1 David Yakobson
From: Jacob Wasserman <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2026 8:17 PM
To: Lana Negrete; Barry Snell; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin
Cc: Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems
Subject: In Support: Item 16C
EXTERNAL
As a Santa Monica resident, driver, pedestrian, biker, and parent, I strongly support Item 16C. The City needs a real plan to prioritize ending traffic violence, or else more people will be injured or worse on our streets. There needs to be a culture change—in the metrics used and the "outreach" processes employed—so that human lives are held above auto throughput and so that the needs of all users of a corridor, not just adjacent residents, are weighed.
Thanks,
Jacob Wasserman
90403
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Caro Vilain <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 9, 2026 1:30 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Lana Negrete
Subject: Item 16C
EXTERNAL
Dear council,
I just want to express my strong support and gratitude for item 16C.
Santa Monica has made and continues to make commendable progress to make our streets safe. The recently added and upcoming protected bike lanes are a major step in the right direction, and as a resident who is passionate about making our streets safe and accessible, they make me very proud of my city.
That being said, it is also very clear that we have not accomplished the Vision Zero goals that the city set 10 years ago.
We’re extremely behind on our bike and pedestrian action plans, and when opportunities for new projects arise, there is still a very concerning lack of prioritizing of safety over convenience.
For instance, while the Santa Monica Blvd safety study will bring improvements that I personally look forward to as someone who lives right off of this deadly road, these improvements clearly don’t go as far as they could/should.
It would be unreasonable to claim that these improvements will make SMB a safe corridor, as people are continuing to get killed by drivers on Wilshire Blvd where similar improvements were already implemented.
If we truly care to reach vision zero, to achieve our sustainability goals, and to achieve our goal of shifting 50% of local trips to sustainable modes, we need to truly make these goals a priority, and to re-consider how we assess options, gather input, implement projects, and respond to FSI crashes.
I hope that you will all show strong support for this item, and will then take the necessary steps to ensure that it is meaningfully implemented. This includes allocating or securing appropriate resources, taking legislative responsibility so that staff has a clear mandate to prioritize safety over convenience, and demonstrating to the community that you are serious about our lives on these streets. This requires action over words, and I look forward to seeing the council lead on this.
Thank you,
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
2 Caro Vilain
90404
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Dustin Shahan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 11:44 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Lana Negrete; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell
Subject: Support Item 16.C for a real "Vision Zero"
EXTERNAL
Good morning Council,
I'm writing to urge your support of item 16.C. The city has not made the intended progress on its 2016 Vision Zero commitment and there is a clear need to evaluate a new strategy. Prioritizing human life over vehicles continues to be a core need to meet the city's moral, financial, climate, land use, health, housing, tourism, and livability goals.
In particular, I'd encourage that the staff plan focuses on streamlining the processes necessary to implement the changes necessary in a quick and dynamic manner. As we've seen with the 2016 plan, studying an end goal is useless without the ability to take the steps necessary to achieve it. Some of these processes will be for literal construction and project input, but they also need to consider the need for dynamic funding, approval, enforcement, and other pipelines to make sure projects and changes can happen in the first place.
My wife and I reside in Santa Monica so that biking, busing, and walking can be our primary, secondary, and tertiary methods of transportation before having to resort to an automobile. Please do your part to ensure that we don't add to the statistic of the city's failure.
Dustin Shahan
90401
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
2 David Yakobson
From: Connor Webb <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2026 11:55 AM
To: Dan Hall; Jesse Zwick; Caroline Torosis; Ellis Raskin; Lana Negrete; Natalya Zernitskaya; Barry Snell; councilmtgitems
Subject: Item 16C: Support with Suggested Amendment
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor Torosis and City Council,
I strongly support item 16C, which directs the City Manager to work with staff on a reimagined plan that prioritizes human life after failing our VIsion Zero Pledge. Traffic violence is a daily occurrence for anyone who walks or bikes in Santa Monica. There is a lot of talk about crime in Santa Monica recently, but frankly the number of drivers that threatened my life just this week is more than I’ve experienced in a decade from anyone outside of a vehicle.
Even multi-million dollar safety projects like the Wilshire Safety Study and Enhancements Project have barely improved conditions for people outside of a vehicle, prioritizing minimal traffic disruption and vehicle throughput over pedestrian crossing safety. The fire department has blocked proven safety interventions like speed humps, despite traffic collisions being one of the most common reasons for emergency response, and speed being a main cause.
Even our 2020 Bike Action Plan Amendment, which sought to define a protected bike lane network for the city, prioritized projects based on avoiding car parking removal. Despite this flawed prioritization, 5 years later we've only completed ~32% of the 5-year protected bike lane vision. Additionally, our 2011 Bike Action Plan included over 10 miles of low-traffic, low-speed Greenways (on Michigan, Washington, Ashland, Chelsea, and 6th St). Our only greenway project, MANGo, was made completely ineffective by the decision to prioritize vehicle cut-through traffic and eliminate planned traffic diverters. Therefore, 15 years into the 20-year vision, we've completed 0% of this Greenway network.
It is past time we reorient our vision and priorities to be human-centered. Overall, the specific directions of this motion are well thought-out. However, while they address design speeds and our Bike Action Plan Amendment network, they do not address the lack of progress on Greenways and cut-through traffic.
Therefore, I ask that an amendment be made to number 1 and 3 to emphasize the need for a reduction of cut through traffic and low-traffic greenways. Something like:
1. Assesses and presents options for reduced citywide Design Speeds for commercial and residential streets and reduced cut-through traffic on residential and school streets, to be used in all street design and engineering decisions, including the rebalancing of signal timing and traffic diversion."
3. Reorients parking and bike lanes and establishes low-traffic greenways and school streets via restriping and other quick-build tools during the planned repaving of any street that is slated for improvements via the existing Bike Action Plan."
Please support this item, and thank you for considering my suggested amendments.
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
3 Sincerely,
Connor Webb
Mid-City, 90404
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026
Item 16-C
February 10, 2026