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

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1448 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 16 ITEM BY MAYOR TOROSIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND RASKIN Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives ● Leon, Kansas and St. Paul, Kansas, where a school district and municipal government stepped in to operate grocery stores after private operators exited.2 ● The Illinois Grocery Initiative, which provides public support to sustain grocery access in underserved areas.3
● Policy research from the Economic Security Project documents that public grocery stores can use publicly owned land, pooled purchasing, and mission-driven pricing to reduce consumer costs and stabilize local food access.4 Santa Monica is not immune to food desertification. When the 99 Cents Only Store on Pico Blvd. and Stewart St. closed in 2024, many low-income families in the Pico neighborhood and across all of Santa Monica were deeply concerned that our city lost its only low cost grocer. Dollar Tree eventually leased the store and continues operations today, but it no longer offers refrigerated foods, and it now offers far fewer low-cost food products. Furthermore, if the company were to cease operations at the site, the neighborhood would be without a low cost grocer. A public grocery would ensure continuity of low cost nutrition for all Santa Monica families.

Early-Childhood Costs and Baby Basket Programs
The birth of a child is one of the most financially vulnerable moments for families.

Diapers, wipes, and postpartum supplies can cost more than $1,000 annually, and many of these items are not covered by federal assistance programs such as SNAP or WIC. Finland has offered a Baby Box program to new families since the 1930s, and New York City piloted a Baby Box program under Mayor Adams, set to be expanded under Mayor Mamdani, which provides no-cost ‘starter kits’ for new parents. A federal pilot program under the Biden Administration found that:
● Two-thirds of parents reported reduced stress with the receipt of baby supplies. ● Over three-quarters of low-income recipients reported meaningful financial relief.5 These programs are typically distributed through hospitals or clinics at birth and paired with information on public benefits and maternal health resources.

Wages and Labor Protections
App-based delivery workers depend heavily on customer tips, yet persistent concerns remain about how third-party delivery platforms calculate pay. Under California law, gratuities are the sole property of the worker and may not be counted toward an employer’s wage obligations. However, opaque pay formulas used by delivery apps 5 https://www.hhs.gov/blog/2024/10/28/supporting-families-moments-that-matter.html 4 https://economicsecurityproject.org/resource/opening-the-door-to-public-grocery-stores/ 3 https://dceo.illinois.gov/illinois-grocery-initiative.html 2 https://www.ruralgrocery.org/learn/publications/case-studies/

Page 2 of 8 ends

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1449 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 16 ITEM BY MAYOR TOROSIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND RASKIN Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives often make it difficult for workers and customers to determine whether tips truly supplement earnings or are used to offset base pay.

Prior enforcement actions and public settlements involving major platforms highlight the need for clearer rules and transparency. When tips fail to increase total compensation, workers lose income and consumers are misled. Ensuring that tips are paid fully on top of guaranteed wages aligns delivery platforms with established labor standards and protects both workers and customers.

Consumer Pricing Transparency
Advances in data analytics have enabled companies to experiment with personalized or surveillance-based pricing, in which prices are adjusted based on consumer data such as location, browsing history, or purchasing behavior. The Federal Trade Commission has documented6 active development of these tools in retail, grocery, and airline industries.

Academic and journalistic investigations7 have shown that such practices can result in different consumers paying different prices for identical goods, often correlating with income, geography, or demographic proxies. In response:
● California and Massachusetts legislators have introduced bills to restrict or ban surveillance pricing, particularly in groceries.
● Consumer advocacy groups have called for “one person, one price” rules to preserve transparency and fairness.
● San Diego banned digital-only coupons to ensure seniors and persons without cell phones could access deals.

Municipal action in this space focuses on access to non-digital coupons, consumer protection, and deceptive practices, areas where cities traditionally exercise authority.

Wage Recovery and Family Protections for Residents and Workers Detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
Santa Monica is home to many immigrant residents and workers whose labor contributes directly to the local economy. Under California and federal law, workers are entitled to be paid for all wages earned regardless of immigration status. This includes final paychecks, accrued wages, and other compensation owed at the time of job separation, detention, or deportation.
7 https://www.consumerreports.org/money/questionable-business-practices/instacart-ai-pricing- experiment-inflating-grocery-bills-a1142182490/
6 https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/sp6b-issue-spotlight.pdf

Page 3 of 8 ends

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1450 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 16 ITEM BY MAYOR TOROSIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND RASKIN Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives When a worker is detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), families and dependents often face immediate financial crisis. In many cases, earned wages go unpaid or unclaimed because:
● the worker is unable to retrieve their final paycheck, ● employers do not proactively release wages to authorized family members, ● or dependents lack information or documentation to assert wage claims on the worker’s behalf.

California law permits authorized representatives, including family members with proper documentation (such as power of attorney), to recover unpaid wages through the Labor Commissioner’s Office. Worker advocacy organizations, including the Asian Law Caucus and the California Labor Commissioner, have documented that wage recovery is legally possible but procedurally difficult without legal assistance.8 Local governments cannot regulate immigration enforcement, but they can ensure access to wage recovery, provide information, and coordinate with legal service providers so that families are not unlawfully deprived of earned income at moments of crisis.

Ensuring that detained workers’ final, prorated wages reach their dependents is both a worker-protection measure and an anti-poverty intervention, preventing sudden income loss from cascading into eviction, food insecurity, or homelessness.

Housing Stability and Anti-Displacement
Santa Monica’s housing stock is predominantly renter-occupied, and displacement often occurs through eviction caused by building sales, followed by rent increases or redevelopment.

The Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) model, first adopted in Washington, D.C.,9 provides tenants the right of first refusal when their building is offered for sale. Under TOPA:
● Property owners still receive fair market value.
● Tenants may assign their purchase right to a nonprofit affordable housing provider.
● Cities preserve naturally affordable housing without new construction. 9 https://ota.dc.gov/page/tenant-opportunity-purchase-act-topa 8 https://www.asianlawcaucus.org/news-resources/guides-reports/how-to-receive-your-paycheck-if-youve- been-detained-or-deported

Page 4 of 8 ends

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1451 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 16 ITEM BY MAYOR TOROSIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND RASKIN Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives TOPA-style policies have been studied by housing researchers and are currently under consideration or pilot in some California jurisdictions as an anti-displacement strategy consistent with state housing law. Santa Monica can learn from other jurisdictions’ opportunities and challenges to craft a local program meeting our needs.

Additionally, other jurisdictions have enacted strict protections to ensure that existing tenants are not pushed out or priced out when family members, such as aging parents or other relatives, are forced to move in. Last month, the City of Los Angeles banned rent increases when family members join the household.10 Enacting similar renter protections in Santa Monica will help promote neighborhood stability and keep long-term renters in their homes.

Tenant Unionization and Collective Tenant Rights
Across California, tenants increasingly rely on collective organization to address habitability issues, unlawful rent practices, harassment, and displacement pressure.

Tenant unions provide a structured way for renters to communicate with property owners, assert existing legal rights, and prevent retaliation when raising concerns.

California law already protects tenants’ right to organize (California Civil Code § 1942.5). Under state anti-retaliation statutes, landlords may not threaten eviction, raise rent, reduce services, or otherwise retaliate against tenants for organizing, participating in tenant associations, or exercising rights under housing law. Courts and enforcement agencies have recognized tenant organizing as a protected activity when tenants act collectively to improve housing conditions or enforce lease terms.

Despite these protections, tenant unions often face practical barriers, including:
● inability to communicate with or meet other tenants easily, ● lack of clear recognition by landlords,
● uncertainty around meeting access in common areas,
● fear of retaliation,
● and fragmented complaint processes that require tenants to act individually rather than collectively.

Several cities, such as San Francisco, have responded by clarifying, facilitating, and reinforcing tenant organizing rights at the local level.11 These measures do not create new rent regulations; instead, they strengthen enforcement of existing rights, provide clear standards for landlords, and create structured communication channels between tenant associations and city departments.
11 https://www.sf.gov/news--new-legislation-tenant-organizing-and-tenant-associations 10 https://mayor.lacity.gov/news/making-la-more-affordable-mayor-bass-enacts-new-tenant-protections- caps-rent-apartment-units

Page 5 of 8 ends

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1452 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 16 ITEM BY MAYOR TOROSIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND RASKIN Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives Santa Monica, with its long-standing rent control and tenant protection framework, is well positioned to formalize and strengthen support for tenant unions as a cost-containment and displacement-prevention tool, particularly in large multifamily buildings where collective action can prevent minor issues from escalating into housing loss.

In order to further advance a Renaissance Agenda for the City of Santa Monica and build upon the City’s Realignment Plan passed in October 2025, WE THEREFORE MOVE THAT THE COUNCIL:

1. Direct the City Manager to return to Council within 180 days with an evaluation of public grocery store models, including:

1.1. Legal authority and operational structures available to Santa Monica,

1.2. Potential use of publicly owned land or partnerships,

1.3. Case studies from other municipalities,

1.4. Estimated startup and operating costs and governance options.

2. Direct the City Manager, in coordination with local community based organizations and municipal partners, to explore and return to council within 180 days with an evaluation and recommendations for a Santa Monica Baby Basket program, including:

2.1. Possibility for coordination with local hospitals, birthing centers, and/or libraries,

2.2. Cost estimates per newborn and potential funding sources,

2.3. Potential non-profit partners,

2.4. Alignment with existing childcare and family support programs,

2.5. Any proposed limitations or eligibility criteria.

3. Direct the City Manager, in coordination with the City Attorney, to evaluate options to prohibit third-party delivery platforms from using customer tips to offset or substitute for base wages, and return to council within 90 days with a recommendation, including:

3.1. Assessing the City’s authority to require clear pay transparency from delivery platforms, including disclosure of:

3.1.1. guaranteed base pay,

3.1.2. customer tips paid to workers,

3.1.3. and confirmation that tips are paid entirely in addition to, and not in lieu of, wages.

3.2. Evaluating enforcement models adopted or under consideration by other California jurisdictions, including consumer-protection and labor-standards approaches addressing app-based delivery services.

Page 6 of 8 ends

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1453 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 16 ITEM BY MAYOR TOROSIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND RASKIN Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives

3.3. Exploring ordinance or administrative options that would ensure tips function solely as gratuities, consistent with long-standing labor standards applicable to restaurant and hospitality workers.

4. Direct the City Attorney to analyze municipal authority to prohibit surveillance pricing, and return to Council within 90 days with recommendations, including:

4.1. Review of FTC findings and pending state legislation,

4.2. Options for defining surveillance pricing as a deceptive practice,

4.3. Exploring an ordinance to require non-digital coupons,

4.4. Enforcement mechanisms and penalties.

5. Direct the City Manager, in coordination with the City Attorney, to report back in 90 days with an ordinance to support wage recovery for residents and workers detained by ICE, including claims through the California Labor Commissioner, for workers who are detained, deported, or otherwise unable to retrieve final paychecks, that would require employers to provide a form to new and existing employees with which an employee can designate a bank account or individual to receive an employee’s paycheck in the event of the employee’s unavailability due to detention by federal immigration authorities.

6. Direct the City Manager to evaluate and return within 180 days with recommendations for community land trust and tenant opportunity to purchase policies, including:

6.1. Compatibility with Santa Monica City Charter Articles XVIII and XX and just cause ordinances,

6.2. Administrative models from other municipalities,

6.3. Financing and nonprofit partnership options,

6.4. Anti-speculation and anti-abuse guardrails.

7. Direct the City Manager and City Attorney to evaluate and return within 180 days with options to support tenant unionization and collective tenant rights, including:

7.1. Clarifying local recognition of tenant associations, including defining when a tenant organization is considered a representative body for purposes of communication with landlords and the City.

7.2. Reviewing best practices from other California cities that have adopted tenant-organizing support measures, such as:

7.2.1. anti-retaliation ordinance enhancements,

7.2.2. required landlord notice of tenant organizing rights,

7.2.3. and protocols for landlord–tenant association communication.

7.3. Evaluating access to common areas in multifamily properties for lawful tenant meetings, consistent with fire, safety, and building codes.

7.4. Assessing need for additional enforcement mechanisms to address retaliation against tenants for organizing, including:

7.4.1. civil penalties,

Page 7 of 8 ends

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1454 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 16 ITEM BY MAYOR TOROSIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND RASKIN Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives

7.4.2. administrative remedies,

7.4.3. and referral pathways to the City Attorney or appropriate enforcement agencies.

7.5. Exploring creation of a tenant-union liaison or ombudsperson function, either within an existing department or via contracted legal services, to:

7.5.1. assist tenant associations in understanding their rights and facilitating organization,

7.5.2. coordinate habitability or code-enforcement complaints raised collectively,

7.5.3. and reduce duplicative, individual filings.

7.6. Ensure alignment with existing Santa Monica Rent Control, Just Cause, tenant-harassment protections, and State and Federal fair housing laws.

7.7. Return to City Council with options for ensuring that existing tenancies will not be terminated, and residents will not be subject to rent increases, when partners, parents, grandparents, children, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, or other close family members move into existing tenancies.

7.8. Return to Council with findings and recommendations, including legal constraints, staffing implications, and potential ordinances or administrative actions.

7.9. The City Manager and City Attorney shall carry out this direction in consultation with the Rent Control Agency, with the understanding that the Charter respects the separation of powers between the City Council and Rent Control Agency.

8. Direct the City Manager and City Attorney to evaluate additional tenant-stability and anti-displacement tools used in similarly situated jurisdictions, including but not limited to; anti-harassment standards, ownership-change protections including requirements to notify all tenants when buildings are put up for sale, additional relocation assistance triggers, data transparency, and procedural eviction safeguards, and report back in 180 days with legally viable options for Santa Monica.

9. Direct staff to engage stakeholders, including renters’ rights organizations, consumer advocates, grocers, healthcare providers, and affordable housing nonprofits, and report back with recommendations, funding opportunities, and potential implementation timelines.
###

Page 8 of 8 ends

16.C.a
Packet Pg. 1455 Attachment: 20260127 - Exploring Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives - Torosis, Hall, Raskin (7509 : Affordability and Tenant 1 David Yakobson
From: Soloff, Michael <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 3:21 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Lana Negrete
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 1.27.26 City Council Meeting Agenda (Items 10.1, 16.c, and 5.G

EXTERNAL
Dear Council Members:

I have a meeting tonight as a pro bono attorney with the tenants of a building in Echo Park whose landlord illegally tried to empty the building. I therefore may not make it back to your meeting in time to provide live public comment (and have learned that phone comment required sign up yesterday). Here are my comments.

Main Agenda
Item 10A
SMRR supports adoption of the proposed worker retention policy, but urges that you amend the draft to include the specific language proposed by UniteHere. SMRR understands that by making these amendments you will bring the new ordinance into conformity with the Los Angeles LAX ordinance and other local ordinances.

Workers at the hotels on City land, and at pier businesses, play a vital role in our tourist economy, and thereby contribute greatly to the sales tax and TOT tax that benefits all of us residing in Santa Monica. We owe it to those workers to protect them to the extent reasonably possible from losing their jobs merely because one lessee goes out of business and a new one enters. Assuring that those workers can be retained, even if there is a delay between the closing of one business and the opening of another, is a very reasonable step that the UniteHere language addresses. It is bad enough that Rusty’s was closed immediately after the workers had decided to unionize. It would add additional injury if this City allowed the delay in reopening at that location to cost these workers their jobs.

Item 16C
SMRR applauds the eƯort of Mayor Torosis and Council members Hall and Raskin in bringing forward an item focusing on aƯordability. SMRR was formed to preserve housing aƯordability, and has continued to fight to do so for more than 45 years. SMRR believes all of the items are worthy of study, although any final position will depend on the details of any proposals later brought forward.

SMRR believes that one critical aƯordability program needs to be added to the list; namely, the Council should direct exploration of expansion of cash payments to rent burdened renter households. The POD program targets senior households, but many other types of households—including families with children and even residents of some of our aƯordable housing projects, get no help from that program at Item 16-C
January 27, 2026
Item 16-C
January 27, 2026

16.C.b
Packet Pg. 1456 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7509 : Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives) 2 present. Part of the reason for passing 2022 Measure GS was to allow expansion of assistance to new groups, and Council should direct exploration of doing so.

The prior direction by Council to stand up a right to council and flexible financial assistance program is critical to avoiding homelessness. But as this item highlights, that does not address ongoing aƯordability and the devastating health and educational consequences of being lower income and rent burdened. Direct cash payments do address this in a highly cost-eƯective manner, as the POD program and Section 8 prove. Please add this to your aƯordability study agenda.

Consent Calendar
Item 5.G
As a personal comment only, while I rarely agree with the people who provided written comment on this, I think that from a transparency perspective the City is going overboard by putting all of this into closed session (i.e., even withholding the rough outlines of what it is going to negotiate about regarding the public land). I also have concerns about EAH given that so little progress has been made on the 4th Street Garage project to date, and hope that the City will negotiate provisions with whomever to assure real and timely progress is made toward building the aƯordable housing to which the City committed in the housing element on its public land.

Item 16-C
January 27, 2026
Item 16-C
January 27, 2026

16.C.b
Packet Pg. 1457 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7509 : Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives) 1 David Yakobson
From: Ann Hoover <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 3:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Lana Negrete; Barry Snell; Jesse Zwick; Oliver Chi; Oscar Santiago; Susan Cline; Peter James Subject: January 27, 2026 City Council Meeting - Item 1. - General Public Input regarding certain Consent Calendar and 16. Items

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis, City Manager Chi, and Councilmembers - Just a gentle comment on some Consent Calendar Items - are all of these contract extensions necessary?
An example is 4.C., the real-time schedule info. and performance metrics re bus arrival predictions.

This seems like an expensive but only nice-to-have rather than a need-to-have service? There is always at least one, sometimes more, Consent Calendar Items that are expensive and seem like nice-to-haves, not need-to-haves.

And a gentle comment on 16. Items generally - many of them involve requests for action that will involve future expenditures by the City. If we start adding up, from meeting to meeting, the

16. Items that get approved, they will total millions more in City expenses over time that likely will fall on the General Fund unless they can be addressed with grants. 16.C. - though a well-intentioned and super-worthy possible endeavor - is an excellent example of this.

So are we in a fiscal emergency or are we not? No matter how worthy a 16. Item may be, and the vast majority of them are, at some point I hope Council will get ultra-disciplined, press pause on coming up with new ways to spend that likely will tap the General Fund, and really review and edit existing General Fund programs and expenditures (for value/efficacy/impact) before we tack on anything new again.

Thank you!
Sincerely,
Ann Bowman
Resident, 29 years
Item 16-C
January 27, 2026
Item 16-C
January 27, 2026

16.C.b
Packet Pg. 1458 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7509 : Affordability and Tenant Protection Initiatives) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.D
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Request of Councilmembers Hall and Zernitskaya that the Council direct City Staff to publicly comment on proposed federal rules and consider joining litigation to protect gender-affirming healthcare for Transgender, Gender Diverse, and Intersex youth.

Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. 20260127 16 Item - Further Protecting Gender Affirming Healthcare in Santa Monica - Hall, Zernit
B. Written Comments

16.D
Packet Pg. 1459
Meeting: January 27, 2026
16 ITEM BY COUNCILMEMBERS DAN HALL AND NATALYA ZERNITSKAYA Request of Councilmembers Hall and Zernitskaya that the Council direct City Staff to publicly comment on proposed federal rules and consider joining litigation to protect gender-affirming healthcare for Transgender, Gender Diverse, and Intersex youth.

All residents of the City of Santa Monica deserve access to health care services that reinforce and support their physical, mental, and emotional well-being. Such critical services include gender-affirming care, which local hospitals provide to transgender, gender diverse, and intersex patients. This essential care for people of all ages is supported by major medical associations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics. Unfortunately, the federal government has announced efforts to ban gender-affirming care for young people under 18 years of age throughout the country, including in the City of Santa Monica.

On December 18, 2025, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F.

Kennedy Jr., and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator, Dr.

Mehmet Oz, proposed two rules that would eliminate gender-affirming care for youth under 18. The first rule1 would prohibit receipt of Medicaid reimbursement for gender-affirming care provided to patients under age 18. The second rule2 would remove access to Medicaid and Medicare funding for any service for hospitals that provide pediatric gender-affirming care; coercing hospitals to eliminate access to gender-affirming care for young people nationwide. The proposed rules would take effect in mid-March 2026, after a 60-day comment period which ends on February 17, 2026 and a 30-day waiting period. Additionally, on December 18, 2025, Secretary Kennedy Jr. signed a declaration finding that pediatric gender-affirming services do not meet professionally recognized standards of health care, and practitioners who provide these services would be deemed out of compliance. This declaration could impact the ability of medical professionals who provide gender-affirming services to children and adolescents to continue to practice medicine.

Under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s proposed rules, patients under age 18 receiving gender-affirming care will lose access to these critical health services. To better protect residents and visitors utilizing gender-affirming care, the City Council unanimously passed a 16 item “Protecting Gender Affirming Healthcare in Santa Monica,”3 which directed the City Attorney to draft a resolution that prohibited the use of City resources or personnel in tracking, investigating, or prosecuting individuals for 3 https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=4&ID=17838&MeetingID=1430 2 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/12/19/2025-23465/medicare-and-medicaid-programs-hospitalcondition-of-participation-prohibiting-sex-rejecting 1 https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/12/19/2025-23464/medicaid-program-prohibition-on-federal-medic aid-and-childrens-health-insurance-program-funding-for

Page 1 of 2 ends

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 1460 Attachment: 20260127 16 Item - Further Protecting Gender Affirming Healthcare in Santa Monica - Hall, Zernit (7510 : Protect gender-affirming 16 ITEM BY COUNCILMEMBERS HALL AND ZERNITSKAYA
Further Protecting Gender-Affirming Healthcare in Santa Monica seeking or providing gender affirming healthcare. That resolution4 was passed unanimously by the City Council at its March 25, 2025 meeting, and the City has continued its longstanding tradition of supporting the LGBTQ+ community through various policies and City-sponsored events since.

The provision of gender-affirming care is supported by leading medical associations and organizations, including the World Health Organization and the American Psychiatric Association. In a recent statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics, President Dr. Susan Kressly, M.D. stated that Secretary Kennedy Jr.’s proposals “misconstrue the current medical consensus and fail to reflect the realities of pediatric care and the needs of children and families.” 5Additionally, on December 23, a coalition of 19 states, including California, filed a lawsuit challenging Secretary Kennedy Jr.’s declaration, which changes previously established, evidence-based medical standards of care. The City must do what it can to protect access to ensure vulnerable residents and youth under its stewardship are provided the essential care and services they need.

In order to further protect access to gender-affirming care for transgender, gender diverse, and intersex youth,
WE THEREFORE MOVE THAT THE COUNCIL:

1. Direct the Interim City Attorney to:

1.1. Submit formal public comment before 5 p.m. ET on February 17, 2026 opposing any federal rules or guidance that would eliminate or substantially restrict access to evidence-based gender-affirming care for young people;

1.2. Consider filing, joining, and/or supporting litigation opposing Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s declaration and proposed rules impacting access to gender-affirming care for young people and return, if necessary, to Council in closed session with a recommendation if additional formal authorization is needed.

2. Direct the City Manager and Interim City Clerk to make any appropriate and necessary changes to comply with the above direction.
# # #
5 https://publications.aap.org/aapnews/news/33988/AAP-Proposed-restrictions-to-gender-affirming-care 4 https://santamonicacityca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=4&ID=17973&MeetingID=1432

Page 2 of 2 ends

16.D.a
Packet Pg. 1461 Attachment: 20260127 16 Item - Further Protecting Gender Affirming Healthcare in Santa Monica - Hall, Zernit (7510 : Protect gender-affirming 1 David Yakobson
From: Ernest Cornish <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:17 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 16D - Support

EXTERNAL
Mayor Torosis, Mayor Pro Tempore Zwick, and Councilmembers, I am writing as a Democrat who strongly supports LGBTQ+ rights and urge you to vote yes on Item 16D to participate in federal rulemaking to protect access to gender-affirming health care for transgender, gender diverse, and intersex youth.

Gender-affirming care is evidence-based, supported by every major medical association, and often lifesaving. The proposed federal rules that would strip funding from providers and deny young people medically necessary care are dangerous, discriminatory, and contrary to established medical consensus.

Santa Monica has long been a leader in standing up for equality, dignity, and the right of every family to make health care decisions free from political interference. I strongly support directing the City to formally oppose these federal actions and to consider joining litigation to defend access to care.

Thank you for continuing Santa Monica’s proud tradition of protecting LGBTQ+ residents and standing on the side of civil rights, science, and compassion.

Sincerely,
Ernest Cornish
[email protected]
714-981-7806
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1462 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 2 David Yakobson
From: Ricardo Marquez <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:18 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]; Latino Coalition Los Angeles Subject: 16D - Support

Thank you for continuing Santa Monica’s proud tradition of protecting LGBTQ+ residents and standing on the side of civil rights, science, and compassion.

Sincerely,
Ricardo Márquez
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1463 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 3 David Yakobson
From: John Pelletier <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:19 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 16D - Support

Thank you for continuing Santa Monica’s proud tradition of protecting LGBTQ+ residents and standing on the side of civil rights, science, and compassion.

Sincerely,
John Pelletier
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1464 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 4 David Yakobson
From: Ricardo Marquez <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:20 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 16D - Support

Thank you for continuing Santa Monica’s proud tradition of protecting LGBTQ+ residents and standing on the side of civil rights, science, and compassion.

Sincerely,
Ricardo Márquez | Treasurer
South Central Neighborhood Council
SOUTH CENTRAL NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL – EmpowerLA
Visit our Instagram
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the designated recipient named above. This message is privileged and confidential. If the message has not reached the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately and delete the original message and all its attachments, if any.

Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1465 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 5 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1466 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 6 David Yakobson
From: Latino Coalition Of Los Ángeles <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 7:25 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 16D - Support

Thank you for continuing Santa Monica’s proud tradition of protecting LGBTQ+ residents and standing on the side of civil rights, science, and compassion.

Sincerely,
With gratitude,
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Ricardo Márquez, BA (he/his/él)
Treasurer|Latino Coalition of Los Angeles
website: latinocoalitionla.org
email: [email protected]
phone: (213) 924-1501
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1467 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 7 David Yakobson
From: Sara Roos <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 10:43 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: 16D - Support

Gender-affirming care is evidence-based treatment, supported by every major medical association, that has been shown to save lives. The proposed federal rules that would strip funding from providers and deny young people medically necessary care are dangerous, discriminatory, and contrary to established medical consensus.

Thank you for continuing Santa Monica’s proud tradition of protecting LGBTQ+ residents and standing on the side of civil rights, science, and compassion.

Sincerely,
Sara Roos
Mar Vista, CA.

Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1468 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 8 David Yakobson
From: lmarreola <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 6:23 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: CC tonight ITEM 11D

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
Please , no new artificial turf for all the reasons that you are keeping real grass fields.

Thank you,
Larry Arreola
SM Youth Baseball Coach
For 30 years
Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1469 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 1 David Yakobson
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 9:50 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Barry Snell; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin
Cc: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: In Support: Item 16D

EXTERNAL
As a Santa Monica resident, I write in a personal capacity to support the City taking any and all actions to protect our transgender and nonbinary residents from the ceaseless persecution they have faced. Thank you,
Jacob Wasserman
90403
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1470 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) 2 David Yakobson
From: Santa Monica Democratic Club <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, January 23, 2026 11:25 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Item 16D - SUPPORT
Attachments: Letter to Council 16D.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Members of the City Council:

On behalf of the Santa Monica Democratic Club, I am writing to express our strong support for Item 16D, brought forward by Councilmembers Dan Hall and Natalya Zernitskaya, and to urge a unanimous “Yes” vote to protect access to gender-affirming healthcare for transgender, gender diverse, and intersex youth.

Across the country, we are seeing coordinated federal efforts to override medical expertise, intimidate healthcare providers, and restrict evidence-based care for young people through coercive funding mechanisms. In that context, local leadership is essential. Item 16D reflects the moral seriousness this moment demands. These are meaningful, concrete steps that affirm Santa Monica’s refusal to be complicit in policies that endanger youth, undermine medical consensus, or target LGBTQ communities for political gain.

Councilmembers Hall and Zernitskaya, both former board members of the Santa Monica Democratic Club and respected leaders within the LGBTQ community, exemplify the progressive values our Club stands for: defending vulnerable communities, grounding policy in science and expertise, and standing firm in the face of political intimidation. We are deeply proud of their continued leadership and grateful for their work on behalf of our city.

We urge the full Council to join them in affirming Santa Monica Values through a strong, united vote in favor of this item. Doing so will send a clear message that Santa Monica stands for dignity, care, and justice.

Thank you for your consideration and for your continued service to our community.

In solidarity and appreciation,
Jon Katz
President, Santa Monica Democratic Club
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1471 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) President
Jon Katz
VP Political Action
Sean Kolodji
VP Membership
Michael Soloff
VP Programs
Michelle Grant
VP Communications
Philip Nazzal
VP Diversity & Inclusion
Keith Coleman
VP Legislation
Isabel Storey
Treasurer
Marcy Lebovitz
Recording Secretary
Lynn Cervini
At-Large
Derek Devermont
Patricia Hoffman
Susan Sheu
January 23, 2026
Dear Mayor Torosis and Members of the City Council:

Thank you for your consideration and for your continued service to our community.

In solidarity and appreciation,
Jon Katz
President, Santa Monica Democratic Club
P.O. Box 1052 • Santa Monica,CA 90406 • 215-962-4357 • [email protected] Item 16-D
January 27, 2026
Item 16-D
January 27, 2026

16.D.b
Packet Pg. 1472 Attachment: Written Comments (7510 : Protect gender-affirming healthcare) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.E
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Request of Mayor Pro Tem Zwick and Councilmember Hall that the City Council direct the City Manager to formalize a policy with regard to curb ramp design standards in the city.

Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Curb Ramp Design Standards (January 27, 2026)
B. Written Comments

16.E
Packet Pg. 1473
Memo
To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Jesse Zwick, Mayor Pro Tem
Dan Hall, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: Request of Mayor Pro Tem Zwick and Councilmember Hall that the City Council direct the City Manager to formalize a policy with regard to curb ramp design standards in the city.

Request of Mayor Pro Tem Zwick and Councilmember Hall that the City Council direct the City Manager to formalize a policy with regard to curb ramp design standards in the city.

Specifically, the policy shall establish dual unidirectional curb ramps as the standard for new construction projects where feasible. Additionally, the policy should clarify criteria for determining “technical infeasibility” and require a Deviation from Standards and Technical Infeasibility Report be submitted and posted publicly if dual unidirectional curb ramp construction is not feasible at any location within an intersection that is being improved.

Please agendize this matter for City Council consideration at the January 27, 2026, meeting.

16.E.a
Packet Pg. 1474 Attachment: Curb Ramp Design Standards (January 27, 2026) (7511 : Curb ramp design standards) 1 David Yakobson
From: Caro Vilain <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:43 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Barry Snell; councilmtgitems
Subject: I support 16E

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
I want to express my strong support for item 16E and thank Mayor Pro Tim Zwick and Councilmember Hall for bringing this forward.

As a city that prides itself on being a leader in sustainability and active mobility, I believe it is crucial that our streets are truly accessible, and that when we build infrastructure that will (should) last decades, we opt for the more accessible and future-proof options.

The choices we make as a city will also influence other places to do the same, hopefully leading to more accessible places and lower costs as the demand grows and policies adapt (yes, I realize this may be wishful thinking).

Directional curb ramps are much safer and easier to use for people using mobility devices, people with vision impairments, people using strollers,... and really anyone who uses our streets.

If staff face cost challenges with the implementation of this policy, I strongly recommend reaching out to organizations such as Streets For All (yes, yes, conflict of interest. I'm with them. Quick, someone call the FPCC) to work on state policies that may help make these changes less costly.

Anyways, 16E has my strong support, and thank you to Mayor Pro Tem Zwick and everyone else behind this item, including community member Connor Webb, who has done more than his fair share of research on this.

Thank you,
Caro Vilain
90404
Item 16-E
January 27, 2026
Item 16-E
January 27, 2026

16.E.b
Packet Pg. 1475 Attachment: Written Comments (7511 : Curb ramp design standards) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.F
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Request of Mayor Torosis, Councilmember Snell and Councilmember Zernitskaya to Pursue Santa Monica Entry into the 2027 Tournament of Roses Parade through a Community-led Planning, Fundraising and Volunteer Effort
Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Rose Parade (January 27, 2026)

16.F
Packet Pg. 1476
Memo
To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Caroline Torosis, Mayor
Barry Snell, Councilmember
Natalya Zernitskaya, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: Request of Mayor Torosis, Councilmember Snell and Councilmember Zernitskaya to Pursue Santa Monica Entry into the 2027 Tournament of Roses Parade through a Community-led Planning, Fundraising and Volunteer Effort For more than a century, the Pasadena Tournament of Roses and the annual Rose Parade have served as one of California’s most beloved and widely watched celebrations. The parade is broadcast to over 28 million viewers annually across the nation and millions more around the world as a showcase of community spirit, creativity, and civic pride. Cities, universities, nonprofits, and civic organizations have long used the Rose Parade to tell their stories, lift up their residents and businesses, and engage their communities in a shared project rooted in collaboration, volunteerism, and California imagination. The theme for the 2027 Tournament of Roses Parade is “Welcome,” perfectly suited to complement Santa Monica’s renewal.

As Santa Monica ushers in a new era of renewal, revitalization, and shared purpose, this moment presents a unique opportunity for our community to take part in one of the most iconic traditions in the world. Through the Realignment Plan, which is our multi-year strategy to restore core services, strengthen neighborhoods, revitalize our economy, and bring energy and activity back to our public spaces, Santa Monica is leaning into the belief that we are at our best when we build together, engage together, and show up together, welcoming residents and visitors alike to our beautiful city.

Entering a Santa Monica float in the 2027 Tournament of Roses, designed, decorated, and funded with the help of residents, businesses, community partners, and volunteers, would serve as a shared civic endeavor that embodies the spirit of our Renaissance. This initiative would create opportunities for residents of all ages to participate hands-on in something inspiring, invite local businesses and nonprofits to collaborate in sponsorships, in-kind contributions, and creative partnerships, and ignite a sense of pride and belonging as Santa Monica projects its story to a global audience.

Importantly, this effort is not intended to draw on scarce General Fund resources. Instead, the vision is to build a float with the community, powered by sponsorships, private donations, volunteerism, and existing philanthropic mechanisms such as the We Are Santa Monica Fund housed at the California Community Foundation. This aligns directly with the Realignment Plan’s goals of activating community energy, strengthening partnerships, and demonstrating that Santa Monica is once again rising as a vibrant, innovative, and connected city.

16.F.a
Packet Pg. 1477 Attachment: Rose Parade (January 27, 2026) (7512 : Rose Parade) Memo
By taking the first step now and pursuing conversations with the Tournament of Roses, creating a community powered fundraising structure, and opening a volunteer interest portal, we position Santa Monica to plan thoughtfully, build momentum, and create a civic centerpiece worthy of international celebration.

Therefore, the City Council directs the City Manager to:

1. Engage in discussions with the Pasadena Tournament of Roses Association to understand entry criteria, timelines, design requirements, and necessary steps to pursue a Santa Monica civic float entry for the Rose Parade.

2. Develop a comprehensive fundraising plan that relies on private sponsorships, grants, community donations, and in-kind contributions rather than General Fund resources. This should include, within 15 days, the launch of a public facing portal for those looking to contribute, and sponsorship levels for organizations interested in walking with and riding on Santa Monica’s float.

3. Identify and pursue partnership opportunities with local businesses, business districts, civic groups, nonprofits, schools, and philanthropic organizations that may wish to support, sponsor, or participate in float development, design, or fundraising efforts.

4. Evaluate the feasibility of using the We Are Santa Monica Fund and/or other appropriate fiscal vehicle(s), to accept individual contributions and corporate donations for this purpose.

5. Develop a public-facing communications, engagement, and volunteer strategy, including an online portal where:
• Residents can express interest in volunteering,
• Businesses and community partners can offer support,
• Donors and other interested parties can receive updates and opportunities to contribute.

6. Report back to the City Council within 30 days with:
• A status update on discussions with the Tournament of Roses, • A proposed funding model and sponsorship framework,
• Recommended donation pathways and partnership structures, • A preliminary engagement and volunteer plan.

Together, these actions will allow Santa Monica to explore participation in the Rose Parade in a manner that builds community pride, engages residents in a shared civic endeavor, and reinforces the spirit and values at the heart of Santa Monica’s Realignment Plan and ongoing Renaissance.

16.F.a
Packet Pg. 1478 Attachment: Rose Parade (January 27, 2026) (7512 : Rose Parade) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.G
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Request of Mayor Torosis, Councilmember Snell, and Councilmember Hall to Strengthen Safety, Accessibility, and Enforcement on the Santa Monica’s Pedestrian and Bike Paths
Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Enforcement against Motorized Vehicles on Beach Bike Path(January 27, 2026) B. Written Comments

16.G
Packet Pg. 1479
Memo
To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Caroline Torosis, Mayor
Barry Snell, Councilmember
Dan Hall, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: Request of Mayor Torosis, Councilmember Snell, and Councilmember Hall to Strengthen Safety, Accessibility, and Enforcement on the Santa Monica’s Pedestrian and Bike Paths
The Santa Monica Beach Bike Path is one of the City’s most iconic and heavily used public assets, serving residents, families, seniors, people using mobility devices, commuters, and visitors from around the world. Designed as a shared-use recreational path, it is intended to prioritize safety, accessibility, and low-speed, people-powered mobility in a uniquely sensitive coastal environment.

In recent years, Santa Monica has experienced a growing and persistent problem of privately owned motorized scooters, minibikes, motorcycles, and modified e-bikes operating illegally on the Beach Bike Path and in the surrounding neighborhoods, often at high speeds and in crowded conditions.

These vehicles are not part of the City’s shared mobility programs, are not subject to geofencing or vendor controls, and pose serious risks to pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors, and people with disabilities.

Coastal cities facing similar challenges have found that education and signage alone are insufficient. Jurisdictions such as Manhattan Beach and Hermosa Beach have adopted stricter local prohibitions and higher penalties for motorized devices on beach paths. Other cities, including San Diego and Miami Beach, have implemented speed-restricted or enforcement zones along boardwalks and coastal paths. Internationally, beach cities in Europe have relied on physical access controls such as bollards and staggered entry points to prevent motorcycles and minibikes from entering shared recreational paths altogether.

Santa Monica already has important tools in place that can be built upon. The Municipal Code prohibits motorized vehicles on pedestrian and bike paths, the City has authority to impound illegally operated vehicles, and Santa Monica is actively piloting technology-based enforcement for bike lanes. What is needed now is a coordinated, layered approach that strengthens penalties, prevents illegal access through design, and uses technology and data to target enforcement efficiently.

This item advances a safety-first strategy that emphasizes prevention over punishment, protects ADA access, reduces reliance on constant police presence, and ensures the Beach Bike Path remains safe, accessible, and welcoming for everyone.

16.G.a
Packet Pg. 1480 Attachment: Enforcement against Motorized Vehicles on Beach Bike Path(January 27, 2026) (7513 : Beach Bike Path Enforcement) Memo
Therefore, the City Council directs the City Manager, in coordination with the City Attorney to:

1. Enhanced Fines and Impound Authority
Return with proposed amendments to the Santa Monica Municipal Code establishing enhanced, tiered fines for illegal motorized vehicle use on the Beach Bike Path, and clarifying authority for immediate impoundment of prohibited motorized vehicles, including motorcycles, minibikes, motorized scooters, modified e-bikes, and repeat violators, where legally feasible.

2. Administrative and Civil Citation Framework
Evaluate and, where feasible, implement the use of civil administrative citations that are sufficiently high and compound with each violation for Bike Path motorized violations, consistent with existing parking, traffic, and automated enforcement models, to reduce reliance on criminal prosecution and deter illegal behavior.

3. Physical Access Controls and Choke Points
Identify priority access points along the Beach Bike Path and develop, pilot, or implement ADA-compliant physical access controls, such as bollards or staggered barriers, designed to prevent illegal motorized vehicle entry while maintaining access for bicycles, strollers, wheelchairs, and adaptive mobility devices.

4. Signage and Public Notice
Install or upgrade clear, standardized signage at Beach Bike Path access points identifying prohibited vehicles, applicable code sections, fine ranges, impound authority, and notice of technology-based enforcement where applicable.

5. Targeted Enforcement Operations
Conduct focused, high-visibility enforcement operations during peak usage periods, including weekends, holidays, and summer months, to deter illegal motorized activity and reinforce updated rules and penalties.

6. Technology-Based Enforcement Solutions
Explore and recommend technology-based enforcement tools, consistent with Santa Monica’s existing bike lane enforcement program and other national models, including fixed or mobile cameras, with appropriate privacy and data safeguards, to deter, document and cite illegal motorized vehicle use on the Beach Bike Path.

7. Community Reporting and Data-Driven Targeting
Explore feasibility of and recommend options for a community reporting mechanism through an existing City platform or web portal to support data collection, hotspot identification, and enforcement planning, with clear limits that community submissions do not independently trigger citations.

8. Reporting Back to Council
Report back to the City Council within 90 days on the status and recommended implementation of the above actions, including proposed ordinance amendments, pilot locations and costs, enforcement approaches, and a coordinated implementation timeline.

16.G.a
Packet Pg. 1481 Attachment: Enforcement against Motorized Vehicles on Beach Bike Path(January 27, 2026) (7513 : Beach Bike Path Enforcement) 1 David Yakobson
From: Caro Vilain <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:07 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Barry Snell; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16G

EXTERNAL
Dear Council,
I wanted to share a few thoughts on item 16G before you consider it tonight.

As we strive to become a safe, sustainable, and accessible city, I believe it's important to be proactive about issues that may arise with certain devices, such as e-motorcycles, and I appreciate wanting to tackle the issue before it becomes more serious.

It's crucial that we consider these things thoughtfully, so we don't find ourselves passing harmful policies such as the recent e-bike laws in New Jersey that will create barriers to active mobility and make it much less accessible and much less inviting to many.

As confusion between e-bikes and e-motorcycles grows, I believe education has a role. Many people, including people who purchase and use these devices, are entirely unaware that these are vastly different from e-bikes. E-bikes are safe, regulated devices that make active mobility much more accessible to many. They allow people to transport children, goods, pets, and themselves further than a regular bicycle, and more safely, efficiently, and sustainably than with a motor vehicle. These devices play an essential role in reaching our sustainability and vision zero goals. They are also currently the best-selling electric vehicle, so they are here to stay.

Modified e-bikes and e-motorcycles have a place as well, but we can all agree that going 40mph in a bikeway can quickly become problematic. And while I don't believe they are our biggest issue at this point, I appreciate council being proactive about it. Places where they have become more prominent have been struggling to regulate them, and we have an opportunity to be a leader in this matter.

This is why I believe that the focus for now should be on making the distinction between these types of vehicles . The goal isn't to generate inaccurate headlines saying "Santa Monica bans e-bikes in bikeways" and deter people from using this form of transportation that benefits us all.

I have issues with the memo stating "This item advances a safety-first strategy that emphasizes prevention over punishment," and then listing "Enhanced fines and impound authority" as the first item.

While I'd be the first to tell you that signs and education alone tend not to be enough when it comes to traffic safety, I strongly believe that starting with education could have an impact here. While enforcement plays a role in traffic safety, and while I appreciate council wanting to address this before it becomes a more serious issue, I don't believe punishment and fines should be our main focus at this point.

Item 16-G
January 27, 2026
Item 16-G
January 27, 2026

16.G.b
Packet Pg. 1482 Attachment: Written Comments (7513 : Beach Bike Path Enforcement) 2 I'd recommend working with local schools to educate teenagers and their parents on these devices and the possible consequences of using these devices improperly (in bikeways, at high speeds, without adequate gear or licensing,...). I'd also recommend clearer signage around our bikeways, considering the significant number of visitors who use these devices and aren't aware of local policies. Nearby companies (both in Santa Monica and West LA/Venice) whose customers tend to use our bikeways should likely also be informed of the updates.

I trust that you can handle this matter thoughtfully, truly emphasizing prevention over punishment.

Thank you,
Caro Vilain
90404
Item 16-G
January 27, 2026
Item 16-G
January 27, 2026

16.G.b
Packet Pg. 1483 Attachment: Written Comments (7513 : Beach Bike Path Enforcement) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.H
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. Process Improvements to City Council Meetings (January 27, 2026) B. Written Comments

16.H
Packet Pg. 1484
Memo
To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

1. Provide a Minimum Amount of Public Comment Time For Speakers • 2-Minutes of Guaranteed Minimum Speaking Time – Ensure that no member of the public receives less than two (2) minutes to speak on any agenda item or during general public comment, regardless of the number of speakers.
• Separate Time for Separate Items – Confirm that speakers are afforded the full 2-minute minimum speaking time for each distinct agenda item they wish to address, regardless of the number of speakers we have on an item.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda.
• Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

3. Earlier Meeting Start Time Once Per Month
• 10am Council Meeting – Explore shifting one of our two regular monthly Council meetings to a 10:00 a.m. start time, to expand access for residents unable to attend evening meetings.

I am respectfully requesting that the City Council consider and implement the above referenced changes to facilitate process improvements for our Council Meetings that would improve resident and public participation.

Please place this item on January 27, 2026, agenda for full City Council consideration.

16.H.a
Packet Pg. 1485 Attachment: Process Improvements to City Council Meetings (January 27, 2026) (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 1 David Yakobson
From: Alison Boyle <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 1:26 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
The time has come for the City Council to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

There was a time when City Councilmembers could allow a speaker to complete a comment without being shut off by a machine. There was a time when the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting "Please complete your sentence." There was a time when a Councilmember could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Thank you,
Alison Boyle
Resident of Santa Monica
Agenda Item 16-H
A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Memo To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1486 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 2 Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1487 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 3 David Yakobson
From: Thea Phillips <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Thank you,
Thea Phillips
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1488 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 4 David Yakobson
From: George Ferrell <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 2:24 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H.

There was a time when City Councilmembers could allow a speaker to complete a comment without being shut off by a machine. There was a time when the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting, "Please complete your sentence." There was a time when a Councilmember could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Peggy and George Ferrell
338 15th Street
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1489 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 1 David Yakobson
From: Shari Phillips <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:52 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Thank you,
Shari Phillips
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1490 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 2 David Yakobson
From: Elizabeth Van Denburgh <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:56 AM
To: Lana Negrete; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Oliver Chi; councilmtgitems
Subject: City Council Mtg. - 1/27/2026 - Item 16-H - Support Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis, Councilmembers and City Manager Chi, The time has come for the City Council to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my STRONG SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government. I have lived in Santa Monica, and as a resident have considered this one of the most activated cities that I know about. We historically have been encouraged to have resident input on a proactive and reactive basis. The neighborhood groups were encouraged to form by the city! For 35 years, Wilmont has provided education, advocacy and outreach for its residents and members.

Learning about a city council and attending a city hall meeting is a privilege, responsibility and a rite of passage.

Process improvements have many objectives, time and cost being two, but another objective is quality, are the customers i.e., residents satisfied with the interaction and processes of the provider. Does the city council consider Santa Monica residents its customers?
We believe that the two-way discussion between residents and city council create a better city. Do you? There was a time when City Councilmembers could allow a speaker to complete a comment without being shut off by a machine. There was a time when the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting "Please complete your sentence." There was a time when a Councilmember could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for residents of Santa Monica community.

Many thanks,
Elizabeth Van Denburgh
Wilmont, 45 years
_________________________________________
16H.

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1491 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 3 Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

1. Provide a Minimum Amount of Public Comment Time For Speakers • 2-Minutes of Guaranteed Minimum Speaking Time – Ensure that no member of the public receives less than two (2) minutes to speak on any agenda item or during general public comment, regardless of the number of speakers. • Separate Time for Separate Items – Confirm that speakers are afforded the full 2-minute minimum speaking time for each distinct agenda item they wish to address, regardless of the number of speakers we have on an item.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Please place this item on January 27, 2026, agenda for full City Council consideration.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1492 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 4 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

There was a time when City Council members could allow a speaker to finish a comment without being cut off by a machine. There was a time when the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting, "Please complete your sentence." There was a time when a Councilmember could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Thank you,
Jack Phillips
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1493 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 1 David Yakobson
From: Teri D Bernstein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:30 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Lana Negrete; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; FOSP - Zina Josephs
Subject: Add Lana Negrete's CC Improvement item: Ethical, de facto, allowance for public input

EXTERNAL
Greetings, Councilpeople:

Please support Lana Negrete's efforts to improve integrity of public input.

She requests that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1494 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 2 You can adapt these, but you get the drift: Things are way off key, out of balance. I have recently been reviewing City Council Minutes and public comment from 2008-2015, and the tone and integrity was at a higher ethical standard--even though there was a vast difference of opinion, as there is now.

Please step up!
Teri Davis Bernstein
longtime Santa Monica resident and heartfelt devoted community enthusiast Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1495 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 3 David Yakobson
From: Elizabeth Lerer <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:01 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Lana Negrete; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Agenda Item 16.H. Improving Public Participation Process at Council Meetings (January 27, 2026)

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
I support item 16.H. and thank Councilmember Negrete for bringing this forward.

Please support a review of and improvements to public participation procedures at City Council Meetings.

Thank you,
Elizabeth Lerer
Santa Monica resident
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1496 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 4 David Yakobson
From: Laurie Yehia <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:23 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: Correcting extreme process limits on public comment

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Tricia Crane
Chair, Northeast Neighbors of Santa Monica
16 H.

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1497 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 5 Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

1. Provide a Minimum Amount of Public Comment Time For Speakers • 2-Minutes of Guaranteed Minimum Speaking Time – Ensure that no member of the public receives less than two (2) minutes to speak on any agenda item or during general public comment, regardless of the number of speakers.
• Separate Time for Separate Items – Confirm that speakers are afforded the full 2- minute minimum speaking time for each distinct agenda item they wish to address, regardless of the number of speakers we have on an item.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen midagenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Sent from my iPhone
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1498 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 1 David Yakobson
From: lmarreola <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: 1-27 CC mtg tonight

EXTERNAL
We fully Support Item 16-H and Councilmember Negrete's posistion on the need for resident's rights.

Carol and Larry Arreola
Lifelong Sunset Park Residents.

Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S21 5G, an AT&T 5G smartphone Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1499 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 1 David Yakobson
From: Wendy Dembo <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Caroline Torosis; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall
Cc: Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
I was at a Wilmont meeting where Ellis Raskin was speaking. I was able to ask him a question about parcel taxes. He answered my question, but suggested that I go to a Community Council meeting. I responded, it is hard to spend 5 hours waiting to speak for one minute.

The time has come for the City Council to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

There was a time when City Councilmembers could allow a speaker to complete a comment without being shut off by a machine. There was a time when the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting, "Please complete your sentence." There was a time when a Councilmember could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Wendy Dembo
Board Member, Wilmont
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1500 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 2 David Yakobson
From: DONALD LLOYD <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:39 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Donald Lloyd
Member, Northeast Neighbors of Santa Monica
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1501 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 3 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:45 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

We give our personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Thanks,
Arunas & Vida Bruozis
Property Owners
1040 Stanford St, Santa Monica
16 H.

A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings. ##
Memo To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1502 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 4 Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1503 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 5 David Yakobson
From: ron miller <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:50 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Council Members,
The time has come for the City Council to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

There was a time when City Council Members could allow a speaker to complete a comment without being shut off by a machine. There was a time when the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting "Please complete your sentence." There was a time when a Council Member could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Council Member Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Regards,
Ronald Miller
16-
H.

A request of Council Member Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings. ##
Memo To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Council Member
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Council Member Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1504 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 6 • Separate Time for Separate Items – Confirm that speakers are afforded the full 2-minute minimum speaking time for each distinct agenda item they wish to address, regardless of the number of speakers we have on an item.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1505 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 7 David Yakobson
From: D'Orsogna, Maria R <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: STRONG SUPPPORT for Public Process Repair - Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
Let the people speak. Let the people participate. The time has come for you to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Maria R D'Orsogna, PhD
Santa Monica
16 H.

A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings. ##
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1506 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 8 Memo To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1507 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 9 David Yakobson
From: Katharine Dreyfuss <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:54 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Full support to Agenda Item 16-H

EXTERNAL
Please add my name to your list of citizen supporters.

Thank you.

Katharine Dreyfuss
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1508 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 10 David Yakobson
From: Noma Boardmember <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:06 AM
To: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: Oliver Chi
Subject: STRONG SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2027) Public Process Improvements at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
NOMA SUPPORTS (Agenda Item 16 – H) adjusting the City Council schedule and agenda management to increase BOTH efficiency AND community engagement. We thank Councilmember Negrete for bringing it forward. We ask that the Council takes the time to discuss and support Councilmember Negrete’s important call for a review of the current process.

The goal should be to ask staff to develop recommendations that cultivate and support a strong and engaged community/Council relationship.

We hope that you will direct staff to consider all options, including implementation of the following two meeting protocol / logistical adjustments, as we feel these will increase engagement from residents of NOMA and other Santa Monica neighborhoods:

1. Provide a Minimum Amount of Public Comment Time For Speakers • Two-minutes of Guaranteed Minimum Speaking Time – Ensure that no member of the public receives less than two minutes to speak on any agenda item or during general public comment, regardless of the number of speakers.
• Separate Time for Separate Items – Confirm that speakers are afforded the full twominute minimum speaking time for each distinct agenda item they wish to address.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1509 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 11 • Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder Council agendas such that Closed Session takes place either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than midagenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, please also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Respectfully,
The Board of NOMA
CC: City Manager Chi
smnoma.org
[email protected]
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1510 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 12 David Yakobson
From: girltunes <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:19 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis & Councilmembers,
I stand with Northeast Neighbors of Santa Monica in the following letter submitted January 27, 2026:

Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
The time has come for the City Council to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Tricia Crane
Chair, Northeast Neighbors of Santa Monica
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1511 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 13 Sincerely,
Ferris Gluck
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1512 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 14 David Yakobson
From: Paula Goldman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 11:20 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda item 16-H

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
Please support Councilmember Negrete’s measure tonight, regarding Council’s relationship to the public.

We realize there are always going to be cranks, and that public comments add time. But the suggestions to handle Closed Sessions differently, and varying start times would help. It is important to Santa Monica governance that you know what citizens are thinking.

This is such a difficult, polarized time. Please return civility and respect to your meetings.

Thank you,
Paula Goldman and Brian Wolf
2821 Washington Avenue
Paula Goldman
PaulaGoldman.com
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1513 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 1 David Yakobson
From: Tricia Crane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:24 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: STRONG SUPPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H - Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
The time has come for the City Council to fix the extreme limits that have been implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Tricia Crane
Chair, Northeast Neighbors of Santa Monica
16 H.

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1514 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 2 Memo To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1515 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 3 David Yakobson
From: Ann Hoover <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:12 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick
Cc: Oliver Chi; Susan Cline; Peter James; Heidi von Tongeln; Susan Cola; Denise AndersonWarren; Nikima Newsome Subject: January 27, 2026 Council Meeting - Item 16.H. - Process Improvements for public input - SUPPORT

EXTERNAL

SUPPORT
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers -
Please support the Process Improvements recommended in Item 16.H. They will help ensure truly meaningful input for stakeholders and provide more equitable opportunities for all in our community to participate in our City Council meetings and the deliberative public process.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Ann Bowman
Resident, 29 years
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1516 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 1 David Yakobson
From: David Misch <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:48 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

I support Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

David Misch
Northeast Neighbors
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1517 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 2 David Yakobson
From: Faustino Garza <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements

EXTERNAL
Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers:

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Faustino Garza
Sunset Park
Santa Monica 90405
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1518 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 3 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:53 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Amani Spielman, Northeast resident
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1519 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 4 David Yakobson
From: Gary Freedman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:55 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: Agenda Item 16-H

We give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Sincerely,
Gary and Donna Freedman
533 9th Street
Santa Monica, CA 90402
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1520 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 5 David Yakobson
From: Phil Brock <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 8:59 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: 16H SUPPORT

EXTERNAL
Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
The time has come for the City Council to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Memo To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1521 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 6 • Separate Time for Separate Items – Confirm that speakers are afforded the full 2-minute minimum speaking time for each distinct agenda item they wish to address, regardless of the number of speakers we have on an item.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Phil Brock / Mayor (ret)
[email protected]
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1522 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 7 David Yakobson
From: Bruce Leddy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:07 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: Item 16H - Support

EXTERNAL
I fully support item 16H which will increase residents' ability to better inform City Council on community opinion. The time limits as they currently stand make it nearly impossible to make any cogent points. To avoid meetings becoming too long, it makes sense to move closed sessions to separate meetings, in order to accommodate more public input.

Please vote to support 16H.

Bruce Leddy
26 year resident
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1523 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 8 David Yakobson
From: Gavin Scott <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:11 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Cc: Nicola Scott
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

My wife and I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly top-down local government.

There was a time when City Council members could allow a speaker to complete a comment without being shut off by a machine. There was a time when the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting "Please complete your sentence." There was a time when a Councilmember could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Sincerely,
Gavin and Nicola Scott
1801 Marine Street,
Santa Monica
CA 90405
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1524 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 9 David Yakobson
From: melissa94306 <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:17 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Ellis Raskin; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Cc: Lana Negrete
Subject: Agenda Item 16-H

EXTERNAL
To Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers:

I fully support item 16-H on today’s agenda. It promises to improve opportunities for Santa Monica residents to provide needed input, and I believe it may improve Council relations with our community.

Thank you.

Melissa Campbell
1040 - 22nd St
Santa Monica, CA. 90403
650 283-7234
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1525 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 10 David Yakobson
From: Dannie Charney <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:32 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Thank you -
Danielle Charney
Resident Since 1982
16 H.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1526 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 11 Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings.

Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1527 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 12 David Yakobson
From: Dan J. <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:37 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
Santa Monica’s current public comment rules have crossed a critical line. Policies adopted in the name of efficiency now function to suppress participation, limit dialogue, and distance elected officials from the residents they serve.

I strongly and unequivocally support Agenda Item 16-H and thank Councilmember Negrete for bringing forward a necessary challenge to this trajectory.

Public comment is not an obstacle to governance; it is a core democratic function. Yet today’s process treats residents as interruptions to be managed rather than constituents to be heard. Rigid timers, automatic cutoffs, and the elimination of basic interaction have stripped City Council meetings of any meaningful exchange between the public and its representatives.

Efficiency cannot justify a system that prioritizes speed over legitimacy. A Council that cannot allow a resident to finish a thought—or seek clarification when appropriate—signals that public input is performative rather than substantive.

I urge the Council to support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a full review of the public comment process and to restore balance, discretion, and respect to community participation. Governing well requires listening, not merely moving on.

Respectfully,
Daniel Jansenson
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1528 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 13 David Yakobson
From: Rachel Harms <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 9:40 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
I urge the City Council to fix the extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency that have resulted in closing down opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my full support to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for calling for a review of the current process. The time has come to restore respect for the community.

Sincerely,
Rachel Harms
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1529 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 14 David Yakobson
From: Bob Seldon <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:03 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Council Members,
My wife and I have been residents of Santa Monica for 40 years, and I have been an active participant in City affairs since I co-founded Northeast Neighbors. Lately, I have been increasingly disturbed as I have watched the increasing marginalization of our residents by City government.

The time has come for the City Council to reduce extreme limits implemented in the name of efficiency, and re-open much-needed opportunities for the people of Santa Monica to provide Public Comment on important City Council Agenda items.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

I can personally attest to the time when City Council members could allow a speaker to complete a comment without being shut off by a machine; the mayor would say to a community member speaking at a meeting "Please complete your sentence.” and a Council member could even ask a member of the community a clarifying question.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Respectfully,
Bob Seldon
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1530 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 15 David Yakobson
From: Corinne Koutsouros <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:10 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi
Subject: SUPPORT for Council Agenda Item 16-H (Jan 27, 2026) Public Process Improvements are needed at Council meetings

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and Councilmembers,
It is important our local government keeps an open book and full transparency of decisions made for the people of our city. You are an elected representative. Representative means you are speaking on behalf of the people with open ears and minds. Not representing based on your own personal benefits.

I agree with everything posted below from Councilmember Negrete and Tricia Crane’s call to action.

I give my personal FULL SUPPORT to Agenda Item 16 – H and thank Councilmember Negrete for acting on behalf of opening up our increasingly
top-down local government.

Please support Councilmember Negrete’s call for a review of the current process and restore respect for the community.

Tricia Crane
Chair, Northeast Neighbors of Santa Monica
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1531 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) 16 16H. A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.
##
Memo To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council consider support directing staff to analyze process improvements for City Council Meetings.

Request that the City Council support directing the analysis and implementation of the following 3 meeting protocol / logistical adjustments.

1. Provide a Minimum Amount of Public Comment Time For Speakers • 2-Minutes of Guaranteed Minimum Speaking Time – Ensure that no member of the public receives less than two (2) minutes to speak on any agenda item or during general public comment, regardless of the number of speakers. • Separate Time for Separate Items – Confirm that speakers are afforded the full 2-minute minimum speaking time for each distinct agenda item they wish to address, regardless of the number of speakers we have on an item.

2. Meeting Structure & Scheduling Reforms
• Reorder Agenda for Closed Session – Reorder our agenda such that Closed Session takes places either at 3pm or at the end of Council meetings, rather than happen mid-agenda. • Consider Closed Session on 1st & 3rd Tuesday – Concurrently, we should also consider and analyze the feasibility of holding closed sessions on the first or third Tuesday of each month, separate from regular City Council meeting evenings."

Please place this item on January 27, 2026, agenda for full City Council consideration.

Thank you,
Corinne Koutsouros
Sent from my iPhone
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026
Item 16-H
January 27, 2026

16.H.b
Packet Pg. 1532 Attachment: Written Comments [Revision 1] (7514 : Process improvements for Council Meetings) City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: January 27, 2026
Agenda Item: 16.I
1 of 1
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Oliver Chi, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council Consider Directing the City Manager to Agendize the ONESAMO People’s Academy and provide an update on the timeline and launch of the program.

Prepared By: Sergio Ramirez, Chief of Staff
Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:

A. ONESAMO People's Academy Program Update(January 27, 2026)

16.I
Packet Pg. 1533
Memo
To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Lana Negrete, Councilmember
Date: January 19, 2026
Re: A request of Councilmember Negrete that the City Council Consider Directing the City Manager to Agendize the ONESAMO People’s Academy and provide an update on the timeline and launch of the program.

On September 30, 2025, the City Council approved directing the City Manager to assess the viability of creating an annual citywide academy. The purpose of this request is to agendize the ONESAMO People’s Academy program to and highlight the objectives, implementation status and provide an opportunity for public awareness and acknowledgement of the program’s role in advancing civic engagement in Santa Monica.

Agendizing this item would allow the Council to formally recognize the program, reinforce its policy intent, and ensure transparency regarding next steps and outcomes associated with the Council’s prior action.

Please place this item on January 27, 2026, agenda for full City Council consideration.

For background, September 30, 2025, 16-Item is included below.

A request of Mayor Negrete that the City Council consider directing the City Manager to assess the viability of establishing a Santa Monica Citizen’s Academy, inclusive of a Youth-inGovernment program component and return to the City Council with options before the end of the year with an overview of how we might implement such a program locally.

During the past year, I had the opportunity to work with the Santa Monica Malibu Unified School District on a youth-in-government program, which served to provide our local students with an opportunity to learn about how the city actually works.

That particular effort inspired me to think about how a broader and more formalized Santa Monica Citizen’s Academy program could help to strengthen civic literacy, build trust, and create a deeper bench of informed community leaders. Including a youth track as part of such a program would also serve to help cultivate the next generation of civic participants while broadening access to local government.

I have seen other cities throughout our region who have successfully implemented multi-week academies that serve to accomplish the following objectives:
• Demystifying how municipal budgeting, planning, public safety, mobility, libraries, housing/homelessness response, and public works functions. • Better connecting residents directly with staff and facilities.

16.I.a
Packet Pg. 1534 Attachment: ONESAMO People's Academy Program Update(January 27, 2026) (7527 : Agendize the ONESAMO People’s Academy) Memo
• Producing graduates who serve on boards / commissions, volunteer, and constructively engage in public processes.

Accordingly, I would like the City Council to consider my request that the City Manager assess the viability of establishing a Santa Monica Citizen’s Academy, inclusive of a Youth-in-Government component, and return to the City Council with options before the end of the year with an overview of how we might implement such a program locally.

16.I.a
Packet Pg. 1535 Attachment: ONESAMO People's Academy Program Update(January 27, 2026) (7527 : Agendize the ONESAMO People’s Academy)

Santa Monica City CouncilJanuary 27, 2026

Santa Monica City Council
January 27, 2026