Santa Monica City Council
May 26, 2026

1 David Yakobson
From: Chris Harding <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 11:05 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; councilmtgitems
Cc: Oliver Chi; Jing Yeo; Heidi von Tongeln; Denise Anderson-Warren; Mark Harding; Tom Larmore; Casparian, Thomas; Terry O'Day
Subject: Proposed Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Establishing Standards and Procedures for Electric Vehicle Charging of Fleet Vehicles
Attachments: CC 2026-05-26.pdf; Legal Alert.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers:

Please see the attached letter on Agenda Item 12.A on tonight’s City Council Agenda.

Sincerely,
Chris Harding
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Christopher M. Harding | Attorney at Law
1250 6th Street, Suite 200
Santa Monica, CA 90401
May 26, 2026

VIA EMAIL
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 209
Santa Monica, CA 90401
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected]
Re: Proposed Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Establishing Standards and Procedures for Electric Vehicle Charging of Fleet Vehicles Hearing Date: May 26, 2026
Agenda Item No. 12.A
Dear Councilmembers:

This letter is submitted on behalf of SMF Property Holdings, LLC (“SMF”), owner of the two properties with EV charging facilities at 1222 and 1310 Broadway, Santa Monica. These two facilities are leased by SMF to Voltera Power and operated by Waymo. They were constructed pursuant to building permits issued by the City in 2023 approving EV charging for fleet vehicles on a 24/7 basis, with certain ancillary services specified on the City-approved plans. SMF is informed that Voltera spent in excess of $10 million constructing these facilities in reliance on their City-issued building permits. They have been operated by Waymo continuously since late 2024/early 2025.

This letter addresses the proposed Interim Zoning Ordinance (“IZO”). As this letter explains:
 The proposed IZO lacks clear use definitions distinguishing between two use categories: (1) Light Fleet-Based Service With Electric Vehicle Charging (“Fleet Service”) and (2) electric vehicle charging only (“EV charging”).  In defining the meaning of EV charging (as opposed to Fleet Service), the City must follow State EV Charging Law (Government Code Section 65850.7) and incorporate its protections including for the EV charging of fleet vehicles and activities integral to such charging.

Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
2  The proposed IZO lacks an applicability provision clarifying that it does not apply retroactively to established uses such as the EV charging use at SMF properties.

Such a provision should be added before the proposed IZO is adopted.  The Staff Report accompanying the proposed IZO overstates the City’s discretion to regulate the use of EV charging, which is strictly limited by State EV Charging Law.

THE PROPOSED IZO LACKS CLEAR DEFINITIONS OF TWO USE CATEGORIES:

FLEET SERVICE AND EV CHARGING
The proposed IZO’s definition of its new use category -- Light Fleet-Based Charging Service With Electric Vehicle Charging expressly excludes “electric vehicle charging only facilities.” (Section 2) (These two use categories are hereinafter referred to as “Fleet Service” and “EV charging”.) SMF’s problem with this key piece of the proposed IZO is two-fold:
 The proposed IZO lacks a definition of what constitutes EV charging.  The definition of Fleet Service is unclear. This definition references EV charging and then strings together a list of “in conjunction” activities preceded by the phrase “including but limited to ….” The definition does not indicate if any one of these activities is enough to push the use from EV charging to Fleet Service or whether more than one such activity necessary. Moreover, at least some of the listed activities are integral to EV charging (and other uses): “fueling” (EV charging is, itself, about fueling vehicles), “storage” (virtually all uses have some storage), and “cleaning” (which is ancillary to EV charging and virtually all other uses).

Given the law’s very different treatment of these two use categories, the proposed IZO needs clear definitions that distinguish between them. In this regard, State EV Charging Law must be considered because it places strict limits on the City’s ability to regulate EV charging.

And, as discussed below, this includes EV charging for fleet vehicles.

STATE EV CHARGING LAW GOVERNS HOW THE CITY DEFINES

EV CHARGING IN ITS PROPOSED IZO
In considering the proposed IZO and the distinction between the two use categories at issue (Fleet Service and EV charging), City Councilmembers should familiarize yourselves with State EV Charging Law and the restrictions it places on municipal regulation of EV charging facilities and uses including by charter cities like Santa Monica.

The State of California has in place strong legal protections for EV charging facilities and uses. State EV Charging Law, codified in Government Code Section 65850.7, contains findings underscoring the importance of EV charging in California and limiting the authority of municipalities to regulate it. These findings are codified in Section 65850.7(a):

Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
3 (a) “The implementation of consistent statewide standards to achieve the timely and cost-effective installation of electric vehicle charging stations … is not a municipal affair, as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution, but is instead a matter of statewide concern. Therefore, this section applies to all cities, including charter cities.” (Subsection (1))
(b) “It is the intent of the Legislature that local agencies not adopt ordinances that create unreasonable barriers to the installation of zero-emission vehicle infrastructure ….” (Subsection (2))
(c) “It is the policy of the state to promote and encourage the use of electric vehicle charging stations … and to limit obstacles to their use.” (Subsection (3)) (d) “It is the intention of the Legislature that local agencies comply not only with the language of this section, but also the legislative intent to encourage the installation of electric vehicle charging stations … so long as the action does not supersede the building official’s authority to identify and address higher priority life-safety situations.” (Subsection (4)) The California Attorney General has provided cities with guidance concerning State EV Charging Law. In a Legal Alert dated March 18, 2025 (copy attached), the Attorney General explained that State EV Charging Law does not allow cities to deny or condition approvals of EV charging stations based on a property’s zoning district: “Specifically, localities may not limit EV charging stations to commercial areas or refuse to site EV charging stations in residential zones or in locations where EV charging stations are not an allowed site use under local law.” (AG Alert, p. 4.)
The Attorney General has addressed State EV Charging Law’s treatment of EV charging for fleet vehicles. According to the Attorney General, State EV Charging Law protects EV charging for all types of vehicles including autonomous fleet vehicles. The State EV Charging Law does not distinguish between “whether the EV charging stations are for personal, public or fleet use ….” (AG Alert at p. 5.)
The AG Alert also makes it clear that when it refers to “EV charging stations,” it includes fleet operations and related uses that are “integral” to the operation of the EV charging facility. (AG Alert, p. 5) Thus, any municipal regulation addressing EV charging (including the proposed IZO) must protect EV charging and related improvements and services that are integral to EV charging including EV charging for fleet vehicles.

Finally, State EV Charging Law establishes the procedures for municipal regulation of EV charging. State law mandates a ministerial approval process for EV charging, providing:
(a) “A city, county, or city and county shall administratively approve an application to install electric vehicle charging stations through the issuance of a building permit or similar nondiscretionary permit.” (Subsection (b)1)
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
4 (b) “A city, county, or city and county may not deny an application for a use permit to install an electric vehicle charging station … unless it makes written findings based upon substantial evidence in the record that the proposed installation would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. The findings shall include the basis for the rejection of potential feasible alternatives of preventing the adverse impact.” (Subsection (c)) In other words, State EV Charging Law allows cities to require a Use Permit to impose conditions of approval if the EV charging facility could have a specific adverse impact upon the public health and safety. Moreover, State EV Charging Law requires that any such conditions of approval only if a proposed EV charging facility “shall be designed to mitigate the specific, adverse impact on the public health or safety at the lowest cost possible.” Section 65850.7(e).

State EV Charging Law does not contemplate a generic imposition of performance standards on all EV charging facilities for fleet vehicles regardless of the particular impacts on public health and safety.

THE PROPOSED IZO SHOULD BE AMENDED TO STATE THAT IT DOES NOT APPLY TO EXISTING EV CHARGING FACILITIES INCLUDING THOSE LOCATED ON SMF’S PROPERTIES The proposed IZO lacks an applicability provision, which is a key weakness in its drafting that should be corrected.

SMF submits that the proposed IZO cannot lawfully be applied to the EV charging facilities at its 1222 and 1310 Broadway properties for two reasons:

1. Because the City previously issued building permits specifically authorizing the construction and use of EV charging at these two properties for fleet vehicles on a 24/7 basis, and SMF/Voltera/Waymo have collectively invested millions of dollars in reliance on these permits, SMF, Voltera and Waymo have a fundamental vested right to operate these facilities for fleet vehicles, 24/7, notwithstanding the proposed IZO. Avco Community Developers, Inc. v.

South Coast Regional Com. 17Cal.3d 785, 791 (1976).

2. State EV Charging Law establishes the sole procedure for the City to impose project conditions on EV charging facilities. This procedure is the Use Permit procedure established in Government Code Section 65850.7. In approving the SMF facilities, the City chose not to impose project conditions. State EV Charging Law precludes the City from imposing such conditions now, via the proposed IZO.

In this regard, the building permits for SMF’s properties approved EV charging use based upon State EV Charging Law, not the City’s Zoning Ordinance. State EV Charging Law has not changed -- it continues to make EV charging (including for fleet vehicles) a permitted use in all zoning districts including in the MUBL district in Santa Monica. Thus, the proposed IZO modifying the City’s Zoning Ordinance does not affect the legal status of EV charging at SMF’s properties: it is a permitted use under State EV Charging Law.

Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
5 Moreover, in approving building permits for EV charging at SMF’s properties, the scope of the City’s approval included approval of ancillary activities that are integral to the EV charging use. (See AG Alert at p. 5) Specifically, the City-approved plans state:
“It is envisioned that this will be a 24-hour charging facility.” “These two lots are ‘spoke’ locations which means they will be used purely for EV charging. During charging there will likely be some on the spot cleaning or light maintenance of vehicle consumables (e.g., windshield wiper replacement, cleaning fluid top-off) in support of turning them around quickly, much like a traditional gasoline service station.”
“There will be around the clock security in place to protect the investment.”
Accordingly, SMF requests the City Council to, at a minimum, add an applicability provision to the proposed IZO clarifying that existing EV charging facilities constructed in accordance with permits issued pursuant to State EV Charging Law are excluded from the IZO.

THE STAFF REPORT MISREPRESENTS STATE EV CHARGING LAW AS PROTECTING THE

CONSTRUCTION OF EV FACILITIES ONLY AND NOT THEIR USE AFTER CONSTRUCTION The Staff Report, at page 4, misrepresents State EV Charging Law as protecting the construction of EV facilities and not their use after construction. The Staff Report states:
“While AB 1236 and AB970 streamline permitting for EV charging equipment itself, the law does not eliminate a city’s authority to regulate land uses and operational characteristics that are distinct from the charging equipment itself including vehicle storage, fleet operations, maintenance activities, circulation, noise, lighting, or other compatibility considerations.”
This statement is contradicted by the express purpose of State EV Charging Law, which encompasses both the construction of EV charging facilities and their use after construction.

Government Code Section 65850.7(A)(3) states: “It is the policy of the state to promote and encourage the use of electric vehicle charging stations … and to limit obstacles to their use.” (Subsection (3))
Thus, an essential legal premise of the proposed IZO -- broad municipal discretion over the use of EV charging facilities unaffected by State law -- is clearly in error. Municipal discretion over the use of EV charging facilities is, in fact, restricted by State EV Charging Law to imposing conditions of approval specifically tied to a project’s public health and safety impacts.

And such conditions must address public health or safety at the lowest cost possible.

Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
6 CONCLUSION
Based upon the foregoing, SMF requests that the City Council continue this proposed ordinance for further review and revision to address the concerns identified in this letter.

Above all, the City Council should ensure that municipal regulation affecting EV charging is aligned with State EV Charging Law and the important public policies it serves. And the proposed ordinance should expressly exclude existing EV charging uses such as those in place at SMF’s properties.

Sincerely,
Christopher M. Harding
Enclosure
cc: Oliver Chi
Jing Yeo
Heidi von Tongeln
City Clerk ([email protected])
Mark Harding
Thomas Larmore
Thomas Casparian
Voltera
Waymo
Terry O’Day
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
2 David Yakobson
From: Kenneth Kutcher <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 11:57 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Cc: Oliver Chi; Jing Yeo; Heidi von Tongeln; Denise Anderson-Warren Subject: Agenda Item 12-A (light fleet-based EV charging stations/proposed IZO) Attachments: CC 2026.05.26.pdf; GO-Biz 2023.03.23.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmembers,
The attached letter is submitted on behalf of Voltera Power regarding Agenda Item 12-A.

Thank you.

Ken
Kenneth L. Kutcher | Attorney at Law
1250 Sixth Street, Suite 200 | Santa Monica, CA 90401
O: (310) 451-3669 | [email protected]
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
(310) 451-3669
May 26, 2026

VIA E-MAIL
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Re: Item 12-A (light fleet-based EV charging stations/proposed IZO) Our Client: Voltera Power, LLC
Our File No.22705.001
Dear Councilmembers:

This letter is submitted on behalf of Voltera Power, LLC (“Voltera”). Voltera leases property at 1222 Broadway and 1310 Broadway (“Broadway Properties”).

Voltera has a long-term lease for the Broadway Properties. Pursuant to Building Permit Nos. 23BLD-1749 & 1750, at a cost in excess of $10 million, Voltera installed 14 dualport electric vehicle (“EV”) charging stations on each of the Broadway Properties.

Following Voltera’s completion of this installation, Certificates of Occupancy were issued by the City of Santa Monica for both of the Broadway Properties on December 31, 2024. Voltera has a customer that operates the EV charging stations for the customer’s fleet of commercial passenger vehicles, providing ride-hail services in Santa Monica.

We have read the draft emergency interim zoning ordinance (“IZO”) proposing to (1) create a new use classification for light-fleet based EV charging and (2) adopt new standards and procedures for approval of light-fleet based EV charging facilities.

As noted below, we have concerns with the Draft IZO that the City Council should address.

SECTION 9.31.165 REGARDING APPLICABILITY

SHOULD BE REVISED TO CLEARLY EXEMPT

EXISTING EV CHARGING FACILITIES
Voltera hereby requests that the IZO’s Draft Section 9.31.165(A), addressing “purpose and applicability,” be revised to add standard language making it clear that the IZO’s new light fleet-based EV charging regulations do not apply to previously approved and constructed development such as the Broadway Properties. This is a standard [email protected]
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Santa Monica City Council
May 26, 2026

exemption that is commonly adopted when changes are made to the Zoning Ordinance.

For example, see Zoning Ordinance Section 9.01.040(D)(1), which reads as follows:
§ 9.01.040 Applicability.
* * *
D. Effect on Previously Approved Projects and Projects
in Progress. The following projects shall have a vested right to proceed without complying with this Zoning
Ordinance:

1. Previously Approved Development. The erection,
construction, enlargement, demolition, moving,
conversion of, and excavation and grading for any
building or structure for which a valid permit or building permit was issued prior to the effective date of this
Zoning Ordinance and which does not subsequently
expire.

Here, as to the Broadway Properties, not only were valid building permits issued for the installation of the EV charging stations, but also the site improvements and installations were actually completed and certificates of occupancy have been issued. In addition, business licenses have been issued (and subsequently renewed as well) for the light fleet-based EV charging occurring on these sites.1 The installation and operation of those two particular EV charging stations on the Broadway Properties predate the IZO. Accordingly, the IZO should make clear that the Broadway Properties are exempt from the IZO and its attempt to regulate future light fleet-based EV charging stations.

Per the Staff Report, the IZO appears to targeted to apply to pending and future applications, not existing facilities already permitted and constructed:
1 The Zoning Review Form for Business License # 250172 for the 1310 Broadway site states in the “comments” section of the “official use only” portion:
“Electric vehicle recharging facility is a ministerially permitted use per Assembly Bill 970 and as agreed upon by Planning Staff and City Attorney’s office.” Similarly, the Zoning Review Form for Business License # 250243 for the 1222 Broadway site states in the “comments” section of the “official use only” portion: “Use is permitted by-right per State law.”
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Santa Monica City Council
May 26, 2026

“At least one application for a light fleet-based service with electrical charging located in close proximity to residential neighborhoods is pending. Staff has determined that without operating conditions this facility will result in specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety.”
(Staff Report, p. 2.)

THE IZO IS AN ATTEMPTED END-RUN ON STATE LAW THAT

PREEMPTS LOCAL ZONING AS TO EV CHARGING,

INCLUDING FOR FLEET VEHICLES
As to local zoning, Assembly Bills 1236 and 970 expressly preempt local zoning regulations as to EV charging stations, including in charter cities such as Santa Monica.

In this regard, Government Code Section 65850.7(a)2 states:

The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(1) The implementation of consistent statewide standards to achieve the timely and cost-effective installation of electric vehicle charging stations and hydrogen-fueling stations is not a municipal affair, as that term is used in Section 5 of Article XI of the California Constitution, but is instead a matter of statewide concern. Therefore, this section applies to all cities, including charter cities.
(2) It is the intent of the Legislature that local agencies not adopt ordinances that create unreasonable barriers to the installation of zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and not unreasonably restrict the ability of . . . business concerns to install electric vehicle charging and hydrogen-fueling stations. (3) It is the policy of the state to promote and encourage the use of electric vehicle charging stations and hydrogen-fueling stations and to limit obstacles to their use.
(4) It is the intent of the Legislature that local agencies comply not only with the language of this section, but also the legislative intent to encourage the installation of electric vehicle charging stations and hydrogen-fueling stations by removing obstacles to, and minimizing costs of, permitting for charging and 2 See also Cal. Atty Gen. Legal Alert No. OAG 2025-01 as to Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permit Streamlining Requirements (Mar. 18, 2025) p. 2 (“These state laws thus apply to all local governments, including charter cities, and preempt local laws and ordinances that conflict with them.”).

Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Santa Monica City Council
May 26, 2026

hydrogen-fueling stations so long as the action does not supersede the building official’s authority to identify and address higher priority life-safety situations.
(Emphasis added.)
Among other things, the Draft IZO purports to attempt to limit the zoning districts where “light fleet-based service with electric vehicle charging” may occur. (See Draft IZO, Section 9.31.165(B).3) However, per the California Attorney General:
“[Government Code] Sections 65850.7 and 65850.71 apply
to EV charging station permit applications even if local zoning laws do not specifically list—or even if they expressly prohibit—EV charging stations as an allowed site use.” (Cal.

Atty Gen. Legal Alert No. AG 2025-01, supra at p. 4
(emphasis added).)
Moreover, the Attorney General has made it clear: “Sections 65850.7 and 65850.71 do not permit localities to condition approval based on the type of proposed EV charging stations installation.” (Id. at p. 5 (emphasis added).) Indeed, the Attorney General has identified “significant and common compliance issues” occurring in certain localities, including:
“Applying local zoning regulations to EV charging station permit application review even though local zoning
regulations are preempted under the charging streamlining laws.” (Id. at p. 2.)
When I was representing EdgeConneX in the permitting process for the Broadway Properties, City Planning Staff took the position that the proposed use of these properties was a Light Fleet-Based Service (see Zoning Ordinance § 9.51.030(D)(6)) and was therefore prohibited in the Mixed-Use Boulevard Low (“MUBL”) Zoning District on Broadway. We disagreed and convinced the City Manager and Planning Director otherwise. Once AB 1236 and 970 took effect in cities of less than 200,000 population, we asserted the right to streamlined processing of these 3 Draft Section 9.31.165(B) reads: “Light Fleet-Based Service with Electric Vehicle Charging shall [only] be permitted in the General Commercial (GC), Industrial Conservation (IC), and Transit Adjacent (TA) Zoning Districts.” By contrast, a hydrogen fueling station can generally be limited to properties zoned for industrial or commercial development. (See Gov’t Code § 65850.7(b)(2)(A).)
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Santa Monica City Council
May 26, 2026

applications. The City resisted. I then wrote to the California Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (“GO-Biz”). A copy of my letter is enclosed. GOBiz agreed that the then-proposed use falls within the protections of AB 1236 and 970.4 It was only after GO-Biz discussed this with City Staff that the City agreed it would process the streamlined applications for these two private fleet EV charging stations on the Broadway Properties regardless of their MUBL zoning.

In summary, the City has no right under State law to prohibit fleet-based EV charging in any zoning district whatsoever. Accordingly, the purported zoning district limitations of IZO Section 9.31.165(B) for fleet EV charging locations must be eliminated to comply with State law.

It should also be noted that per State law:
“Any conditions imposed on an application to install an electric vehicle charging station or hydrogen-fueling station shall be designed to mitigate the specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety at the lowest cost possible.” (Gov’t Code § 65950.7(e) (emphasis added); see also subd. (i)(1) requiring such conditions to be “cost-effective methods.”)

CONCLUSION
Voltera urges the City Council to direct City Staff to revise the IZO to make it clear that the proposed new regulations do not apply to previously approved and constructed sites that are currently under operation such as the Broadway Properties. 4 As the Attorney General confirms: “The charging streamlining laws do not distinguish between installation types—they apply to all [emphasis in original] charging station installations, regardless of whether the EV charging stations are an accessory, incidental, or primary use of a site; whether the EV charging stations are for personal, public, or fleet use; or whether the EV charging stations are for light-, medium-, or heavy-duty vehicles.” (Atty Gen. Legal Alert OAG 2025-01, supra at p. 15 (underlined emphasis added).)
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Santa Monica City Council
May 26, 2026

Voltera hereby reserves all rights to challenge the IZO to the extent that it exceeds Santa Monica’s authority to regulate the installation and operation of EV charging stations in violation of State law governing such uses.

Very truly yours,
Kenneth L. Kutcher
KLK:sna
Enclosure
cc: Oliver Chi (w/ encl.)
Jing Yeo (w/ encl.)
Heidi von Tongeln (w/ encl.)
Heather Hickerson (w/ encl.)
Hannah Goldsmith (w/ encl.)
Sloane Perras (w/ encl.)
Thomas Ashley (w/ encl.)
F:\WPDATA\22705\001 (1222, 1310 Broadway)\Cor\CC 2026.05.26.docx Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026

(310) 451-3669
March 23, 2023

VIA E-MAIL
Heather Hickerson, Lead Advisor
Hannah Goldsmith, Counsel, Legal Affairs
Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) 1325 J Street, Suite 1800
Sacramento, CA 95814
Re: 1222 and 1310 Broadway, Santa Monica
Our File No. 22705.001
Dear Mses. Hickerson and Goldsmith:

I am writing with respect to two proposed EV charging sites in Santa Monica.

I believe the City of Santa Monica may already be in contact with your office about these same sites, but Santa Monica has not responded to my inquiry about whom specifically they are speaking with. So, having read through your Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permitting Guidebook (2d ed.), I am reaching out to both of you.

My client is Voltera, an EV infrastructure provider. https://www.volterapower.com/ They have executed long-term leases for two existing paved surface parking lots at 1222 Broadway and 1310 Broadway in Santa Monica. Broadway is a commercial street, and the two properties are a few blocks outside of Downtown Santa Monica. The properties were in auto dealership auto storage use for decades and are zoned for commercial uses (including Alternative Fuels and Charging Facility by conditional use permit) or mixed-use. Both sites became available after expiration of an auto dealer lease of the properties for auto inventory storage.

Because both sites are already paved surface car dealership parking lots, they require very little change to convert to vehicle charging usage. Fourteen dual-port DC fast chargers will be installed throughout each of the two paved sites. These two new EV charging facilities will be used to serve private passenger-sized zero-emission fleet vehicles—up to 28 ZEVs on each site at any one time.

These ZEV service vehicles will be great for the environment and great for the patrons served. The sites will be used purely for EV charging and on-the-spot cleaning or quick light maintenance of vehicle consumables (e.g., windshield wiper placement, cleaning fluid top-off, etc.) in support of turning the passenger vehicles around quickly to [email protected]
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Heather Hickerson
Hannah Goldsmith
March 23, 2023

get them back on the road for hail-ride services. Any necessary storage or repairs of the zero-emission fleet vehicles will occur elsewhere at a centralized depot, not on these lots. In sum, these sites will be converted to EV charging stations and no more.

As a result, we believe the installation of the 14 charging stations on both lots clearly qualify for the ministerial approvals and streamlined processing established by AB 1236 and AB 970. We are not aware of any conceivable health or safety concerns that would be triggered by these EV charger uses.

Consistent with the State’s Guidebook, I have reached out to Santa Monica Planning Staff and have been in presubmittal discussions with City Planning, City Attorney and City Sustainability staff members to discuss how these applications will be processed by the City of Santa Monica. It is disappointing that, at least thus far, Santa Monica has been unwilling to commit to ministerially process these EV charger applications.

I would welcome the opportunity to hear your thoughts and input on any assistance you might provide in this regard to me, my client or the City of Santa Monica.

As further background I am enclosing preliminary site plans for the two sites.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Very truly yours,
Kenneth L. Kutcher
KLK:sna
Enclosures
cc: Voltera team
F:\WPDATA\22705\001 (1222, 1310 Broadway)\Cor\Hickerson, Goldsmith 2023.03.23.docx Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Hannah Goldsmith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2026 5:02 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Attorney Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox; Gia Vacin; Jessie Denver; Jing Yeo; Heidi von Tongeln; Van Nguyen
Subject: GO-Biz Concerns Re: Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance - City Council Meeting Item

12.A.

Importance: High

EXTERNAL
Good afternoon,
The California Governor’s OƯice of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) just became aware of item

12.A. on tonight’s City of Santa Monica, City Council meeting agenda regarding “Introduction and Adoption of Emergency Interim Zoning Ordinance Establishing Standards and Procedures for Light Fleet-Based Service with Electric Vehicle Charging.”
GO-Biz has serious concerns about this proposal moving forward, particularly regarding inconsistencies with Government Code sections 65850.7 and 65850.71, and unintended consequences for other electric vehicle charging use cases. We also have concerns with the lack of transparency of this proposal moving forward, and the amount of notice provided to the public, as this agenda item was noticed only 4 business days prior to the City Council meeting.

We would very much appreciate this item being held for vote until after we’ve had a chance to discuss with you.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Hannah
Hannah Goldsmith (she/her)
Assistant Deputy Director, Legal Affairs
office: (916) 447-7942
1325 J Street, Suite 1800 | Sacramento, CA 95814
Follow: LinkedIn | YouTube
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026
Item 12-A
May 26, 2026