City Council - Regular Meeting

Testing one, two. Testing one, two. Not this.

Good evening, Santa Monica, and welcome to both the special and regular meeting 5:35 p.m. Tuesday, November 18th. Before we get started, uh just please silence your cell phones. Remember, we do happy hands instead of clapping. And council member Snell, will you lead us in the pledge of allegiance?

I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Before we le read the land acknowledgement, I want to acknowledge uh what occurred today with the ICE raids and the individuals that were apprehended in the city of Santa Monica. And I want to assure everyone that um the city does not participate. Um our police department does does not participate. Our goal is to keep folks safe and treat them equally regardless of where they're from. and we do have services that are being provided to those individuals and we will continue to keep a you updated um on what all is going on. And with that, council member Snell, do you want to read the land acknowledgement?

It's on the agenda. On the agenda, City of Santa Monica is located microphone.

The city of Santa Monica is located on Atlanta of the Tonga. With with great respect, the city acknowledges the Gabriola Tonga as the first people of this ancestry, an unseated territory of the Kuma. a village that we know as Santa Monica. We honor their elders, past, present, and the Gabriel descendants who are part of the Gabriel Tonga tribe. We recognize that these people are still here and our settlers and guests. We recognize our responsibility and obligation to care for the land in partnership with them. The city of Santa Monica commits to work in partnership with Gabriola Tonga people to uplift their voices and visibility on their ancestral land. I will now call the role. Council member Zwick is absent this evening. Council member Hall

present. Council member Raskin here. Council member Snell here. Council member Zernaya present. Mayor PM Terrosus present. And Mayor Negrete here. Will any council members be recusing themselves from any items on the agenda pursuing to being back this evening? Hearing none. Mayor, do you have any agenda management this evening? Yes, we'd like to hear close session at the end of the meeting after the 16 items, but still hear public comment on close session items at the normal time. And we'd also like to read the proclamations and then the adjournments that we have right after the proclamations.

Okay, we'll move on to general public input. Regular for regular meetings, public comment is permitted on special agenda items and items not on the agenda that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city. State law prohibits the city council from taking any action on items not listed on the agenda, including issues raised under this agenda item. For special meetings, public input is limited to scheduled special items only. And we have exactly 25 speakers, 23 present, and two on the phone. Okay, I'm going to call the first few names. Tina's so just to clarify. Oh, sorry. Everyone gets a minute. So, how many do we have? Say that again. 25 on the button. over. I feel like we're at 25. They get two minutes.

23 here and two on the phone. So that's 25. So they get two minutes. It's if there was over 25 is what I'm um Okay. I'm going to call up the first few names. Is that Tina Simone, Jerry Rubin, Alan Mont, and Michael Feinstein?

No, it's that it's the Hi. So, I have a question. Uh, I'm about 15 seconds over. Can I go over a little bit and take it from Susan who's going to be up next? She's going to be No. No. Okay. I'll talk very very fast.

Okay. Um, my name is Reema Simon. I'm a licensed clinical social worker and psychotherapist, proud resident of Santa Monica. I've worked with the homeless population at the VA for 12 years and and acutely aware of the many issues and programs that work and programs that don't. In the early 2010s, we serviced homeless by providing transitional housing in sober living environments, which included testing for sobriety, mandatory savings, clinical support groups, individual therapy, intensive case management, and dispensing prescribed medication. These programs worked as life skills were taught in preparation to permanent housing. Around 2015, we adopted the harm reduction model, which eliminated the requirement for sober living, enabling folks to use substances, alcohol, as long as it was not on program grounds. The day rate for such programs greatly increased as more homeless program providers switched over from sober living to harm reduction, receiving more money, providing little or little oversight um to the population. We found drug dealers and hookers would know when the vulnerable population would get their benefit checks and would be standing by outside programs to sell their goods. These programs proved to be ineffective in preparing folks for housing. At the core of the homeless problems are severe mental health issues as well as substance abuse which harm reduction programs and bridge housing are unequipped for. and the problems continue to multiply. Placing homeless people in our neighborhoods destroys our safety and quality of life. For example, open bottles on Third Street Mall further drive businesses, residents, and tourists away. It has become a haven for the homeless. We are not helping the problem by allowing bottles nor needles.

We are simply growing the problem and endangering the well-being of our community. Thank you. Jerry Jerry Rubin.

Oh, thank you very very much. Uh, mayor, mayor prom, city council members, city manager, city attorney, city clerk, police officers, firefighters, all of the city staff, and fellow Santa Monicans. First of all, foremost, I want to wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving. I feel so grateful to be living in this great city that it's revitalizing. It's such a great city. I wanted to talk to you about something that people been asking me about and I feel it's bringing back some of the vending machines you have so people can get a hot chocolate or coffee, maybe some soup or sandwich, nuts, cookies, the soft drinks. It doesn't cost the city any money to do it. In fact, the city makes some money. used to have it and I sure could use a cup of coffee now, but Starbucks is closed and I don't want to miss out on hearing what's going on. So, if you look into it, it would be really great and uh I think you could understand why people would appreciate it. Thank you very much and happy Thanksgiving.

Thank you, Jerry Alan Mont. Yes.

Thank you, council members, for the opportunity to speak. I want to address the phrase best use often cited when city-owned properties are converted to surplus land and then used for housing under the housing first policies. Recent examples include the Bergamont station and it appears possibly the Santa Monica Civic. Two cultural landmarks. Best use should be more than about increased density. It should include community benefits and be subject to community input with an emphasis on transparency. I believe best use is being used irresponsibly as a justification for building unnecessary housing and is a very short-sighted approach to our serious fiscal challenges. Selling valuable city assets is not a responsible long-term strategy. Instead, we should prioritize safety and business growth. Housing is important, but we must not confuse housing shortage with affordability. Building skyscrapers on eight square miles near the beach won't solve the affordability crisis. If we support business and focus on safety, residents and tourists will return feeling secure and that could increase 70 city revenues by 50 to75 million a year. Everyone benefits, but it takes a bold vision, long-term thinking, and prioritizing the right issues to get Santa Monica back on track. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Before Mr. Feinstein comes up. I'm going to call the next few names. Nikki Kolhoff, Charlie Loventhal, Denise Barton, and Susan Finley. Good evening. There are over 70 community organizations that are part of the great park coalition, and they share a common meaning about what a great park means. It's a large enough contiguous parcel where in meeting our open space deficit, we don't pit active versus passive needs. uh fields versus cultural spaces, our sustainability goals, our climate change addressing goals, and restoring real ecological spaces. I was at a community meeting a week and a half ago or so of a very important local community organization of which I'm a member and I'm very proud to be a member. And there were people making a presentation who want to pave over and develop a big portion of of the land that could be a park for us. and they were appropriating the term great park which means something very specific to tens of thousands of residents in this city and saying instead we can have this big development on that land and a great park. These people have every right to argue for the development but not to gaslight the people who know what a great park means. a non-commercial space where all the land is for all the people. If you want to argue against that, you're free to do so. But don't use a term that means something to so many people and appropriate it for yourself in a political argument. That's not what this community should be about. Thank you.

Thank you, Nikki Kolhoff. Good evening. Nikki Kolhoff, Sunset Park resident. Uh, in general public comment tonight, I'm going to be addressing the way public comments are actually noted in the minutes, meaning that they're not actually noted in the minutes, which is not respectful of the time and effort that the public puts into coming down here and making comments. Um later I'm going to be speaking about a litigation matter uh where staff and then council misused the common sense squa exemption. Um in reviewing the record for that it's really quite disappointing to see that there were almost no public comments reflected. Uh the common sense SQA exemption means that staff and council can say with certainty that there are no significant impacts possible from whatever the decision is. no significant impact with certainty. If any impacts are presented, you cannot utilize the common sense exemption and must undergo environmental review by law. There were no fewer than five public hearings. Almost all comments were against the upzoning. Yet, the minutes do not reflect this. Instead, the speakers were all lumped together just by name. The minutes no longer say so and spo so spoke in favor and so and so spoke against. It's just a mishmash of names without any viewpoint captured. There's no substance of what the speakers raised, what issues were brought up. That's not in there at all. Um and then finally when you guys all get to the matter three, four, five hours later, we just get ignored. And the minutes only reflect what you inquired about. So when you ignore us and you don't ask questions based on the topics that the people raised, everything that we said is eliminated

from the record. And that's quite shameful. People take time here and it should be captured in the minutes that you have 300 people opposing something that matters when. Thank you. You please don't shout out from the back. If you want to come up and speak during your time, you can. But if you're gonna shout out, we'll have to ask you to leave. Charlie Levventhal.

Hi everybody. My name is Charlie Levventhal. I've lived in Santa Monica for 25 years and I'm the ho president of 701 Ocean. Very grateful for Mayor Lana's leadership and transparency. I'm not here as an adversary to the council. I'd very much like you to succeed, but we need to trust our elected leaders. The community was afraid of those centers. One was near a school. Principal afraid for his kids, another by the oceanana. We could destroy their business. My question is, how could you not engage this community and lobby and fight for us? I suggest a simple solution. Be honest and transparent. I think each of you should let us know when you knew about the project and why you thought it was appropriate not to engage the community. And I'd also like to ask, are there any other things going on that you are not telling us about because people are wondering about that? Thank you.

Thank you, Denise Barton.

Good evening. Tonight, I'd like to address why you're sitting up there. First, people know that everyone is are is everyone is aware that you all are smurf plants. As can be seen by all of you vote being against dropping the fight against district voting in Santa Monica, which cost the taxpayer 14 to 15 million. than as representatives of the people. How can you represent the people if you don't want to hear what the people feel public feels or has to say which can be seen by your cutting the public speaking time to only one minute if there are more than 25 speakers which is actually a quite unreasonable not only due to the low number but due to the hypocrisy shown by you regularly staying out of close session for two hours or more. Oh, but I forgot that's your way of further thinning out the speakers for the remaining agenda items. put that together with the city council secrecy and lying to us about the housing for the severely mentally ill on Ocean and that would bring us to the meme on the screen titled when your city council doesn't want to hear or care what you have to say which says they have their photo ops first and stay out of close session for two hours or more trying to thin out the public speaker speaking on the main agenda items and then if there are more than 25 speakers our speaking time is cut to one And on the subject of freedom of speech, Mayor Negreti has articles taken down that don't reflect favorably upon her. All examples of your corruption. Thank you.

Before Miss Finley comes up, I'm going to call the next few names. Greg Morrena, Dcoin Moyer, Jonathan Foster, and Ishmael Tinsman. Miss Finley,

I hadn't planned to speak tonight, but I think transparency is what you're hearing from your constituents. And I think that this lack of trust and this feeling that things get pushed down or shoved down our throat without us knowing what they are and without our elected representatives considering the consequences to us. And just when I'm reading government documents and I read things like the nimbies, which is such an insulting thing to condense somebody's home and family and community and neighborhood and ecosystem which they have participated in and possibly helped create. Uh it just it gives me this feeling that we've gotten to a place where where we don't trust one another and um I understand we the thing is that you have a natural resource here. You have extremely intelligent and skilled people who have plenty to bring to the table when we're putting all of this money into trying to save Santa Monica and the realignment. There are so many people here who might have something really helpful to bring to this table who live here and have lived here for a long time. We should participate. I know it's a pain in the A. I know it because you have to sit through people who, you know, they care more about their ego than Santa Monica maybe. But on the other hand, there are gems among us. And and I think that if people feel that they're part of the process, you might be surprised to learn maybe mistakes we've made in the past that we don't have to make again and and to understand that yes, we all want to be compassionate towards people who are struggling and who are suffering, but at the same time, we don't want to destroy what we've built. So how do we do it? We

don't know the answer. And that's really the truth. The truth is we don't know the answer. And from there, thank you, Greg Mora.

Former council member Greg Mora.

Thanks, uh, honorable mayor, council members, uh, thank you for sharing the information, um, Mayor Lana, about Ocean Avenue project in September. Uh, as you know, we organized the neighborhood quickly. We filed lawsuits and dozens of PAS. Uh those documents show some of your names. It's never good or righteous to withhold information from residents that put our families at risk. In Lana 16 item, some comments were about respect and housing rules. Yet you redlined that in the same item you took power away from the very community you serve. From a Birmingham jail, Dr. King wrote, "One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." If the state or county has unjust laws that put our safety at risk, we need you to check your moral compass, disobey, and stand up for us. We are your neighbors. Look, it's the same issue with the directed LPA and right to recall. Your economic plan is great. I believe we will recover, but please don't create policies that will kill your progress. Your newest tenant on public record wrote, "If council passes a labor peace agreement, then my investors will be pulling their investment." The neighbor next door to the Ocean Avenue site is selling his house. Investors in your economy are telling you they'll leave. These aren't threats, they're promises. Hear our cries. Stand up for us, your neighbors. Thank you.

Thank you. Taquan Moyer. Mr. Mohler. Um, I'm sorry if I'm pronouncing that wrong, but you're signed up twice. Once for two minutes and once for one minute. How many? Are you only speaking for two minutes? Two minutes. Okay. Sorry, I maybe pronounced your name. Oh, it's

like it was French. Okay. It's German. Um, good evening. My name is Dacoin and I worked at Resty's which sudden closed suddenly earlier this year, leaving many of us without the jobs we held for years. Jobs we were proud of, jobs that made the pier feel warm and welcoming for locals and visitors. We helped build the spirit of the place and yet the lease for California Roadhouse was recommended without any notice on the website and without giving workers a fair chance to weigh in. There's no right of return. Even though many of us gave years, some over a decade, to serving this community. Um, and honestly, I've been here before. We've come to meeting after meeting, speaking out again and again. We've held pickets at the pier, and I have some promises of my own. We will keep doing it because we refuse to be ignored. How can this still be happening? How did this process get this far without workers at the table? How is this even up for discussion? Um, I can't believe this is where we're at and it feels like everything we gave to this beer is being thrown away. Uh, because of how serious this is, workers will be holding a vote in two weeks on calling for a boycott. That's how deeply this has affected us. I'm urging you to reject moving forward with this lease unless it requires a worker retention policy that would ensure laid-off workers would be offered the first chance to return to the jobs they once held. Thank you. Uh, no clapping, just happy hands. Jonathan Foster.

Hey, Seven Beer Bums. Hey, did you realize you could sell Coke and make more money and pay the $220 million off faster if you sell cocaine? And uh the report on alcohol from 38 years in France, did you hear it? What they'd said basically in a nutshell, alcohol kills anything it touches in the body. So what I came to speak about is the reparations. Uh you somebody's been talking about paying black people reparations and uh this is a back paycheck. It's not by the city or the state directly. This is a federal crime. The whole nation will pay, needs to pay, should have already paid, had the money to pay it, does have the money to pay it. It will uh will have to pay this money, but it doesn't because of the racism towards the concept that because you are some other compromised race, you don't have to pay. And the answer truly is without black slaves, we've got nothing here. Nothing. And these people must be paid. The amount of money is not as great as anyone thinks it is or should be. And this sentiment and morality about this is critical to everybody's existence. This is the true failure. It's not the amount of money. If you are a citizen, you will help pay this issue into resolution. Then that part will be over and a new connectiveness can be enjoyed and bestowed toward each other to continue to mend the wrongs these black people in reparations. It must be paid by the federal government. Santa Monica will pay. The state of California will pay. Minnesota will pay. Washington state

will pay. Florida will pay. Tennessee will pay. Colorado will pay. Thank you. Ishmael Tinsman. And before Mr. Tinsman begins. I'm going to call the next few names. Gonzalo Hernandez, Rabbi Neil Komes Daniels, Matt Horn, and Maria Espinosa.

All right. Hi there. Um, my name is Ishmaile and I was a worker at Rusty's much like Daycoin who just spoke. Um, when the recommendation for this new lease was made without clear public notice and without any path for Rusty's workers to return, it felt like the people who gave their lives to this pier were simply forgotten. Yesterday, workers filled the meeting uh the pier meeting yesterday to remind you that we're still here and still fighting because we want to be because we were part of what making this place feel welcoming for families, for locals, for visitors, for people from around the world. It was pouring rain when we came there, but still we came. Why? I'll tell you why. Rusty's was more than just a job for me and for my co-workers. It was a family and the people I met there were lifelong are lifelong friends. Uh the people here cared about this community and they were a major part of what made this um city and this community and this pier what it was the great place that it is. Even after losing I drove all the way from the harbor area to be over here because I like this place so much. Many of my co-workers drove from South Central and other parts of the city because they cared about this community that much. Even after losing my job, my friends and I fought to return because that's how much we care about this place. We wanted to be a part of this community. Please don't take this sense of community away from us. I'm asking you today. Um, we ask you to reconsider this process and include the community and the workers who help build this space. Please don't move forward with this lease without a real opportunity for workers to return. And I just want to reiterate that we are prepared to ask the community to boycott and to pick it if these needs aren't met. I just want to make that very clear. You know, we've been fighting hard and we will continue to fight and we're still here. So, thank you so much for your time, folks.

Gonzalo Hernandez I will be. Okay. for present. Fundament. Trai can say no compa.

Okay. All right. Um, hello. Good evening everyone. Uh my name is Gonzalo and I'm part of the Rusty's team. We lost our jobs earlier this year when Rusty's closed and for many of us that was more than just losing a paycheck. We lost a place we cared about and fought hard to make it successful. Even with the rain pouring yesterday, we still showed up to make sure we were heard because it's deeply concerning that the new operator can take over the same space without any obligation to offer us a first chance of return. And I have worked at Rusty's for more than 10 years. And the reason for that is because all other jobs are not comparable. Here is where I've learned and met from people all over the world and where I felt part of the community and I feel like I'm part of this community. Please allow me to continue being part of this community. I would like to be part of this community once more. Thank you.

Thank you, Rabbi Neil Kz Daniels.

Good evening. Thanks for the opportunity to speak. I'm Rabbi Neil Komas Daniels. I am the ameritus rabbi at Beth Shalom. I was there for 29 years um as the spiritual leader. So uh within Judaism we have laws just like Santa Monica has laws. We have positive laws and negative laws. Um so the positive laws that I I'm going to give you an example of a negative law in Santa Monica. Stop signs. What does a stop sign say? Stop sign says don't go through this intersection. It would not be safe. Don't do it. And so I'm giving you an opportunity to think about that in a in in in a way that's expansive as well. So here um some people in the world have a value that says do unto others as you would have others do unto you. Judaism frames that negatively. Don't do something to other people that you don't want them to do to you. And and that's basically because we don't trust people to be nice. We don't trust people to be good. We don't trust people to be just. We don't trust people to be righteous. And so indeed, our commitment, our perspective, our orientation towards the world is to avoid doing things to other people that we don't want done to us. I am sure that the owners of the new restaurant, the California Roadhouse, as it's proposed to be called, um it wouldn't want their jobs dropped out from underneath them out of uh no no cause of their own, no fault of their own, and then not have an opportunity to gain employment when a new restaurant opens. That's all we're asking, but we're demanding it. and the city needs to demand it because otherwise it won't happen. People don't stop at sun at stop

signs unless they're there. Thank you.

Thank you, Matt Horn. And after Mr. Horn comes up, I've got Maria Espinosa, then Aurelia Gonzalez, Christina Santiago, and then I just have a Christina after that with no last name. Good evening, honorable mayor, mayor pom and city council members. My name is Matthew H and I'm the LA and Santa Monica organizer at clue clergy and laty united for economic justice. And as we are every single time we are here in deep solidarity with hospitality, tourism, restaurant workers, including those who gave so many years of their lives and so much passion into Rusty's on the Pier into making that restaurant in the pier such a vital and vibrant part of what attracts people from across the world to this great city. And the pier, as so many of you know, is more than just a landmark to us. It's a symbol of who we are. And it's where families gather and visitors from across the world are welcomed into our city. And that feeling doesn't come from the buildings or the view alone, but it comes from these workers who greet us and bring life to the pier every single day. The resties workers are a key part of this, whether they worked just a year or many of them. Um, and they deserve um this community to be stronger when we honor the people who helped to build it. So please,

thank you, Maria Espinosa.

Is sorry registered? Yeah, she's registered for one minute though. Did you really want two minutes and two minutes for translation? Yes, please.

Okay. Local 11. Hi again. Hello. My name is Maria Spinosa and I am a housekeeper at the Sanborn Hotel, formerly known as La Mer Go, where I have worked there for 21 years and I'm a proud member of unite here local 11.

Workers across the city depend on transparent public processes. Yesterday's turnout at the Peer Corporation meeting showed how much this matters to all of us. Because when a lease is pushed through without accessible notice and without worker retention requirements, it sends a message that workers who keep this city running are disposable. If a business can reopen without bringing back longtime workers, that threatens job stability for all of us. I understand this kind of situation because my hotel underwent a change of ownership. As I mentioned, we were La Mergo Hotel before and if it weren't for the right of return, my 21 years of service at the same hotel property would have gotten thrown in the trash. Additionally, I live in this very city, so I contribute to this community in more ways than most. And it's absurd to me that we're still going through this. Regardless if a worker is in our hotels or working on our pier, every worker deserves a fair opportunity to continue to work in this community. people do not please do not approve this lease unless it includes a worker retention policy that would ensure laid off workers would be offered the first chance to return to jobs they want. Thank you.

Thank you. Aelia Gonzalez. I'm back.

Four minutes, please. Santa Monica. Santa Monica. Um, Hello again. Um, good evening. My name is Aurelia Gonzalez and I am a worker um at the Sanborn Hotel in Santa Monica where I've have worked for the last 25 years. I am a proud member of Here Local

11 and hotel workers already won worker retention in Santa Monica and it's made a profound difference in our lives and our famil family's lives. Yesterday we stood with peer workers at the peer corporation meeting to support them because Santa Monica recognized that stability and respect for workers should come first in the past. Peer workers deserve that same respect and that same protection. Now, I know firsthand as well um through a similar circumstance where the company denied my opportunity to work for two years and thankfully because of the retention policy and the fight within my union to bring me back, I was able to return back to work. Please do not approve this lease unless it includes a worker retention policy that would ensure laidoff workers would be offered the first chance to return to the jobs they once held. Now there are cooks, housekeepers, dishwashers that are strong armed that build Santa Monica. And we too stand in solidarity with the workers here and we ask of you that you bring our colleagues back. Thank you.

Thank you, Christina Santiago. Miss Santiago, you're signed up for one minute. Is that correct? Yeah, that is correct.

Good evening, mayor and council. My name is Christina Santiago and I'm a longtime Santa Monica resident. We need transparency when public land is involved and this lease like the basic public notice to review that to re to review that workers and We need transparency when public land is involved and this lease lack the basic public notice and review the workers and residents depend on a right of return is essential for workers to make sure that they aren't left behind when business changed hands. Yesterday despite the rain workers showed up and demand fairness at the pure corporation meeting because a public land lease process without public notice and without giving workers the chance to return is not the standard Santa Monica should set. And the truth is the fight didn't start yesterday. There is already an ongoing labor dispute at the pier. Workers and community have been out there picking sometimes in the cold, sometimes in the rain because we refuse to be ignored. We're out there because this matters to our families, to our comm.

Thank you. Is that Oh, okay. There's another Christina afterwards. Is that okay? Okay. I have a Christina without a last name. And then I've got Marie Antonoma, Sierra, Robbie Jones, and Hajar and then we have late signups right from speaker 23 down um Miss Hajar and Mr. Morgan or Okay. So Marie and Toma Fersa.

Good evening mayor and council members. My name is Marian Toma and I'm an organizer with theite here local 11. One of the central requirements of the Brown Act is that regular meetings must have an agenda posted at least 72 hours in advance so the public can understand what will be discussed and decided whether to participate. But for the October 20th, 2022 25 meeting where the pier corporation took substantive is action on the lease in uh 256 Santa Monica Pier, the peer corporation failed to post the agenda for the meeting that on your website and it still has not been posted to this day. This is a serious violation of the Brown Act. We are formally demanding that Santa Monica Peer Corporation cure and correct these violations by rescending the actions taken illegally on October 20th. The public deserved the opportunity it was denied. A clear withdrawal of any commitments made, a transparent explanation at a properly noticed future meeting of why individual members took the positions they did, and a full opportunity for informed public comment in that meeting. And finally, as you move forward, we want to be clear, no lease should be approved without public notice and review and without a right of return.

Thank you, Sierra. And then after Sierra, we have Robbie Jones, Hajar, and Devon Ray Morgan. And then Sierra, you're it looks like you're on here twice, I think. I wasn't sure. Okay.

Good evening. My name is Sierra Jones. I'm here because for the last three years, I have been living with ongoing target harassment from my landlord. My landlord has retaliated against me for exercising my rights. He has racially discriminated against me and involved neighbors and third parties to bully and intimidate me. I am being targeted in a way that no tenant in this city should ever experience. Santa Monica tells his residents that it has some of the strongest tenant protections in California, but those ordinances have not protected me. I have um I have submitted my complaint to the city attorney's office three times. I have provided ring video footage, emails. I've showed that there's been police involvement in a clear pattern of retaliation. I would like help because at this moment it has affected my mental health. Um, a little bit about myself. I have two cats that I love dearly and I would like to be here to take care of them, but my landlord is making it very difficult for me and the city attorney's office refuses to do anything. Um, I've been told by at least four people in in the scheme of law that Santa Monica has strong landlord tenant harassment

ordinances and that the city attorney's office should have acted on my complaints. Thank you. Okay. So, the last three speakers are Robbie Jones, Hajar, and Devon. And council, they were late chits, so I need a motion to be able to hear them. Second. Moved by Mayor Promosis, and seconded by council member Snell. I to hear the three late speakers. All in favor? You have to do a roll call. Oh, sorry. That's right. Council member Zerkaya. Yes. Council member Snow. Yes. Mayor Timosas.

Yes. Council member Raskin. Yes. Council member Hall. Yes. Council member Zwick. I'm sorry. Mrete. Yes. You'll get one minute.

Okay. I'll make it brief because y'all already know why I'm here. Um. Okay. So, we're embarking on the third year of Black Apology. Um I want to say that few years ago I particip well well more than a few years ago quite a few years ago participated in um rainbow operation rainbow push uh Reverend Jesse Jackson which we you know I'll pray for right now uh with his health um he and his family but um they did a commitment to education. So, as you all know, you got emails today from Committee for Racial Justice on a commitment of accountability from the black community. Um, while the black apology, y'all voted unanimously, um, there's no visible accountability. And, you know, we also had put a list together um, prior to. So, can y'all take a look at that again and see what you Thank you, Hajar. Good afternoon. Good evening. In 2023, you issued a historic black apology. Acknowledging harms, and committing to a path of restitution, healing, and structural repair. Yet, an apology without action is an empty gesture. Progress has been slow. commitments have gone unmet and the urgency for justice remains. Today, reaffirm clearly and without hesitation your commitment to actively advance the promises made in the 2023 black apology. I call upon city leadership, community partners, institutions, businesses, and residents across Santa Monica to join in

this work with courage, honesty, sustained accountability. The 2023 Black Apology was a beginning, not an end. Our work now is to make its promises real. Thank you. Thank you, Devon Ray Morgan. Devon Ray Morgan. Okay, I think that is Devon here and then we have two speakers on the phone. Correct.

Edgar, you can bring in the calls now, please. Good afternoon, council members. Uh, our first speaker is Mr. Mike Montgomery. Uh, you have two minutes. Uh, please press star six to unmute yourself.

Hi. Uh, good evening. Many of us remember when Santa Monica felt safe to walk at night, when our parks were welcoming, and when our public spaces reflected real pride in this community. And that feeling slipping away, at least it is for me, and I think we're hearing from a lot of people tonight that they're feeling the same way. We're seeing more crime, more open drug use, more struggling businesses, and a city failing to manage even the basics. Um, and these problems didn't just happen overnight. They were the result of decisions made too fast, without transparency, and without honest communication. And nothing nothing illustrates that more clearly than the Ocean Avenue housing projects. What happened with these projects projects wasn't just rush rushed. It felt deceptive. Residents weren't told the truth. The full scope wasn't disclosed. Key details were hidden or softened. Uh and by the time we finally understood what was coming, these were already quietly advanced. And that's not transparency. That's not public outreach. That is leadership deciding the outcome first and uh hiding it from the public. So people feel misled because in many ways they were um we were told projects were routine. They weren't. We were told everything was fully vetted. That's not true. We were told the community had been engaged. We weren't not even close. And these are massive, high impact facilities placed in one of the most sensitive corridors in the city. Projects like this demand open hearings, real neighborhood input, and honest explanations. Instead, the city just pushed them forward quietly, hoping we wouldn't catch on until it was too late or after the fact. And that is not how healthy government behaves. Santa Monica deserves leaders who speak

plainly, who tell the truth, and who respect the people who reside here. Residents are not opposed to helping vulnerable individuals. Um, thank you for your time. Our next speaker is Mr. Steven Price. Mr. Price, please press star six to unmute yourself. You have two minutes. Uh yes. So um I I called tonight because I feel that Santa Monica deserves a lot better than the management it's been getting. Uh I'm going to echo a lot of what the previous caller said. Great job to him for for stating a lot of the of the same feelings I had. You know, our city is is not failing by accident. It is failing because of choices that have been made. Choices that have led to rising crime. You know, drug use right out in the open, unchecked encampments, and and the collapse of the small business environment that once made this city vibrant and safe. residents. You know, we're we're tired of being told that this is normal or that it's somehow acceptable for one of the wealthiest cities in this nation to feel less safe and less functional than ever. We were once a model community. Now we are a known statewide for mismanagement, secrecy, and rushed decisions that sidestep the people who actually live here. We've watched millions of taxpayer dollars flow into programs with little transparency and even fewer results. We've seen politically motivated decisions, including the sighting of major homeless and mental health facil facilities pushed forward quietly without genuine community input or accountability. And while these projects move at at lightning speed, the basics of city

management move at a crawl. Our parks and public spaces are not safe or clean. Local businesses are closing. Families who've lived here for decades are questioning whether they still belong. The truth is simple. Santa Monica is not working for us residents. And when the city stops working for its own people, it's time for one thing and one thing only, and that is change. We need leadership that listens. Leadership that actually measures outcomes, demands accountability from service providers and partner agencies, and stops approving projects just because they're politically convenient.

Edgar, is that complete? Public comment. Yes, that complete public comment. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. We'll now move on to special agenda items. Item 2A, World Day of Remembrance for Traffic Victims, road traffic victims.

Thank you. I'd like to call forward um Kado Vain with Streets for All, Deputy Fire Chief Dan Caldwell, Battalion Chief John Sly, members from Fire Engine One, Police Department staff, and Anuj Gupta, Director of Transportation, Jason Cligier, Chief Planning Officer. It's a lot of people. It's half this room. I'm going to read the proclamation and then whoever wants to speak up and then I'm assuming we're going to take a photo. Today is we are um proclaiming World Day of Remembrance for victims of traffic violence is observed globally to honor the millions of people who have been killed or seriously injured on roadways and to recognize the deep and lasting impact traffic crashes have on families, friends, and communities. And whereas traffic violence is a preventable public health crisis and every life lost represents a call to action for safer streets, equitable mobility, and a transportation system that pri prioritizes human life above all else. And whereas Streets for All, a leading advocacy organization dedicated to improving mobility, reducing traffic injuries, and creating safer, more sustainable streets, works tirelessly to advance policies and street designs that protect all road users, including pedestrians, cyclists, children, seniors, and people with disabilities. And whereas Streets for All collaborates with community members and policy makers to champion safety improvements, raise awareness of roadway dangers, and advocate for proven strategies that save lives. And whereas World Day of Remembrance provides an important opportunity for the Santa Monica community to stand in solidarity with survivors, honor those lost to traffic crashes, and reaffirm the city's commitment to vision zero and the elimination of severe and fatal collisions. Now therefore, I, Lana Negrete, as mayor of the city of Santa

Monica, on behalf of the city council, do hereby proclaim the third Sunday in November as World Day of Remembrance for victims of traffic violence and recognize Streets for All for its steadfast leadership and advocacy in creating safer streets and preventing further tragedies on our roadways. Did you want to come up and speak, KTO? Good evening everyone. So my name is Cara Valain and I'm here to represent streets for all. Uh we want to thank you for this proclamation and we want to urge you to take it as a call to action. Reco recognizing victims of traffic violence is only meaningful if appropriate action follows. In 2016, the city set a goal to achieve vision zero, the elimination of fatal and severe injury crashes by 2026. I recommend looking back at some of the measures that were proposed in that plan if you if in that plan if you haven't already. In 2024, there were 60 fatal and severe injury crashes, up from 39 in 2023. So, we're not on track. Uh, we're fortunate to have very smart and dedicated staff working on these projects and a council majority that actually cares about these issues, but what some of the recent tragedies tell us is that we're not doing enough. We can eliminate traffic fatalities. It's not easy and it'll take serious dedication and political will. Um, but other cities have shown us that it is possible. So, I think the best way to honor victims of traffic violence is to do our best to ensure that no one else suffers the same fate. Thank you. It's not me.

They're not in the vein of what? Hi guys. Yeah. Yeah. Hope you can see us. Thank you guys. Thank you very much.

Thanks for coming. Item 2B, proclamation for transgender awareness week. So, we're going to read the proclamation and then afterwards we're going to do the adjournment. Yeah. Whereas transgender awareness week held November 13th through 19th uplifts the vo voices and lived experiences of transgender and gender expansive people while deepening public understanding, visibility, and inclusion. And whereas transgender people continue to face dis disproportionate harm in housing, health care, employment, and safety with the 2023 US transgender survey reporting more than 30% of transgender adults have experienced homelessness or housing instability. And whereas the city of Santa Monica remains committed to being a place where all LGBTQ plus people, including transgender residents, workers, students, and visitors, feel valued, affirmed, and safe. And whereas transgender awareness week leads into transgender day of remembrance on November 20th, which honors transgender individuals whose lives have been taken by hate and violence. And the Santa Monica City Council will adjourn and read those names during this meeting, the memory of transgender lives lost over the past year. Now therefore, I, Lana Negrete, mayor of the city of Santa Monica, on behalf of the members of city council, do hereby proclaim the week of November 13 through 19 as transgender awareness week in the city of Santa Monica and encourage all residents to join in efforts that advance dignity, safety, and inclusion for transgender people in Santa Monica and everywhere.

Um, sorry. So, this was an endurement, but we felt it appropriate to read this after this proclamation. Colleagues, as we adjourn our meeting tonight, I'd like to note that this Thursday, November 20th, is Transgender Day of Remembrance. On that day, across the nation and across the world, we pause to honor and remember transgender people whose lives were taken by violence. Violence fueled by transphobia, cruelty, and hate. Every life taken as a person whose story mattered. Every name spoken is a reminder of a full human being who deserve dignity, safety, community, and joy. Colleagues, will you join me in the reading of their names? I will start. Amay Dior, age 23. Arty Cassidy Bewolf Gibson, age 23. Aubrey Dearan, age 25. Aurora Pelligrina Alexa Luna, 35. Blair A. Sawyer, 27. Bla1 Alexander Bellmason 17, Charlotte Fosgate, 17, Dream Johnson, 28. Alyssa Ray Shupe, 61. Emma Slavach, 24, and Urbana Johnson, 25.

Gabrielle Camwin, 21. Hope Young Bloodood, 49. Jax Graten, 34. JJ Godbay 26, Jonathan Joss 59. Jordan JJ May 17. Council members Erneskaya,

Pam Nordquist, age 24, Scarlet, age 21, Shyarius Dupri, age 32. Tahiri Broom, age 29, Tessa June, age 21, and Tiara Love Tori Jackson, age 37.

Caitlyn Vanetta Benoy, 15, Kelsey M, 25, K. Leah Tabitha Roberts, 55. Laura Scheler, 47. Lily Dawn Hawkins, 22. Linda Brcetta Moran 30. Ktoria Le Cynthia Banks Kai 31. Kamora Woods 27. Carmen Wells 25. Cassie Ray 31. Nathaniel Peabone Cruz Natada 27. Nora Orwitz 38. Onyx Cornish 18.

Parker Saves 15. Robin James Post 48. Rosa Machuka, 24,

and Blake Sturm, 25. Here in Santa Monica, we reaffirm our commitment to stand with our transgender neighbors, family members, co-workers, students, and friends, and we recommmit to working toward a community rooted in inclusion, acceptance, and love. Tonight, we will be adjourning this meeting in memory of all transgender people who have been killed as a result of transphobia and in solidarity with the transgender community here at home and around the world. Item 2 C proclamation for the month of Movember. Movember is an annual global campaign held each November to raise awareness about key men's health issues, particularly prostate cancer, testicular cancer, and mental health and suicide prevention. And whereas Movember began in 2003 in Melbourne, Australia, when two friends challenged 30 men to grow mustaches to spark dialogue about men's health, launching a movement that spans multiple countries and has raised funding for research, education, and support programs. And whereas Movember's signature activities, growing a MO, hosting events, and encouraging physical challenges, have made men's health more visible and reduced stigma by inspiring conversations and promoting care. And whereas while men's health awareness month is a broader national initiative, November concentrates on three priority areas: prostate cancer, testicular cancer, and mental health, where improving early detection, treatment, and support can measurably save lives. And whereas Movember has helped accelerate research breakthroughs, increase access to screening and care and strengthen community programs focused on connection, resilience, and healthy decision-making. And whereas the city of Santa Monica remains committed to community health and recognizes the importance of access to prevention care, destigmatizing mental health, and encouraging men to seek help when needed. Now therefore, I, Lana, mayor of

the city of Santa Monica, on behalf of the members of this city council, do hereby proclaim the month of November 2025 as Movember in the city of Santa Monica, and encourage all residents to participate in efforts that raise awareness, support those affected by prostate cancer, testicular cancer, and mental health challenges, and promote early detection, treatment, and support. I'd like to tell my husband to go to a doctor. I've been with him 25 years, and he's never been. Hopefully, he's listening. Um, I just outed him. Sorry. But I think a lot of men, we we are often always talking about women's health and we forget about our men. So, I just want to say a special shout out to all of our men here in this chamber, those who serve and those at home. Um, we see you and go get your mental health and your physical health checked. I don't know if there's is there someone that I'm giving this to. I'm so sorry. I feel like it's uh Sorry, I was supposed to call forward people and I just totally screwed that part up. Okay, police staff, fire department staff, including fire deputy chief uh Dan Caldwell, if you guys will come to the well and you can uh show us your mo. And uh I feel like it's beyond a mustache and it's more of a beard.

Madame Mayor, I would like to um see if perhaps we should I can't if for those that are engaged in Movember um certain members of our public safety team have actually been curating the MO instead of just letting it grow. We might uh where's the curation? We might have everyone turn around and have the council select who's curated the most. Oh, okay. Let's see. Oh, yeah. I see a theme. I feel like I think the police aren't allowed to grow facial hair any other time. So, you guys have a

fire has a heads up. Chief Jacob has agreed to allow that to happen this this year. You guys look great. Thank you guys.

You cannot like 12y old feel like I need to clean up that statement about my husband. He doesn't go because he's so healthy. So, I'm just going to put that out there. He doesn't want he doesn't want to go to find out if he's not okay. I think we have moved to do an adjournment or before we go, right? Are we doing that now? Next. Uh, no. I thought we were going to do it before we go to close session.

Okay. Sorry. You're right. Um public input for items under consent calendar and close session only. This includes the regular session and special meeting. Uh public input is not permitted on ordinance or second reading adoption. And looks like we have six speakers in the queue. Yes. Okay. So I've got Nikki Kolhoff, Denise Barton, Terry Davis Bernstein, and Mindy Shank. And just a reminder to please state for the record which items you're speaking on when you uh come to the microphone. Miss Kolhoff, I have you registered twice. Are you speaking on two items?

Yes, I'm speaking to 5D and 4S.

Okay, you can proceed. I was waiting for the timer.

It's gonna start once you start speak. Can I start the timer? Okay. Uh, first I will speak to 4S. Um, Nikki Kolhoff, resident of Sunset Park. I urge you to oppose adoption of the local hazard mitigation plan in its current form. First, the ubers it took to agendaize this emergency plan as a consent item, which means it's not worthy of a staff report or discussion is stunning, but also consistent with a staff and council who created an entire realignment plan with no public input. While the draft outlines the hazards facing our community, it contains gaps that leave out it out of compliance with state law and weaken its effectiveness as a public safety document. This forces us to ask why you are choosing not to take the safety of residents into account and certainly appears to be tied to your quest to overdevelop Santa Monica. Since the state has exempted most new developments from SQA, the only way we can challenge a project is to demonstrate a threat to health and safety. But if you refuse to conduct the study and we don't have the data to prove that Santa Monica doesn't have the evacuation capacity to handle additional development, it makes it very hard for us to challenge that development. And this seems by design. It seems you are willing to put all of our lives at risk to keep the developer spigot flowing. The only way to prove us wrong is to halt all new development until you can prove we are safe. Next 5D. The city changed the zoning of a portion of 264430th Street from R1 to neighborhood commercial and determined that this zoning change was exempt from SQA under the common sense exemption because it quote can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendments may have a significant effect on the environment. That's all that's before you tonight. Does the common sense exemption apply?

And the answer, of course, is no, because it can't possibly have no foreseeable impact. The proposed reasonzoning not only enables it to go to 85 ft tall, it changes the uses. This is in the middle of R1. A 10-year reprieve from certain kinds of development in the covenant that you all sought from the developer is proof that there are impacts and evidence that the land use and zoning change is not eligible for the common sense exemption. It doesn't matter that you have a covenant or that you think you mitigated. The fact that there is an impact to mitigate means you don't qualify for the common sense exemption. In addition to 85 feet height of height, here is a list of uses that are now permitted on that property which staff failed to provide council despite multiple requests by the community to have this put in the record. There is no way any of you can say with a straight face that these have no possibility of a significant effect effect. Here's the list from the code. Grooming and pet services. This is again in R1 residential pet daycare services. Veterinary services, alternative fuels and recharging facilities, banks and credit unions, business services, theater, small-scale gaming, arcade, restaurants, full service, limited service and takeout, including outdoor dining and seating up to 5,000 square ft. Food hall up to 175 seats. Convenience market, farmers market, general market, liquor stores. Can't wait for one of those next door. Instructional services, live work, bed and breakfast, maintenance and repair services, nurseries and garden centers, outdoor news stands, general personal services, tattoo or body modification parlor, general retail sales, bus and

passenger stations, utilities, bike share facility. Obviously, this is no this is no appropriate uh place for the common sense exemption. These all have impact Thank you, Denise Barton. Good even Good evening. On item 4 I, just so I understand this right, you're encouraging people to drink alcohol in your entertainment zone, aka the prominade. But here you want to saturate the city with public officers looking for DUIs. Here is the city saying, "Give the city your money for alcohol, then give the city more money for the citation and the towing of your vehicle." Next item 4S. My concern here again is that the city's safety element does not meet evacuation access assessment requirements, which can be seen on page B19 in volume 3 appendixes. Another concern is on page B17 where it states, "Emphasize the importance of incorporating mitigation and resilience building into all programs and encourage the practice into the city staff's culture similar to sustainability. In other words, this is the next thing to scare the public. Or do you not want the to admit with all of your new large developments are happening near freeway onramps which will hinder and make evacuations take longer due to traffic not only on the streets but on the 10 freeway back to BCH making it harder for other areas to evacuate too. And finally item 4L just so just so I have this right. You misappropriate funding from the Boeing Gillette settlement fund even though it's only supposed to use for water service. You've raised the water rates to cover the misappropriation and now you're fraudulently going to apply for a federal grant. Do I have

this right? Thank you. Terry Davis Bernstein.

Hi. Due to timing considerations, I filed the SQA lawsuit 5D under my name with the help of concerned neighbors. We will be amending and following up with legal representation. We filed the lawsuit not only to reverse the wrongful reasonzoning at 264430th, but also to establish a public rep record of opposition to this action as your minutes do not fairly represent resident concerns. How is reszoning a section of a twob block long R1 street or neighborhood commercial reasonable? It doesn't make sense. It also doesn't make sense to give a business person a huge favor like this with nothing in return for the residents. My guess is somebody got something. Have developers been shouting into your ears so relentlessly that you have forgotten why you went into public service in the first place? The elephant in the room is that you on the council have a very difficult job and you are not being paid enough. That is a recipe for disaster. People try to equalize things and I'm afraid that you might rationalize doing the bidding of others in exchange for a new job or donations to your favorite charity or the promise of support when you seek your next public office. This doesn't have to be the way things are done. You can back away from this resoning knowing that because of your enormous workload and your forced reliance on city staff, you one accepted their misrepresentations of this being an error in loose. Two, you unknowingly let a property owner make a reasonzoning request without paying the proper fees and filing the proper forms. Three, you gave into pressure to go along with some bigger plan of developers with money and a long agenda rather than following your conscience, which was evident when this first came up and you initially tabled the item.

It is not your fault that you were sent down this path, but you do have the power to step back from this resoning position. Please reverse your action. Thank you. Before I call up uh Miss Shank, I have Eve Lopez and then Trisha Crane after Miss Shank. Mindy can never get this right. Hi, good evening. I am Mindy Shank. I am speaking to item 5D. Tonight, I'd like to address the continuing pattern of neglecting Santa Monica residents public health and safety. This council continues to plow ahead on approving all new development and projects without regard for environmental and safety concerns of our residents. Squa exemptions are the flavor of the day, week, month, and year. This is the rubber stamp that this council has put on the reszone of the R1 parcel at 2644 30th Street, as well as the new lease of jets taking off at the supposedly soon to be closing Santa Monica airport. Similarly, the state of our current evacuation plans are dismal, if at all existent, and again, our livelihoods are not a priority for the city. This proves to us that the public safety needs of the residents are insidiously ignored at our own peril. Stop advancing the wishes of the corporations and developers and center the people and the planet in your consequential decisions. None of these decisions is truly exempt from environmental impact studies. Why spend so much in realigning the city and plant trees while ignoring the rest of the environment? It is shameful. Thank you.

Thank you, Eve Lopez. Power just the PowerPoint, please.

Thank you. Great. Thank you. Uh, and good evening, council members. I'd like you to imagine a wildfire or a major rupture on the Santa Monica fault, which triggers a tsunami. Now, imagine every resident, worker, visitor trying to leave the city at the same time. The truth is simple. We don't know if they can. That is the risk that you are being asked to ignore here tonight. The LHMP is woefully will willfully inaccurate. While it identifies wildfire routes, tsunami and coastal flooding routes and inundation route, it fails to address the capacity of those routes. So, while we can say take these certain streets in the event of an emergency, you don't actually know if this will be Palisades 2.0 because you haven't complied with the law and done the analysis to understand if the roads could handle the capacity to get us out safely. This is a legal requirement. This is not something we're asking as additional or optional. This is statemandated and you we haven't complied with it. City Council members and staff have habitually, all of you, I look each of you in the eye because I have raised this with every single one of you and have with my hair on fire wondered why you aren't as concerned as I am. This is a legal requirement. Our safety is

important to us and it should be to you. Without knowing the capacity of our evacuation routes, you simply don't know if we can survive. We have asked not only for the evacuation study, but on the screen is our chief resilient officer's email where she admits that she forgot to ask about the process for updating our evacuation routes. That is unacceptable. Our lives depend on your leadership. Without this analysis, we just don't know if we are safe. Please stop accepting staff's representation that the plans are legally compliant. Thank you, Trisha Crane.

Northeast Neighbors and I'm representing the residents of our neighborhood whose homes sit on an earthquake fault line. Our board opposes agenda item 4S because Santa Monica does not have a detailed publicly available emergency evacuation route capacity analysis which is required by state law. Specifically AB747 and SB99. They both require every California city to evaluate whether its evacuation routes are safe, viable, and capable of moving our population out of harm's way during disasters. which means analyzing road capacity, chokepoints, clearance times, accessibility for seniors, and people with disabilities, and how evacuation performance changes under different hazards like wildfire, earthquake, or tsunami. Santa Monica's documents, the safety element, the local hazard mitigation plan, the local coastal program, and the tsunami evacuation maps show roots, but none of them contain the required capacity analysis. Without this analysis, the city cannot demonstrate that our evacuation system is adequate today, let alone with the added population expected under new state housing laws. This is both a public safety issue and a legal compliance issue. As has been pointed out, we urged the city to prepare a full AB747 compliant evacuation route analysis. An analysis, not a map, before approving additional development or adopting updates to the safety element. Thank you.

Thank you. That concludes public input on that item. We'll now move to the consent calendar. All items will be considered and approved in one motion unless removed by a council member for descent. For discussion, sorry. In accordance with charter section 615, the adoption of all ordinances and resolutions shall be reading of title only unless a council member present descents. No public discussion is permitted on ordinance or second reading and adoption. And I just want to note for the record that um the minutes for October 28th have been amended to specify that survivors, as noted in item 16F, should specify that it's for survivors of domestic violence. And I have a note that council member Hall would like to pull for A.

Yes. And I'd like to pull for S. Yes. Uh thank you, mayor. Um I will be recusing from item 4 A due to a conflict of interest based on where my residence is located. Okay, I will move the consent calendar with the exception of 4 A and 4S. Second. Moved by Mayor Pam Terrosa, seconded by Council Member Raskin. Council member Hall. Yes. Council member Raskin. Yes. Promosis. Yes. Council member Snell. Yes. Council. Yes. And Mayor Negrete.

Yes. Would you like to do 4S first? Item 4S, adoption of a resolution approving and adopting the city of Santa Monica's update updated local hazard mitigation plan. Do we have slide deck? Yeah. Thank you.

Good evening, council. So, I'm coming tonight uh to present a collaborative effort uh that took multiple years to create. Um this is our local hazard mitigation plan. It's an update from our 2016 plan. Um just a little bit about my team. I I'm Lindsay Co. I oversee the office of emergency management which is the public safety communications uh unit as well as the emergency services and preparedness unit um that oversees disaster management mitigation efforts preparedness and response. So what is the local hazard mitigation plan? Um, one of the main purposes is to raise awareness about our local community hazards and the risks and also to identify a five-year mitigation action plan to reduce those risks and community vulnerabilities. This is an opportunity for us to agree upon priorities um that are multi-partal that we want to move forward again to reduce that risk and ensure that resources are available uh to those that need them the most and implement these action items in an equitable way. The planning team um again was across multiple years and involved many city departments and valued partners um including other jurisdictions and their emergency managers uh local hospitals, the college and school district, local nonprofits and business representatives. This uh chart or graphic shows our planning process. We started in July

2023 um identifying the stakeholders to sit on the panel. Um mind you that this is a FEMA required plan with very specific requirements and so we wanted to make sure that this resilience planning committee and um group really was reflective of whole community. We conducted extensive hazard research um in alignment with the safety elements hazard research. We conducted a public survey in January 2024 to identify um community input on vulnerabilities, preparedness, and what actions they wanted to see uh taken to reduce disaster risk. Then we went through our chapter review which was a painful process making sure that subject matter experts had an opportunity to weigh in and do the word smithing to ensure that it was reflective of uh realities within the city. The safety element was adopted in February 2025. We had a public uh comment period for the draft of the local hazard mitigation plan in September. I have been to three commission meetings to present the plan and per and get feedback that way um last month and then we're here tonight after uh council adoption. Uh Calloes and FEMA will review this plan and provide feedback and questions that may result in revisions um before FEMA officially adopts the plan. Then every five years we are required to update our local hazard mitigation plan to reflect new concerns and issues. So why did it take so long? Um I'm a tiny but mighty team um in emergency services and preparedness and we're responsible again for disaster

preparedness, mitigation, recovery and response and we've been very busy with response and recovery. Um these are some of the natural hazard incidents that occurred during planning. Um primarily in January 2025, Palisades and Eden fires um uh were a a impactful response and also lengthy recovery effort that also involved us um implementing FEMA reimbursement measures and things like that. It also required us to rewrite three chapters of the plan. So, we went back, rewrote the wildfire chapter, rewrote the climate change chapter, and met with our stakeholders to identify mitigation actions that were specific to wildfire as we had a brand new reality to deal with. There are many different uh volumes and chapter sections in the plan. Um some key components. Uh one thing to note is our executive summary is available in Spanish. We also do a community profile risk assess risk assessment goals and action items and how the PL plan will be maintained. Um we have hazard information on all the hazards listed there that go into detail about that specific hazards. Um it provides a risk analysis um and gives general mitigation measures that are available for those different hazards. We have many different resources available to community members through the appendices and I want to point out that a key next step that hasn't happened yet. So, we received grant funding through FEMA for this plan and we are we understand that this is a a multi- like 400page document and not very user friendly for the everyday

citizen who needs to learn about hazard um that are in their community and what to do about it. So we're using that funding to create public education tools available in multi multiple language languages both hard copies and digital um so that the community can be better informed and engaged. Um this plan is not a response focused plan. That is not what FEMA requires of this plan. And so it we have other response plans that address how we respond in an emergency. The emergency operations plan guides this uh detailed response and sets the framework. We also have tsunami, peer emergency, civil unrest, alert and warning, rush fire evacuation, facility emergency action plans, and other department procedures that detail response actions. So what did our hazard analysis uh findings show? Uh the greatest risk is for earthquake, tsunami, wildland fire, flood due to dam inundation failure, severe weather and sea level rise. Lower risk items were coastal flooding, landslide, structure fires, hazardous materials release, and airport crashes. FEMA has a tool called Hazis that is a GISbased risk assessment software that has the capability to estimate earthquake, tsunami, hurricane and flood um damage and impacts due to those disasters. We use those disasters to or we use that software to evaluate the disasters um that are applicable to Santa Monica um and then presented those findings to the resilience planning committee to take next steps. We did use an also used

a tool called crisis track to estimate potential wildland fire loss and how much of a financial impact it would have um especially with the new state guidelines. So, um I'm here to present all of the doom and gloom information. Um we looked at four different uh fault scenarios for earthquake. Santa Monica fault, Newport Englewood, Palace Verdeise fault that would prompt a local tsunami and then the um most famous shakeout scenario of a San Andreas earthquake. Um these are the estimates of building damage per for each earthquake scenario uh injuries and total economic loss. As you can see when the fault line is closest to Santa Monica, it has the highest number of damage because it's the most intense shaking. um as the fault line fault moves away the the shaking uh would decrease or be less significant and then the uh the estimates are lower. However, for example, the San Andreas is surprising because that we think of that as our worst case scenario often. Um while our local numbers may be lower, it doesn't take into consideration the regional impact that transportation lines could be down um and there could be a cascading impact or a secondary wave of injuries and issues um because of the regional impacts to San Andreas. Uh these slides just show the residential building loss um and building exposure. Again, it really is dependent on the location of the fault and how the wave earthquake wave travels

um to Santa Monica. Uh it shows uh where the building damage is most likely. This is the same type of figure but for commercial building loss. Um next for tsunamis, uh we looked at local source tsunamis and long-distance tsunamis. Um so a local source tsunami is during an earthquake um where an earthquake or local seismic event occurs and it creates a tsunami immediately. I want to be clear in that s in that scenario. We want the public to drop cover and hold on when the shaking starts and then to immediately evacuate by foot, not by vehicle out of harm's way and out of the tsunami inundation zone. They can use a bicycle, they can use a scooter, but we do not want them to be in a vehicle in if an earthquake occurs and it prompts a tsunami event. For a long-distance tsunami, we work very closely with National Weather Service to identify when exactly the tsunami waves will first be coming on shore. Um, typically this is for Alaska, Russia or another worldwide event and then we implement evacuation procedures accordingly. This is the statewide tsunami inundation map with a teles tsunami originating in Alaska with a 20 foot runup. Um, again, north of or north of the pier, it goes up to PCH. South of the pier, it mainly impacts our beaches and parking lots and parks. Um, there are condos that are impacted. Um and as well as oceanfront walk

uh we ran the haz tsunami risk analysis. Um this shows the uh exposed population. It the haz tool cannot account for visitors. It just uses our resident population. Um and we understand that tsunamis will have on a a daytime event versus a nighttime event. there are differences as well as how many employees um may be in the area uh during an event. The next event that is most impactful is the inundation due to the Stone Canyon Dam failure. Um the Stone Canyon Dam is up at the top of that map. Um if they had a this map shows an absolute catastrophic failure um which is a low probabilility event but it would be a tremendous impact on West LA and some impact on Santa Monica. This shows you the flooding boundaries within Santa Monica and the estimated residential building loss in these areas. and then also the commercial building loss. Um, one thing to note is that in this event, um, West LA is tremendously impacted and so we would also have to, um, work with Los Angeles to evacuate those residents into Santa Monica or into uh, not areas that are not inundated, not just for Santa Monica residents. This shows the haz um results for the Stone Canyon Dam. Um this is again only to Santa Monica with 214 buildings in

the area including 23 residential buildings. Um so our wildfire uh outlook changed drastically in 2025 clearly. Um, previously this was the California fire hazard severity zone where the border of the high uh very high hazard uh stopped at Santa Monica's border. Um, primarily our posture uh for wildland fire events was to fully support Malibu and the Palisades in their evacuation. Um and do we have a robust traffic services plan that unfortunately has been exercised several times uh to facilitate uh that evacuation procedure. Of course, the Palisades fire occurred uh in January um and destroyed almost 7,000 homes. Um and so it has uh reshaped our local wildfire risk and also has changed the state maps. These are the new uh wildfire hazard maps that just came out in March 2025. We do not have the ability to run this scenario in haz, but we ran it in our own damage assessment system and um if all of the buildings were impacted the same way, it could cost 60 million to 660 million. Uh that likely is a low estimate. Um, climate change is also um something that we focused on um during our analysis, especially with extreme weather events like this week's rains um were uncharacteristic for November in Southern California. It is difficult to

quantify um but we all are familiar that these types of events are occurring more regularly um requiring a lot of resources and that reducing our greenhouse gas emissions is the primary thing that will reduce the impact. Um this is our look at sea level rise and the damage that would occur to our beaches and pier. um estimated two 22 million damage $22 million in damage of private private damage a total of 847.5 million. Okay. So what are we going to do about it? Well again we met collaboratively to identify mitigation actions to reduce this vulnerability. Um again after the Palisades fire we came back together to identify uh new mitigation action items that we're recommending uh to reduce wildfire um hazard and risk. Uh this progress is monitored by my my team and then the updates are provided in the next local hazard mitigation plan in five years. So I just want to be clear on the constraints to implementation. There is no funding tied to these projects. This was all um work that city staff felt they could take on in the five-year plan. Um you know, if conditions are perfect, right? if we don't have any uh surprise disasters, if we don't have any other council priorities that detract from or or city priorities that detract from this work, but we also are aware that there is a reduced capital improvement budget for these types of infrastructure improvement programs and also that the

fe the grant stability currently is very shaky. uh FEMA grants um either have been eliminated or are not available um and so uh there is more competition for grants related to hazard mitigation. I will go through these relatively quickly um but these are the recommended action items that city staff will be taking on in five years if adopted. So the water deconliction planning um to prioritize portable water services during disaster events like seismic events or wildfire evacuation planning. Assess Santa Monica's transportation network and multimodal citywide evacuation routes identified in the revised safety element. Create a citywide evacuation plan to meet anticipated need anticipated demand during emergency events, especially in tsunami, dam inundation, or wildfire. Plan to include evacuation considerations for persons with access and functional needs, including those without access to private transportation or those living in assisted living high-rise buildings, and publicized to the community. Santa Monica airport design ensuring that we have preparedness, mitigation and response features within a new airport design and the replication of our disaster cache. Um just to highlight evacuation activities that were detailed in the safety element. So these are we had a multi-EP department team that came together when we were um working on the safety element to really dive into um what are the holistic factors involved

in evacuation? Um where are the traffic signals? Um what capacity do those roads typically have? What kind of how densely populated are those areas? and created the the the roots and the map um that's seen here. Um it also identified the single egress park par parcels that are of particular concern in wildfire mostly in rural areas is where we see issues with those. Um and then this we really do want to build a comprehensive evacuation plan. Um especially that now includes wildfire and stone canyon. And we do have evacuation plans currently uh but they're very much focused on tsunami and we want to do more on those. Okay. Local assessment and regulations uh Santa Monica bluffs and 10 freeway slope and brush fire mitigation uh to provoke uh bl prevent uh bluff instability and brush fires. red flag warning restrictions uh like parking restrictions and very high hazard zones to facilitate evacuations and prevent the type of bottlenecks we did see in the Palisades fire. Resilient city facility design, water infrastructure, seismic assessment, backup utilities, tsunami alerting system, natural dune restoration and expansion, food resilience through community gardening, inclusive communications, local wildfire safety education to really ensure this the population in these new fire hazard zones understand their risks, their requirements and any regulations that we implement as a city

and then expand critical management emergency management technologies. Um so again the this plan was written to ensure that we receive FEMA approval. Upon FEMA approval, it opens our door to el be eligible for certain grants. Without approval, we are not eligible for those grants. And so we will be constrained to the existing funding resources we have available to the city. Um we'll hope we hope to get final uh adoption in April. Um and then we'll implement our accessible plan design and happy to take questions and get feedback.

Thank you, Mayor Prom Terrosus. Great. Thank you, Miss Call. Really appreciate your work on this. Um these plans are required by FEMA for federal funding. Is that correct? Correct. And for and let me clarify. Yeah. They're not required to receive recovery funding. So, for example, Palisades fire reimbursement, we were able to receive that type of funding, but there's additional funding for hazard mitigation post and pre- disaster um that we we need this plan for to be eligible. And since we've been submitting these in 2004, has FEMA ever said that any of the things that we've submitted have been deemed ineligible?

So, we have not applied for our last plan was approved in 2016. Um it has a five-year time period. Our goal was to start writing it in 2020 and we all know what happened then. Um and so as soon as we ended the COVID emergency, our team refocused on getting this plan completed. The only plan we've had or I'm sorry, the only grant we've had approved is a hazard mitigation grant that helps facilitate this plan. Um but we need it for we need the funding to continue projects like seismic retrofit other major infrastructure projects where we can get this um we need grant funding to support it.

Got it. And the consultant that we hired, Earth Consultants International, um have we used them before? Do they work for other jurisdictions? How reputable are they?

Yes, we have. So part of our um why we selected that vendor uh for this work is we wanted to get this plan done as quickly as possible in a comprehensive way. That vendor had been selected uh for the safety element and so they had already completed robust technical hazard evaluation. Um they were selected so we could ensure consistency in the plan ha use what had been completed in the safety element and proceed so we can again open the door for funding um and and continue this important work.

Got it. And you referenced this resilience planning committee. Can you just uh I think you went over pretty quickly what departments were on that committee because you said many departments but just wanted to make sure we said that. Yes. um the uh community development department, the fire department, rent control. I'm going to get to that slide here sometime. I saw it quickly. Yeah.

Yep. It's at the very beginning. City Attorney's Office, Building and Safety, uh, Department of Transportation, Housing and Human Services, Airport, Office of Sustainability and the Environment, Engineering, Street Services, as well as the participation from our community partners um who were subject matter expertise in their had subject matter expertise in their areas. And I will say these are the group this is the group that uh sat through the workshops and and created the plan. But there was a lot of city staff members who did the evaluation of the chapters to ensure their accuracy. So, water department team members um and other city staff.

Is it fair to say that our city emergency response uh experts were on this uh committee? Yes, we've um I would say we were leaning upon many of the members that we conduct our response activities and our members of our emergency operations center team. And then in addition to the stakeholders, you also had a public survey, uh, community workshops, a 30-day public comment period where members of the public could comment on this plan, and you went to three Santa Monica commissions. Is that correct?

Corre correct. And then I also attended all of the commissions as a part of the safety element review. So, we had 168 individuals respond to our first community survey. Um, I've done outreach to all of the neighborhood organizations to promote the plan and encourage public comment and participation. Um, and we've we continue to have our um one of our community workshops that was held online available on YouTube if anybody missed it. Great. And you anticipate that FEMA is going to approve this uh local hazard mitigation plan? Correct. It might with uh their current staffing conditions, it might take a minute, but I do anticipate their approval. Okay, great. Thank you so much,

Council Member Hall. Thank you, Director Call for your presentation. It was really helpful to see all this. Um, just to confirm because I didn't hear you speak the departments. Uh, our fire, police, and planning departments were all present and active members of the planning team. Is that correct? Correct. Thank you. Um, I'm just curious, why is your recommendation to evacuate by foot during a tsunami?

Absolutely. So in a local seismic event where the the there could be an underwater landslide or the displacement of our local bay is such you have about 10 minutes to evacuate and traffic gridlock would be uh so much that we would we would never advise people to evacuate by vehicle. It is always recommended to evacuate by foot and then to complement that with uh evacuation tools for those with mobility issues, but that is a na nation globalwide standard. That's why on our tsunami signs that you'll see all throughout the city, there's somebody running up the hill um and not getting in their car because we we want to ensure that people um do not get in their vehicle uh during an local tsunami event.

Would you mind pulling up the tsunami zone, Matt?

Yes. So, if if I'm over So yeah, so just looking at this, you you mentioned that it goes up to the bluffs on the north side of the pier and to the south side of the pier effectively where like where the sea colonies uh developments are and and into the neighborhood a little bit there um in at the our very southern portion of the city. If I'm in Ocean Park, it's pretty easy for me to get by foot to a safe area um if I'm mobile and able to do that. But if I'm on the north side and I'm by the Jonathan Club, say, uh, what do I do?

So, you could take, if you were at the Jonathan Club, you'd be right next to the California incline. Um, it's hard to say like if depending on how large that seismic event is. I can't tell you immediately what the damage is to our pedestrian overpasses, the bluffs and the if there are any landslides that are prompted by the earthquake, etc. So, just bear with me that there are lots of unknowns in these events. So, but evacuating up to Entrada um or the California incline or Mumati um is a is a decent walk and that's understood. Um typically it's a I I clocked it and it's about 15 minutes for but that's also a steep incline and so we understand that for those with AC those with access and functional needs it will take more time. That's why in our um our hazes there is a a range of injuries and and casualties that kind of reflect uh different abilities and good and fair preparedness levels because there is such a wide range of potential you know vulnerabilities within the tsunami scenario.

Okay. And um tonight we heard a lot of public comment and we got a lot of written comment about AB747. Um are we required under AB747 to do a capacity analysis for the local hazard mitigation plan? So I will defer to our safety element expert on this question.

Right. The law says that we do do an analysis that doesn't say a quantitive analysis. So while we when we looked at the evacuation routes, we took it we we looked at it from a holistic and qualitative point of view like for example um you know we looked at multiple routes and we we picked routes that were arterials boulevards that you know larger routes that could carry and handle larger volumes of traffic. We did not do a specific capacity analysis because frankly the amount of people that has to be evacuated is entirely dependent on the situation as well as the affected areas. Okay. So are but are there plans to do any more detailed analyses with our evacuation routes?

So we are planning to do a robust evacuation plan. Now those types of quantitative assessments can run up to $85,000. So um I think our and there are different consultants that you can hire to do uh different types of work related to evacuation plan. Um we were working under the assumption that we would be using existing budgets and funding and staff expertise as well as experts in the field. Malibu is engaging in evacuation planning right now. Other um agencies as well. So we we leaning on those subject matter experts and bringing them in. Um but at that this time we were not planning to hire a consultant to um do a specific quantitative assessment like I think is recommended in the the comments.

Okay. Um you mentioned FEMA with the general state of the federal government. Do we expect delays I guess with FEMA's approval? Um and if that is what we're expecting are we able to start implementation of these mitigating measures while we wait for that approval? Absolutely. Um we're able to start the implementation of the mitigation measures. The thing that may be held up is our ability to apply for f for funding.

Um the other thing is that we are waiting on our scope of work uh modification approval from FEMA to start the design of the public booklet and website. that will also uh we were are very excited to do and as soon as it's uh approved we'll begin the work on that. Okay. Um I know we now have a speaker system on the pier but what is the latest on procuring and installing a broader tsunami warning system especially in Ocean Park.

Uh that would be a very large project that would involve the coastal commission um and our other city partner city and county partners county lifeguards etc. So that is certainly something we want to explore. Um but no specific work has been uh done to try to organize that or or provide a you know specific answer.

Okay. Um and last question. I believe it's been kind of over a year now since we've done any emergency response training on the pier. I'm just curious, are there any plans in place to do another training, especially since we've been on such a hiring tear in our police department? Um, that's a good question and I'll have to consult with fire and police on when their next large training event is where they close the pier and conduct a large drill. Um, we did hope for the great California shakeout. We did a test um of our pier system uh and not giving earthquake and tsunami education information to test that speaker system uh like we would use in the event of a tsunami or earthquake.

Great. Thank you. Council member Raskin, thank you. I'll make this uh quick. Some of the questions were already asked and answered. So, state laws haven't been updated. So, the safety element trails the housing element, right? And and uh it's important, I think, for the public to understand the relationship between the local hazard mitigation plan, safety element, and housing element. and and that the safety element of our general plan has been designed to contemplate the buildout that could occur under uh the projections in the housing element. Is is that right?

Yes, that's a fair assessment. They have to be integrated with each other and be consistent with each other. Right. So So to the extent that there are comments about uh conserns about buildout, that's already been contemplated in our planning. Right. Right. Correct. Got it. Okay. And establishing the policies for addressing hazards in the city. Got it. And uh last question. Safety is always an ongoing preparation process, right? And we're continuing to look at how we can uh continue to look at the latest and greatest trends. Correct. Perfect. Thank you, Council Member Ernit Skaya.

Thank you. Um I'll try to be brief because some of my questions were already answered. Uh but I just wanted to clarify that or clarify around the evacuation planning and the capacity um and alternative routes. I I just want to ask for more clarity around how we're moving forward in evaluating um alternative routes in case anything is blocked. and if we're proposing any changes to the language of the of the item around evacuation planning to address community concerns.

So, um you're absolutely correct that while we lay out these routes and this plan um we cannot foresee the type of damage that will occur during the disaster. So the evacuation routes are our our best attempt and our plan. Um but during an actual evacuation order um if there are specific routes that we need to take people to take, we will communicate that if and we ant we will instruct the public to follow the directions of public safety professionals uh to facilitate those evacuations and detours and things like that. I can't tell you that a tree won't fall and block the road on that evacuation route that you know we have done our best to identify. Um we have heard uh the public uh concern about the evacuation planning. We did work to revise the language uh to uh specifically try to address capacity and that we wanted to make sure that we met the demand um if an evacuation order was implemented for our key emergency events. Um and so we have done that, but I also welcome council direction if there's anything um else specific um you'd like to to change.

Thank you. And just to clarify, this is a living document and it will continue to be updated as we receive new information and as we learn of new hazards um and evaluate next steps to try to keep our community safe. Is that accurate to say?

Absolutely. So where the safety element is kind of long-term uh goals and planning uh that the city wants to commit to uh we were very intentional with the local hazard mitigation plan to give these mitigation actions a five-year timeline um and uh really wanted to prioritize the these efforts because we need them now. And so, um, for example, with the evacuation planning, we are planning to do that in 2026. Um, and so we want to address the vulnerabilities that exist within Santa Monica and strengthen our emergency response system. There is no group that wants to be c, you know, we we do not want to be c caught flatfooted in a disaster response. We bear that responsibility. And so we want to lean in um and do the best that we can um on these mitigation action measures.

Thank you. And final question, could you please expand on um how the plan will include considerations for folks who might not be very mobile or might have language um accessibility issues or might have other other qualities that uh might prevent them from being able to evacuate. pretty easily.

Absolutely. So, our plans, the mitigation action item specifically says that we will address access and functional needs. That's an emergency management term that includes um lots of folks that might face barriers um to uh and be more vulnerable to in disasters, including persons with mobility issues or other disabilities. um persons who are pregnant, children, older adults, uh persons with language uh barriers who either do not speak English or maybe they speak sign language or another language. And so we were very intentional in writing that action item to ensure that we are holding ourselves accountable uh to address access and functional needs um and persons without transportations, persons who are living in high-rise. And that also took into um we also had our our aging plan that just got approved, aging and disability plan. They also included evacuation measures so that we can all be consistent um and make sure that we're addressing community concern.

Thank you. And sorry, I know I said that was the last question, but uh real final question. Are we also planning to run any sort of drills, any sort of I know we did the great shakeout, but are we planning to do evacuation drills basically in to prepare for different emergencies.

We just did one in January 2025, but um but aside from real life events um absolutely we want to implement uh drills and education for our community. I think the first step and what this plan does is really tries to educate the public on what hazards exist. I don't know if many people who live near the Stone Canyon Dam are even aware of a a hazard in Bair that could impact them. And so I think first our action is to educate um and then devise how can we incorporate uh the community and our our drills and exercises. The city uh holds regular drills um as well as response to real emergency events. Um, so we practice these things all the time, but we want to make sure that we're educating the public and that they have an opportunity to create their own household plan and then implement it in a drill.

Thank you. Much appreciated.

Last but not least. Um, okay. So, thank you for going over a lot of those things. I do just want it in plain language because the biggest thing that folks are concerned about is the fact that we're densifying. We're building more, which means more people. And I heard you say in so many words based on council member Raskin's question that this plan took that into account is what you're saying for the future development and increase in population because the biggest concern is if we're building more and more people are coming, how does this plan today reflect the future? Yeah, the policies does take into account, you know, future needs, um, future emergencies that may happen. So, we recognize there is densification. There is al also policies to counter and address those concerns. For example, like we talk about increased um fire education and increased fire um uh to to uh to residents as well as impro increasing the number of um neighborhood community centers to provide um resources in the case of emergencies. And we're trying to put those centers and the safety element has that policy with putting those centers in areas that will be densified. for example, also calls out um uh the need for a fire station in the north of in the Wilmont area to address, you know, concerns that that area might be densifying. So, it does include accountability of future growth in there.

But what about actual evacuation routes? So I hear you saying that like educating people on what they can do during an emergency or creating an additional place for community to go or or a firehouse, but what about the actual routes? If we're increasing folks and we can assume cars, how does this evacuation plan address that the increase in density of people trying to leave and escape?

Yeah, we identify multiple routes of evacuation. you know taking into consideration that you know there are um there are going to be increased density in those areas however as I said before you know just having a quantity capacity analysis is slightly difficult just because we don't know that the numbers of people that will be evacuating will depend depend on the actual emergency and the areas that are affected. Um but of course you know in the evacuation planning and when we identified the routes we took a holistic view identify multiple routes that had you know there were major arterios that were major boulevards that could move people out of the areas that would be impacted.

So just to be really concise you're saying we look at the fact that there's new projects online and when we plan for an emergency evacuation we take that into account. Yeah. Holistically. And then but so on that note mentioning the north side and the fires can you speak to I don't know who um yeah the hydrant issue and the fact that apparently nine hydrants working simultaneously are successful but the minute we put one more online can you speak to that that are we looking at additional hydrants during when we look at densification and

so we have the water deconliction planning uh effort as one of our mitigation action items to identify how we can divert and prior Prioritize water use in emergencies like earthquakes and wildfires. Um so that can be an element that um we look at. I know uh with the the Palisades fire, we did bring our our water resources expert in uh to provide calculations and estimates. Um we also can procure water resources um from other jurisdictions as well to assist. We provided that service to LWDWP and provided them reclaimed water during the Palisades fire. Um, but there may be opportunities for either diverting water uh for hydrant use uh or we can explore if there's a need for additional hydrants.

Does that need council direction to look at additional hydrants and the fact that apparently once a tenth goes online it then can impact a neighborhood? I don't know if council direction is specifically needed, but we'd be happy to add that language to the mitigation action item. Um, and then you mentioned the tsunami PA. Since I've been on council, that has been a topic of I know they finally installed a PA system. Um, but my understanding was or I've heard that it still doesn't come with like it we still don't have a tsunami warning horn or whatever goes off outside of the PA. that.

So most of our coastline does not have tsunami w warning sirens and so moving forward with that type of project would require us working with the county and the state um to ter determine our authority to implement that locally um and co the coastal commission etc. That is something we want to explore and are holding ourselves to. It was not included in the lo last local hazard mitigation plan. it has not been on our work plan in OEM before and so we're committing to do that examination and work as well as looking at the existing PA system on the pier and determining if how it needs to be expanded. Um it also only is an audible right

um alert and so uh looking at other methods that we need to implement uh to make sure uh we you know educate everyone that there's an event. I do want to say though our biggest tsunami risk in Santa Monica that is most timesensitive is an actual earthquake. And so the shaking is your first warning sign. You should not be waiting for any type of alert. If there is severe, this is an opportunity for a little tsunami education. If shaking lasts more than 20 seconds and is intense, that is your sign to head inland immediately. Start walking. Um, and so that we don't want people to wait for an alert or a siren. If there is a major earthquake, it could also impair some of our communication systems. And so if people are sitting there waiting for something, a siren to go off, that's a recipe. You know, we don't want people to do that. Um, we also have the ability to do a wireless emergency alert, which we did do during the last tsunami advisory. That is where you pick a geographic area and you can send a text message with that very annoying Amber Alert sound uh to everyone within that geographic area regardless if they're a resident, an employee, or a visitor. Everyone that has a US-based phone will receive that message. And we're working with carriers to see how we can expand that to an international community for the Olympics. I'm not a professional, so forgive me for this next statement. I hear you on the education, but the reality is some people um sleep through an earthquake and severe shaking. And I would think an

audible um warning is something that actually I mean I've been traveled to places, right, that have uh weather warnings like that and you hear that and I it feels easy to put some sort of um alert with throughout the city. I don't know how easy it really is, but I'm just saying it would feel like I hear you on the education and and but for me to remember was that 20 seconds of shaking. Should I run inland? Like I don't know that everyone has that education. And then second to that, I was just going to ask about signage. Like I know we have some signs I see somewhere, but I wonder if there's better clear signage that has, you know, braille signage. It's has different languages or even QR codes for this ed extensive education. if there's more updated ways that we could put put signage in places because maybe people don't even know where to go for these centers and whatnot.

Absolutely. Um, one of the things in the tsunami alert mitigation action item that we do we want to do and have been working on is looking at the use of our kiosk and so many people in who visit the tsunami zone are um tourists who may not be familiar with tsunamis or earthquakes. um putting education on those where they can actually see the tsunami inundation map and uh know what to do have have those instructions provided to them that way. Um and working with our hotels to provide a better education. So this is we are right there with you. We want to explore the sirens. Um we want to do the education in a robust way. The mitig hazard mitigation plan though opens the door for us to be able to pursue funding to get these projects realized. Otherwise, if you're I we are going to be constrained with our current budget uh to try to fund a tsunami uh siren system on the pier doing all of this other work with the current budget. So it's a um I we are in alignment though that this work needs to be done and prioritized and that is why it's included in the plan.

So just to summarize this plan is put together. You're saying it's a working plan. It's not perfect but there has been a lot of outward discussion community uh members involved professionals. Um you're hearing the need for um maybe be it drills, signage, other things. There was some dis council member Hall made the comment about like you know if you're at the Jonathan club how where do you go and how do you get up there and if you're not as agile as council member Hall how would you get up the California incline if you're elderly or disabled. Um these are all concerns and I guess my question is tonight you're you know people were concerned that this was on the consent calendar and we didn't have this presentation and so just wanting to understand for the community like you're saying that this is on the consent calendar so that you can move forward and continue to work on the plan and get the funding that's needed to do the things where you want to do in it.

So this is not a response plan. A lot of the elements that people are asking for are response plan efforts that we want to prioritize and that's why they are included in this plan. This plan is to prevent or to present rather an analysis of all of the local hazards and provide information so we can prioritize what hazards we need to plan for and we need to implement mitigation measures and preparedness measures. So I I hear everyone on we should be doing outreach and and and we should be planning uh this and doing drilling that. I agree with you. I absolutely agree with you. That's why we're including it in this plan is so that the city as a whole, not just office of emergency management, but all city departments have this plan as our path forward to implement uh these priorities

in including looking at the fire hydrants, including all the things we're talking about. Correct. Um going forward and also this densification is always being looked at. Yes. And we could add language into the evacuation. Uh we we made modifications based on previous community feedback, but we could add additional modifications that says meets current and plans for future um needs or evacuation needs. Okay. So, so it addresses future densification. Thank you. Does anybody have I seem uh council member Zernitzky, I don't know if your name is just left in the queue from before. Okay, that's okay.

Yeah, I think it was just left in the queue from before. I don't have the ability to remotely press my button. Thank you, Council Member Hall. I'd like to move the staff recommendation. And to be clear, I am never at the Jonathan Club. Maybe I should have said Anna Beach House. Never been there. Never will be probably. I'll second that. Moved by Council Member Hall, seconded by Council Member Raskin. Council member Hall. Yes. Council member Raskin. Yes. Tim Roses. Council member Snell. Yes. Scott. Yes. Yes. Mayor Negrete. Yes.

Now move into item 4 A. Item 4 A, award bid number SP2575 and construction contract to Velutini Corporation doing business as Royal Electric Company for the Santa Monica Department of Transportation Charging Infrastructure Project phases 2 through4. I'll make a motion to move this item. I'll second it. Moved by Council Member Snell, seconded by Council Member Raskin.

Council member Brasin. Yes. Mayor Perttois. Yes. Council member Snell. Yes. Council member Skaya. Yes. Mayor Negrete. Yes. I guess we can call Council Member Hall back. But this is really a huge win for our transportation department where we're going to have major electric charging infrastructure. So, congratulations. Okay. Skipping close session for now. Moving to item moving to the city manager report.

Thank you. Um wanted to have uh share a couple of brief comments with the council and community. First um massive thanks to Lindsay, our emergency management and response personnel. Um and also our public works and public safety personnel that helped keep everything the water flowing the last couple days. We had some fairly significant rains. It's Southern California. Every time it rains, it's potential for a major major calamity. Um, and thankful that the work the team did to keep um sandbags moving, clearing roadways, maintaining all of our beach drains, everything worked as it should. So, many thanks to um the entire city team for their efforts the last couple of days. In addition, um wanted to just note that our team's been hard at work thinking about how we continue to not just maintain but make advancements to realign our um work on maintaining our infrastructure in the city. The last couple of days we've been um really engaged in executing key components of the realignment plan. um tree pruning, tree planting, parking structure maintenance, roadway repairs are the first of multiple efforts that we have underway. We're currently realigning some of our internal management structures and meeting structures to make sure that we can um really focus on implementing the key things that have been incorporated into the council's realignment plan moving ahead um as we move forward through this week. Also, um the holiday season's here. Um, next week we do have Thanksgiving. Hope everyone has a terrific time um, celebrating Thanksgiving as we start moving towards the end of the year holiday season. Wanted to remind everybody that uh, coming up. Um, the date was recently changed, but now it's going to be December 4th at 6 PM we'll be having our

special holiday programming on the prominade. Um, you'll see Santa and snow. So, we hope everyone will come on out to be there on December 4th at 6 PM. We'll have special musical performances and um it should be a festive time for everybody.

Um moving ahead, we wanted to also just let folks know we um recognize that during the recent federal government shutdown, there were multiple um food insecurity issues that we worked to try and address here locally. Um, one of the things that we've launched are donation boxes that we've placed at various facilities all throughout the city. Virginia Avenue Park, fire stations, city hall, our public safety facility, also at um, Santa Monica Main Library and the Montana Branch Library. Um, hope that everyone in the community help participate and wanted to remind folks if anyone is experiencing food insecurity, please visit Santa Monica.gov for a list of local resources that are available. Last thing we wanted to do is introduce everyone to our adorable adoptable pet of the meeting who is Target. Target, it's a 9-year-old pitbull mix. Um, still very youthful for his age. He loves attention, exploring, performing tricks. Um, if you have kids, he'd be a great addition to your family. if you have other dogs. He likes other dogs, too. Um, he has had obedience and leash training and can't wait to meet you at the Santa Monica Animal Shelter. As always, please visit the Santa Monica Animal Shelter Foundation if you want to make a donation or shop the Chewy Wish List and somebody um take a look at Target and see if you want to bring him home for the holidays. That madame clerk, we'll turn it back to you.

Do any council members have anything to report on travel since our last meeting? Nope. And my only highlight is as we go into the holiday season, I'm asking that everyone please shop local. It's so tempting to go online and get all those boxes at our front door. Our businesses need our support. So, you'll see that around town we have the shopping events on Montana, Ocean Park, and Wilshire has great new shops opening. Um, Main Street all over the city. Our prominade has new shops opening. um check out what's going on even in the Santa Monica Mall. And also when you're eating out, go in and dine in. Um our weight staff needs our support and our patronage. And so we want to continue to see um our businesses stay open. We want to revitalize our city so that more businesses want to come in. So my only highlight is to highlight all of our local businesses, whether it be restaurants or small shops. Please consider making an extra concerted effort to support all of them now and every day and month of the year. Moving on to item six, public input on remaining agenda items only. Public comment is permitted on ordinances for introduction and first reading. No public discussion is permitted on ordinance or second reading and adoption. Public input for 12 items will be heard at the time when the public hearing is called. And we have one speaker for this item.

Jonathan Foster. Hello, Council 16C on Legato Latinos. They they I've been here for 25 years and I've listened and they keep coming and asking for money over and over and over and over and over and over. I haven't heard a year they haven't come here to ask for money. What during the rest of the year? Don't they do anything to get the money together that they need? They had a whole years and months to get not just few hundred bucks, thousands, tens of thousands of dollar. They could be running completely, you know, monetized, I guess, is the best word. You know, but they keep coming to ask the city council for a handout. I I'm homeless. C can I get a handout? So I I think it's a little bit extreme that year after year after year after year at they keep coming to ask the city for money. And I know they're capable, smart, extremely brilliant, capable people. They're they're not, you know, inept. They're not unable to raise money. They're they're very very capable, smart, intelligent, bright, you know, exceedingly smart people. So, I I would en encourage the council and the mayor to encourage these people to change into a more public monetization that where they can have so much money they they almost, you know, could start another city, you know, they would would have so

much money. That's, you know, what I would encourage them to do. Thanks. Thank you. That closes that section of public comment. That is correct. Moving on to item 12A, appeal of decision by landmarks commission to designate the front residence on the property located at 1125 18th Street as structure structure of merit. And this is a public hearing. I think it's

right.

Okay. Good evening, council members, city manager, staff, and members of the public. I'm Stephanie Reich, the design and historic preservation planner, presenting the appeal of the landmarks commission decision to designate the property at 11251 18th Street as a structure of merit. The image, this image is the property as viewed from the street. The city recommends the city council approve the appeal of the landmarks commission decision to designate the property located at 112518 street as a structure of merit and deny the designation application to designate the property as a structure of merit based on all the evidence in the record. Alternatively, if the city council approves the designation, we recommend adoption of the landmarks commission findings included in the STOA and the alternative findings under SQA. For background, the Santa Monica Conservancy filed an application to designate the property as a structure of merit in response to a demolition permit application filed by the owner. When the city receives a designation application, we hire an independent historic preservation consultant to provide research on the property and analysis to see if the property meets criteria for designation. The city hired Paige and Turbull. Paige and Turbo found the property to be ineligible for designation. staff agrees with that assessment and recommended denial to the landmarks commission and recommends denial of that designation tonight. After considering the application staff report, historic resource assessment and all the information in the record, the Landmarks Commission designated the property in a 4-2 vote. Landmarks Commissioner Pam Okconor appealed the designation.

What is designated is a 952 square f foot building set back from the street. As the lot is 175 ft in depth, there is another residential structure at the back of the lot that was built in the 40s and is not part of the designation. The designation encompasses the front building only and does not include the parcel or the building at the rear. The building is modest in every way. It can be called the vernacular of the day or an example of a modest craftsman bungalow or a vernacular building with craftsman styling. The craftsman bungalow is a building type that remains prevalent in Santa Monica. Here are some examples in the neighborhood that are also on the historic resources inventory. In 2018, the city did an update of the historic context statement and historic resources inventory. Based on a review of the context statement, there are 178 properties in Santa Monica identified as Craftsman style and 30 individually significant properties identified in the Wilshire, Montana neighborhood. These are the designation criteria for the structure of merit. In order to be designated, a property must meet one or more designation criteria. The application was specifically for a structure of merit. The criteria for a structure of merit are different than the landmark criteria. A city landmark would have greater historic significance. When we analyze a building or property to see if it meets the designation criteria, we rely on accepted professional practice, the commission's past practice, and guidance from the National Park Service.

I'll review the designation criteria with staff's recommendation on this property. These are the recommendations provided to the landmarks commission and for the council tonight. Criterion A states simply that the structure has been identified in the city's historic resources inventory or hri. It should be noted that noted that this is a designation criterion and not a code provision per se. It has not been the commission's practice to designate a property based on this criteria only. Additionally, we'd like to note that this residence was first identified in the 2018 HRI update and not before that. The HRI is a windshield survey and not an in-depth analysis of the property or its historic merit. When we reviewed the property, we found that it does not appear to meet the structure of merit criteria. The commission has not designated a structure of merit based on this criteria alone, although it might be included in a determination if the property is found to meet other criteria. Criterion B1, the property is more than 50 years old and is a unique example of an architectural design, detail, or historic type. As discussed, there are many examples of craftsmanstyle bungalows throughout the city and in the Wilshire, Montana neighborhood. So, the building at 112518 Street does not appear to represent a unique or rare example and does not appear eligible under this criterion. Designation criteria B2, the property is more than 50 years old and is representative of a style that is no longer prevalent. The craftsman style or

modest craftsman or vernacular building with craftsman styling was very popular in the first three decades of the 20th century and remains prevalent of this in the city. Therefore, it the subject property does not appear to be eligible under this criterion. The matter was presented to the landmarks commission in July. The commission designated the property largely based on its prevalence in the Green Acres tract, a very small area within the Wilshire, Montana neighborhood. This is not consistent with the commission's past practice. Criterion B2, the commission also found that the building represents a style no longer prevalent in the Green Acres tract. As mentioned, staff disagrees with this finding. These are the grounds for the appeal. While the commission found that the property meets the structure of merit criteria, the appeal points out that staff and staff's consultant Paige and Turble find that the property does not meet the criteria for structure of merit. The appeal statement identifies that the commission's finding are based on the prevalence in the green acres tract, a small area within the larger neighborhood. The appeal also discusses the structure of merit designation category as flawed. This is outside the scope of the appeal before the council. Staff agrees that the structure of merit findings cannot be met and that a vernacular modest craftsman uh was actually never prevalent in the Greenacres tract or in the the Montana Wilshire neighborhood. The Montana the modest craftsman is prevalent elsewhere in the neighborhood

and throughout the city. Staff agrees that making findings for a property based on such a small area is not consistent with the commission's past practice or professional preservation practice. Staff recommends the city council approve the appeal of the landmarks commission decision to designate the property located at 112518 street as a structure of merit and deny the designation application to designate the property as a structure of merit based on all the evidence in the record. That concludes my presentation. I'm available for any questions.

Thank you mayor promosis. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. So, my understanding is that this appeared in the city's own historic resources inventory. Uh, are you now asserting that our historic resources inventory should not be relied on even though the ordinance explicitly uses it as a designation criterion?

So, the historic resources inventory is anformational document. The criterion is not uh a yes or no code. uh item per se. It's uh it's a criterion that is subject to analysis and interpretation like all the other criterion. Okay. Um has staff ever before told council or commission to ignore an hri listing when applying criterion A?

We don't say to ignore it. It's included in the evidence of the record. Um, we have not ever recommended a designation based on the fact only on the fact that it's listed on the hri. We look at the information in the hri which is a windshield survey uh which is not very a very detailed look at the property. We look at that in and include all the other information that we have in the record when we analyze the criterion.

Okay. Um but does the ordinance say that an HR identification may be disregarded if staff later disagrees with it? It's not that we disregard it. It's that we more fully analyze that and explain why we don't find that it meets that criterion. Okay. Um, it would seem to me that we might need to update our ordinance because uh the way that our ordinance is being applied here seems inconsistent with like the written letter of the law. I don't know if our city attorney wants to weigh in on that.

Sure. So, understandable. Uh I think the concern as you heard from Miss Reich has been over the years and the practice has been that um and this generally doesn't come up because usually if if there is enough evidence in the record to support um a structure of merit designation there is at least enough evidence in the record under criterion B. Um so it doesn't usually come up where the only one where somebody could find um is A. The concern has been that it is a windshield survey and I think in this particular instance and it has come up in the past as well that it is a windshield survey. It is anformational document once a um historic preservation professional is um hired to look at the property as a whole. They do sometimes um determine that upon further review that it isn't actually eligible for listing under the hi. I think that is what the um historic preservation professional um right determined in this particular instance. And how often does that happen that we

It has happened um actually four four or five times in the past five years. Okay. Um and then we're aware that the the burden for structure of merit is intentionally lower than that for landmark designation. Correct. And we're applying the correct level of scrutiny here. Absolutely. Yeah. It it's a yes. Just to clarify very quickly, it is a two-tier system right now. The city's historic preservation ordinance has a two-tier system. This is the lower tier of designation. Okay. Council member Raskin. I'm sorry. Madame Mayor, before we proceed, we do need to ask council members if they have any expartite communities. Oh, yes.

Do any council members have exparte? Um, council member Hall. Yes. Thank you, mayor. Um, on Sunday, November 16th, I spoke with Ruthanne Lara of the Santa Monica Conservancy. the conservancy is uh or was the organization that requested a structure of merit designation. Council member Ruskin. Yeah. On Friday, I uh had a telephone conversation with Mario Fondai from the uh conservancy and I've exchanged several uh emails, text messages with Nina Fresco. Um and that's it. Mayor Promosis.

On uh this past Sunday, the November 16th, I had a conversation with Ruth Lair as well. Um, and then we've received emails, but I haven't responded to any of them. Council member Snow. Um, I had breakfast this morning with Rof Linder and with Nina Fresco, and I responded to an email from Roffliner. Sorry, I I did need to add um I also received texts and responded to them from Nina Fresco of the conservancy.

Okay. Um, I attended the awards for the preservation and there was light conversation, although I didn't engage in this specifically. I'm presuming that the optics of me being at that award um might might make that look so um so I'll just say that I was at that award that award ceremony and there was conversation around this topic. Sorry. Council member Zerkaya also has Oh, council member Zernkaya. I had a brief phone call earlier today with Ruthanne Lair uh from Santa Monica Conservancy. We also exchanged a few texts and I received an email from her that I responded to just to set up the call.

All right. And with that, sorry. Um, Council Member Raskin, thank you. Uh, and thank you, uh, to the whole team for the work on this. Um, so picking up on the series of questions that Mayor Proemptous was asking. So there there are two sets of criteria under this is section 9.56.080 08 and criterion A asks whether that this is direct quote whether the structure of merit has been identified in the city's historic resources inventory. That's all it asks, right?

Yes, that's that's the criterion. And so it sounds like what you're asking us to do is to do the analysis under part B to find that it's eligible for part A. Is that right?

Um well, we've provided an analysis for part A. Um and we, as I mentioned, the a this property was never picked up prior to the 2018 survey. So, we take that into account. Um and then we look further at the property as to why it might have been assumed to be uh uh eligible as a structure of merit and we found that it like it is not eligible as a structure of merit. So the premise of your question I I understand it and I would agree somewhat.

Okay. Um well I'll turn to the city attorney then. I mean, aren't we not supposed to read parts of statutes and ordinances of surplusage?

Yes. Um, agreed. Uh I will say that the practice has been because because of the nature of the hi understanding exactly what the statute how the statute reads the practice has been um not to designate solely based on that criterion because it is as as Miss Reich alluded to earlier that is um not a discretionary question right it's a binary question it's a yes or no question so we have as a matter of practice over the years made sure that there was at least some sort of discretion because this is a quasi judicial proceeding. And again, this is we have we have not seen um an instance where the landmarks commission or the city council on appeal has designated solely under criterion A. Generally, we have relied on um B for the designation which is um again the practice which would be a more consistent way of applying the um the ordinance over the years. And the reason why again is because this is supposed to be applying a set of facts right to the law. And if there is if if the question is whether or not it's simply on the hri then everything would be automatically designated if it was just on the hri which again is a windshield survey. We usually file the application and take in more information and do a further analysis at that time. Well, it sounds to me, and I'm not sure it's best position to speak to this, but it sounds to me like this is speaking to the distinction between structure of merit and the landmark designation, and that there is an intentionally lower bar for structures of merit.

Yes, but there is actually an intentionally lower bar under criterion B as well. It is a lower bar under criterion B. Um, uh, significantly lower than under the, uh, designation criteria set forth for a landmark. Right. Yeah, I I understand that. I think um all right. Well, shifting gears a little bit. Um well, you know what? I'll I'll uh pass the baton to my colleagues here. Council member Hall. Thank you, Mayor. Uh city clerk Newsome, would you mind pulling up the picture that I sent you? Uh sure. Did you just send it to me?

That was a few minutes ago via email. I don't know why it's not. I was like, that looks like a nice place to That is not the picture. Yeah, I'm sorry. I don't know why it's rejecting my

It's is it's it's fine. Um I I just I just want to confirm one thing. Uh, Miss Reich, and and sorry if this feels like a gotcha. I don't I don't mean it to be. I just want to confirm on page 17 of the staff report, it does state that your assessment uh for section A, uh, I quote, it technically meets the wording of this criteria. Is that still your assessment tonight? Uh, the property is on the 2018 hri. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. So my question and I'm sorry if it's not so technical um or it doesn't sound like we're in like a line of questioning but just some of the things that you had pulled up earlier in one of the screens was like 50 years I was just sort of confused as a layman reading it right if I'm just tuning into this city council meeting you're going through I understand that there's this windshield literally meaning for those at home you're like kind of driving by and looking at the property correct and making an initial assessment. That's right. you can go through the designation.

Well, I just wanted to make it just easy to digest, you know, for folks that don't maybe sort of look at this kind of stuff all the time. The rest of it talks about like how old the building is and the rarity and it sounds like like we've confirmed that it is right over 50 years old. It is a rare building. No. So, um that the structure is a minimum of 50 years of age. Uh I'm sorry. Can we go back to that? Sorry. Oh. I just felt like it was conflicting.

Okay. So, um this uh that the structure is a minimum 50 years of age uh is necessary for either of the criteria B1 or B2 to be met. Okay.

So then B1, the structure is a unique or rare example of an architectural design detail or historic type. Um the property has been identified as a modest craftsman or vernacular structure of that time period. And uh here are the this is the data for the other properties in the city and in the neighborhood that are a similar in style. Um some are eligible to be landmarks. Some are also found to be eligible as structures of merit. Um but we can see very clearly with this data that the structure is not a unique or rare example of its architectural design detail or historic type. We have many of these in the city. They are prevalent throughout the city. And then the landmarks commission is comprised of folks, right, that observe um these types of properties and I would assume come from a variety of different backgrounds that right look at these properties. Can you just explain the process that they go through when they're deciding whether or not the structure of merit applies?

So uh they do as you do. They look at all of the evidence in the record as you said that there are a variety of different backgrounds uh different folks on the landmarks commission. Some have a professional background uh in preservation, some do not. Um it just so happens that the professional preservation person on the on the commission has filed the appeal in this case. It was a split vote of 42 which is somewhat unusual. Often there are uh unanimous votes. Um so and this was a split vote which I think also speaks to that there was a real difference of opinion on this

but ultimately the majority of the commission yes it was a 4-2 vote and the commission voted to designate the structure as a structure of merit. Okay. Um I have council members and it's sky in the queue. I just want to Okay. Council member Skaya, if you have other questions, mayor, I'm happy to go after you. That's okay. Go ahead. Thank you. Um, so one of my questions was already answered of what it means to be a windshield survey. Uh, can you please clarify how a property gets added to the historic resources inventory and how frequently that's assessed?

Um, thank you for that question. So periodically the city does uh a comprehensive update to the historic resources inventory. Uh the last one that we have done was in 2010 2011. um that was not as comprehensive as the 2018 survey in that it primarily I uh what the intention was to identify if a property had been demolished or had really lost its integrity. Um, when we say a windshield survey, uh, what we mean is that, uh, our preservation consultants drove down every street in the city and identified whether or not they think something might be eligible as a structure of merit or a contributor to a historic district or a potential landmark. There was no study of any of these properties done. How long is it?

And um according this might be more of a question for the city attorney. According to the staff report, the information in that report is presented quote unquote presented for the council's consideration as part of this denovo hearing. And uh I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that denovo hearing is a legal legal term. So I just want to get clarification. What is the definition of a denovo hearing and what is our obligation or responsibility within the context of this type of hearing?

Sure. So denovo means that that this is a entirely new hearing. You're taking in all the evidence yourselves and you are weighing it as you see fit. Which is actually something that I did want to clarify because the mayor's questions actually kind of reminded me of this. This is not something the council does very often. So, for the benefit of the public and the council, this um you are being you will be presented with evidence. You have the staff report. There's written evidence before you. You're going to hear from um the property owner, the applicant, the appellant, and members of the public. So, you you will take in all that evidence and you're being asked to weigh it as you see fit um and apply it to these criterion and see whether or not they um meet it. Um what denovo means in part is that you are not required to pay any difference to what the landmarks commission um did. So you you are hearing this new and completely fresh. So, if I'm understanding you correctly, that means that we

that the landmarks commission's decision file part of the record of evidence uh we are not specifically required to we'll pay defense to it. So I I think Yeah. Yeah. Right. In other words, you're you're not being asked to to say whether or not the landmarks commission's decision was correct. You are making your own independent decision on the on the evidence. If that's a more helpful way of explaining it.

Yes, that is. Thank you. Uh so the conservy's argument, my at least my understanding of it is that they believe this structure to be unique within the subset of Craftsman homes because the entrance is on the side of the home and because the front of the home uh has a this bank of windows that uh they state that most Craftsman homes do not. So, I just wanted to get some clarification. Do we have other Craftsman homes that fall within that kind of um that that have an entrance on the side and a bank of windows in the front? And is that unique among craftsman homes?

You know what's interesting question. What's really interesting about this uh subset of homes, these vernacular or modest craftsman homes, is that sometimes they were kit houses and they were all identical to one another or very similar to one another. And sometimes um as we think in this case uh a contractor purchases a property and builds builds something that is kind of similar to other homes but has their own kind of ideas about how they want the building to to be like not dissimilar to what happens in vernacular architecture today. So we have not done a study uh an exhaustive study of side entrances or a bank of windows. Um we uh we and our historic preservation consultant identified uh this property as fairly similar to other similar properties uh that we see in the city and frankly much more modest than other properties. We don't see anything really unique or rare about this particular property.

Office.

Thank you. And can you please clarify kind of what is the difference between a landmark and a structure of merit and what the practical implications would potentially be if the property were to be designated a structure of merit? Um so that's that's a very good question. There are uh very different criteria between a landmark and a structure of merit. Um so there are six criteria for a designated landmark. Um we have not I don't believe we've included them in the staff report or in the presentation uh because the applicant did not apply for a landmark. um not noting that the the property might only be potentially eligible as a structure of merit. Um the city of Santa Monica is somewhat unique in this twotiered designation systems. Most cities do not have a structure of merit or a two-tiered designation system. And the structure of merit is a lower designation uh that it's a lower it meets a lower bar as we were saying before the designation criteria uh is much lower. There are much more specific criteria for um specialness uh for uniqueness for uh architectural merit for associations with arts with master architects or cultural events uh in the city or important personages in the city.

I just gonna say council members, do you mind muting when you're not talking? Just sorry. No, no worries. Didn't realize I forgot to mute. It's very busy in this lobby.

Thank you. Um so uh so a landmark if something is designated as a landmark um it is very very difficult to um to demolish that property. Um, we do have provisions in the code uh that uh under certain conditions a designated landmark could be demolished. To my knowledge, no designated landmark has ever been demolished. Um, a designated landmark can also be designated with the parcel. And so when a property is designated a landmark, it falls under a different regulatory structure than a structure of merit does. A designated landmark uh must go before the landmarks commission for significant uh alterations, anything that's visible from the street, etc. uh a structure of merit for any modifications would go to the architectural review board. The structure of merit could also be potentially demolished within 6 months. There's a provision in the code that enables it to be demolished within six months and then there is another sixmonth waiting period uh where the uh staff is um is advised to uh to consult with the property owner uh about the benefits of a designated structure. um the structure of merit does not that that designation does not enable a parcel to also be designated. So in this case it's just the 952 square foot structure at the front of

the property that has been designated a structure of merit.

So if I'm understanding correctly so please this this question is me stating something and then asking if I'm understanding correctly. Um, if I'm understanding that correctly, the if the structure were to be designated a structure of merit, uh, it would effectively pause a demolition for at least six months. While the owner of the property and the applicant of the structure of merit application would attempt to negotiate uh a way to somehow preserve the property whether or not it would be on that specific uh piece of land. Is that accurate?

Hi council members and it's skaya. I I I think I just want to bring us back to the hearing. I appreciate the questions around process, but this is around the designation. I just don't want it to get too far a field in terms of number one, there's not a certificate appropriateness that's been filed for the demolition, right? This hearing is regarding whether the this subject, this improvement, you know, meets the criteria for structure of merit. Um I think you know happy obviously to have a further conver offline conversation around procedure but really want to bring it back to the subject of the hearing.

Okay. Thank you. I'm I'm just trying to understand what course what that practical meaning of structure of merit is. It's kind of new. Um so I'll I'll I'll yield here if I have more questions. So I'll raise my hand again and sorry for the noise here.

Council members now. Uh first of all I want to thank you very much for this this is quite interesting. I just have one quick question and u it might be a general question with respect to um uh with this this entire ordinance because this is a historical preservation. It doesn't preclude for any new development on that particular property does it? Um not exactly. No, with I mean something could be developed on the on the rear of the property with with respect to it and still keep the historical designation. That's right. Thank you.

I just want to make sure does that do those types of questions take us away from the hearing? No. Right. Or does um it's the the hearing is really about the appeal whether or not this particular structure um meets the designation criteria. Um it, you know, we typically advise the landmarks commission. We're also advising the council that what can be done with the property. Um it should not enter into the decision- making. It's the focus should really be whether or not the property meets the criteria or does not meet the criteria. Okay. Council member Raskin.

Sorry, one last real quick question. How many other surviving crafts and bungalows are there in the green green acres tract? Um I do not have that. Um I do not have that number. Um that um just I don't have that number because to identify a number of building types within a tract that's that small is outside of the Landmarks Commission's practice and it's outside of professional practice. So, we don't have that number for you,

but hasn't the I'm sorry. Hasn't the landmarks commission in the past looked at neighborhood location and you know the geographic scope of of parts of the city and determining whether something is a rare example.

That's right. But usually um it's not such a small tract. And that's why um we've identified let's see if I can bring this up. Uh we've identified the number of properties uh that are craftsman properties in the city. Uh the number of properties in the Wilshire, Montana neighborhood. That's more consistent with the Landmarks Commission practice and with best professional practice. Okay. And I I think that concludes our questions at least. Yes, madame mayor. We do need a motion. The city attorney's office is recommending that council vote to give the property owner 10 minutes in addition to the applicant and the appellant. So, we would need a motion to suspend rule 15F to allow the property owner 10 minutes and then they would speak last in the opening and first in rebuttal.

Make the motion. I'll second. Moved by council member Snell, seconded by Mayor Protemptous. Council Council member Hall. Yes. Council member Raskin. Yes. Hold on. Heidi, do I need to do something for Okay. Council member Raskin, did I call you? Yes. Okay. Snow. Yes. Council member Zern Sky, are you there? Yes. Mayor Penttois? Yes. You're in Negrete? Yes. Okay. Um, so first we will begin with opening remarks from the U. I believe. Yes. The

Yes. You get 10 minutes, but just let me know how you want that split up. Yeah. Well, good evening, council. Sorry, Miss Okconor, if you could just let me know how much you want for the opening and how much you want for the Oh, I probably saved two minutes for rebuttal. Presentation. Yes.

Okay. Hi, folks. Um, my name is Pam Okconor. I'm a landmark commissioner. This is my second time around as a landmarks commissioner. I also for the past 30 years, my day job um outside of city council has been to be historic preservation consultant working throughout um the region. So I'm here today um to talk to you about this and why I believe based on facts that this um project does this building does not meet the designation for um structure of merit. Now, how do I Oh, I'm technically deficient here about getting this going.

Oh, there. Well, thank you. City clerk will help me. So, the Santa Monica landmarks ordinance came to be in 1976 during the bsentennial year. And then in the 1990s in the era of downzoning, the structure of merit became part of the ordinance. There is no structure of merit category recognized by the state of California. puts together a list of historic status codes. That is something that is unique to Santa Monica. So again, it's not recognized and in many places in most places, I guess, you know, it's a big world. It could be some place that has something similar, but it is not recognized by the state of California. The nomination itself says that the building does not rise to the level of significance that needs to be eligible as a landmark. So, um, they're moving down to structure of merit. Um this uh next slide please. Move over to the next slide. Thank you. There are historic contexts that have been developed to talk about what what are the representative features of various styles of architecture. Excuse me guys. I might be better without the glasses. Um, so the context shows you that this is, you know, what the context talks about is what are the what are the types of features that make a building have the integrity, have the style, have the features that communicate their architectural style. It's not a good example of the craftsman style of architecture. Um, it's not it's supposed to be unique, but there's nothing in the nomination that discusses or talks about why it being different is significant. The building was built in 1923. It was built well after the era of popularity of the Craftsman style. Craftsman style was basically popular between about 1905

into the in 1920. The height of the popularity was about 1910 to 1915. So this is definitely an outlier and and um again it does not represent the major features of the style. The domination does not explain the why why the fact that there's a side entrance is significant. It's different but why is it significant? There's nothing about that. There's nothing about why the design the bank of windows is significant. There's nothing about that. It is not a design that was replicated or used or identified by other property owners. The nomination states that the style is no longer prevalent. Um, and you know, but yet the hri provides that there are at least 170 other examples of the craftsman style extent in our city of Santa Monica. The nomination goes on to say it is quote relatively uncommon building type um within the neighborhood specifically the green acres track. So if we can move to the next slide. Thank you. This is the Greenacres tract. This is tract that is two blocks wide by four blocks. It's a very small tract. It was initially recorded in 1906 and the parcels were larger. Development was slow. It then picked up in the 1920s when there was a population boom in Santa Monica and throughout the region. And at that point many of the properties were further subdivided. So uh within that subdivision there were um buildings that the the properties were developed with a range of building styles. The historic context report that was done for the city and the analysis done for this um shows that there were when this was built out in the 20s there were single family homes there were bungalow courts. There were low-rise apartment buildings.

It was never and not a homogeneous single family neighborhood which um is stated in the statement of official action claims that it was. So the structure of merit criteria again to go over it. Is it a rare or unique example of an architectural design detail or type? Well, there's no information about yeah it's rare it's different but why is that important? You have to show and prove that something is significant. And the why of that is not explained. It's not representative of the craftsman's style. While this influence has some features, craftsman style, it's not a distinguished or unique um version of the design. So, letting it get back to the Green Acres track, two blocks by four blocks, a very small track. So, within that tract, is it rare? Oh, yeah. You know, within a track of so many places, I mean, so few parcels, almost everything is unique. So that really is not a good criteria. It's not implied that you're looking at a very small area of the city and say, "Oh, look, there's a craftsman house." Because it's a craftsman house in this small area of the city, it must be designated. That's a flawed way of analyzing looking at buildings and determining if they're historic. So to summarize again and go over the criteria, the sty does it represent a style no longer prevalent? Well, we've learned and we've heard multiple times already tonight that the historic resources inventory, which is a windshield survey, by the way, I will digress here for a moment where someone drives around, looks at it, and says, "Oh, there's something interesting about that building." It ends there. What happens later, something is brought forward to be analyzed at either a structure of merit or a landmark. A full historic resource assessment is done that is many many hours that looks at building permits, compares it to other types of buildings, compares the style, analyzes that. That

is what is different than just being listed on historic resources inventory. So again, it's a style that's it is the style that is still prevalent and still has many uh models and examples in Santa Monica. Does it contribute to historic district? No, it does not. There is no historic district that this is part of. Um hang on guys. So I did want to get back to um just saying on a number of you know just does not meet the criteria. Hopefully I've gone at enough you heard it from the staff also. I do want to go a little bit into the fact that the something about the pro the um the structure of merit and we'll move to the next slide. One of the things that this shows you these are letters a letter that was sent during the um to the landmarks commission and you'll see that most of the points are not about whether the building is historic or not. Most of the points are about hey it's going to be redeveloped. It's going to have another building put there. And I just mentioned this. I want to point out to you that um HCD now is looking more closely at how cities are dealing with historic preservation issues. Our cities finding ways to use historic preservation to stop redevelopment. So you have to file every year an annual report that you are not putting up barriers and obstacles. Well, the structure of merit is a barrier. It is an obstacle. Um it was um again I noted in 1994 was added. You have 16 um in the 30 years you have 16 examples. There were two in the 90s, three in the 2000s, eight in 2010s, and three in 2020.

Miss O' Conor, pardon the interruption, but you're at two. Pardon the interruption, but you're at two minutes now. I have two. I'll go one more minute. Okay.

Okay. And I note this because I know you had the discussion about the Mills Act. Well, last year there were two properties, two buildings 10,000 square feet, 12 units each, that were designated as structures of merit and then got a Millsac contract. You now have um recently the Lamarks Commission um declined to designate a building as a structure of merit or a landmark, but it was proposed be by the owner. No reason for an owner to say, I want something to be a structure of merit other than if they can't become a landmark, they're structure of merit, they could get a millac contract in Santa Monica. So frankly I think you need to take a look at that Mills Act. You need to take a look at that structure of merit category. Again not recognized by anyone unique to Santa Monica. And in terms of the no hearing that this property is not a good example of craftsman architecture. It's not unique that doesn't represent the green anchors tract which is two blocks by four blocks. So I ask you to uphold my appeal and deny the designation as a structure of merit. Thank you.

Perfect. Okay, we'll now hear from the um appellent. I'm sorry, applicant.

Okay. Good evening, council members. Ruth and Larara for the Santa Monica Conservancy. Miss Lair, if you could let me know how many minutes you want for your opening and then how many for your rebuttal. So, how much time do I have? You have a total of 10 minutes. Okay. So, I'm not going to need that much time. Let's say seven minutes for opening. Okay.

Yeah. Um, just introducing myself. Um, I am a former landmarks commissioner who served three terms on the commission as the architectural historian and I have a career in historic preservation that goes back decades. So um our evaluation which is grounded in our deep knowledge of the city's architecture and history and our own research differs from the conclusions of the outside consultant and staff and our findings were validated by the decision of the landmarks commission. I'll be explaining how this uh proposal meets multiple criteria for structure of merit. The bungalow is a small-scale example of craftsman architecture and is listed on the hri as an example of a residential building from the formative period of neighborhood growth in the Wilmont neighborhood in the early 20th century. Let's take a look at the evidence. So, do I just press forward?

Yeah.

Oh, there we go. Okay, great. Um, this 1935 map shows that even then, 12 years after a bungalow was built, the neighborhood was still just being formed with single family houses and some undeveloped parcels. The 1961 map shows how development has advanced in the area with multifamily housing as well as single family. Today the Wilmont area is a mix predominantly multif family interspersed with single family houses. I have a few photos of the immediate context for this bungalow. This is one and here's another. I should say also that in our nomination we were not confining the evaluation simply to the green acres track but we looked at Wilmont as a whole as well as citywide. The consultants report found that the hri lists just 30 craftsman buildings in all of Wilmont and 178 in the entire city. What proportion of the buildings of the entire city is 178? A very small. You would have to say that this is a style that is no longer prevalent. And uh you'll be hearing more about this from some of the other speakers. As it turns out, most of the city bungalows are are concentrated in the Ocean Park area. This craftsman bungalow, a late example built in 1923, has typical craftsman characteristics. Wood cladding, gable roof, visible rafter tails, the window type. However, it does have unusual design characteristics. Facing the street is a bank of windows, not the typical craftsman facade with has a broad front porch and entry door facing the street. And here is a side entry door. To understand the unique architectural characteristics, here are two examples

in the Wilmont area of the classic and typical Craftsman bungalow composition. What you see from the street are strong prominent front-facing gables, strong peers supporting the roof of masonry bases, a broad open porch where the entry door is. Community volunteers actually surveyed all the crafts and bungalows on the hri, not only in Wilmont, but citywide. And they all follow this this traditional template except for the building at 11251 18th Street. And now for something completely different. As noted, the band of windows faces the street, letting light in directly from that from that source. The facade is broken into two sections. The gable is less prominent and is intersected by another sidefacing gable. The entry door is on the side elevation. This building creatively re-imagined craftsman elements to result in a fresh, unusual, and distinctive variation on that style. For these reasons, we believe it's valid to make the finding consistent with the structure of merit criteria that this house is both unique and rare as a variation of craftsman design. So, here's a look at the uh the smaller gable over the entry door. And just a little footnote that there's a record of a historical event here during the Northridge earthquake when the house slid off the foundation and was re repaired. The front door is offset from the front steps as a record of the Northridge earthquake. So to summarize our findings and as I mentioned that there are multiple criteria for structure of merit that we believe are addressed in this nomination is listed on the historic reason inventory. Yes. More than 50 years old? Yes. B1. The structure is an unusual or rare variation of an architectural design detail or historical type. And

there are two elements here that are satisfied. One as a rare example of a historical type as a pioneer building in the devel in the residential development of the Wilmont neighborhood and secondly as a rare variation of the typical craftsman bungalow with the windows facing the street and the entry door placed at the side. And then the structure is representative of a style in the city that is no longer prevalent. And as has been mentioned, citywide there are 178 buildings that have defined as craftsmen. Does that seem prevalent considering this the scale and the amount of development in Santa Monica? It doesn't to me. So those are our findings. I was also going to address one of the issues that uh um Pam Elconor brought up because I think this is important to look at the future. And although I know that this is not strictly on your agenda, I'm very proud of the fact that Santa Monica has innovated ways to encourage the development of new construction adjacent to historic houses through zoning modifications. So we have a number of these projects. 2512nd Street where a historic Victorian cottage was picked up. A whole new basement floor was added below and condos built behind it. 401 ocean with condos behind a a landmark building. This is a Ponoberger showing how this historic Quanset hut has become kind of the anchor of this high-rise residential development and the Laurel which is uh 58 units of affordable housing and combined the Nikay Hall which is an important uh emblem of of the Japanese presence in Santa Monica. So we can look at a bright future if we decide that the house is worthy of preserving because as has been stated it's a very large lot. So there are opportunities for a good future but

we feel that the criteria that we've identified are very solid and that they constitute a basis for upholding the nomination. So thank you. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you. No questions. just a comment that I'm glad you pulled that up because I know it wasn't part of it and I was I actually had passed by and not realized the one building you had shown where there's new and and old and that's pretty unique to see I think. Thank you.

We'll now hear from the owner of the property. which truly reflects the actual condition, character or architectural value of this property. as we heard from Pam and also Stephanie. Uh just to give you a little background, I'm a physician and surgeon by profession, but I've also been interested in restoring and improving properties around Los Angeles for many years. For example, I own this commercial property in 2011 North Avalon Boulevard, which was built in 1924 and designed in the Italian Renaissance revival architectural style. and listed in the historic cultural monument in 2022. I bought it in 2010 because of the style, the uniqueness, and I still take care of it greatly, and I'm very proud of owning it. You can see how grand it is.

I also own a 1908 Craftsman style home in Jefferson Park, 2146 West 31st Street, which is part of a lease historic district. Part of the historic Jefferson Park, known for its art and craft bungalows throughout the whole neighborhood. Um, it's a true piece of history. It's always been proud to preserve it. I always been proud to preserve it. I bought in 2015 and since then I have learned a lot about craftman style homes and as you can see 1125 street is not a craftsman style home or bungalow. More recently I built a modern single family home in Brenwood completing 2017 444 to load a project that was really well received by the neighbors and the community. So when I purchased 112518 Street in December 2021, about four years ago, I did so knowing its zoning and its potential. I plan not to history, but uh to contribute something thoughtful and positive to Santa Monica, Santa Monica's evolving community. I truly believe that the real preservation should highlight exceptional examples of history, not to restrict the modification of properties that simply don't meet that level of significance anymore. We must find a balance between honoring the past and supporting the need for safe, beautiful, livable housing for the future. That's my plan. So tonight, I simply ask the council to take another look and allow the demolition permit to move forward, not as a loss of history, but as a step forward for a vibrant future for the city and the neighborhood we all love.

Thank you so much for your time and consideration. And if by any chance uh history of M is not um they considered I will definitely apply for a certificate of approp which would delay the passes by one year. Thank you all. Thank you. That concludes the opening um statements. We'll now move to the public comment and um it says we have 12 people in the queue but it's actually more. It's 10.

Okay. Because of the doubles. Okay. So I'm going to read the first few names. Pam Okconor, John Prindle. Oh I'm sorry. She signed up but she No, I know but I saw that you were in there. Wasn't sure if you were speaking again. John Brindle, Neil Ree, Ruthan Lair. Al you not speaking. Okay. Harry Baz and Devon Ray Morgan. I think there's a landmarks commissioner here to represent the landmarks commission and I believe that person gets five minutes uh and speaks uh at first. That would be Jack Hillbrand.

Jack Hillbrand. Okay. So Jack Hillbrand um as a commissioner, you'll speak first for five minutes and then I'll call the remaining names. Okay, it's some very interesting discussion in this and uh let me start by saying that it's correct that the staff and the uh the retained professional page and Turbo determined this is not a masterpiece of craftsman. It was not built by an AR or designed by an architect. Um it is um by strict architectural standards it represents a a restrained maybe modest craftsmanesque or ver vernacular. Uh so there is a critical distinction though that is the exactly where the landmarks commission applied the structure of merit ordinance differently. The Santa Monica structure of merit ordinance establishes different evaluation has been established or been discussed in particular the um architectural style detail or historic type and the landmarks commission saw those as distinctly different three different elements. Historic type doesn't have to be a architectural element. It can be a historic type in the way that it's in its place which is the example of this particular uh address. It documents patterns of res residential development during a formative period in

the Wilmont neighborhood. Incidentally, the whole issue about the uh small district, one of the commissioners had mentioned the district, but he didn't mean it as a um item of criteria. It ended up that way in the uh staff um minutes, but I spoke with him recently and he said he's really sorrowful that he mentioned it in that way. He didn't mean it that way. Amen the as the uh Wilmont district. Well, it documents patterns of residential development during that period and that's a historical significance. It it is also a contextual importance. The commission correctly recognized this distinction and applied it. Uh the house was built by a middle-class family who could afford that part of town, not the more uh premium prices in the beachfront areas. Uh it was over a century later that the house was um uh still standing and still standing as an example of one of the only single family residences in the area surrounded by multif family two two and threetory buildings. And there's this is what makes it more profound that this structure documents something in Santa Monica we we can no longer claim. It's a time when a working professional of ordinary means could actually afford to build a house. The irony cuts deep because there's we're here debating affordability in the city that has demolished very housing stock that made Santa Monica accessible to ordinary people. We speak about affordability as a policy goal. Yet, we've systematically eliminated the

physical record of when it was actually achievable. This house is that record. It's not a museum nostalgia. It's evidence. Contextually, surrounded by bland mid-rise apartments, the house possesses what those buildings lack, authenticity. It honestly reflects the means and aspirations of a builder in that area that produced it. that authenticity has value. But Santa Monica has made a choice through its structural merit ordinance. There are buildings that matter not because they're architecturally exceptional because they document but because they document who we were and what was possible. This is one of those buildings. Landmarks commission was correct and it met the criteria. The distinction of this house will erase the destruction of this house will erase the material evidence of a simple middle class family re residence in Santa Monica that no longer exists. A building has that has created an example of a modest well-built place that all of us can appreciate merits protection especially when it is not replicated not cannot be replicated and when it is it represents when what it represents is

thank you.

You have the list of names. What? List of names. Oh, sorry. I'm all right. So, we have folks knocked off on there. We've got John Prindle, Neil Ree, Harry Baz, and then Devon Ray Morgan. You may proceed.

Greetings, council members. If I was going to be quick today, all that I would say is what landmarks commissioner Okconor said. Deny the designation. The underlying issue I'm here to ask you to address is centered around landmarking and structures of merit. In 2025, we find landmarking has been abused and is now just another tool in the NIMI playbook. It stands in the way of housing for all. 25 years ago was when the shift from landmarking actual historic buildings to using the landmarking process as a tool to prevent new homes began in earnest. When I bought my first house on Santa Monica's Upper East Side, there was an old-time speck builder named Cecil Gail who built many of the most inexpensive small Spanish style bungalows in the neighborhood. They were speck houses at that time. Former resident Nancy Coleman along with her friends and other well-known NMA personalities used our neighborhood organization platform to try and landmark these most unremarkable houses. The good news, I don't believe a single one is standing. The bad news, a lot of young unprofessionals suffered because it took two extra years to get the permits to build their houses. In the 25 years since 2000, uh, the conservancy and the landmarks commission has tried to landmark nearly every development that has come before the council for approval. So, nothing new would get built. Today, the process is out of control and damaging our pathway to affordability. A perfect example is a single nogrowth resident, Nina Fresco, acted unilaterally in an attempt to put the civic auditorium on the National

Registry of Historical Places. She did not ask her fellow residents for input. All I'd say to that is ick. I implore you to give direction to staff to try and rectify this abuse. Let the landmarking begin and make sure property owners know that this is your goal. Yes, the time for the city to start communications with the small mom and pop property owners should begin immediately. Thank you, Neil Ree.

Oh, sure. Yeah, I'll pass. Good evening, uh, council members, uh, mayor and mayor prom. Uh, my name is Neil Ris. Um, and I live on 18th Street in the vicinity of 1125 18th Street. Um, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight regarding the appeal of the Landmarks Commission designation of the house as a structure of merit. Um, I also submitted written comments, extensive written comments and I hope you've had an opportunity to look at those and I'm only going to reiterate a few of the points that I actually made in those comments. Uh, first a bit of background about me. Uh, by profession I'm a human geneticist and a statistician uh with a special interest in human evolution, but my interests extend beyond that to preservation history as well. Um, especially uh the history as we see it. Um, one of my favorite things about Santa Monica and the neighborhoods we have is that we still have vestages of the history of architectural development throughout the city, especially in the Wilmont neighborhood in which I live. I'm speaking tonight to urge you to uphold the landmark commission's careful and well-reasoned designation. Uh, the commission conducted a thorough review, considered the property itself, the staff report, the historical resources, inventory, public testimony, and the broader context of the neighborhood. Their analysis found that the house meets three separate criteria under the city's preservation ordinance. First A, which is criterion A, its excl its inclusion in the historical resource inventory, which already recognizes its architectural historical significance. The appellant and staff report argue that this criterion should be ignored because was based on a windshield survey. However, that is common practice and the basis of many if not most of the entries in the hri. Therefore, that argument would invalidate the entire basically the entire hri. Second, uh

citing the page and turnable report is argued that it doesn't meet the intent of the hri. However, it was uh qualified professionals. So, the hri is uses qualified professionals by its definition who placed the structure there. So, this is really simply a matter of a difference of opinion. Um it is a simple fact that the structure is included in the hri and meets that criterion which actually the way it is written alone is sufficient for the designation as a structure merit. I would also mention criterion B1 is also easily met. Um as I pointed out in in what I wrote after visiting I visited all 30 craftsman houses in Wilmont. This one is unique. I can attest that this one is unique in its design and its character. Uh this appeal suggests that the house is too modest or ordinary to merit designation but as a commission findings make clear modesty does not disqualify a property and it is not an exclusion criterion in the stated code. Uh even small unassuming houses can have exceptional significance if they represent a style error or construction method that is rare or particularly intact. Now criterion B2 is also easily met and that's where I want you to take a look at the map. Okay. So you can see it's very clear in that map the and we're talking about was brought up about green acres. No, the discussion was about Wilmont. Really in the landmarks commission meeting it was about Wilmont and you can see the entire east half of Wilmont and the northeast there's a total of three remaining craftsman structures and I can tell you two that question came up. There were two actually that are in the greenacres tract. Okay. Um, all of those three are structures of merit. Okay. So now the the appellant has argued for the elimination of the class that classification would effectively eliminate most craftsman houses in Wilmont and the northeast and all of the craftsman houses east of 14th street. So

you can see the entire eastern half of Wilmont and the entire northeast will be devoid of craftsman houses. Okay. Um, so I want to also I want to emphasize that the landmarks commission didn't make this decision likely. Their vote reflects a careful weighing of the evidence. The commission's decision is grounded in substantial evidence and professional.

Thank you. Thank you. So we have Harry Bles and then Hi. Do I do I have four minutes? Four minutes.

My name's Harry Bolaz. I live at 11:25 and a half 18th Street. That's the house behind. I've lived there for 23 years. Um I've attended all these meetings. Um you know, started in July. I've u researched the hri extensively. In fact, uh probably more than any than any of the other speakers uh uh tonight. Uh, and that means that I the and I'll just the hri is 73 pages long. on that hri. Everybody talks about 178, but I counted 150 because the 178 is qualified by Paige and Turnball as some some that were previously recognized but are no longer recognized and some that have been demolished. Anyway, to that to that degree, I took it upon myself to uh research every craftsman house in Santa Monica. Every all 150. I defend identified where they were. I did a windshield survey. I wanted to determine whether they're still here or not. Basically, 11 are gone. So, if I take from my 150, I take away 11, that's 139. Okay, some of these people they talk about prevalence in and uh Green Acres. There's one house in Green Acres that's still standing. That's 1125. The other one was on 21st Street, 1035 21st Street. It's gone. It's like a six-unit condo or 8-unit condo. I don't know what it is. But anyway, you want to talk about prevalence

in if you go from Montana to Wilshire and from 14th all the way to Sentinella, there's three houses, three craftsman houses that are remaining. So that's in my mind that's not very that's a big area and that's not very prevalent. So that's that's my point of view. The other thing I found out is about 65% of all craftsman houses in the whole city and that goes all the way from uh San Viceni all the way to Marine are west of Lincoln Boulevard. So that kind of tells you and most of them and like was discussed by uh Ruth Anne. Uh there's a lot of craftsman houses in the Ocean Park area and that's really a distinctly different area than what we're talking about. And uh I don't have the time here to describe to you how I uh was able to organize myself to the extent that I could visit all these houses and if you want to I could talk to you privately about it and tell you what I did uh because uh it wasn't easy and it took it took a lot of time and uh and that's another thing. But anyway, I don't have any prepared remarks. Uh, I'm I just wanted to, you know, give you my viewpoint and sort of back it up a little bit. And, um, I appreciate you listening to me. I hope you I hope you say vote no on this application because I think, uh, I think the house is worth saving. Like I said, I've lived there for 23 years. Uh, and I know a lot about it and history that I just don't have time to bring it up because I've only got four minutes. So anyway, um thank

you very much and um I hope we do the right thing here. Thank you. So I have Devon Ray Morgan. I don't think he's here. Okay. An uh an Pomemeroy and then after Miss Palmer, I'm just going to call through their names. Elizabeth Vanderber, Zenan Ulate Crow, and David R and Shahab Gods. Sorry if I'm mispronouncing the names. So Ann Pomeroy is next.

Miss Pomero, I just want to confirm you only want one minute. Miss Pomeray, I just want to confirm you registered for one minute. Is that correct? Uh one minute. Yes. Okay. You can pull the mic down if you want. Yeah, that's a total

council members. You're a varied and illustrious group. Thank you for all you do. We have everything in Santa Monica. Worldclass hospitals, worldass schools, worldclass restaurants, a vibrant economy, a caring populace. the ocean. It's a worldclass destination for tourists. What we're in danger of losing is our history. After experiencing the devastation of the Palisades fire firsthand, I'm begging you to do what you can to preserve this charming and historic bungalow. Our history was wiped out overnight. Please save yours while you can. Thank you, Elizabeth Vanderberg.

Two. Thanks. Good evening. Elizabeth Vandenberg, chair of Wilshire, Montana Neighborhood Coalition, also known as Wilmont in which the 1125 18th Street property resides. I have lived in this neighborhood for over 45 years and have grown to love it. The board of Wilmont strongly supports the designation of 112518 street residential property as a structured of merit. We agree with the Santa Monica Conservy's application that the property meets structure of merit criteria A, B1, and B2. The Wilmont neighborhood boundaries are from Ocean Avenue to Montana Avenue, Wilshire Boulevard out to 21st Street. Our neighborhood is R3 from Ocean to 4th Street and R2 from 4th to 21st Street. As a neighborhood, we are mostly two to fourstory multif family apartment and condo buildings. Our perspective is that this structure is representative of a style no longer prevalent in our neighborhood, the densest in Santa Monica and especially in the east end of Wil of Wilmont. We don't have representatives like this. A single family one-star craftsman home is rare in Wilmont as are single family homes. We do have single family homes sprinkled throughout Wilmont and they provide a diversity and openness that we often don't see in our neighborhood and we welcome that. We welcome the architecture openness and the historical representation and homage to our Wilmont neighborhood. Please deny the appeal and designate 11251 18th Street as a structure of merit in Wilmont. We won't ever see more of these types of residential properties again. Let us preserve what we have ha what we have in this over 100year-old residential home. Thank you.

Thank you Zenin Ulate Crow and after uh Zenan is David Name and Shahab Gods.

Awesome. Can I get two minutes please? Thank you. All right. Hello council. Uh my name is Zenan Algate Crowe. I am the uh Santa Monica director with Abundance Network and I wanted to speak today to encourage the council to deny this structure of merit designation. Um I really want to emphasize the fact that in terms of this structure, some of the things that are brought up is that it's rotated 90 degrees and so that makes it different. And I know that's a bit, you know, crass, for lack of a better term, but really what we're talking about here is minor architectural things that if you're going around and talking to random people in the city of Santa Monica and say, "Oh, yeah, you know that one bungalow house on 18th Street, nobody's going to know what you're talking about." And in that point, I think that we can all really tell when there are buildings of historical significance in this city. The clock tower, this city hall, for one, everybody knows that and nobody would ever want that to change. When we talk about these things, that's why we have historical landmarks. This quasi category of I know it's not a real historical landmark, but it looks a little cool is not something that we should be entertaining. We know that the frivolous and widespread use of historic districts and properties have been used as a tool to prevent change and shut out new people. Time and time again, empirically, it's been proven that historical districts are on average wider, wealthier, and more exclusive. And so, I really want to encourage the council to evaluate the merits of the structures of merits category overall. Let's let landmarks be landmarks and homes be homes. Thank you.

Thank you, David. De name or shahabs. No. Okay. Shahab.

Good evening, Madame Mayor, member of the council. My name is Shahab Goats. I'm a principal of plus architect. I'm not a historian, but uh when I look at this uh specific project uh the style of craftsman, this pro this house is a mishmash of different styles of architecture. does not represent the real craftsman architecture. Just look at the front. Most of the craftsman architecture they enter from the front not from the side. Just look at the overhang that is over the entrance. Uh that has been probably done years after the uh building was constructed. So also something that we are all missing here is the city hired a professional company, a professional historian, architect to study this in detail and they studied this in detail and they came up with the fact that this is not a structure of merit and we are completely disregarding this fact. Thank you so much for listening to me.

Thank you. So, I believe that closes public comment and we're on to discussion. No, actually, we're on to So, first we have the owner with How many minutes is that? He has six minutes and 5 seconds left. Is he still I'm sorry. Is the owner of the property here? What's his name? I don't. Yes. Did you want to rebuttal? Did you have more to say? I have nothing else to add. Okay. Um, and then we have the applicant, Ruthanne Lair.

Miss Lair, you just have two minutes and 59 seconds left.

Hello again. Um, I don't have anything substantial to add to uh the record in terms of the support for the structure of merit. I think the case is very strong. You've heard from many people on that. I just wanted to address the the spectre of the nimi argument that comes up again and again to fight historic preservation which is really a misplaced argument as we see this is a property where we can have a both and solution. we can have preservation and new development. And uh one of the architects who's done many of these project in Santa Monica has offered free consultation to the owner should he wish to actually plan five or six condominiums on the property which is doable. So that offer is out there. Um in terms of the structure of merit as a category itself, of course that's not before the commission. uh it is a difficult category to interpret because the term prevalent is somewhat ambivalent and uh difficult to define in in relation to what and the Lamar's commission has uh over many years looked at some of the difficulties in using the structure of mayor which is intended as a lesser tier and was placed in our ordinance as appropriate to the Santa Monica's needs. I should mention other cities do have various categories uh which is beyond a single category that they use. We're not alone in that. But it probably would be very useful to revisit that in connection with other needed revisions to our landmarks ordinance which was adopted in 1975. And so uh please put that on your wish list for the next budget hearing. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. picked up on myself.

Okay. Um, you have to make legal findings. This is a land use issue. You heard words like pioneer about the property, but there was no evidence, nothing supporting it being a pioneer property. Population 1910 8,000 Santa Monica population 1920 15,000. This was built in 1923. not a pioneer of property. So while it's important to celebrate history, absolutely you need to give serious this is a serious land use decision. You need to give it serious consideration. Unsupported, unproved statements, no evidence supporting them do not suffice to make adequate findings that this is a structure of merit. I urge you to uphold the appeal. Thank you. Thank you. Are we in discussion now, Mayor Promterosas?

Okay. I think we've heard a lot of Oh, I know it's late. We've heard a lot of compelling arguments.

Um, you know, from a legal perspect the the issue of whether or not we have a structure of merit designation is not before us tonight. And I think we're like, you know, that's a different discussion that we can have. Um, but as I look at it from a from a legal perspective, the property clearly satisfies criterion A. Under our ordinance, a structure of merit may be designated when the structure has been identified within our historic resources inventory. It was um criterion A is not discretionary. It meets criterion A. The property also meets at least one criterion under subsection B. Uh the landmarks commission itself and we heard from them identified multiple distinctive documented features including offset side entry, reduced porch, intersecting gables, asymmetrical prairie style muttons. Several things I think that were notable and meet our standard. Um that together I I I do believe form a rare variation of a modest craftsman bungalow within the green acres tract. And again, I was a little disappointed that we couldn't talk about uh the specific area and we looked only at the totality of craftsman's in the entire city. Uh I do believe that the structure retains exceptionally high integrity of design. Um and I think the structure of merit category again we can debate the merits of whether we should have that exist for this type of building. Um we're not looking at whether we should landmark this. We're not looking at uh a district a district contributor. It's an intact surviving early 20th century example of Santa Monica's residential development. And I feel excited about the fact that uh we have all of these examples where we potentially could develop uh additional homes on the property. And it sounds like we have a a a partner here who has developed uh and owns property in multiple parts of the county. So that that's exciting to me. Um, I believe that the landmarks commission applied the ordinance correctly.

Thank you. I just want to check in with council member Zernitzkaya. Are are you gonna put yourself in the queue because he has no comments at this time. Okay. Thanks, Council. Not yet. Okay. Council member Hall.

Thank you, mayor. So, in the first year I lived here, I walked every street of this city. Literally every street. I kept a map on my desk that I highlighted when I crossed when I when I completed a street. Um, and so in preparation of for tonight, I could have reflected on some of the houses that I saw in those walks and whether this house that we're discussing tonight is quote unique and rare or quote prevalent. Uh, but respectfully to our friends at the conservancy, to our appellant, to the owner, I didn't have to give much thought to section B of our code, this question of level of significance on unique and rare or prevalent. Because when I read the law, it's pretty straightforward. If I'm reading the letter of the law, it reads, "Does it meet criterion A or criterion B?" If it meets criterion A, and we confirm that it does, then the structure meets the criteria for a structure of merit. You know, I could comment on my thoughts about this process that allows a consultant to effectively do this by fiat instead of a public body, but that's not agendaized tonight. So, as a reflection of how our municipal code is written, I will be voting to to deny the appeal. Council member Raskin,

thank you. Um I I do want to echo the uh uh comments of my my colleagues and um I appreciate the work that's gone into this but the staff level at the community level uh and uh from all all sides here. Uh this is a serious laneous decision and we're taking seriously the evidence that we've we've seen here. Uh and particularly given the uh constrained nature of the findings that were put into the code that we have to follow here. uh this does meet the criteria for a structure of merit. Uh I believe that uh for the reasons that uh mayor promosis articulated it meets the criteria both under subp part A and subp part B. We we've heard from many people tonight uh about the reasons why this this is unique example of a craftsman uh home that is rare for the area and there are an increasingly small number uh that remain. And I I I do want to thank the member of the public who who sounds like spent considerable time uh investigating this. Um I imagine that was um a tremendously timeconsuming undertaking. Um you know as as as Ruthan said this is an opportunity for a yes and solution here. You know, the structure of merit category is intentionally designed to give a pause in the demolition process so that folks can work collaboratively to try to find solutions that incorporate adaptive reuse and housing. We've shown before tonight and tonight again that we are a council that does value housing deeply and this is an opportunity I I hope for uh the property owner to work with uh historic preservationist to figure out a solution that can retain this uh truly unique structure and get us to that yes and uh solution. So uh I'm I'm prepared to make a motion though we haven't heard from the mayor

but you can do that if you want. Um, yeah. Let me I'll I'll hold off for now since other people are in the queue. Council member Snell,

I I'm first want to thank um both parties. It's not often that um we get educated like this in a particular item. I I really mean that from both sides of it. Um I found this to be very intriguing. I found that the amount of work that the that both parties have done on this particular item was was really exquisite. But I do believe that um in this particular case that I'm going to support the denial um of this particular petition. And I also want to thank my my council members for their way they articulated what was happened tonight because you know obviously we have long meetings all the time but this one this particular item uh whichever way my council members fall on this particular was incredibly interesting incredibly knowledgeable very educational and I want to thank um the community and the historical committee for bringing it not bringing it forward but articulating um their desire for it. So, I'm going to deny this petition also.

Thank you. Well, I'm going to just run this out with a different avenue and say that look at us here uh potentially agreeing all on something when it comes to preservation of an older building and I'm not the oldest person up here. So, okay. Okay, Barry, you get to piss it in. You going to leave me hanging?

I was trying to pound you, but you left me hanging. Um, all right. So this non-millennial here will just say that look I I am disappointed that the weaponization of uh you know historical preservation is being used when it comes to talking about development. I don't think that's fair. I think it's unfair the loose use of the word nimi and how it's become so negatively kind of dropped on folks and neighborhoods who oftentimes just are um wanting to not preserve to keep people out but to slow down what seems like over densification oftentimes and has other impacts to communities that actually go against why we you know the why the argument is that we need more housing in the first place and that's affordability. I watched my father leave this earth last year, not being able to afford to eat and play and experience the city that I grew up in. And I think it be as we see more homes and places uh kind of be torn down to be replaced by maybe more housing, but oftentimes it's more expensive much much more expensive to the so to the extent that we are um excluding diversity to move in in terms of affordability. I would say that the new units that go up are often much more expensive than potentially an older bungalow that is sitting there. So, I cannot opine on, you know, this front porch or that front porch or that window. I just know as a layman driving by, it looks like a craft. I lived in a craftsman bungalow before in Venice uh for a brief time when my parents were divorced um with another family. And I can say that it looks kind of like that. And so, although I'm not an engineer and architect, it looks like an older cool building. And I think it provokes um curiosity and a conversation about history that I enjoy when my kids walk past older buildings. I grew up on Fourth in Ashland and I can tell you I remember every detail of all the mini bungalows on Ashland, 126 Wadssworth, I

have favorite houses that I love to go by because they slow me down and remind me of a simpler time. And so with that, I will just say that outside of all the legal conforms and fitting into this or that, I just think it's really neat. We are um paving over everything. uh buildings are getting so tall we're having tunnels when we drive that block out the sun before 4:00 and it's kind of neat to just drive by an old building and think about how we lived a long time before. So with that, I'm glad to see that we're on the same page and it looks like um Council Member Zernit Skaya has something to add.

Thank you. Um, we did hear quite a few comments and u received some written comments about the potential impacts if this property or this building were to be redeveloped, impacts on parking, things like that. None of that factors into this disc this decision that we're going to make tonight. What's before us is a legal decision of does this meet the criteria of structure of merit in the under the municipal code as it currently stands. Uh several of my colleagues have noted that under the municipal code it it states for the purposes of this chapter an improvement may be designated a structure of merit if the landmarks commission determines that it merits official recognition because it has one of the following characteristics. A, the structure has been identified in the city's historic resources inventory and B and they're they read we already read those and went through them and under the literal language of the municipal code, it does meet that designation. Um, while I may personally not uh have some concerns with the use of uh this particular designation um in this case, I'm also not an expert on architecture. Um, but I believe we we do have to follow what the municipal code states. And so I will be um voting to deny the appeal as much as I would personally love to um support the appeal because I

I one applicant and that's Scott Ginsburg. I'm sorry. We have one applicant and it's Okay. Yes. Scott Ginsburg. Are we scanning or no? I guess there's one applicant. City clerk. Uh, wasn't a boy hand on the Wasn't if it if he was, it wasn't received in a timely fashion. The only applicant I have is Scott Ginsburg. It rece it was received on May 8th, 2025. According to his application,

Brian P. Let me let me check it on the website really quick.

Feel free to play whole music. So,

yeah. Oh, I did pull up the application. It It does say that it was received May 8th. I'm not sure why it's not included in the packet. It um So, but we have to do this one because there's a core issue. We can't do this on December 9th. We could hold it till December 9th. I mean, because I didn't get to review the addition. I'm just asking. Yeah, we could hold it to December 9th. They're not They only have to meet once a year and I'm sure they're not going to be meeting between now and December 9th. And there's also only So, we could table this one. We keep tableabling the other ones. So, it feels like Sure. Okay. Is the council amendable? Do we need to make a motion to uh table 16 it to continue it to continue uh 16A to the next meeting? Second. Moved by council member Hall, seconded by myself,

and then Okay. Um, unfortunately, we need a roll call vote. Council member Hall, yes. Council member Raskin, yes. Mayor Pim Terrosus, yes. Council member Snow, yes. Council Zala, yes. Mayor Negrete, yes. Okay. Uh moving on to item 16B, appointment to one vacancy on the housing commission for terms ending on June 30, 2028, continued from the October 20 uh 28, 2025 meeting to meet quorum requirements. So right now they're hanging on by a thread um with a quorum. Um they did actually have someone who was absent from the November meeting, so they couldn't hold a meeting. So I am recommending that we at least appoint additional one an additional member. Um, given that,

well, we have a lot of I'd like to nominate William Kaziki.

Okay, I guess we don't need to use the app then. Just so only one nomination. Okay, I guess so. Sweet. Um, we do need a roll call vote. So, council member Zenit Skaya, yes. Uh, council member Snow, yes. Mayor Pro Timosas, yes. Council member Raskin, yes. Council member Hall, yes. And Mayor Negrete, yes. Okay. Um, the other two items, do you want to vote as a consent or do you actually want to discuss them? Move items 16 C and 16 D. But I thought we couldn't do that with Oh, you can. You just have to do a roll call then.

Okay. Natala, do you have your hand raised? Oh, Council Member Skaya. Uh, I would like to do 16D separately because I would like to add um funds from my allocation of council discretionary funds to the SMC Thanksgiving giving Thanksgiving um allocation. We can do that without we can still vote on consent. Add that to it. Okay. Discussion on that. It's her Did she make a note of that now? Well, she just did. Okay. But she didn't say how much. Does that I'm sorry. I I would like to add $1,000 from my um my allocation of discretionary funds, please. Okay.

Okay. Okay. I'm sorry. Who made the first or who made the motion? I'm sorry. Move item 16 C and 16D as by council members Ernit Skaya. Uh, Council Member Hall, uh, moved it, seconded by Council Member Snow, adding $1,000 to item 16D for a total of $3,000 of council discretionary funds to support SMC's 9th annual giving. Thanks. Council members Hall, yes. Member Raskin, yes. Mayor Tempos, yes. Uh, Council Member Snell, yes. Council member Jaya, yes. Mayor Negrete, yes. Before we move to close session, mayor, did you have a an adjournment? I do.

My gosh, I'm usually prepared for this one. Okay. because we're doing uh close session after I'm going to adjourn the meeting now in the memory of Barnaby Kono um who many of us uh who live in the neighborhood around Pearl and uh 17th or who've whose kids have gone to John Adams know Barnaby as a crossing guard who was well loved. Barnaby joined the Santa Monica Police Department family as a crossing guard on December 15, 2008 and was most recently assigned to John Adams Middle School and Will Rogers Learning Community. He worked his final shift on Wednesday, October 29th, 2025 and passed away on November 2nd, 2025 at the age of 81. And by the way, he was talking about the Dodgers and the World Series right before. Barnaby was a dedicated, old school, nononsense kind of person who took great pride in his role. You could always count on him to be at his post, rain or shine, often arriving early to ensure the safety of the children and families he served. Known for his professionalism and crisp uniform, Barnaby took great pride in representing the Santa Monica Police Department. He preferred the busiest intersections, finding purpose and satisfaction in the challenge. Barnaby was deeply respected and well-liked by his colleagues in the Santa Monica community. His reliability, commitment, and pride and service will be remembered fondly by all who had the privilege to work alongside him or across the streets under his watchful care. My uncle Victor Fernandez is a crossing guard and Barnaby was a dear friend of his. And if you would like to get more information about Barnaby's family, um his daughter has posted her phone number and some information publicly on the post where um Barnaby um would stand and there's flowers there in his memory in front of John Adams on the

lawn there on um 16th and Pearl. Um we will miss you Barnaby. He was also a lover of anyone walking their pets in the morning and would often take photos with them. So you'll see um a photo with him there with the pets. So with that we are Excuse me. Council member Hall, you're in the queue. Did you need something? Oh, no. Okay. Yeah. Well, no. I just need to do my recusal for 5F and 5G. Okay. So, we are adjourning the meeting to go into close session and then are we all coming back to report out or would it just be We are Oh, dang it. I'm just kidding. Um I'll save my little sign off then for then. Um, and with that, um, council member Her I need to read the items into the right. Okay. Okay.

Which reads like war in peace. So Oh my gosh. Do you have to actually read all of them? Yeah. Or at least some semblance of all of them. Yeah. Okay. We don't have to list every do she said. No, no, no. All I'm not. I'm like,

all right. So on the regular meeting agenda, we have item 5A. uh anticipated litigation claims of Constance White and Milana Davis against the city pertaining to condemnation of property located at 1811 Ocean Avenue. Item 5B is a conference with legal counsel regarding existing litigation pertaining to all of the litigants as listed on the agenda. Item 5 C is the city versus Ixop and others. Item 5D is existing litigation Terry Davis Bernstein versus the city and others. Item 5E, potential litigation. Item 5 F is conference with real estate negotiator regarding the property at 164014th Street, the owner of record 16414 owner LLC. Um and the city founder of industry partners and a negotiation is price and terms for payment of purchase of the property. Item 5G is also real estate negotiator 1639 and 1645 Uglit Avenue. Owner of records 1639 Uklid LLC and 1645 LLC. Um party to be negotiated is Jim Jacobson, founder industry partners. Under negotiation is pricing terms of payment for purchase of property. Item 5H is a consider public employee appointment of the city attorney. Item 5 I is a report out only Alejandro Garcia versus the city. And on the special meeting agenda, item 5A, existing litigation, people the state of California and others versus say Farzam and others. And item 5B is existing litigation, pavilions, motel incorporated and others versus the city and others.

When do we expect to be back, city attorney, and and and be and be be quick? Yeah, exactly. I I would say um hour and a half. Two hours. Oh my gosh. Hour and a half. We'll do an hour and a half. Council member Hall. Thank you, Mayor. Um, I will be recusing from 5F Fox and 5G Golf of the regular meeting out of an abundance of caution due to a potential conflict of interest. I will be recusing from those items until the FPPC rules on my ability to participate. Thank you. You're just trying to leave early. I'm just joking. All right. Thank you.

We will be back in hopefully an hour and a half. Okay, I'm gonna um head upstairs and switch to the close session link.

Okay. Oh.

Oh, shoot. This is cool, right? You're not coming.

Oh, we can add you to it. We have a quorum. Yeah, she's ahead. Okay, welcome back. And city clerk, I'm just going to have the city attorney report out. Okay. Items 5B, 5 C, 5D, 5F, 5G, and 5H of the regular meeting, and five and items 5 A and 5B of the special meeting were all heard with no reportable action taken. We have three report outs. Item 5A of the regular meeting was heard with the following report out. Following a dayong mediation on October 30th, 2025, the city and Constance White entered into a settlement agreement whereby the parties agreed to the following substantive terms without any admission of liability. First, the city shall provide a payment of $350,000 to Miss White in recognition of Miss White's efforts to address alleged wrongs to silence White's efforts to create the Ebony Beach Club. Miss White may file an administrative reparations claim if such process is established by the city.

priority in processing future claim shall be given to persons 90 years of age and older. If and when a process is created and if a reparations fund is created, the city will explore additional funding sources and will provide to White or her designated representative a status report of said exploration efforts within 90 days of creating the reparations fund. And staff will recommend one, leaseold interests are eligible, two, that the claims process will not be set up in such a way that disqualifies the white claim. and three that Miss White's acceptance of the finder fee will not be disqualifying consideration for the claim. And four, that the White claim will be given full consideration. The claims process requires legislative approval. There will be no offer to negotiate outside the claims process. By February 2026, the city will establish a Silus White exhibit at the city's main library and coordinate with Miss White andor her representatives regarding the exhibit materials. The city will rename a portion of Vicente Terrace to Silus White Street for the section of the roadway not currently used as a mailing address for any existing residents. The city will adopt a Silus White proclamation and coordinate with Miss White andor her representatives in naming a specific day as Silus White Day on October 12th in Santa Monica. The parties agreed to mutual release of claims. The settlement was previously authorized in close session by the city council on September 9th, 2025 by a vote of 7 to zero.

Associated um with that particular issue, but in a different vein, we also wanted to let the city council know that we will be um by January 2026 bringing back for city council consideration the formal establishment of a citywide restorative justice program. More details about that particular program will be shared um in the coming weeks.

Item 5E was heard with the following report out. Direction was given on a vote of six to zero to issue a demand to the property owners, lees and operators for the properties located at 1222 Broadway and 1310 Broadway to cease overnight operations due to nuisance conditions at the site and if the owners lees and operators do not comply with an expedited time frame to initiate litigation to abate the nuisance conditions. The action defendants and other particulars shall once formally commenced be disclosed upon inquiry consistent with the Brown Act. And finally, there is one report out only from item 5. At its October 28th, 2025 meeting, the city council approved a settlement in Garcia versus City, a class action lawsuit against multiple governmental in entities related to the May 31 to June 20th June 2nd, 2020 events in Santa Monica involving claims that the city violated those civil rights of two plaintiffs. The city denies liability and does not admit fault, but agreed to settle for $150,000 for both plaintiffs. And in exchange, plaintiffs agreed to release all claims against the city. The settlement was approved by a vote of 70 and I am finally done.

Wait, do you need to do a vote on the initiation? Yeah. I didn't either. That was weird. I zoned out. I think I fell asleep for a minute. I'm just kidding. Sorry. Okay. Well, it's been a long evening. Thank you, Santa Monica. We already did our adjournments and we will be back here December 9th for our regular city council meeting. Um, and also just a note that Thursday the treeing has been moved to December 4th. So be safe and stay sassy. Santa Monica, good night.