1 David Yakobson
From: Ben Espinoza <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 3:45 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 writing because I strongly support keeping the Santa Monica Airport open while exploring ways to expand park space and community benefits.
The Santa Monica Airport is a historic and valuable resource, and decisions about its future have implications beyond city boundaries. We do not want an irreversible decision that can impact jobs, businesses, and regional connectivity. 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 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 beginning to see that sentiment translate into action, with 834 letters submitted and 200 individuals showing up to speak in support at the most recent City Council meeting. Those speakers made clear that Santa Monica can pursue both open space and aviation, while also positioning itself as a hub for clean air mobility and emerging aviation technologies, creating benefits that extend across the city and the broader region.
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.
Please listen to residents and avoid rushing toward closing the airport.
Thank you for your service to our community.
Sincerely,
Ben Espinoza
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
2 David Yakobson
From: Wally Perkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 6:55 PM
Subject: No Homeless in Neighborhoods; Keep Samoshell Open; Homeless belong away from neighborhoods
EXTERNAL
Please do not place more homeless in neighborhoods. Every building that houses homeless in this City is surrounded by Trash/Open Air Drug Use/Noise/Loitering/Yelling/Uncivil Behavior/Poop/Pee/Violence and overall anarchy and chaos.
Citizens who have worked so hard to live here, pay taxes, have jobs, go to school and just want to enjoy regular life do not deserve to have these buildings placed in their neighborhoods. It is fundamentally unfair and wrong. The homeless are not from Santa Monica. The County and other states ship them here because we supposedly have money to deal with it. We don't and we don't deserve to cure a 10,000,000 population in our very small town.
Do not put homeless housing in neighborhoods. Keep Samoshell where it belongs - on the side of a freeway in an industrial area. Industrial, non-populated areas are the only place where homeless should be held.
Our poor children cannot even go to parks because of the drug use and just horrific conditions. The bathrooms are repulsive. There are people using drugs and sleeping all over; they are naked; they threaten people; they yell. This is not normal; this should not be allowed; drug users should be arrested and the county should be banned from ruining our City.
You're creating a City where kids have to stay inside instead of being allowed to use the parks and beaches because parents are afraid of these maniacs who have taken over every public space in Santa Monica - the parks, beach, libraries, sidewalks, chairs, etc. They have more freedom than we do and have absolutely destroyed this City.
Please come to your senses and make Santa Monica normal again.
Thank you,
Wally
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
3 David Yakobson
From: nealcassidy1234 <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 5, 2026 10:53 PM
To: Ellis Raskin; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Caroline Torosis; Lana Negrete; Oliver Chi; councilmtgitems; Josh Kurpies; Lizzy Acosta Subject: Re: speeding cars and pedestrian's at risk and actually being hit by cars on Ocean Avenue
EXTERNAL
how come not one of you people ever responded? You work for the residents of this city...and that;s me. It seeems to me that no public employee gives a shit about residents.
I'm assuming you'll never respond...so fuck you and fuck you and fuck you somemore.
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
On Wednesday, June 17th, 2026 at 2:13 PM, nealcassidy1234 <[email protected]> wrote:
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 re-striping 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.
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
4 Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
5 David Yakobson
From: John Cyrus Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2026 1:28 AM
To: Andrew Hoyer; Charles Andrews; Amy Aukstikalnis; Annspun; [email protected]; [email protected]; betzi richardson; Kate Bransfield; Elizabeth Brooks; Bruce Leddy; Brian Menendez; Sean Besser; Danilo Bach; Santa Monica Bay Chess Club; Bangkok West Thai; Cindy Bendat; Senator Ben Allen; B Onofre; Mario Fonda-Bonardi; Bob Taylor; Bobby Tsui; Robert Henry; bullockc; [email protected]; Clare Thomas; Cathy Larson; George Centeno; Kolt Chiropractic Wellness Center; Mid City Neighbors; councilmtgitems; Jeff Jarow; editor santamonicalookout.com; Coalition for a Livable City; Great Park Coalition; Karen Croner; CrisMac; CRAAP; Erica Cuyugan; Upton, Carey; Alicia Mignano; Evelyn Lauchenauer; [email protected]; Laurie Lieberman; Lauren Howland; Laura Wilson-Hausle; Schwala, Dan; Stacy Dalgleish; David Yuguchi; David Tann; Wendy Dembo; Gina DeBaca; Devan Sipher; [email protected]; Debbie Lee; Diana Gordon; Douglas Trussler; Duresky, Nancy; Elizabeth Lerer; SMDP Editor; Ellen Hannan; Victor Fresco; Fabian Ledesma; Santa Monica Family YMCA; John Fairweather; Mike Feinstein; Monica Fernandez; Sanchez, Felipe; Merrick Siebenaler; Ross Furukawa; Jeffrey Gordon; Matt Goldenberg D.O.; Patricia Godon-Tann; Friends of Sunset Park; [email protected]; Daniel Jansenson; Jack Hillbrand; Jim Harris (Santa Monica Pier); Jing Yeo; Kay Ward; Jon Katz; Karin Hall; Kara Taub; Kevin McKeown Fwd Subject: Wilmont's FREE Live Music and Movie series begins SATURDAY Attachments: 2026 FLYER FRONT final.PDF
EXTERNAL
Hey Folks!
Wilmont's "Second Saturdays" begin THIS SATURDAY at 6PM in Palisades Park between Montana and Idaho! Free family fun.
I've attached our flyer. Look for our ad in Friday's SMDP. www.wilmont.org for more info.
John Cyrus Smith
[email protected]
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
6 David Yakobson
From: Dennis Moloney <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2026 5:46 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,
Dennis Moloney
Ocean park
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
7 David Yakobson
From: John Alle <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 7, 2026 3:36 PM
To: Santa Monica Coalition
Subject: Unelected and Unaccountable
EXTERNAL
Reckless Ideologues
https://x.com/john__alle/status/2085845189319700886
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Alexander Rosson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 10, 2026 10:11 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,
Alex Rosson
Pico
Sent from my iPhone
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
3 David Yakobson
From: Eve Lopez <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2026 9:51 AM
To: councilmtgitems
Subject: Agenda Item #1 -August 11, 2026
Attachments: Palms to Pines 2026.png
EXTERNAL
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2026 10:48 AM
To: councilmtgitems; Council Mailbox; Council Mailbox
Subject: Timeline of Events & Images for City council official Agenda
EXTERNAL
June 23rd, 2026 - I presented an option for a Santa Monica Global Conference Center.
July 1st, 2026 - I was told the city was no soliciting proposals and that an RFP and LOI’s would be forthcoming
July 13th, 2026 - I was told to hold off till after the vote.
July 13th, 2026 - The city rushes to put a vote for an ENA on agenda with no public notice, no disclosure of a relationship, no Oaks disclosure as one on record it is dated 8/5/2026. No open RFP or request for LOI’s as is city’s policy for available property.
July 17th, 2026 - No vote, yet I am still told there is no option for the Civic, even though there has been no vote.
Aug 11th, 2026 - Another vote has been put on agenda, without any open process, incorrect disclosures Prior Timeline
October 2022 — Civic Auditorium Declared Surplus Property November 2023 — Surplus Land Act Process Completed
January 10, 2024 — City Opens Public Solicitation for Civic Proposals Early 2024 — Four Proposals Submitted; AEG/Goldenvoice Is Not a Respondent July 2024 — Revitalization Partners Group (RPG) Selected March 25, 2025 — City Approves Six-Month Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with RPG April–October 2025 — RPG Exclusive Negotiation Period October 14, 2025 — City Council Ends RPG Exclusivity
October 17, 2025 — City Announces Broader Exploration of Civic Options Sincerely,
To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Joe DiRosa
Founder, CEO
Artist Series, Seedlings, Tartare, BrainPower
213-STAGE-LA
(213-782-4352)
[email protected]
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
2 www.seedlings.vc
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
3 Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
4 Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
5 Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
1 David Yakobson
From: Karen Melick <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2026 2:36 PM
To: councilmtgitems; Lana Negrete; Dan Hall; Ellis Raskin; Caroline Torosis; Jesse Zwick; Barry Snell; Natalya Zernitskaya; Oliver Chi; Heidi von Tongeln; Denise Anderson-Warren Subject: Agenda item 1 General Public Comment
Attachments: Sample Argument page.pdf; Ballot example.pdf
EXTERNAL
Hello,
I’m asking that the Election Code be applied appropriately and that the 3 individuals signing the argument against the parcel tax measure have their titles included in the Voter Information Pamphlet.
Last Thursday, the City Clerk wrote that based on discussions with the City Attorney’s office, Election Code 9170 would be applied to both the ballot label and the Voter Information Pamphlet so our individuals would not have titles in the Pamphlet.
Attached is the ballot label for the County Measure ER and a page of the Voter Information Pamphlet with the Argument Against ER and the Rebuttal so you can have a better idea of what I am talking about.
9170 went into effect when the state added the list of supporters and opposers on the ballot that has the description of the measure and where you select yes or no. We agree no titles for our individuals can be used there.
9170 does not apply to the Voter Information Pamphlet, which has the arguments for and against the measures. For the recent School Bond measure, two of our individuals had the same titles we submitted, printed in the pamphlet. Our titles should be included in the pamphlet.
It’s frustrating because the Clerk has allowed the proponents to significantly modify their argument submission after the July 28th deadline. They had two people who did not comply with the requirement for a principal officer to sign the attestation, and one organization that is a PAC, that are not allowed to support a measure. We believe their changes still do not comply with the Election Code requirements.
The ballot measure wording is misleading because it says it benefits the Santa Monica public schools when the funds will be used for the Malibu schools too, without Malibu residents paying this tax. This should be amended or the ballot measure pulled.
Thank you.
Karen Melick
Sunset Park
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Official Ballot
STATEWIDE DIRECT PRIMARY ELECTION, June 02, 2026 • County of Los Angeles Page
3 / 8
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 66
Vote For ONE
BEN FORER
Deputy District Attorney, County of Los
Angeles
CHERYL C. TURNER
Attorney at Law
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 81
Vote For ONE
DAN KAPELOVITZ
Attorney/Experimental Filmmaker
DAVID WALGREN
Judge of the Superior Court
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 87
Vote For ONE
DAVID DEJUTE
Law Professor/Attorney
ANTHONY (A.J.) BAYNE
Deputy Public Defender, County of Los
Angeles
SHAREE SANDERS GORDON
Deputy City Attorney, City of Los Angeles
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 116
Vote For ONE
PAT CONNOLLY
Judge of the Superior Court
PAUL A. THOMPSON
Deputy District Attorney, County of Los
Angeles
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 131
Vote For ONE
CARLOS DAMMEIER
Administrative Law Judge,
Unemployment Insurance Appeals
Board, State of California
DAVID ROSS
Deputy Alternate Public Defender,
County of Los Angeles
TROY W. SLATEN
Administrative Law Judge, Department of
Industrial Relations, State of California
DONNA TRYFMAN
Deputy Public Defender, County of Los
Angeles
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 141
Vote For ONE
MARIELA TORRES
Deputy District Attorney, County of Los
Angeles
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 176
Vote For ONE
ZACHARY SMITH
Deputy Public Defender, County of Los
Angeles
GLORIA MARIN
Deputy District Attorney, County of Los
Angeles
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 181
Vote For ONE
RYAN DIBBLE
Superior Court Commissioner
THANAYI LINDSEY
Administrative Law Judge, Office Of
Administrative Hearings, State Of
California
Write-In Candidate
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Office No. 196
Vote For ONE
CANDICE J. HENRY
Deputy District Attorney, County of Los
Angeles
Write-In Candidate
ER
COUNTY MEASURE ER
Vote YES or NO
Essential Services Restoration Act for
Los Angeles County General Sales Tax
Measure. Shall the measure to help our
community address severe federal cuts enacted
by the President and Congress; reduce the loss of
essential services, including healthcare for County
residents; reduce the risk of closing the County's
four public hospitals and numerous clinics, and
significant healthcare provider layoffs and other
service cuts by enacting a 1/2 percent (0.5%)
general sales tax for 5 years, generating
approximately $1 billion annually, with
independent audits, be adopted? Supporters:
St. John's Community Health; Planned
Parenthood Advocacy Project; LA County Medical
Association Opponents: LA Taxpayers Assoc.;
Sup. Kathryn Barger; Cheng, Arcadia Mayor Pro
Tem; Armenta, Rosemead Mayor; Sternquist,
Temple City Mayor
YES on Measure ER
NO on Measure ER
Continue voting on next page
26234 - NP - EN / 8128 / 1
EN-NP-0128-2-3 LA 128-009
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
SANTA MONICA AIRPORT
OBSERVATION DECK
9 AM - FRIDAY AUG 14, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
● City has procedures which were not followed.
● City Approached AEG ( Not open or democratic)
● AEG was not one of the original proposals in the
RFP in 2024 so a new RFP should be held, AEG,
a company founded with money from a $100B
stock fraud + D4VD Tour Manager, should not be
given preferential treatment.
● Oaks Disclosure, wrong per Ocean Way Fest.
$1.34M lease. All parties should be disclosed.
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
● Civic is not listed on city’s list of available properties ● City’s procurement site says it was closed/cancelled with a closing date of Feb 24’ City list of available properties Procurement website
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
An ENA wasn’t on agenda till 7/14
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Timeline of Events
June 23rd, 2026 - I presented an option for a Santa Monica Global Conference Center.
July 1st, 2026 - I was told the city was no soliciting proposals and that an RFP and LOI’s would be forthcoming July 13th, 2026 - I was told to hold off till after the vote.
July 13th, 2026 - The city rushes to put a vote for an ENA on agenda with no public notice, no disclosure of a relationship, no Oaks disclosure as one on record it is dated 8/5/2026. No open RFP or request for LOI’s as is city’s policy for available property.
July 17th, 2026 - No vote, yet I am still told there is no option for the Civic, even though there has been no vote.
Aug 11th, 2026 - Another vote has been put on agenda, without any open process, incorrect disclosures Prior Timeline
October 2022 — Civic Auditorium Declared Surplus Property November 2023 — Surplus Land Act Process Completed
January 10, 2024 — City Opens Public Solicitation for Civic Proposals Early 2024 — Four Proposals Submitted; AEG/Goldenvoice Is Not a Respondent July 2024 — Revitalization Partners Group (RPG) Selected March 25, 2025 — City Approves Six-Month Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with RPG April–October 2025 — RPG Exclusive Negotiation Period
October 14, 2025 — City Council Ends RPG Exclusivity
October 17, 2025 — City Announces Broader Exploration of Civic Options Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026
Item 1
August 11, 2026