council Series)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA TO AUTHORIZE A “YIELD RIGHT-OF-WAY” SIGNAGE PROGRAM FOR BIG BLUE BUS BUSES PURSUANT TO ASSEMBLY BILL 1904
WHEREAS, transit buses are frequently delayed when attempting to re-enter traffic after stopping to load or unload passengers, and this condition can affect schedule reliability and create obstacles for bus operators and motorists; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill (AB) 1904, signed into law in 2024, authorizes transit agencies statewide to equip buses with yield right-of-way signage on the left rear of buses, subject to approval by the agency’s governing board and the implementation of a public education program, and the legislation builds on prior pilot programs and statutory extensions; and
WHEREAS, in response to City Council direction provided at the February 11, 2025, meeting, City staff evaluated options to implement a Yield Right-of-Way program for Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus; and
WHEREAS, City staff recommends the authorization of a Yield Right-of-Way program that installs static yield right-of-way decals on the left rear of each Big Blue Bus, with installation consisting of surface preparation and decal application – and that is cost effective, minimally complex, and can be implemented efficiently across the fleet with limited operational disruption; and

12.A.a
Packet Pg. 1433 Attachment: BBB Bus Yield Signage Resolution A 1 (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield Right-Of-Way Signage on Buses) 2 WHEREAS, on January 27, 2026, and in compliance with AB 1904, the City Council conducted a noticed public hearing on the Yield Right-of Way program.

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

SECTION 1. Pursuant to AB 1904, the City Council authorizes the Big Blue Bus to create a Yield Right-of-Way program to install yield right-of-way signage on the left rear of Big Blue Bus motorcoaches, as described and shown in Exhibit A.

SECTION 2. The City Council authorizes the Big Blue Bus to also develop and implement an educational program regarding yield right-of-way signage on Big Blue Bus motorcoaches.

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:
_________________________
Heidi von Tongeln
Interim City Attorney

12.A.a
Packet Pg. 1434 Attachment: BBB Bus Yield Signage Resolution A 1 (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield Right-Of-Way Signage on Buses) 3 EXHIBIT A
Static Decal

12.A.a
Packet Pg. 1435 Attachment: BBB Bus Yield Signage Resolution A 1 (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield Right-Of-Way Signage on Buses) 4 EXHIBIT A
Flashing LED Sign

12.A.a
Packet Pg. 1436 Attachment: BBB Bus Yield Signage Resolution A 1 (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield Right-Of-Way Signage on Buses) Yield Right-of-Way Signage on Big Blue Bus Buses
Presented by Liseth Guizar, Transit Safety and Training Manager Item 12-A
January 27, 2026
Item 12-A
January 27, 2026

12.A.b
Packet Pg. 1437 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield Background • Assembly Bill 1904 (AB 1904)
authorizes, but does not require,
transit agencies to install yield right-
of-way signage
• Requirements for Program: • Public hearing • Resolution by the agency’s governing board
• Public education program
2 Item 12-A
January 27, 2026
Item 12-A
January 27, 2026

12.A.b
Packet Pg. 1438 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield 3 Recommendation: Static Yield Right-of-Way Decal
Static Decal Flashing LED Sign
Item 12-A
January 27, 2026
Item 12-A
January 27, 2026

12.A.b
Packet Pg. 1439 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield Public Education
Program
The public education
campaign may include the
following: • Public service announcements
on social media and City/BBB
websites
• Digital, print, and mobile app
advertisements
• Ads on BBB buses and City-
owned parking structures
4 Item 12-A
January 27, 2026
Item 12-A
January 27, 2026

12.A.b
Packet Pg. 1440 Attachment: PowerPoint Presentation (7472 : Approval of Resolution Adopting Yield City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.A
1 of 4
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Selection of Councilmembers to Participate in SCAG Regional Council District 41 Special Election
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:

1. Select five of its seven Councilmembers available to attend the Westside Cities Council of Governments (WSCCOG) Board Meeting to participate in the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Council District 41 Special Election by each casting one of the City’s five authorized votes;

2. Designate a sixth Councilmember as an alternate, authorized to cast a vote in the event that one of the initially selected five Councilmembers is unable to cast a vote;

3. Authorize the seventh Councilmember to cast a vote only if fewer than five votes have been cast on behalf of the City after all other authorized Councilmembers present have cast their votes; and

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

Executive Summary
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the region’s metropolitan planning organization and plays a central role in shaping transportation funding, housing planning, and other regional policy decisions. Santa Monica participates in SCAG governance through Regional Council District 41, a shared district with Beverly Hills, Culver City, and West Hollywood.

A vacancy has been created on the SCAG Regional Council following the recent

16.A
Packet Pg. 1441
2 of 4
resignation of Councilmember Jesse Zwick. As a result, SCAG will conduct a special election on Thursday, February 12, 2026, at 12:00 noon, to fill the District 41 seat. The election will take place during the WSCCOG Board Meeting at Santa Monica’s Main Branch Library, Multipurpose Room.

Under SCAG election procedures, each member city may cast up to five votes, with one vote per councilmember. Because Santa Monica has seven councilmembers, the City must designate which members are authorized to cast votes on its behalf. This item is before Council now to establish a clear and orderly voting authorization process in advance of the election.

Staff recommends that Council designate five councilmembers to cast votes, identify a sixth as an alternate, and authorize the seventh to vote only if necessary to ensure all five votes are cast. This structure ensures full City participation while preventing uncertainty or procedural disputes at the election site.

Background
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a council of governments that brings together cities, counties, and tribal governments to address regional issues that cross jurisdictional boundaries. SCAG’s primary governing body is the Regional Council, which sets policy direction, adopts regional plans, and appoints members to standing committees.

The Regional Council meets monthly, and members commonly serve on one or more committees addressing transportation, housing, sustainability, and governance matters.

Participation generally includes attendance at the Regional Council meeting and committee meetings, with the combined time commitment typically occupying approximately half a day each month.

Santa Monica is represented on the Regional Council through District 41, which includes Beverly Hills, Culver City, Santa Monica, and West Hollywood. When a vacancy occurs, SCAG conducts a special election among the member cities within the

16.A
Packet Pg. 1442
3 of 4
district.

Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
March 11, 2025 City Council selected five Councilmembers to cast votes in the election to fill the seat of Regional Council District 41 Director.

Discussion
The resignation of Councilmember Jesse Zwick has created a vacancy on the SCAG Regional Council, requiring a Regional Council District 41 Special Election. SCAG is expected to issue a formal Call for Candidates, with the election scheduled for February 12, 2026, at 12:00 noon, during the WSCCOG Board Meeting.

Under SCAG rules for multi-city districts, each member city may cast up to five votes, with one vote per councilmember. While Santa Monica has seven councilmembers, only five votes may be cast on the City’s behalf. Accordingly, Council action is required to designate voting authority.

In prior elections, last-minute schedule changes have occasionally resulted in uncertainty regarding which councilmembers are authorized to vote, creating avoidable confusion leading up to and at the election site. The recommended approach establishes a vote-based authorization framework, rather than a rigid attendance-based hierarchy.

By authorizing the seventh councilmember to cast a vote only if fewer than five votes have been cast after all other authorized members present have voted, the City ensures it can exercise its full voting allotment while maintaining a clear, orderly, and transparent process.

Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There are no direct fiscal impacts associated with the recommended action.

Participation in the SCAG Regional Council District 41 Special Election does not require

16.A
Packet Pg. 1443
4 of 4
additional budget appropriations.

Prepared By: Josh Kurpies, Council Office and Legislative Affairs Liaison Approved Forwarded to Council

16.A
Packet Pg. 1444
City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.B
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Denise Anderson Warren, Interim City Clerk, Records and Election Services Department
Subject: Recommendation to accept Melanie Luthern Allen's resignation from the Personnel Board and authorize the City Clerk to publish the vacancy Prepared By: David Yakobson, Staff Assistant III
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Resignation Email

16.B
Packet Pg. 1445
3 From: Melanie Luthern Allen <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2026 1:22 PM
To: Ivan Campbell <[email protected]>
Cc: Melanie Luthern Hallye Wright <[email protected]> Subject: Resigning from the Board
Hi Ivan,
After a lot of thought, I've decided to resign from the Board for a variety of reasons. I regret that I will not see through my term, and apologize for the inconvenience that this will cause to you and the other Board Members. I have a variety of professional and personal pressures on me in the coming year that

in executing the duties of the position. This has made hearings unenjoyable for me and I believe would make someone else a better candidate for the position. Given this and my projected absences for the year, I do not want to a disservice to the City by remaining in the position. It has been a pleasure to work with you and to serve the City. It has been a nice experience and I will recommend the experience to anyone who asks me. I especially want to thank you for advising the Board and for helping to make our City a better place through your public service.

Must I submit a formal resignation letter to the City Council? Please include my personal email address on the reply this once because I do not want to miss your reply so that I can act in a timely manner.

Best regards,
Melanie

16.B.a
Packet Pg. 1446 Attachment: Resignation Email (7522 : 16.B. Recommendation to accept Melanie Luthern Allen's resignation (1 Min)) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.C
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Request of Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers Hall and Raskin to direct the City Manager and City Attorney to evaluate and advance targeted affordability strategies addressing food costs, early-childhood expenses, worker wage protection, consumer pricing fairness, and tenant displacement, using proven local and national models.

Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin
B. Written Comments

16.C
Packet Pg. 1447
Meeting: January 27, 2026
16 ITEM BY MAYOR CAROLINE TOROSIS, COUNCILMEMBER DAN HALL, AND

COUNCILMEMBER ELLIS RASKIN
Request of Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers Hall and Raskin to direct the City Manager and City Attorney to evaluate and advance targeted affordability strategies addressing food costs, early-childhood expenses, worker wage protection, consumer pricing fairness, and tenant displacement, using proven local and national models.

Over the past several years, the cost of everyday life in Santa Monica has risen sharply. Even as headline inflation has cooled, residents continue to feel real pressure at the grocery store, when welcoming a new child, in their housing costs, and in the prices they pay as consumers and workers. Affordability is no longer a challenge facing only the lowest-income households; it affects renters and homeowners, families with young children, seniors on fixed incomes, working professionals, small business employees, and longtime residents alike.

While the federal government abandons many Obama- and Biden-era affordability policies, cities across the country are increasingly focusing on affordability strategies that reduce costs directly at the source. These approaches lower prices, improve transparency, protect earned wages, and prevent displacement caused by consolidation, speculation, and opaque pricing practices. They are designed to benefit middle- and working-class households while providing the greatest relief to those with the least financial margin.

Santa Monica is well positioned to lead locally by piloting and scaling policies that are legally viable at the municipal level, supported by resident sentiment, and grounded in documented outcomes elsewhere. A city cannot claim economic recovery and renaissance if residents and workers cannot afford to live, raise families, or remain housed here. If Realignment is about restoring confidence in City Hall and revitalizing our Downtown, this affordability agenda is about ensuring that Santa Monica remains livable for the people who power its economy and civic life.

Food and Household Essentials
From 2020-2024, grocery prices nationally increased by 23%,1 outpacing wage growth for many households. Research by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Federal Reserve shows that food costs take up a disproportionate share of income for lower-income households, and that grocery consolidation has reduced competition in many regions. In response, several cities and states have explored public or municipally supported grocery models to stabilize prices and ensure access. Examples include:
1 https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/chart-gallery/chart-detail?chartId=58350

Page 1 of 8 ends

Santa Monica City CouncilJanuary 27, 2026

Santa Monica City Council
January 27, 2026