Written Comments — Santa Monica City Council, June 23, 2026

1 David Yakobson
From: Jesus <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 12:12 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya
Subject: Bicycle Infrastructure Safety Concern: Collapsed Bike Rack at Civic Center Parking Structure
Attachments: 29c2f2c0-8e9e-4b52-a231-8982b1f0eacd.jpg

EXTERNAL
Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am extremely frustrated that I am having to write this email at all. Santa Monica regularly promotes cycling as a safe, sustainable transportation option and has invested significant effort into encouraging residents to bike rather than drive. Yet this weekend, a city-provided bike rack at the Civic Center parking structure failed while my bicycle was locked to it and being used exactly as intended. The rack detached from the ground and collapsed onto my bicycle. Inspection of the rack revealed that it appeared to be secured to the ground with adhesive rather than visible mechanical anchors, and the adhesive appeared to have failed. I photographed the rack resting on top of the bicycle immediately after the incident. The impact bent the chainring and caused mechanical damage that required repair by a local bike shop.

I am fortunate that the damage was limited to my bicycle. Had someone been standing next to the rack while it failed, the outcome could have been far worse, especially if a child had been involved. A bicycle rack should not detach from the ground during normal use. What is particularly frustrating is that the bicycle lockers at the facility were unavailable. If secure bicycle storage had been accessible, I would not have been forced to rely on a rack that apparently was not properly secured. The City cannot encourage residents to bicycle while simultaneously failing to provide safe and functional bicycle infrastructure. Cyclists should not have to worry that the very infrastructure intended to support them will damage their property.

I respectfully request that the City inspect the bicycle racks at the Civic Center parking structure, evaluate whether similar conditions exist elsewhere in the City's bicycle infrastructure, address any unsafe conditions, clarify the status of the bicycle lockers, and provide guidance regarding reimbursement for the damage caused by this failure. I have already submitted a 311 report regarding this issue.

If Santa Monica wants residents to choose bicycles over cars, the City must ensure that the infrastructure it provides is safe, functional, and available for use.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,
Jesus
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
2 David Yakobson
From: Marleen Urbaitis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 8:05 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Susan Cline; Peter James; [email protected]; Oliver Chi Subject: RE: Agenda Item 1 - Please Listen to Residents on the Future of the Airport

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmember,
I am a Santa Monica resident who lives near the airport, and I am writing because I strongly support keeping the Santa Monica Airport open while exploring ways to expand park space and community benefits.

As someone whose daily life is directly shaped by the airport and the surrounding area, I value the activity, jobs, and services it brings to our neighborhood. We do not want an irreversible decision that can impact the local businesses and livelihoods right outside our doors. A park-only option creates enormous costs for the City at a time when Santa Monica is already facing serious budget challenges, and would likely take many years and hundreds of millions of dollars before residents like me, the ones closest to the site, see any benefit.

Most importantly, a strong majority of Santa Monica voters support keeping the airport while still having park space and businesses. We are also seeing that support turn into action. At the most recent City Council meeting, 834 letters were submitted and 200 individuals showed up to speak in support of the airport, including residents who emphasized that Santa Monica does not have to choose between park space and aviation. There is a clear path to do both, while positioning the city as a hub for the clean air mobility movement already underway, bringing innovation, investment, and long-term benefits to the entire community.

I hope the City will take the time to pursue balanced solutions that preserve this important community resource while adding new public space and amenities for those of us who live nearby.

Please listen to residents and avoid rushing toward closing the airport.

Thank you for your service to our community.

Sincerely,
Marleen Urbaitis
Ocean park
Sent from my iPhone
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
3 David Yakobson
From: Joe Traba <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 10:35 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Susan Cline; Peter James; [email protected]; Oliver Chi Subject: RE: Agenda Item 1 - Please Listen to Residents on the Future of the Airport

I hope the City will take the time to pursue balanced solutions that preserve this important community resource while adding new public space and amenities for those of us who live nearby.

Please listen to residents and avoid rushing toward closing the airport.

Thank you for your service to our community.

Sincerely,
Joseph Traba
Wife’s office in ocean park
Sent from joe's iPhone
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
4 David Yakobson
From: nealcassidy1234 <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 2:13 PM
To: Ellis Raskin; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Oliver Chi; councilmtgitems; Josh Kurpies; Lizzy Acosta Subject: speeding cars and pedestrian's at risk and actually being hit by cars on Ocean Avenue

EXTERNAL
Hi. Recently someone was hit by a car on Ocean Avenue at Idaho. There have been numerous near misses at the intersection of Ocean and Washington -- so many that someone placed these red flags (pictures below) and the city posted an eye-level sign glued to the pavement about the cross walk was replaced.

Perhaps it's time to add one of those cross walks with the blinking lights in the ground? If you can put up $650,000 for a Rose Parade float, me thinks there has to be money available for this basic need...surely public safety outweighs a rose parade float?
I live on the third floor of the condo at Ocean/Washington. This is, as is Idaho, a very dangerous corner. About a decade ago two women were mowed down by a car while in the crosswalk. Cars are always speeding down this section of Ocean. It's time the city did more than just put a sign glued to the pavement in the middle of the road. You are aware of the danger otherwise this sign and the ones that were placed a few years ago after restriping would not have been placed. So...now it is time to really do something to protect the public.

I would appreciate someone getting back to me with your response and intention and a timeline.. Thank you.

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
5 David Yakobson
From: Lizzy Acosta
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 2:58 PM
To: Ellis Raskin; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Oliver Chi; councilmtgitems; Josh Kurpies
Subject: RE: speeding cars and pedestrian's at risk and actually being hit by cars on Ocean Avenue
Good Afternoon Council,
This has been forwarded to our Public Works leadership so that the Traffic Engineering team may respond to these concerns. Once they respond we will forward as an FYI.

Lizzy Acosta (she/her)
O: (310) 458-2201 ext. 5546
From: nealcassidy1234 <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 2:13 PM
To: Ellis Raskin <[email protected]>; Jesse Zwick <[email protected]>; Natalya Zernitskaya <[email protected]>; Dan Hall <[email protected]>; Barry Snell <[email protected]>; Caroline Torosis <[email protected]>; Lana Negrete <[email protected]>; Oliver Chi <[email protected]>; councilmtgitems <[email protected]>; Josh Kurpies <[email protected]>; Lizzy Acosta <[email protected]>
Subject: speeding cars and pedestrian's at risk and actually being hit by cars on Ocean Avenue

I would appreciate someone getting back to me with your response and intention and a timeline.. Thank you.

Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
6 Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
7 David Yakobson
From: Bruce Mann <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2026 8:59 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Susan Cline; Peter James; [email protected]; Oliver Chi Subject: RE: Agenda Item 1 - Please Listen to Residents on the Future of the Airport

The City should actively promote the airport area as a center for aerospace businesses.

I live in a takeoff pattern. The airplane noise is noticeable, but not too disturbing. Jets make less noise than prop planes at my location.

Sincerely,
Bruce MANN
Sunset Park
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
8 David Yakobson
From: nealcassidy1234 <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2026 4:28 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Ellis Raskin; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Oliver Chi; Josh Kurpies; Lizzy Acosta Subject: Re: Automatic reply: speeding cars and pedestrian's at risk and actually being hit by cars on Ocean Avenue

EXTERNAL
With regard to my email of yesterday re. crosswalks on Ocean Avenue at Washington and Idaho, below please find pictures of the city's recent placement of signs attempting to alert drivers tothe crosswalk. You will notice on of the signs is missing from the plastic pole.

Clearly this type of warning is ineffective and insufficient...as lots of near misses and several car v. pedestrian situations have and continue to occur. Please do something about this as soon as possible...before someone gets killed for simply taking a walk. Thank you.

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

On Wednesday, June 17th, 2026 at 2:13 PM, councilmtgitems <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you for your email. Please be advised that this email will: 1) become part of the public record, 2) be filed with the City’s official records, and 3) be posted online at smgov.net/council/agendas. Comments will not be redacted and appear online as they are submitted.

If you plan to speak at the meeting and have an electronic presentation to show, please submit it to [email protected] no later than 12 PM on the day of the meeting.

Levine Act Disclosure. Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the Council is required to Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
9 disclose on the record any contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 made by the party or the party's agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official. Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well. The disclosure must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution; the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made.

Thank you,
The City Clerk’s Office
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
10 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, June 19, 2026 12:20 PM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition
Subject: Downtown Santa Monica

EXTERNAL
Summer is here but the amount of unreported daytime theft from retailers in Downtown Santa Monica, Montana Avenue and 3rd Street Promenade remains the same. There are more arrests, but fewer undercover units, if any, and less police presence, despite the fanfare about an (understaffed) police substation in the Santa Monica Place Mall. Sales tax revenue and hotel occupancy are down, despite the World Cup being in LA. BUT CITY MANAGER OLIVER CHI HAS THE ANSWER FOR A BROKE CITY: VOTE FOR A
PARCEL TAX THIS NOVEMBER.

Insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZxzomOiy-8/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link YouTube
https://youtu.be/mD9hrmOk-58
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
11 David Yakobson
From: Clarence McDowell <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2026 7:10 PM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Victoria McDowell (Isis)
Subject: June 23, 2026 City Council Meeting – Public Comment – Tenant Relocation Enforcement – 1011 Pico Blvd., Unit 7

EXTERNAL
PLEASE NOTE: I am submitting this written public comment for the June 23, 2026 Santa Monica City Council meeting regarding the City’s failure to enforce its tenant temporary relocation and tenant-harassment protections in our case at 1011 Pico Blvd., Unit 7.

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
My name is Clarence McDowell. My wife Victoria and I have lived at 1011 Pico Blvd., Unit 7, for over twenty years. Our home is a three-level deed-restricted unit where we raised our kids and where I run my home-based business. Since September 3, 2025, we have been forced out of that home because of fire-related water damage that made it uninhabitable. We have now been displaced for about nine months.

On February 19, 2026, your Code Enforcement officer issued Habitability Determination HD-11536, finding our unit uninhabitable, confirming that we were not at fault, and ordering our landlord to provide temporary relocation benefits “until this Order is lifted.” That order has never been lifted, and the unit is still not livable.

At first, the system worked the way your laws say it should. The landlord, through Howard Management, paid a City-approved per diem of 473 dollars per night and booked temporary housing for us. That is exactly what your Temporary Tenant Relocation Assistance rules say: when a tenant has to leave for repairs, the landlord must provide per diem or comparable housing for as long as the tenant is required to be out.

On March 16, 2026, the landlord simply stopped paying.

There was no written lifting of the Habitability Determination, no written change to the Relocation Plan, and no written notice to us. Instead, we were told that “based on Chris’s statements, relocation did not have to be provided anymore” – a verbal comment from a City employee that directly conflicts with a City-stamped Relocation Plan choosing per diem and with your own requirement that notices and changes be in writing and properly served.

Since that day, my family has been carrying the full cost of displacement. As of early June, more than 37,000 dollars in per diem has gone unpaid. We have had to pay nearly 9,000 dollars for Airbnb housing and additional storage costs, even though your July 2025 relocation guidelines say the landlord “must pay” reasonable moving and storage expenses. We have used our savings and our daughter’s college fund just to keep a roof over our heads while our home remains uninhabitable.

Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
12 We have done everything the City asked of us. We moved out when you said it was unsafe. We filed a detailed Tenant Harassment complaint under SMMC 4.56, and we have sent repeated written requests to Code Enforcement and the City Attorney documenting violations of your relocation and construction-protection ordinances. So far, there has been no enforcement that actually restores our relocation benefits or comparable housing.

I am asking you to do three things:

1. Enforce your own orders and plan in our case.

Direct staff to require our landlord to pay all accrued per diem at $473 per night, pre-paid weekly going forward as your rules require for long-term displacement, and to reimburse our documented Airbnb, storage costs, and other mandatory moving expenses.

2. Make clear that verbal comments cannot cancel written protections.

Direct staff to confirm in writing that a landlord cannot terminate relocation or change a City-approved Relocation Plan based on a verbal conversation with a City employee, without any written order, without any amended plan, and without serving notice on the tenants, as required by SMMC 8.100 and Chapter 4.36.

3. Look at the bigger picture.

Require a public report on tenants currently displaced under City habitability or construction orders: how many are not getting required relocation benefits and what enforcement actions are being taken. The protections in your ordinances only work if they are enforced.

My wife will speak briefly at the June 23 meeting to share what this has felt like for our family. I am asking you, through this email, to look at the record in our case and to ensure that the relocation and anti-harassment laws you have already passed are real for us and for every displaced tenant in Santa Monica.

Thank you for your time and for your service.

Respectfully,
Clarence McDowell
Victoria McDowell
1011 Pico Blvd., Unit 7
Santa Monica, CA 90405
310-291-4468
[email protected]
[email protected]
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
13 David Yakobson
From: Andrea Yazdi <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 7:23 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick
Subject: Item 1: General Comment 6/9/26 (LCP, AB 1740)

EXTERNAL
Honorable Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for prioritizing completion of Santa Monica's LCP and for your leadership in reaching an MOU with the Coastal Commission targeting certification by December 2027. As someone who loves this coast and wants the best for our community, I appreciate this important step forward.

Now that the LCP process is moving, please withdraw the City's support for AB 1740. The bill's latest amendments create a perverse incentive for developers to oppose or delay LCP completion, because an incomplete LCP triggers future Coastal Act exemptions that benefit them directly. The bill also creates new statewide exemptions allowing removal of coastal public parking for bike and transit lanes without meaningful consideration of impacts on beach access for inland visitors and families who depend on that parking.

I am pro-housing and pro-transit. But blanket Coastal Act exemptions set dangerous precedent and are easily abused. The LCP is the right path - it can deliver what this bill proposes, with public access protections intact.

Please withdraw your support for AB 1740 and keep the focus where it belongs: completing your LCP.

Thank you.

Sent from my iPhone
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
14 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 8:01 AM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition
Subject: Homicides and A March To Death

EXTERNAL
Insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZ5EpnECVnR/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link YouTube
https://youtube.com/shorts/M2Ryc0b4zTo?feature=share
During the last 4 years of LA Mayor Karen Bass's and
Councilwomen Nithya Raman's and Eunisses Hernandez's
terms in office, 5 to 8 people die of overdose or homicide in MacArthur Park. Others are pulled out from the lake dead.

Nearly $100 million in taxpayer funds have gone to
"HOMELESS HEALTHCARE LOS ANGELES" to distribute
crack pipes and drug needles in MacArthur Park, the Westlake area, and now Echo Park. Overdoses, public drug use and crime continue around families and children. All other LA City Councilmembers voted for these expenditures or
were noticeably absent during every vote to extend this march to death using taxpayer money.

Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
15 David Yakobson
From: Clarence McDowell <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 8:00 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Cc: Victoria McDowell (Isis)
Subject: June 23, 2026 City Council Meeting - Public Comment - City Failure to Enforce Relocation Code Against a Known Housing Offender Case No. 25-COM-1882 | HD-11536 | Permit No. 26BLD-0578 | 1011 Pico Blvd., Unit 7

EXTERNAL
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:

My family has been displaced from our home at 1011 Pico Blvd., Unit 7 — a three-level, 1,800 sq. ft. rentcontrolled unit we have lived in for over 20 years — since September 2025. That is now over nine months. The City of Santa Monica's own Code Enforcement Officer issued Habitability Determination HD-11536 on February 19, 2026, finding the unit uninhabitable with water damage on all three levels and attributing 100% landlord responsibility.

Our landlord is managed by Howard Management Group, Inc. (HMG). The Council should know that HMG is not an unknown actor. The Los Angeles Superior Court has already adjudicated habitability claims — mold, water damage, failure to repair — against this same company in Shaker v. Howard Management Group, Case No. 22SMCV01452 (Jan. 10, 2024), and in Barboza v. Howard Management Group (20STCV48250), which settled for $195,000. HMG has a documented, multi-case pattern of habitability failures across Los Angeles County.

Despite that record, the City of Santa Monica has allowed HMG to construct at 1011 Pico under Permit No. 26BLD-0578 — a permit issued April 21, 2026 on the basis of ten documented material misrepresentations, including a false ownership certification, six false Means and Methods Plan certifications, and a false answer stating no residential tenants were present. The City's own Building Department approved these documents without verification.

More critically: HMG's agent Filip Shaposhnik signed a City-approved Relocation Plan on February 25, 2026 committing to a $473/night per diem. The Building Department stamped and approved that plan on April 21, 2026. HMG then unilaterally stopped all payments on March 16, 2026 — citing only an alleged verbal statement from a Code Enforcement officer that predated the Building Department's own approval by 13 days. No written lifting order for HD-11536 has ever been served on us. The per diem balance now exceeds $45,800 and grows by $473 every day.

We have submitted 22 formal written requests to Code Enforcement, the Building Department, and the City Attorney's Office. Construction has not been completed — the permit's own one-month deadline expired May 21, 2026, now 31 days overdue. No enforcement action has been taken.

The City's codes exist precisely for this situation. SMMC §§ 4.36.100, 8.100.030, and 8.04.060 require enforcement. A known housing offender with a documented court record is being allowed to construct Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
16 without fulfilling mandatory relocation obligations — while a Santa Monica family of over 20 years funds its own displacement out of pocket.

Issue Shaker (Beverly Hills) McDowell (1011 Pico, Santa Monica)
Same Defendant Howard Management
Group, Inc.

Howard Management Group (HMG
for 1011 Pico)
Uninhabitable Conditions Black mold, water leaks,
no heat/electricity
Water damage on all 3 levels, no
power, dismantled bathroom/kitchen
— per HD-11536
Official Written Notice Issued Alleged complaints to
LADBS
Formal Habitability Determination
HD-11536 issued by Officer C.

Cope, Feb. 19, 2026
Failure to Abate Within 35
Days
Alleged throughout
tenancy
Permits obtained April 28, 2026 —
unit still uninhabitable 37+ days later
as of June 4, 2026
Rent Demanded/Collected
During Uninhabitable Period
Basis of Civil Code §
1942.4 claim
Three-day notice to pay rent was
issued; rent withholding letter sent
Feb. 3, 2026
Threats / Harassment
Threats to raise rent if
tenant complained;
forced entry
Unilateral termination of relocation
benefits; unpermitted work triggering
displacement
Relocation Obligations
Refused
No relocation offered
despite requests
Per diem payments ceased March
16, 2026; Airbnb housing abandoned
without notice
We respectfully ask the Council to direct staff to immediately enforce HD-11536, compel payment of all accrued per diem, and issue a stop work order until all Chapter 8.100 obligations are satisfied. -
Best Regards,
Clarence McDowell
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 7:52 AM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition
Subject: Sidewalks and Bus Stops Near Schools and Public Spaces

EXTERNAL
Blocking sidewalks and public spaces is tolerated in Santa Monica. Friday afternoon 911 was called to determine if man in a sleeping bag blocking the sidewalk at Montana Av across from Roosevelt Elementary was dead, overdosed or asleep. SMPD arrived, determined the man was breathing, and left him on the ground when he declined help. Three hours later, the man was in the exact same place. SMPD never updated the caller. Mayor, City Manager, and his appointed Police Chief predetermine their own interpretation of the law. Wonder why there are fewer residents and tourists?
https://www.instagram.com/p/DZnuedRSOl8/?hl=en
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
2 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 6:55 AM
To: The Santa Monica Coalition
Subject: OUR PARKS

EXTERNAL
"Things have a price and can be for sale, but people have a dignity that is priceless and worth far more than things." Pope Francis, September 20, 2013.

Honest voting, vote counting, and public safety should be human rights in LA and Santa Monica. They are not.

Insta
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZqRdPTyvkQ/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link YouTube
https://youtu.be/vnurPJ3_JiU
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Jonah Breslau <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2026 2:34 PM
To: Shawn Landres; Nina Fresco; Jim Ries; Josh Hamilton; Peer Chacko; Leslie Lambert; Jacob Wasserman; councilmtgitems; Planning Commission Comments Subject: Item 11-B: Require development agreements for non-residential uses Attachments: 15June2026.RealignmentSantaMonica.Letter.pdf

EXTERNAL
Dear Planning Commission Chair Hamilton and Commissioners, Please see the attached letter from UNITE HERE Local 11. We ask that changes to the Santa Monica Downtown Community Plan and Zoning Ordinance require a Development Agreement for commercial uses (like hotels) on both City-owned sites and the Gateway sites to ensure the City retains maximum ability to negotiate and enforce substantial community benefits. In addition to the ideas proposed in the attached letter, we would also urge the Commission and the Council to integrate provisions from LA's Responsible Hotel Ordinance - specifically the Conditional Use Permit provisions that add additional findings that consider the social and economic impacts of hotel development.

See https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/los_angeles/latest/lapz/0-0-0-7378.

Thank you,
Jonah Breslau
--
Jonah Breslau
UNITE HERE Local 11
Research Analyst
He/him/his
773 603 5174
[email protected]
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
June 15th
, 2026
Chair Hamilton and Santa Monica Planning Commissioners
Santa Monica City Council
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, CA 90401
RE: Item 11-B: Recommendations regarding Amendments to Downtown Community Plan & City’s Zoning Ordinance (Planning Commission Agenda 6/17/26)
Dear Planning Commission Chair Hamilton and Commissioners, We write on behalf of UNITE HERE Local 11, the union of over 30,000 hospitality workers in Southern California and Arizona. UNITE HERE Local 11 has long fought for more housing, particularly affordable housing in Santa Monica, as well as responsible development that provides substantial community benefits. For that reason, we ask that changes to the Santa Monica Downtown Community Plan and Zoning Ordinance require a Development Agreement for commercial uses like hotels to ensure the City retains maximum ability to negotiate and enforce substantial community benefits. Below are more specific recommendations.

Regulatory Adjustments to City Owned Sites
Staff recommends that City-owned sites be exempted from zoning regulations to “provide flexibility to evaluate a variety of projects based on their ability to provide public benefits.” However, we ask that statutory development agreements be required for all non-housing projects that qualify for this exemption. Development agreements have been a successful tool for Santa Monica to set priorities for community benefits, attract high quality development and enforce promises made to the City and its residents. Additionally, we believe the proposed flexibility should only be available for projects where the City retains public ownership of the land through a lease or similar mechanism, not by selling it to a private developer. If the City sells land the permanently as part of a development that is exempted from the zoning code, this could mean that the new owner inherits the lack of restrictions and could do a project without any kind of City Council approval, or alternatively become a non-conforming use. It is simpler and better on a policy basis to allow this exemption only for sites where the city maintains ownership and to require a development agreement for projects that are not strictly housing.

Downtown Community Plan Amendments – Gateway Sites
Staff recommends amending the Downtown Community Plan to allow for administrative approval for non housing projects on Gateway sites, and increase max FAR for non-housing projects to 5.0 and max height to 130 feet from the current max of 3.5 and 84 feet respectively. As currently proposed, the ordinance would allow staff to process entirely commercial projects administratively – without public hearings and with limited discretion for the City to modify or deny unsuitable projects. As pointed out by the staff report itself, the City in the past has excluded even mixed housing/hotel projects from the administrative process, which would take away city discretion. We urge the Commission and the Council to require development agreements for commercial projects of above 30,000 square feet, and in particular for projects that contain hotels. This Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
will ensure that the City has a say in deciding the best possible use for these sites, can provide the right balance between housing and other uses, and ensure and enforce community benefits.

Thank you very much for your consideration,
Regards,
UNITE HERE Local 11
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
2 David Yakobson
From: Lauren de la Fuente <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 6:50 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Dan Hall; Lana Negrete; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Caroline Torosis; Natalya Zernitskaya; Jesse Zwick; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Council Mailbox; Oliver Chi; Planning Commission Comments; [email protected]; [email protected]; Peer Chacko; Nina Fresco; [email protected]; Leslie Lambert; Shawn Landres; Jim Ries; Jacob Wasserman; Ross Fehrman; Jing Yeo; Santa Monica City Manager's Office Subject: Item 11-B Strongly Oppose

EXTERNAL
Dear Members of the Planning Commission, Planning Staff, and City Manager Chi, I am writing regarding Item 11-B on the June 17 Planning Commission agenda and the continued push for increased housing density throughout Santa Monica.

In the Sunset Park neighborhood, 8-story buildings are currently planned for both Pico Boulevard and Ocean Park Boulevard, directly adjacent to established residential neighborhoods. This is not compatible development.

While the proposed Realignment Plan focuses on downtown housing, it fails to address the significant impacts of the boulevard incentive programs that continue to encourage oversized development along Pico and Ocean Park. The City should revisit these programs immediately and reduce allowable heights and density along these corridors.

Santa Monica is already experiencing declining apartment rents and softening occupancy rates. These trends indicate that we do not have an immediate shortage that justifies the level of housing production currently being proposed.

Continuing to approve ever-larger developments despite weakening market demand risks creating long-term challenges for both residents and the City's financial health.

Equally concerning is the erosion of Santa Monica's business and retail base. The City's economic vitality depends not only on housing, but also on thriving local businesses, retail sales, tourism, and commercial activity. Without a strong business community generating tax revenue, Santa Monica's ability to fund essential services, maintain infrastructure, support public safety, and preserve quality of life will continue to deteriorate.

The current approach prioritizes housing growth at the expense of neighborhood character, small businesses, traffic management, parking availability, and overall livability. Extreme overdevelopment is not a sustainable planning strategy.

We need a program that:

1. Scales new development to fit its surroundings and respects existing residential neighborhoods;

2. Protects and strengthens local businesses and commercial corridors;

3. Preserves the unique character that makes Santa Monica an attractive place to live, work, and visit; and

4. Aligns future development with actual market demand rather than speculative growth targets.

If the downtown portion of the Realignment Plan must move forward now, I urge the Commission and City Council to commit to bringing a revised boulevard program back to the public as soon as possible—one that meaningfully reduces building heights, protects neighborhood compatibility, and puts an end to the current pattern of excessive development.

Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
3 Santa Monica's future depends on balanced growth, not unchecked density. Please start listening to the community, the voters, and not outside developers.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Lauren de la Fuente
Sunset Park Resident and Voter
Lauren de la Fuente
Founder and Strategic Advisor
Pearl Street Marketing
[email protected]
310.283.8488
www.pearlstreetmarketing.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/laurendelafuente/
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Wendy Dembo <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 2:06 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Oliver Chi
Subject: "Cut the Cable?"

EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and esteemed Council,
I heard with great interest you proposal to pay for a Santa Monica float in the Rose Bowl Parade.

I wonder, what audience are you targeting?
Years ago, when I was a kid, I would wake up early on New Year's Day to watch the Parade on TV.

But I haven't had a TV since I went to college, which was many years ago.

I know very few people, who "watch" TV. Most people I know "stream." My parents have cable TV to watch the news and 60 Minutes. I don't think that they are your target audience. My daughter, who is 18, only stream shows. She has no interest in Live TV.

I have friends, who have cable to watch sporting events. Those people will probably be watching football games instead of re-runs of the Parade.

TV watching habits have dramatically changed in the last twenty years. It in theory sounds like a great idea, but in reality, you would do better buy hiring another police person. That way tourist won't have to see people making their morning ablutions in front of NY Bagel Deli as everyone, getting bagels on Father's Day morning saw.

Best regards,
Wendy Dembo
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Sarah Skarka <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2026 4:44 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Susan Cline; Peter James; [email protected]; Oliver Chi Subject: RE: Agenda Item 1 - Please Listen to Residents on the Future of the Airport

EXTERNAL
Dear Councilmember,
I am a Santa Monica resident and I am writing because I strongly support keeping the Santa Monica Airport open while exploring ways to expand park space and community benefits.

Even though I do not live right next to the airport, it matters to me as part of what makes Santa Monica the city it is. We do not want an irreversible decision that can impact jobs, businesses, and city revenues that fund the services all of us rely on. A park-only option creates enormous costs for the City at a time when Santa Monica is already facing serious budget challenges, and would likely take many years and hundreds of millions of dollars before any resident sees a benefit.

Most importantly, a strong majority of Santa Monica voters support keeping the airport while still having park space and businesses. That support is becoming more visible. At the most recent City Council meeting, 834 letters were submitted and 200 residents came forward to speak, reinforcing that many in the community believe we can have both meaningful open space and continued aviation use. Speakers highlighted the opportunity for Santa Monica to serve as a leader in clean air mobility, supporting innovation that benefits the entire city.

I hope the City will take the time to pursue solutions that preserve this important community resource while adding new public space and amenities for all Santa Monica residents.

Please listen to residents and avoid rushing toward closing the airport.

Thank you for your service to our community.

Sincerely,
Sarah Skarka
Ocean Park
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
2 David Yakobson
From: Silvia Chacon-Crawford <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 12:13 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Susan Cline; Peter James; [email protected]; Oliver Chi Subject: RE: Agenda Item 1 - Please Listen to Residents on the Future of the Airport

I hope the City will take the time to pursue balanced solutions that preserve this important community resource while adding new public space and amenities for those of us who live nearby.

Please listen to residents and avoid rushing toward closing the airport.

Thank you for your service to our community.

Sincerely,
Silvia Crawford
Mar Vista, south of Airport on Rose
Sent from my iPhone
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
3 David Yakobson
From: Jamie Marie Davis <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2026 7:39 AM
To: Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Council Mailbox; councilmtgitems; Santa Monica City Manager's Office; Susan Cline; Peter James; [email protected]; Oliver Chi Subject: RE: Agenda Item 1 - Please Listen to Residents on the Future of the Airport

I hope the City will take the time to pursue solutions that preserve this important community resource while adding new public space and amenities for all Santa Monica residents.

Please listen to residents and avoid rushing toward closing the airport.

Thank you for your service to our community.

Sincerely,
Jamie Marie Davis
Wilshire-Montana
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
President
MARQUEECE HARRIS-DAWSON, Eighth
District
President Pro Tempore
BOB BLUMENFIELD, Third District
�
Assistant President Pro Tempore
JOHNS. LEE, Twelfth District
AGENDA

LOS ANGELES CITY

COUNCIL
Tuesday,"' June 23, 2026
10:00AM

JOHN FERRARO COUNCIL

CHAMBER
ROOM 340, CITY HALL
200 NORTH SPRING STREET, LOS
ANGELES, CA 90012
Submit written comment at
LACouncilComment.com
EUNISSES HERNANDEZ, First District
ADRIN NAZARIAN, Second District
NITHYA RAMAN, Fourth District
KATY YAROSLAVSKY, Fifth District
IMELDA PADILLA, Sixth District
MONICA RODRIGUEZ, Seventh District
CURREN D. PRICE, JR., Ninth District
HEATHER HUTT, Tenth District
TRACI PARK, Eleventh District

HUGO SOTO-MART( NEZ,
Thirteenth District
YSABEL JURADO, Fourteenth District
TIM McOSKER, Fifteenth District
Tuesday - June 23, 2026 - PAGE 1
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026
Item 1
June 23, 2026

Santa Monica City CouncilJune 23, 2026

Santa Monica City Council
June 23, 2026