4A
Date: October 22, 2025
To: Chair and Members of the State Legislative Advocacy Committee From: Aram Chaparyan, City Manager
Michelle Ramirez, Community Development Director
By: Carlos Huizar, Management Associate | [email protected] Subject: Supplemental Material #1 for Agenda Item 4A
DISCUSSION
Subsequent to the posting of the agenda item, the Community Development Director provided a written response to public correspondence received, which is included as Attachment 1 for your consideration.
ATTACHMENT
1. Response to Public Correspondence Received
1 1
Huizar, Carlos
From: Ramirez, Michelle
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2025 7:34 PM
To: East Lion
Cc: Sheikh, Asam; Chaparyan, Aram; Santana, Danny
Subject: Re: Question regarding SB 79 and the City.
Good Evening Mr. Saracco -
I understand your concern, as it is the same concern of City staff. It was not my intention to allude that staff would just wait around to see if SB 79 ever affected Torrance. Staff has already been analyzing the bill to determine what measures we could put in place now to be ready for the future. Should you have any questions, please feel free to reach out.
MICHELLE RAMIREZ
Community Development Director - Community Development Department 310-618-5983 | [email protected]
TorranceCA.Gov |
Facebook |
X (Formerly Twitter) |
Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments.
Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
From: East Lion
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2025 7:19:14 PM
To: Ramirez, Michelle
Cc: Sheikh, Asam ; Chaparyan, Aram ; Santana, Danny
Subject: Re: Question regarding SB 79 and the City.
Director Ramirez,
Since Metro will be extending the tentatively called pink line to the Torrance Transit Center, it will become a qualifying transit stop, with the last industrial area left in the city within the 1/2 mile radius from the transit stop.
My concern, as a long time resident of the city is possible short-sighted actions without considering the long term implications.
Jim Armstrong was my government teacher at Torrance High School, and he related the TUSD’s short- sighted sale of the Greenwood middle school site, which the city went into hock to purchase.
He taught us to consider the long-term results of government actions if we were ever in that position as an elected representative or as a regular voting citizen. 2 2
I would request that the status quo be continued, because Torrance needs a balance of residential, commercial, and industrial within the city.
Thank you for your response, and I appreciate thatyou took time out of your busy day to respond to my concerns.
Stephen Saracco II
Torrance, CA.
On Oct 20, 2025, at 6:41 PM, Ramirez, Michelle wrote:
Good Evening Mr. Saracco ~
My name is Michelle Ramirez and I’m the Community Development Director for the City of Torrance. Regarding SB 79, one of the provisions of the bill allows transit agencies (such as Torrance Transit) to develop their own land for housing pending the project meets certain requirements, including being located near a qualifying Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) site. At this time, the City of Torrance does not have any qualifying transit stops, which is defined as heavy rail, very high-frequency commuter rail with at least 72 trains daily in both directions, high-frequency commuter rail with at least 48 trains daily in both directions, light rail, or Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) with dedicated lanes and peak hour frequency of 15 minutes or less. The idea behind this provision is to create new housing opportunities on underutilized agency-owned property. Again, at the current time, there are no properties that meet the definition of a qualifying TOD within Torrance. Should you have any additional questions, please feel free to reach out.
MICHELLE RAMIREZ
Community Development Director - Community Development Department 310-618-5983 | [email protected]
TorranceCA.Gov |
Facebook |
X (Formerly Twitter) |
Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain
confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any
attachments. Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
From: Sheikh, Asam
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2025 10:00 PM
To: East Lion
3 3
Cc: Chaparyan, Aram ; Santana, Danny ; Ramirez, Michelle Subject: Re: Question regarding SB 79 and the City.
Dear Stephen -
Thank you for reaching out and raising these important questions. We’ll review your concerns and get back to you shortly.
Regards,
ASAM SHEIKH
Councilmember District #3
310-618-2801 | [email protected]
TorranceCA.Gov |
Facebook |
X (Formerly Twitter) |
Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain
confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any
attachments. Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
From: East Lion
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2025 5:44 PM
To: Sheikh, Asam <[email protected]>
Subject: Question regarding SB 79 and the City.
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Councilman,
I have questions regarding SB 79 and what agency would be the transit agency defined in SB 79 which would own the property which the high density development would be located on. The law states that the transit agencies would own the property, effectively making the property tax free, depriving the city of its share of property tax revenue.
At the same time, I don’t envision the city being a landlord either.
If it is Torrance Transit Agency, would the city be purchasing properties within 1/4-1/2 mile of the Giordano Regional Transit Center located at 465 Crenshaw be the center of that 1/4-1/2 mile radius?
If so, how is the city planning on financing the purchases since the law prevents the use of eminent domain to acquire the property?
4 4
If it is MTA, would they be purchasing properties within that same 1/4-1/2 mile radius, utilizing MTA funds?
If the city has insufficient resources to purchase the properties, I assume the city’s purchasing process would not go forward, correct?
The concept of a legally-required minimum density of 80 units per acre (208 feet by 208 feet square) is a proposition this city is unable to manage. This city does not have the water, sewer, and electrical infrastructure to handle that kind of population addition and won’t have it in the foreseeable future, let alone the funds to purchase properties within the radius of the transit center.
I would request the Council have a hard, “No” in funding this state-mandated boondoggle.
Thank you for your time.
Stephen Saracco II
Torrance, CA
5