1 February 24, 2026
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 24, 2026
A regular meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Torosis at 5:33 p.m., on Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at City Council Chambers, 1685 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA.
Roll Call: Present: Mayor Caroline Torosis
Mayor Pro Tem Jesse Zwick
Councilmember Lana Negrete
Councilmember Dan Hall
Councilmember Ellis Raskin
Councilmember Barry Snell
Councilmember Natalya Zernitskaya
Also Present: City Manager Oliver Chi
Interim City Attorney Heidi von Tongeln
Interim City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren
CONVENE/PLEDGE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 5:33 p.m., with all members present. Councilmember Negrete led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance.
STATEMENT OF
ACCOUNTABILITY
(LAND
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT)
The City of Santa Monica Statement of Accountability (Land Acknowledgement) was read into the record by Councilmember Hall.
LEVINE ACT
DISCLOSURE
No Councilmembers made disclosures regarding the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308).
AGENDA
MANAGEMENT
Motion by Councilmember Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Snell, to move Closed Sessions to the end of the meeting, and hear all other items before. The Mayor also noted that Item 12.A. has been removed from the agenda.
Councilmember Hall made a friendly amendment to waive the rule disallowing more than two commendations and proclamations per meeting.
The amendment was considered friendly by the maker and seconder.
The motion, with amendment, was unanimously approved by voice vote, with all members present.
PUBLIC INPUT FOR Members of the public Andria Mc, Morgan Hunter Gross, Jerry Rubin, Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 2 February 24, 2026
GENERAL PUBLIC
COMMENT AND
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS:
Johnathan Foster, Laurence Cohen, Samantha Mota, Brice Cooper, Joe Dirosa, Anthony Jerigan, and Mike Montgomery commented on various local issues.
There were no members of the public present to comment on Special Agenda items.
AGENDA
MANAGEMENT
Motion by Councilmember Raskin, seconded by Councilmember Zernitskaya, to move the City Manager Report ahead of the Consent Calendar. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, with all members present.
PROCLAMATIONS/
COMMENDATIONS/
SPECIAL AGENDA
ITEMS
2.A. Commendation: Santa Monica's first Black Firefighter Eddie Davis, was presented.
2.B. Proclamation: Women's History Month, was presented.
2.C. Proclamation: Kidney Awareness Month, was presented.
CITY MANAGER
REPORT
The City Manager Report was presented.
PUBLIC INPUT FOR
CONSENT CALENDAR
AND CLOSED SESSION
ONLY:
Members of the public Andria and Denise Barton commented on Consent Calendar items.
There were no members of the public present to comment on Closed Sessions.
CONSENT CALENDAR: All items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Councilmember for discussion.
At the request of Councilmember Zernitskaya, Item 4.D. was removed from the Consent Calendar.
Motion by Councilmember Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Zernitskaya, to approve the Consent Calendar except for Item 4.D., reading resolutions by title only and waiving further reading thereof. The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Zernitskaya, Snell, Raskin, Hall, Negrete, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, Mayor Torosis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVICES
4.A. Award RFP 455 for Medical Director Services for the Fire Department Emergency Medical Services Rendered by Firefighter Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 3 February 24, 2026
Paramedics and Emergency Medical Technicians, was approved.
Recommended Actions
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Ratify the Procurement Manager’s approval of the emergency extension of Agreement No. 11121 (CCS) with Dr. Walid Ghurabi to continue providing Medical Director services for the Fire Department. This emergency purchase was made as an exception to the competitive bidding process per SMMC 2.24.250(i) and SMMC
2.24.240(d)(3) and is for an amount not to exceed $18,000, for a new total amount not to exceed $288,000;
3. Jointly award RFP 455 to Dr. Walid Ghurabi and to Dr. Jonathan Warren to provide Medical Director services for the Fire Department;
4. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11803 (CCS) with Dr. Walid Ghurabi for an amount not to exceed $162,000 for three years, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval; and
5. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11804 (CCS) with Dr. Jonathan Warren for $131,760 for three years, with two additional one-year renewal options for $79,920 each, for a total contract amount that does not exceed $291,600 over a five-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
REAL PROPERTY &
ASSET MANAGEMENT
SOFTWARE
4.B. Second Modification to Agreement No. 10362 (CCS) with Yardi Systems, Inc. for Real Property and Asset Management Software Licensing and Maintenance, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a second modification to agreement No. 10362 (CCS) in the amount of $350,000 with Yardi Systems, Inc. for real property and asset management software licensing and maintenance services for the Public Works Department. This would result in a fourteen-year amended agreement with a new total amount not to exceed $600,000, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
PLAIN OLD TELEPHONE
SERVICES (POTS) LINES
4.C. Agreement No. 11805 (CCS) with Granite to Migrate and Rebuild Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS) Lines, was approved.
Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 4 February 24, 2026
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11805 (CCS) with Granite Telecommunications, LLC for
telecommunications services, including the consolidation and replacement of legacy Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS) lines, for the Information Services Department. This recommended award is made as an exception to the competitive bidding process pursuant to Section 2.24.250(c), and is for a total amount not to exceed $1,463,517, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
COALITION OF SANTA
MONICA CITY
EMPLOYEES
MEMORANDUM OF
UNDETSTANDING
4.E. Memorandum of Understanding (Umbrella Agreement) with the Coalition of Santa Monica City Employees for CalPERS Benefits, was approved and adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that Council:
1. Adopt a finding of categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15324 (Class 24 Regulations of Working Conditions) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Adopt proposed Resolution No. 11739 (CCS) (Attachment A) accepting the tentative agreement and authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute Memorandum of Understanding (Umbrella Agreement) No. 11806 (CCS) between the City and the Coalition of Santa Monica City Employees (the “Coalition") adopting the terms and conditions of the contract for California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) benefits with the City's miscellaneous employee (non-safety) units and certain unrepresented employees, namely AFSCME Local 4819 (Management Team Association), Supervisory Team Associates, Administrative Team Associates, Municipal Employees Association, California Teamsters Local 986, Public Attorneys Union, Public Attorneys' Legal Support Staff Union, International Association of Sheet, Metal, Air, Rail, and Transportation Workers - Transportation Division Local 1785, Executive Pay Plan Participants, Confidential Unrepresented Employees Pay Plan participants, and certain unrepresented employees.
OUTDOOR DINING
PROGRAM
4.F. Second Reading and Adoption of Interim Zoning Ordinance No. 2848 (CCS) Extending Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2837 (CCS) Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 5 February 24, 2026
and Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.31.200, Outdoor Dining and Seating on Sidewalks, to Promote Economic Recovery by Simplifying the City’s Outdoor Dining Program, was adopted.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance.
PLAN REVIEW
SERVICES
4.G. Award RFP #453 to 4LEAF, Inc., CSG Consultants, Inc., and TRB and Associates, Inc. for Contractual Services Related to Plan Review Services for the Building and Safety Division, was approved.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of signification effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Award RFP# 453 to CSG Consultants, Inc. for plan review services for the Community Development Department;
3. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11807 (CCS) with CSG Consultants, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $250,000 over a three-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval;
4. Award RFP #453 to 4LEAF, Inc. for plan review services for the Community Development Department;
5. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11808 (CCS) with 4LEAF, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $250,000 over a three-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval;
6. Award RFP# 453 to TRB and Associates, Inc. for plan review services for the Community Development Department; and
7. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute Agreement No. 11809 (CCS) with TRB and Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $250,000 over a three-year period, with future year funding contingent on Council budget approval.
PROCUREMENT
POLICIES, PRACTICES,
AND PROCEDURES
UPDATE
4.H. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance to Amend Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 2.24, Purchasing System, to Modernize the City's Policies, Practices and Procedures, was introduced and heard.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 6 February 24, 2026
2. Introduce for first reading the attached Ordinance amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 2.24, Purchasing System, to update the City’s procurement policies, practices, and procedures; and
3. Direct the City Manager to take necessary steps to establish a modernized procurement system.
MINUTES 4.I. Minutes of City Council - Special Meeting - Feb 6, 2026 8:45 AM, were approved.
MINUTES 4.J. Minutes of City Council - Regular Meeting - Feb 10, 2026 5:30 PM, were approved.
MINUTES 4.K. Minutes of City Council - Special Meeting - Feb 10, 2026 5:35 PM, were approved.
UPDATED INVESTMENT
POLICY & EXTENSION
OF DELEGATION
INVESTMENT
AUTHORITY
4.D. Approval of the City's Updated Investment Policy and Extension of the Delegation Investment Authority, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant effect pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
2. Review and approve the City’s Investment Policy.
3. Extend the delegation of investment authority to the Director of Finance, as City Treasurer, from March 1, 2026, through February 28, 2027.
Councilmember Zernitskaya pulled this item to ask questions of staff, about the restrictions of the city’s investment policies, to help the public understand the limitations the city has as a government entity on how the city invests.
Questions asked of staff included: can it be confirmed that the city divest of Russian based investments due to the Ukraine war, beginning in 2022. Is that still the policy and are there any state laws that also affect that; confirm that California state law prohibits Municipal governments from investing in crypto-related investments or crypto currency; and clarify what the city’s investment policy means when it comes to socially responsible investing.
Motion by Councilmember Zernitskaya, seconded by Councilmember Snell, to approve the recommended action.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Zernitskaya, Snell, Raskin, Hall, Negrete, Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 7 February 24, 2026
Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, Mayor Torosis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
COUNCIL TRAVEL
MAYOR’S HIGHLIGHT
Councilmember Negrete reported that she traveled to Santa Barbara for Independent Cities Association, where she serves on the Executive Board.
She collaborated with other beach cities and inland cities, including meeting with the Coastal Commission members.
PUBLIC INPUT ON
REMAINING AGENDA
ITEMS:
Members of the public Peter Wheelon, Caro Vilain, Connor Webb, and Jacob Wasserman commented on item 11.A.
Members of the public Jerry Rubin, Luke Cane, and Denise Barton commented on 16.A.
STAFF
ADMINISTRATIVE
ITEMS:
SANTA MONICA BLVD
SAFETY STUDY
11.A. Receive and Adopt the Santa Monica Blvd. Safety Study, funded by a Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve the recommendations outlined in the Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study;
2. Direct staff to proceed with the phased implementation of the Santa Monica Boulevard Safety Study recommendations; and
3. Adopt a finding that this safety study is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines.
Questions asked and answered of staff included: in effort to reduce speed, which parts of the plan reduces lane width; why weren’t certain bus stops far sided; theoretically, couldn’t we lose and gain parking spaces at the same location; any consideration of expanding the eastbound bus only lane that stops on 4th Street to Lincoln; were there any other treatments considered to reduce speeds; is there any concern about the new unsignaled cross signals; where are you contemplating to put peak hour bus rapid transit lanes; how easy would it be to coordinate our designs with the Westside Cities Council of Governments’ (COG) study; how many routes currently use Santa Monica Blvd; what improvements are being recommended to address the intersection for all of the buses coming through; bus stops, are any other physical improvements being suggested; are “beg” buttons being eliminated and different ways that are more efficient for pedestrians to use crosswalks; would the audible signal be able to automatically pick up that a person is waiting to cross; would there be some type of sensor that can automatically detect a pedestrian; for unsignalized crossings, are those going to become signalized instead; clarify how the use of paint and bollards are used to slow Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 8 February 24, 2026
people down; is the plan to apply for grant funding for Phase II, and is there a way to speed up the timeline; is there a way to speed up the Santa Monica Blvd. and Chelsea crosswalk; what has been done with respect to businesses on Santa Monica Blvd. and how the street changes will impact their customers; did we look at any studies to reduce speed on Santa Monica Blvd.; where does our level of service fall in priorities with regards to the vehicular operations crash study; were there any treatments rejected because of the level of service and through-put decrease; what is the difference between left turning signal phasing versus protected left turn signal; at 26th Street, will there ever be a time when a car will have to take a right turn from the middle lane, or does the light turn red every time the bus is there; when is the Westside Cities COG study due to be completed; are pedestrians not using certain intersections because they are not safe; on the pedestrian push buttons, why wouldn’t we just have the pedestrian recall with audible noises automatically; what is the point of the pedestrian push buttons, if they can’t remotely work all the time; are there any specific treatments that can be installed in the next six to twelve months; were any raised treatments considered, especially at Chelsea; if technically feasible, all curb cuts will be aligned with the city new policy; with regard to installing signals, does that include signal coordination; can signals timing be coordinated with buses to reduce and maintain consistent speed; is there a concern about building a hardening treatment for parking and how that would affect bus lanes; is safety the governing principal in everything put forward, or is it level of service, and where did we make sacrifices based off of level of service; isn’t it true that we’ve had over 400 serious injury crashes in the city over the past 10 years; wouldn’t we want to prioritize pedestrian safety over vehicle safety; why did we limit bus only lanes to peak travel time, instead of all of the time; is our gold standard the City of LA; why are the pedestrian signal and raised median on Chelsea designated in Phase II instead of Phase I; and, could staff comeback with more robust performance measures beyond how many deaths have occurred.
Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to:
expressed gratitude for all the work done on this study, however; concern that in this study, staff is making design choices contrary to policy set by Council; if an improvement reduces the likelihood of someone being killed or seriously injured, but reduces vehicle through-put, the Council supports that improvement; staff hasn’t done enough to reduce lane widths; haven’t far sided enough bus stops at intersections where it is feasible; didn’t look for more efficiencies for buses at sections where it has been identified the bus speeds are very low; would like to see an exploration of raised crossing at certain unsignalized intersections; prioritize safety at Chelsea; prioritize pedestrian and cycling safety, as well as prioritize roadway safety; and, supportive of taking the time to get this right, but don’t want to delay or slow things down to move this forward.
Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 9 February 24, 2026
Motion by Mayor Torosis, seconded by Councilmember Hall, to come back in 60 days with reduction of lane widths to approximately 10 feet, all bus stops far sided as much as feasible, as a best practice, (26th and Santa Monica Blvd); extend the bus only lanes eastbound in downtown from 4th Street to Lincoln; explore raised crossings at unsignalized intersections; prioritize pedestrian signal and raised crossing and Santa Monica and Chelsea as a Phase 1 project; prioritize safety over level of service and transit over parking; want feedback on what can be accomplished in 6 months to a year, not necessarily 2 years; what are things getting done right away, versus what’s a little longer term, including Phase 1; revaluate everything in Phase 1 for the highest impact intervention (which means safety); get feedback from the City Manager on what needs to happen with the capital budget, and then Council will make the decisions on whether trade-offs are needed; also want to see some real KSI’s that are going to be tracked and reported out post implementation; and prioritize pedestrian recall over push buttons.
The City Manager asked Council if they would be amenable to consider the direction to synthesis the feedback received tonight and identify more clearly for the Council the specific improvements heard would be integrated into a permanent design. This could be returned within less than 60 days.
The Council agreed and stated that they would prefer to have this specific document returned with updated concepts, as opposed to general guidance that gets incorporated later.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Negrete, Hall, Raskin, Snell, Zernitskaya, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, Mayor Torosis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
SELF-CERTIFICATION
BUILDING PERMIT
PILOT PROGRAM
12.A. Introduction and First Reading of an Extension of Interim Zoning Ordinance Number 2844 (CCS) Amending Santa Monica Municipal Code Section 9.21.130, Resource Recovery and Recycling Standards, to update applicability thresholds and standards for resource and recycling room dimensions in order to further economic recovery efforts by facilitating a Self-Certification Building Permit Pilot Program, was pulled by staff.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of no possibility of significant environmental effects pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) and findings of categorical exemptions pursuant to Sections 15301 and Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 10 February 24, 2026
15305 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines; and
2. Introduce for First Reading an Interim Zoning Ordinance (IZO) Extending IZO Number 2844 (CCS) Amending Santa Monica
Municipal Code Section 9.21.130, Resource Recovery and Recycling Standards, to update applicability thresholds and standards for resource and recycling room dimensions in order to further economic recovery efforts by facilitating a Self-Certification Building Permit Pilot Program.
PROMOTE ECONOMIC
RECOVERY AND
INCREASE LAND USE
FLEXIBILITY IN THE
CITY’S DOWNTOWN
12.B. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance (1) Permanently Adopting Economic Recovery Interim Zoning Ordinance 2825 (CCS) and (2) Amending the Text of Article 9 Zoning and Planning of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to Promote Economic Recovery and Increase Land Use Flexibility in the City’s Downtown and Citywide Areas by Streamlining, Simplifying, and Modifying Land Uses and Limitations, Updating Standards for Specific Uses and Activities, Including, But Not Limited to, Alcohol Permits and Review, Modifying Definitions, Adding Flexibility for Certain Non-Conforming Uses, Adjusting Standards Regarding the Applicability of Resource Recovery and Recycling Requirements and Trash Enclosure Dimensional Standards, and Making Other Minor Changes, Corrections, Clarifications, and Clerical Amendments, was presented.
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15301 (Class 1 Existing Facilities of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Implementation Guidelines.
2. Introduce for first reading the attached ordinance permanently adopting economic recovery changes to the zoning ordinance and amending the text of Article 9 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code to promote economic recovery and increase land use flexibility citywide and Downtown by streamlining, simplifying, and modifying land uses and limitations, updating standards for specific uses and activities, including, but not limited to, alcohol permits and review, modifying definitions, adding flexibility for certain non-conforming uses, adjusting standards regarding the applicability of resource recovery and recycling requirements and trash enclosure dimensional standards, and making other minor changes, corrections, clarifications, and clerical amendments.
Members of the public Michael Klass, Luke Cain, Will Klass, and Jacob Wasserman spoke to the recommended action.
Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 11 February 24, 2026
Questions asked and answered of staff included: is it correct that alcohol exemptions have move from Conditional Use Permits (CUP) to Minor Use Permit (MUP); is there a way that these new MUPs could become full bars; are office campus district uses being proposed; are changes being made for larger projects as well; should staff considering looking at square footage instead of specific sizes; what is the prohibition on pub crawls; bar cycles and carts; would these amendments also allow for corner stores and convenient markets; if Council implements these changes, would it retroactively allow those uses for those who hold CUPs currently; how do the alcohol thresholds compare with other jurisdictions; and, what effect has there been on the Police department with staffing.
Motion by Councilmember Negrete, seconded by Councilmember Hall, to approve the staff recommendation, including RRR amendments in the staff presentation and the following additions:
o Answers to policy questions
▪ Policy Question #1: No: No vote means go with staff
recommendation, no to requiring CUP for medium-scale retail of 50-80K sf
▪ Policy Question #2: No: No vote means do not prohibit pub crawls.
▪ Policy Question #3: Voted for staff recommendation of 12AM closure
▪ Policy Question #4: Yes: Yes vote allows for reopening of NonConforming bars on Main Street. o Minor Use Permit instead of Conditional Use Permit for bars in all locations that they are permitted
Additional Direction:
o Protect existing businesses with any new alcohol service that might be authorized (e.g. mobile beverage carts)
Mayor Pro Tem Zwick proposed a friendly amendment to add direction to staff when they return with revisions in June that they look at Office Campus land use restrictions and the impact of trash enclosure standards on development for future zoning amendments. The amendment was considered friendly by the maker and the seconder.
The motion was approved by the following vote, with amendments:
AYES: Councilmembers Negrete, Hall, Raskin, Snell, Zernitskaya, Mayor Pro Tem Zwick, Mayor Torosis
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
COUNCILMEMBER
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
In accordance with Council Rule 6(y), all Councilmember Discussion items were considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 12 February 24, 2026
Councilmember for discussion.
RETAIL-TORESTAURANT AND
HOSPITALITY
CONVERSIONS
16.A. Request of Mayor Pro Tem Zwick and Councilmember Negrete that, in furtherance of the city’s economic revitalization strategy, the City Council direct the City Manager and City Attorney to analyze and present options for supporting retail-to-restaurant and hospitality conversions. Specifically, the city analysis should include options for a pilot program that would waive, reduce, or defer fees for qualifying conversion projects, including outdoor dining and wastewater/sewerrelated fees, as well as provide other financial incentives and support for tenant improvements—including grease interceptors, ventilation, ADA upgrades, fire/life safety, and utility modifications—that impede conversions of retail spaces into restaurant uses, was presented.
Motion by Councilmember Hall, seconded by Councilmember Raskin, to approve the recommendation. The motion was unanimously approved by voice vote, with all members present.
CLOSED SESSIONS On order of the Mayor, the City Council recessed at 9:48 p.m., to consider Closed Sessions and returned at 11:40 p.m., with all members present, to report the following:
Councilmember Hall recused himself from items 5.H., 5.I., and 5.J., due to a potential conflict of interest.
Mayor Pro Tem Zwick recused himself from Item 5.F. due to a potential conflict of interest.
5.A. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1): John U.N.B. Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 23STCV12746; John Doe 1, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 23STCV15009; Hector Orozco v. John Doe: Does 1-2; LASC # 23SMCV03120; John JPC Doe v. Doe City, et al.; LASC # 23STCV22020; John AD Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 23STCV26548; John CW Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 23STCV29623; John Doe (A.G.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al; LASC # 23SMCV06066; John GA DOE, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV06484; John U.L.W. Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV06768; Joseph Garcia v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al.; LASC # 24SMCV01368; John Doe 15, et al. v.
City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV07647; John Doe 18, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV0239; John RR Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV09398; John Doe 33, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV15580; John Doe 48 v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV15420; John Doe 49 v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV19296; John DD Doe v. City, et al.; LASC # 24SMCV04421; Jane EB Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV24146; John Doe (V.D.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 13 February 24, 2026
League, et al.; LASC # 24SMCV05049; John Doe (D.F.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al.; LASC # 24SMCV05050; John Doe (D.G.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al.; LASC # 24SMCV05051; Jane Doe 13, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV27233; John AM Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV28433; John Doe v. City, et al.; LASC # 24SMCV05527; John Doe 53 v. City, et al.; LASC # 24STCV31763; John Doe (Y.M.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al.; LASC # 24SMCV06355; Jane Doe 16, et al. v. a Public Entity, et al.; LASC # 25STCV02235; John Doe 62, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV04414; John Doe 23 v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV05850; John Doe (E.B.) v. Santa Monica Police Activities League, et al.; LASC # 25STCV06354; Jane PB Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV06880; John Doe 67 v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV10142; John Doe 68 v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV12089; John Doe 69, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV14031; John OR Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV16251; John RD Doe, et al. v. City, et al.; LASC # 25STCV24158
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
5.B. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1): City v. ICSOP, et al.; OCSC # 30-2022-01261243 The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
5.C. Conference with legal counsel - existing litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1): Edgar Espinoza v. City; LASC # 24SMCV00473 The City Attorney reported out a settlement for a personal injury claim the plaintiff was struck by a city maintenance vehicle. The City denies liability and does not admit fault, but agreed to settle for $8 million, and in exchange, the plaintiff agrees to release all claims against the city. Amounts exceeding $1 million will be paid by the city’s excess insurer. The settlement was approved by a 7-0 vote.
5.D. Conference with legal counsel – existing litigation – Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1): People of the State of California et al. v. Saeed Farzam et al., LASC # 24SMCV02305
The City Attorney reported the City Council approved a settlement 7-0. The cases involve a nuisance abatement lawsuit filed by the city against the owners of Pavilions Motel for allowing drug and other nuisance activities to occur on the property and a lawsuit filed by the motel owners in a federal court challenging the city’s revocation of the owners’ business license to Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 14 February 24, 2026
Mayor Pro Tem Zwick was
excused at 10:00 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tem Zwick
returned at 10:15 p.m.
operate a hotel on the property. In accordance with the settlement, the property owners would agree to: not reopen the motel; operate any other business at the property, or allow any occupancy of the property; maintain the property in compliance with the drug abatement law and city property maintenance vacant property and public nuisance code; not own any other motel in Santa Monica for a period of 10 years; not transfer ownership of the motel onsite to a new owner unless through legitimate arms-length sale to a buyer approved by the city, and $100,000 suspended penalty for violation of terms of this settlement. In addition, the property owner would agree to dismiss the federal lawsuit.
5.E. Conference with legal counsel – existing litigation – Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1): Pavilions Motel Inc. et al. v. City of Santa Monica et al., 2:25-cv-05523-FLA-JC (C.D. Cal)
The City Attorney reported the City Council approved a settlement 7-0. The cases involve a nuisance abatement lawsuit filed by the city against the owners of Pavilions Motel for allowing drug and other nuisance activities to occur on the property and a lawsuit filed by the motel owners in a federal court challenging the city’s revocation of the owners’ business license to operate a hotel on the property. In accordance with the settlement, the property owners would agree to: not reopen the motel; operate any other business at the property, or allow any occupancy of the property; maintain the property in compliance with the drug abatement law and city property maintenance vacant property and public nuisance code; not own any other motel in Santa Monica for a period of 10 years; not transfer ownership of the motel onsite to a new owner unless through legitimate arms-length sale to a buyer approved by the city, and $100,000 suspended penalty for violation of terms of this settlement. In addition, the property owner would agree to dismiss the federal lawsuit.
5.F. Conference with legal counsel - significant exposure to litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(2) - 1 case
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
5.G. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code § 54956.8; property: 256 Santa Monica Pier, Santa Monica, California; City negotiator: Oliver Chi, City Manager; owner of record: City of Santa Monica; persons to be negotiated with: Sean Ahaus, California Roadhouse, Inc., a California corporation d.b.a. California Roadhouse; under negotiation: price and terms of payment for lease The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2 15 February 24, 2026
Councilmember Hall excused
at 9:48 p.m.
Councilmember Hall returned
at 10:00 p.m.
5.H. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code § 54956.8; property: 2019 and 1905 Pico Boulevard, Santa Monica, California; City negotiator: Oliver Chi, City Manager; owner of record: Dennis Wylder; persons to be negotiated with: Dennis Wylder; under negotiation: price and terms of payment of lease
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
5.I. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code § 54956.8; property: 2020 14th Street, Santa Monica, California; City negotiator:
Oliver Chi, City Manager; owner of record: Thea Cappiccille; persons to be negotiated with: Thea Cappiccille; under negotiation: price and terms of payment of lease
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
5.J. Conference with real estate negotiator - Gov. Code § 54956.8; property: 5600 Rickenbacker Rd, Bell, CA 90201; City negotiator:
Oliver Chi, City Manager; owner of record: The Salvation Army; persons to be negotiated with: Maddy Rodriguez; under negotiation:
price and terms of payment of lease
The City Attorney advised this matter was heard with no reportable action taken.
5.K. Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation - Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(1): Furley Williams v. City, et al.; LASC # 23STCV27401 [ The City Attorney reported at the February 28, 2026 meeting, the Council approved a settlement for a personal injury case involving a claim that William was injured when he was struck by a Big Blue Bus while crossing the street. The City denies liability and does not admit fault, but agreed to settle for $645,000, and in exchange Williams agrees to release all claims against the city. The settlement was approved by a 7-0 vote.
ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 11:42 p.m. in memory of Reverend Jesse L. Jackson.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Denise Anderson-Warren Caroline Torosis
Interim City Clerk Mayor
Docusign Envelope ID: 0D1DF057-FFD1-4921-A7CA-98A69F359BD2