1 David Yakobson
From: Santa Monica Forward <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2026 2:48 PM
To: Caroline Torosis; Dan Hall; Barry Snell; Ellis Raskin; Jesse Zwick; Natalya Zernitskaya; Lana Negrete; councilmtgitems
Subject: Support Item 16.D
EXTERNAL
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,
I’m writing in support of Item 16.D and the proposed modernization of Santa Monica’s planning procedures. Our zoning processes should allow the City to respond more quickly when changes to zoning or business regulations are needed, while preserving appropriate public review.
I especially support establishing a clear timeline for Planning Commission consideration. I would encourage Council to consider an even shorter shot clock than the proposed 90 days in cases where the Commission has held more than one hearing and there is no identified need for additional staff analysis, revisions, or information. Where further work is necessary, a 90 day timeline can remain available with appropriate findings. However, I would suggest making the default a shorter period, such as 45 days, with Staff discretion to continue to 90 days in response to revisions.
These are sensible procedural reforms that can reduce unnecessary delay without diminishing substantive review.
Thank you for your consideration,
Sam Shapiro-Kline and Brad Ewing
Co-Chairs, Santa Monica Forward
--
We are working for a diverse, progressive, sustainable and equitable Santa Monica.
SantaMonicaForward.org
Item 16-D
September 22, 2026
Item 16-D
September 22, 2026