CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting Agenda

Tuesday, October 14, 2025

Closed Session at 5:00 PM and Open Session at 6:00 PM

Council Chambers

1315 Valley Drive

Hermosa Beach, CA 90254

CITY COUNCIL
Rob Saemann, Mayor  
Mike Detoy, Mayor Pro Tem
Ray Jackson, Councilmember 
Michael D. Keegan, Councilmember
Dean Francois, Councilmember

David Pedersen, City Treasurer

APPOINTED OFFICIALS
Steve Napolitano, Interim City Manager
Jason Baltimore, Interim City Attorney 

EXECUTIVE TEAM
Brandon Walker, Administrative Services Director
Myra Maravilla, City Clerk
Alison Becker, Community Development Director
Lisa Nichols, Community Resources Director
Landon Phillips, Police Chief 
Joe SanClemente, Public Works Director 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 - To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Assistive Listening Devices (ALD) are available for check out at the meeting. If you require special assistance to participate in this meeting, you must call or submit your request in writing to the Office of the City Clerk at [phone] or at at least 48 hours before the meeting. 

 

PARTICIPATION AND VIEWING OPTIONS  

Hermosa Beach City Council meetings are open to the public and are being held in person in the City Hall Council Chambers located at 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. Public comment is only guaranteed to be taken in person at City Hall during the meeting or prior to the meeting by submitting an eComment for an item on the agenda. As a courtesy only, the public may view and participate via the following: 

 

• Zoom: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89968207828? pwd=bXZmWS83dmxHWDZLbWRTK2RVaUxaUT092
• Phone: Toll Free: [phone]; Meeting ID: 899 6820 7828, then #; Passcode: 472825
• eComment:  Submit an eComment no later than three (3) hours before the meeting start time.
• Supplemental Email: Submit a supplemental email for agenda items only to . Supplemental emails should indicate the agenda item and meeting date in the subject line and must be received no later than three (3) hours before the meeting start time. Emails received after the deadline but before the meeting ends will be posted to the agenda the next business day. 

Please be advised that while the City will endeavor to ensure these remote participation methods are available, the City does not guarantee that they will be technically feasible or work all the time. Further, the City reserves the right to terminate these remote participation methods (subject to Brown Act restrictions) at any time and for whatever reason. Please attend in person or by submitting an eComment to ensure your public participation.  

 

Similarly, as a courtesy, the City will also plan to broadcast the meeting via the following listed mediums. However, these are done as a courtesy only and not guaranteed to be technically feasible. Thus, in order to guarantee live time viewing and/or public participation, members of the public shall attend in Council Chambers. 

 

• Cable TV: Spectrum Channel 8 and Frontier Channel 31 in Hermosa Beach 
• YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/CityofHermosaBeach90254 
• Live Stream: www.hermosabeach.gov/agenda
• Cablecast App: Available on supported devices and smart TVs

If you experience technical difficulties while viewing a meeting on any of our digital platforms, please try another viewing option. 

---

1.

CLOSED SESSION—CALL TO ORDER 5:00 PM

2.

ROLL CALL

3.

PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CLOSED SESSION AGENDA

Matt McCool

Attached is the George Brunn v. City of Hermosa Beach civil complaint. I am in support of Ofc. Brunn, as I too, have been a target for retaliation by Landon Phillips.

This Public Comment period is limited to Closed Session agenda items only. Public Comment is limited to three (3) minutes per speaker.

4.

RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

4.a

MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on September 9, 2025 

4.b

CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATOR

Government Code Section 54957.6
City Negotiator: Cynthia Stafford, Human Resources
Employee Organizations: Teamsters and Professional and Administrative Employees (PAE)

4.c

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: Threatened Litigation

Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2) and (e)(1)
The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation.
Number of Potential Cases: 1

4.d

CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: Existing Litigation

Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)
The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. (1 case)
Name of Case: George Brunn v. City of Hermosa Beach
Case Number: 23TRCV02212
Date of Filing: July 10, 2023

5.

OPEN SESSION—CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM

6.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

7.

ROLL CALL

8.

CLOSED SESSION REPORT

9.

ANNOUNCEMENTS—UPCOMING CITY EVENTS

10.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

This is the time for the City Council to discuss any changes to the order of agenda items.

• Recommended Action:

  To approve the order of the agenda.

11.

PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS

11.a

RECOGNIZING OCTOBER 19–25, 2025 AS UNITED AGAINST HATE WEEK

11.b

RECOGNIZING OCTOBER 2025 AS BREAST CANCER AWARENESS MONTH AND OCTOBER 13, 2025 AS METASTATIC BREAST CANCER AWARENESS DAY

12.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Howard Lee

The word “Routine” needs to be restored to describing items placed on the Consent Calendar. Tonight the Consent ordinance to ADOPT the obscene meter rate increases “introduced” last meeting, needs to be reconsidered. Let’s see who will pull consent item 15.d such that public comment can be taken, if existing. Or are you to be using the Suja introduced rubber-stamping of an ordinance to suck well over another million dollars from residents and visitors to the city? It’s your choice. I frankly couldn’t give a damn if you choose lazy government or better government.

Bette Mower

The article in all 3 of our local publications regarding the "highly lauded and successful" collaboration between HBPD and the School District is laughable. I hope the District didn't spend too much money on that program because it isn't working. The good kids who follow all the rules are not the target population and if the media had only paid attention when at the Mayor's Town Hall the ebike situation was overwhelmingly the center of attention, they could not have published such an article with any attention to journalistic integrity. It isn't working as evidenced by the poor behavior of teens on ebikes on the Plaza and Strand. We need solutions which should address not only the responsibility of the kids but their parents too. I suggest we start with addressing the teen gang called "Goons" who are guilty of most of the terrorizing of visitors to the Plaza. Stop them and we will have gone a long way in solving this issue.

This is the time for members of the public to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction and on items where public comment will not be taken (City Manager Reports, City Councilmember Comments, Consent Calendar items not pulled for separate discussion, and Future Agenda Items). If public comment is provided on a Public Hearing or Municipal Matter item, public comment on the same item will not be accepted when the item is heard at a later part of the meeting.

The public is invited to attend and provide public comment. Public comments are limited to three minutes per speaker from those present in City Council Chambers and via the remote participation options listed on the agenda. This time allotment may be modified due to time constraints at the discretion of the Mayor or City Council. 

No action will be taken on matters raised during public comment, except that the Council may take action to schedule issues raised during public comment for a future agenda. Speakers with comments regarding City management or departmental operations are encouraged to submit those comments directly to the City Manager. Members of the public will have a future opportunity to speak on items pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion, Public Hearings, and Municipal Matters when those items are heard.

13.

CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS

14.

UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES

15.

CONSENT CALENDAR

The following matters will be acted upon collectively with a single motion and vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. Councilmembers may orally register a negative vote on any Consent Calendar item without pulling the item for separate consideration before the vote on the Consent Calendar. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember removes an item from the Consent Calendar, either under Approval of the Agenda or under this item before the vote on the Consent Calendar. Items removed for separate discussion will be provided a separate public comment period.

• Recommended Action:

  To approve the Consent Calendar.

15.a

WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ON THE AGENDA

Recommendation: 
Staff recommends City Council waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions on the agenda and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.

15.b

CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES

(City Clerk Myra Maravilla)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council approve the minutes of Tuesday, September 30, 2025 Regular Meeting.

15.c

CHECK REGISTERS - 25-AS-084

(Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council receive and file the check registers for the period of September 24, 2025 through October 2, 2025. The Administrative Services Director certifies the accuracy of the demands.

15.d

ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 10.36.010 TO INCREASE PARKING METER RATES - 25-AS-083

Amanda Holsinger

Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed increase in parking rates within the City of Hermosa Beach. While I understand the City’s need to generate revenue and manage parking demand, raising parking rates is not the solution if our goal is to attract residents, visitors, and shoppers to our downtown area. An increase in parking fees would make Hermosa Beach the most expensive coastal city in the South Bay for parking—with neighboring Manhattan Beach currently at $2.50 per hour and Redondo Beach at $2.00 per hour. Such a change would discourage people from visiting our city, particularly when nearby destinations like The Point, Manhattan Village, and Del Amo Mall all offer free parking and convenient shopping experiences. This policy would place our local businesses at a severe disadvantage. Small, independent shops and restaurants depend heavily on foot traffic and spontaneous visits—both of which decline sharply when parking becomes costly or inconvenient. Higher parking rates would not only deter potential visitors but would also undermine years of effort to build a vibrant, welcoming downtown environment. Instead of raising rates, I encourage the City to explore alternative strategies that support both fiscal goals and economic vitality. Hermosa Beach’s charm lies in its community spirit and local business culture. Increasing parking rates risks eroding these values and driving commerce away from our city center. Thank you for your consideration and for your continued support of Hermosa Beach’s local business community. Sincerely, Amanda Holsinger

Andrew Gawdun

Dear City Council, You have to have regular business and visitor traffic to actually make money on meters. Just raising the cost won't do much. From what I understand MB rates are $2.50 an hour, RB is $2 an hour and of course the shopping and dining malls around us offer free parking. (Del Amo, The Point, MB Village). Continues to show reason to shop and dine those other places if this is passed.

Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce

Dear Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers, On behalf of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and our business community, I want to express our opposition to the proposed parking rate increases. While we fully understand the City’s responsibility to fund essential services and manage parking efficiently, this proposal - raising meters to $3.00/hour and beach lots to $3.50/hour - is far from “incremental.” Based on the City’s own data, we’re looking at increases of up to 75% during the day. These kinds of jumps hit hardest in the daytime and off-season months when local businesses, employees, and visitors are already facing economic pressure. Hermosa Beach would suddenly have the highest coastal parking rates in the South Bay, surpassing both Redondo and Manhattan Beach. For families deciding where to spend the day or customers choosing where to shop and dine, these new fees could easily deter them from coming here at all. If rates are going to rise, they should do so gradually, aligned with demand, seasonality, and supported by current infrastructure. We urge the Council to reconsider this approach and instead prioritize a phased model, with smart demand-based pricing implemented once the system is equipped to support it. Thank you for your continued partnership and for considering the real-world impact on our business community. Respectfully, Michelle Crispin President & CEO Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and Visitors Bureau

Howard Lee

Click/Tap these words and then Click/Tap the Blue attachment link to read PDF comment.

MC Guerry

I urge you to approve raising parking rates. Cities are cleaner and safer when parking is priced fairly.

(Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council:

  1. Waive full second reading and adopt by title only “An Ordinance amending Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 10.36.010 to increase parking meter rates” (Attachment 1); and
  2. Direct the City Clerk to print and publish a summary ordinance in a newspaper of general circulation within 15 days following adoption and post a copy on the City’s bulletin for 30 days.

15.e

PARKS, RECREATION, AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES - 25-CR-075

(Office Assistant Amari Gilbert)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council receive and file the action minutes of the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission meeting of September 2, 2025.

15.f

APPROVAL OF 2026 RETURNING IMPACT LEVEL III SPECIAL EVENT - 25-CR-070

tony for another "nothing week"

Dear City Council, Having a pristine downtown beach area free of any sign of special events on occasion is good thing and appreciated by many residents. We already have downtown special events or set up and tear down on the vast majority of summer days. Off peak-season its usually around 15 days a month. Having a second summer "nothing weekend", if that is what is being proposed, would be a good thing for residents and visitors alike and help preserve our small beach town culture. Most residents dont want Hermosa to turn into Venice or Long Beach. Thanks, tonyhiggins

Laura Pena

Dear Mayor, Council Members and Staff - As both a resident and local business owner, I want to share my concern about the proposal to add a second “Nothing Weekend” in the 2026 Special Events Calendar (Consent Calendar Item 15.f, “Returning Impact Level III Special Events”). The “Nothing Weekend” policy serves a reasonable purpose, giving residents and staff a breather during our busy summer season. However, expanding that concept to two weekends could unintentionally harm our small businesses, many of which already face slower weekdays and rely on steady weekend activity to stay sustainable. Weekends are when our community feels most alive where visitors stroll through our downtown, dine outdoors, enjoy live music, and discover local shops. These moments don’t just strengthen our economy, they strengthen our sense of place and community pride. A second “Nothing Weekend” would reduce opportunities for those organic connections and limit even small scale events that bring people together without placing heavy demands on City resources. I respectfully ask City Council to pull this item from the Consent Calendar for discussion and to maintain a single “Nothing Weekend” during the peak season, consistent with the original intent of the policy. Our City thrives when we balance community quality of life with a healthy, vibrant local economy. I truly believe we can achieve both by keeping our event policy simple, fair, and business friendly. As always, I appreciate your thoughtful consideration. Laura Pena

(Lead Special Events and Filming Coordinator Kalyn Kaemerle)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council approve the Parks, Recreation, and Community Resources Advisory Commission’s recommendation to allow three Impact Level III returning special events and two “Nothing Weekends,” as proposed.

15.g

APPROVAL OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF LONG-TERM AGREEMENT NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE AAU HERMOSA BEACH CHAMPIONSHIPS, AVP JUNIOR NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS, AND JVA/BVCA NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIPS - 25-CR-056

Todd Tullis

As LTA negotiations with AAU commence, please consider requesting the Park & Rec Department to maintain more balance between organized tournaments and open public use of the North Volleyball courts. As the South courts are used nearly year round for classes, the North courts are the only ones at the pier available in the mornings for public use. In 2024 only 40% of weekend days were used for tournaments. In 2025 this increased to 48%. For 2026 this is proposed to increase further to 60%. Based on a material increase in requested AAU dates for for 2027, this could jump to 65% or more. Such steady increases limit access for the many public groups who regularly come to Hermosa to play at the Pier.

(Community Resources Director Lisa Nichols)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council approve the Parks, Recreation, and Community Resources Advisory Commission’s (Commisson) recommendation for staff to commence LTA negotiations with the following organizations for their respective special events on the dates listed below for a two-year term with an option, at staff’s discretion, to extend the LTA for an additional one-year term for each organization’s special events in 2028 on dates to be determined:

  1. JVA/BVCA for the JVA/BVCA National Championships from July 6 through July 12 in 2026 and 2027;
  2. AAU for the AAU Hermosa Beach Championships from July 12 through July 19 in 2026 and 2027; and
  3. AVP for the AVP Junior National Championships from July 19 through July 28 in 2026 and July 19 through July 27 in 2027.

15.h

CONSIDERATION OF FORMING A JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION SUBCOMMITTEE TO EXPLORE THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION - 25-CMO-068

(City Clerk Myra Maravilla and Public Works Director Joe SanClemente)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council consider the formation of a joint City Council and Public Works Commission subcommittee to discuss the roles and responsibilities of the Public Works Commission.

16.

PUBLIC HEARINGS—TO COMMENCE AT 6:30 P.M

Continued from meeting of September 30, 2025

16.a

INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.52.040 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO REVIEW OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS - 25-CDD-127

Nancy Schwappach

Sorry, an add on to my below comment. How will citizens even learn whether two Council members have elected to have the matter reconsidered? So, even it they do so promptly, it seems a citizen appellant would have to go through the entire process, and pay the costs, even if Council members have elected to reconsider it?

Nancy Schwappach

I am against this staff recommendation because I do not believe it is clear. First, the staff report refers to a "modernized" process to address applications for CUPs. “Staff recommends that the City Council’s review process of Planning Commission actions related to Conditional Use Permits be amended.” However, the proposed ordinance seems to include all Planning Commission decisions including PDPs and/or any other matters in front of the Planning Commission. “The city council may on its own initiative call up for review all actions of the planning commission.” Second, assuming we become clear as to what matters must be appealed within 10 days of the PC hearing, I'm not clear on how the Council action works versus the appeal. Does the Council action (two Council members deciding to reconsider the matter) under this new process (receiving a notice and submitting a “City Council Review Form”) have to happen within a certain period of time before the 10th day? From a citizen appellant's point of view, one would need to make a decision to file an appeal, likely retain counsel, and pay ~$3000 in fees in order to initiate an appeal. Then, if two Council members want to reconsider the matter, the appellant's expenditures are just wasted? The current process, I agree, may cause delay for applicants. But it allows citizen appellants a realistic opportunity to appeal a decision they do not agree with, and with which two Council members may ultimately disagree, without an unnecessary expenditure of personal funds for the public good. Please continue this matter until the process is clarified and folk have an opportunity to fully consider it.

CEQA: Determine that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines
(Community Development Director Alison Becker)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council:

  1. Conduct a public hearing to consider amending Section 2.52.040 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code related to the review of Planning Commission actions; and
  2. Introduce by title only and waive first reading of an ordinance titled “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, Amending Section 2.52.040 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code related to review of Planning Commission actions; and finding the action to be exempt from CEQA” (Attachment 1).

17.

MUNICIPAL MATTERS

17.a

ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND THE MANAGEMENT GROUP EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2025 – JUNE 30, 2028 - 25-AS-082

Laura Pena

Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Staff - As a resident who deeply values good governance, I am writing to express concern regarding the lack of measurable performance standards and transparency in the City’s current management evaluation system. While I appreciate the dedication and hard work of our City leadership, the newly proposed Management MOU highlights the need to align pay and benefits with clear, outcome based performance indicators that reflect our City’s adopted goals and long term fiscal outlook. Link Performance Standards to Citywide Goals: The City’s stated mission and vision should form the foundation of all departmental goals and annual performance metrics. However, many existing performance standards are activity based rather than results based, tracking outputs such as meeting attendance or record acknowledgements instead of tangible outcomes like service quality, fiscal accuracy, or project delivery. I respectfully recommend that the City require each department to establish a concise set of quantifiable performance metrics directly tied to Plan Hermosa and City Council priorities. Examples might include: • Community Development: Average permit turnaround times; Housing Element compliance progress; percentage of CIP projects delivered on time and within budget. • City Clerk’s Office: Average completion time for Public Records Requests; record retention and digitization milestones. • Public Works: Infrastructure projects meeting performance targets; proactive maintenance completion rates. • Police Department: Resident satisfaction scores related to safety enforcement and community engagement. These metrics should be measurable, updated regularly, and presented to the public through a transparent performance dashboard. Make Performance Outcomes the Basis for Bonuses: If the our City intends to maintain its Management Performance Bonus Program, it is critical that bonuses are awarded only when performance outcomes demonstrate meaningful progress toward adopted goals. “Exceptional performance” must be defined through data, not subjective interpretation. For example: • 90–100% of targets met: 8–10% bonus • 75–89% of targets met: 5–7% bonus • Below 75%: No bonus eligibility This structure ensures bonuses reward measurable improvements in service delivery, efficiency, and community satisfaction, rather than generic performance ratings. Publish Annual, Anonymized Performance Summaries: To maintain privacy while enhancing public trust, I recommend the City publish an annual anonymized performance summary showing aggregate outcomes and bonus distributions. This summary could include: • The average percentage of performance targets achieved by department. • Total amount of management bonuses awarded and the corresponding performance outcomes. • Narrative highlights of major accomplishments and areas for improvement. This type of disclosure mirrors best practices in peer cities and would significantly enhance transparency. It would also help residents understand how their tax dollars support measurable results and continuous improvement. Strengthen Fiscal Accountability and Public Engagement: Given that projected salary and benefit growth outpaces expected General Fund revenue, the City should adopt a Fiscal Review Clause requiring a mid-term cost and performance audit (FY 2027) to assess whether compensation growth aligns with fiscal sustainability. Additionally, our City should provide residents a structured way to weigh in on service outcomes and priorities through annual community satisfaction surveys and online feedback tools. Incorporating public input into the performance evaluation process will strengthen trust and reinforce alignment between staff priorities and community needs. We are a small city with big aspirations and a community that cares deeply about transparency, fiscal discipline, and results. By tying performance metrics directly to measurable outcomes, publishing clear progress data, and linking bonuses to verified achievements, our City can lead by example in building a performance culture that is both fair to staff and accountable to residents. As always, I appreciate your thoughtful consideration. Laura Pena

tony for better performance standards

please see PDF link above on City Management Group Performance Standard Shortcomings. Sorry for duplicates. Asked staff to delete

tony for better mgmt performance standards

Please see above PDF describing improvements In the performance standards the city uses to evaluate exceptional performance for senior managers

tony for better performance standards

Please see above PDF describing improvements In the performance standards the city uses to evaluate exceptional performance for senior managers

tony for better performance standards

Please see above PDF describing improvements In the performance standards the city uses to evaluate exceptional performance for senior managers

(Human Resources, Cynthia Stafford)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) approving the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Hermosa Beach and the Management Group (Attachment 2) for the Fiscal Years (FY) 2026-2028.

17.b

CONSIDERATION OF A COMPLIMENTARY HOLIDAY PARKING PROGRAM - 25-CMO-067

Amanda Holsinger

Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council, Every year, our clients look forward to shopping in downtown Hermosa Beach during the holiday season, in large part because of the City’s free holiday parking initiative. This small gesture provides a meaningful sense of relief during the busy shopping season and contributes greatly to a positive experience for residents and visitors alike. The program not only alleviates the stress associated with holiday errands but also demonstrates that the City values its local businesses and is committed to supporting a thriving downtown economy. Offering free parking during the holidays sends a clear message that Hermosa Beach welcomes and encourages community engagement and local commerce. Removing this initiative would have a significant negative impact on local businesses. When shoppers must worry about parking costs or time limits, many will choose to take their business elsewhere. Maintaining the free holiday parking program ensures that Hermosa Beach remains a vibrant, accessible, and inviting destination throughout the holiday season. I respectfully urge the City Council to continue supporting this valued tradition and to reaffirm its commitment to the economic vitality and community spirit of downtown Hermosa Beach. Sincerely, Amanda Holsinger

Andrew Gawdun

Aloha City Staff and Council, As a business owner here in Hermosa Beach approving the annual Holiday Parking Program has great impact on the business community and fosters a greater appreciation for said businesses. It invites folks to spend time here and dine, and shop, supporting the greater economy in our beach community. On the retail side of things, the weeks between Black Friday and Christmas Day are pivotal and have the most impact on do we make or break it during the MOST important time for retailers. We fight against major chains that have wildly large budgets to market and attract folks to shop them and not with us. These 4 to sometimes 6 weeks help sustain us when the first few months of the year are typically the quietest here in town. As prices rise for all local shops due to the tariff trade war mess many folks will find ways to save. Incentivizing folks to shop locally with free parking is a positive direction when retailers need it most. For the dining side of things this helps invite folks into the amazing restaurants that are gaining wide attention to hopefully have their holiday parties or dinners here instead of going to elsewhere. I can keep going if I need to on the positives PR passing this program gives... But please just do the right thing and support the local business community. Don't you all claim to be business friendly? Or is that just a facade? -Andrew

Kathleen Knoll

Please approve the holiday free parking. This has become a wonderful tradition and our locals and visitors enjoy the Hermosa holiday spirit. As well as it encourages people to come Hermosa beach for their holiday shopping and enjoy our restaurants and bars during November and December. Our neighboring cities offer it as well so if for some reason we do not have it -it will really hurt Business in Hermosa Beach. Thank you for your time and considering this matter. Kathy Knoll, Uncorked Wine Shops

Michelle Crispin

Dear Mayor, Council Members, and City Staff, On behalf of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and our local business community, I want to express our strong support for continuing the Holiday Parking program. The Free Parking bags on meters are a visible sign that the City supports its businesses and values the people who live, work, and shop here. We consistently hear from business owners that this gesture from the City makes a big difference in foot traffic, customer sentiment, and holiday sales. The program helps level the playing field with neighboring cities that offer complimentary holiday parking and have made it part of their annual tradition. More importantly it sends the message that Hermosa Beach is open, welcoming, and committed to a thriving local economy. While the staff report outlines the potential revenue lost in meters and citations, it doesn’t account for the increased sales tax revenue and goodwill generated when people choose to spend their time and money here during the holiday season. The Holiday Parking Program is a smart investment in our community at a time when businesses need it most. Let’s keep the tradition going. Thank you, Michelle Crispin President & CEO Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Bureau

Laura Pena

Dear Mayor, Council Members, and Staff - As a local business owner, I strongly support continuing the Holiday Parking Program. Every year, when those red bags go up, we see an immediate boost in goodwill, foot traffic, and local spending. It’s a noteworthy gesture with a big impact, showing that the City values its small businesses and the community we serve. This program is more than free parking; it’s an investment in our local economy and holiday spirit. Our neighboring cities have already made it a tradition, and it’s time we lead rather than follow. The staff report notes the City’s lost meter and citation revenue but doesn’t reflect the sales tax revenue generated from increased local shopping and dining. That’s a key part of the equation. The program is an investment that helps sustain our local economy during the slower winter months. We also need to consider the larger cost if visitors and residents choose to celebrate and shop in Manhattan or Redondo, where free holiday parking is already a given. We shouldn’t be the city that follows it should be the one that leads. When people feel welcome and appreciated, they stay longer, spend more, and return often. Let’s continue the program and keep this cherished Holiday tradition alive. Because sometimes, the smallest gifts of a waived meter fee, a red bag, a kind gesture can make the biggest difference in how people feel about their city. As always, I appreciate your thoughtful consideration. Laura Pena

Todd Tullis

If a free parking program won't actually drive more parking visitors (which is implied by the Staff Report meter demand analysis), then perhaps there is not much rationale for this program. The big missing voice is that of our Hermosa merchants. I'm curious what they experience in terms of customer visits over the non-summer months and whether they believe that free parking meters has made a material difference customer visits in previous Decembers.

MC Guerry

I urge you to reject a holiday free parking program. While it seems to help, any benefits are short-term and not significant. Instead, the city should focus on policies that promote year-round success for businesses like encouraging full-time residents in Hermosa Beach and reducing the high cost of housing in the city.

(Senior Management Analyst Ken Bales)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council discuss and provide direction on a complimentary holiday parking program at citywide commercial zone silver-post meters.

17.c

CONSIDERATION OF A POSITION ON LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY C LINE EXTENSION ROUTE INTO TORRANCE - 25-CMO-066

Brandon Lim

Dear Hermosa Beach City Council, Thank you for taking the time to consider a position on the Metro C Line Extension to Torrance. The Hybrid (Locally Preferred Alternative) serves EVERYONE, and I urge you to support this option. There is a clear and immediate need in our community for alternatives to car dependency, and this is a huge step in the right direction. As a Hermosa Beach resident of 6 years, I see the significant positive impact that this will make for not only our Hermosa Beach community, but our South Bay community as a whole. The challenges that this city discusses seem to treat things like parking, traffic, safety, and support for local businesses all as separate issues, but in reality a lot of these things can be tied back to car dependency and the infrastructure we prioritize. Hermosa Beach is not unique in this challenge, but by taking a stance on the LPA, we can lead by example and do what's best for our community. The benefits for Hermosa Beach are tremendous. The Hybrid alignment will help connect our city to both planned and future bike/walk paths in Redondo Beach. Additionally, the K line stops at the Redondo Beach Transit Center, which can be connected by Beach Cities Transit and Torrance Transit buses. If we want to bring local visitors to Hermosa Beach and support our local businesses, this is one great way that is both cheaper AND faster than pushing for more parking infrastructure that we cannot afford. There are incredible benefits to this Hybrid alternative, and if you have any questions about the "downsides" and "dangers" that people are mentioning, I strongly encourage you to reference the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). You will see that all of these concerns are addressed, and the Hybrid alternative is beneficial for everyone and in all ways.

Niki Negrete-Mitchell

Yes, supporting the SAFEST option whether or not you feel directly impacted is the right thing to do in the interest of both public safety and being a good neighbor to those who are SEVERELY impacted. Also the economic benefits of the Hawthorne Bl route far outweigh any other option. Most importantly however, are the absolute environmental hazards that are of serious concern to management at the Torrance refinery where the last mile is routed through. Consequences there would be as anyone can imagine catastrophic. I have included their letter to Metro raising their concerns.

K. Marino

Dear Hermosa Beach City Council members, As a Hermosa Beach resident for more than half a decade, I am writing to ask that you support the Hybrid Alternative Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) option for the C Line Extension to Torrance. While this project does not impact Hermosa Beach directly, I believe that it will indirectly benefit Hermosa Beach. Both the lack of business and lack of parking have been long-standing issues in Hermosa and affect each other- a lack of transportation infrastructure prevents people from patronizing our businesses. The LPA Redondo Beach Transit Center (RBTC) station would help this issue, both with bus connectivity and bike connectivity. With bus connectivity, Hermosa already has a bus that almost directly connects to the proposed RBTC station- the Torrance Transit 13, which takes about 15 minutes. This would open up opportunities for people to visit Hermosa Beach and support our businesses without adding to the car infrastructure burden. In particular, I live near Hermosa Avenue, which presents many safety concerns from car use during high tourism and car throughput times. I believe that offering an alternative method to visit Hermosa will also increase the safety of and decrease the noise and pollution for the residents here by reducing car traffic. This would also provide opportunities for Hermosa Beach residents to have a cheap and fast method to go to LAX, as it's estimated that it will take 20 minutes to get from the RBTC stop to the LAX metro center. The LPA would also create bike paths that connect to Redondo Beach, adding to the bike infrastructure Hermosa has access to. The Hawthorne option would be a disservice to Hermosa Beach residents because there is little public transit infrastructure to get to the proposed station and there would be no bike paths created as in the LPA. I've taken public transit, which involves 2+ buses, to get to the Del Amo Mall before, and on top of taking almost an hour to get there, Hawthorne Boulevard and the surrounding infrastructure is extremely hostile to pedestrians. It is neither safe nor enjoyable to walk along a 10 lane road that has no street cover and very few sidewalks to get to shops and restaurants. The RBTC area has a unique opportunity to create new businesses and residencies with the closing of the nearby South Bay Galleria. This will strengthen the region, add more potential local visitors to Hermosa beach, and make the HBTC a superior metro station to the Hawthorne option. It is understandable if you want to address the problems listed by the many other comments alleging danger in their neighborhoods from the LPA; however, these concerns have already been addressed at length in the Final Environmental Impact Report, section 5.2. The LPA does not create a sound, vibration, or safety burden to residents living along the ROW and will likely even increase property values within 0.5 mile radius of the metro stops. For these reasons above, I am again asking that the Hermosa Beach City Council supports the Hybrid Alternative LPA option for the C Line Extension to Torrance. Thank you.

Dave M

As a daily Metro C-Line rider commuting from Norwalk to South Bay, I encourage you to support this project. Right now, it is difficult to get further than Redondo Beach into other areas of South Bay without have to take a train and at least another bus or two. Please support the Locally Preferred Alternative and get this project built.

Christopher Truman

Thank you for taking the time to consider the Metro C Line Extension to Torrance project. This project, funded by Measure M, is a great opportunity to improve transit across the South Bay and make it easier for all of us to get around. As a regular Metro rider, I believe this extension will be a real benefit for the Beach Cities. It will connect our communities with reliable light rail service, reduce traffic, and give people more options to commute without driving. I also see how important this is for safety and clean air. Public transit helps reduce traffic injuries, cuts pollution, and improves quality of life in neighborhoods affected by heavy car traffic. Metro has a strong track record of building safe light rail alongside homes and freight lines in other parts of Los Angeles, like the E Line and A Line. I encourage you to review the Final EIR at https://metro.net/clext . The Hybrid Alternative, which Metro selected as the preferred option, is fully grade-separated—keeping trains and cars apart for safety—and upgrades the old rail corridor with better tracks and safer crossings. It’s also the most practical and cost-effective choice: at least $700 million less than the Hawthorne route and faster to build, since it avoids extra state approvals. For Hermosa Beach residents, the Hybrid route will be closer, with easier access to the Redondo Beach Transit Center, Beach Cities Transit, and Torrance Transit lines. It also includes plans for new walking and biking paths that could connect to Hermosa in the future. Community and business groups across the South Bay support the Hybrid Alternative because it’s safe, affordable, and ready to go. I hope Hermosa Beach will do the same by taking a supportive or neutral position to help move the project forward. Thank you again for your time and for your service to our community.

Brianna Egan

Dear Hermosa Beach City Council, Thank you for considering taking a position on the Metro C Line Extension to Torrance Project. This is a once-in-a-lifetime project for the South Bay, made possible by Measure M tax dollars for the benefit of the region. As a rider of Metro transit and a resident of Redondo Beach, I strongly feel this project will be a game-changer for the Beach Cities, connecting us with high-quality transit, boosting our local transit system, and providing viable alternatives to driving and commuting along the larger Metro rail system. As a public health and healthcare professional, I understand the extensive benefits of public transit to reduce traffic injuries, improve air quality, and eliminate pollution in impacted communities. This project is no different. Metro has a proven and safe track record of building light rail adjacent to freight rail and homes across LA County, including in West LA (E Line) and the San Gabriel Valley (A Line). I strongly urge you to review the extensive materials in the Final EIR found on the project page: metro.net/clext. Metro has taken thorough measures to respond to community concerns.The Hybrid Alternative is fully grade-separated, eliminating potential conflicts with cars and pedestrians. It upgrades the aging rail right-of-way with modernized freight tracks and pedestrian crossings, making things much safer for neighbors than they are currently. The Metro Board selected Hybrid as the LPA because it makes the most use of available funds and provides community benefits. It is far more feasible than the Hawthorne option which would delay the project even longer requiring approvals with Caltrans and SCE. Pertinent to Hermosa Beach, the Hybrid Alternative will be built sooner and is at least $700 million less than Hawthorne Blvd, making the best use of taxpayer funds. It will also be located closer to Hermosa Beach and provide easier access to Redondo Beach Transit Center and the various Beach Cities Transit and Torrance Transit lines that serve Hermosa Beach residents. Plans for neighborhood walk/bike paths will provide accessible bike connections from Hermosa Beach. As Hermosa Beach leaders have stated in the past, there are no substantial reasons for Hermosa to be compelled to support Hawthorne. Community and business organizations across the South Bay and LA County support the Hybrid Alternative. Please take a position of support for the project, either neutral in alignment or in support of the Hybrid Alternative, for the numerous benefits to Hermosa Beach and the South Bay. Thank you.

Colleen Villegas

Dear Mayor and City Council, Thank you for putting this item on your agenda. I would like to strongly encourage you to support the Hawthorne Blvd. for the Metro C-Line extension to Torrance. This alignment puts public transportation along the commercial corridor where it is best utilized for the future of the South Bay. It also solves the very serious safety concerns of running two light rail trains next to a train carrying liquid petroleum dangerously close to homes. In addition, it keeps a quiet green space and hundreds of mature trees that absorb greenhouse gasses and protect the neighborhood. Thank you.

Alina Rodriguez

As someone who lives near the freight corridor, I’m deeply concerned about Metro’s plan to run the C-Line Extension through the ROW. It would move hazardous freight trains dangerously close to homes—including mine, and I’ve seen no clear plan for protecting our families if there’s an emergency. No one should have to trade safety for transit. The Hawthorne Blvd option may cost more, but it avoids these health and safety risks. I urge you to reject the Hybrid ROW alignment and support a route that doesn’t come at the expense of our neighborhoods.

JC

I am writing to express my strong opposition to Metro's Hybrid ROW alignment for the C-Line/K-Line Extension and hope you will do the same. This route will move active petroleum freight trains closer to homes in Lawndale and Redondo Beach and subject residents to years and years of construction impacts. Metro's own environmental impact report says the impacts from construction will be "severe and unavoidable" for thousands of residents. Why would anyone accept that when there is a less impactful choice on Hawthorne Blvd on top of an old red car line? This isn't about opposing transit -- supporting a Hawthorne route is still supporting the project. This is about demanding common sense solutions to this project that doesn't put thousands of South Bay residents at risk. Please stand with the communities most impacted by this project and support the Hawthorne Blvd route.

John

Dear Hermosa Beach Council, I am writing to ask that you take a position on the C/K-Line Extension to Torrance by voicing support for the HAWTHORNE BLVD route and voice opposition to the inequitable "Hybrid ROW" alternative. By voicing your opposition to the "ROW", you are showing solidarity with your friends and neighbors in Redondo Beach, Lawndale and Hawthorne -- all of whom have city councils who have voted "No to ROW" and "Yes to Hawthorne Blvd." While a letter from the City of Hermosa Beach is not going to make or break this project or change the decision of the metro board, it WILL show that you care about your neighbors and their fight to keep this project from being built dangerously close to homes. Those who support the ROW show little regard for how this project will impact more than 1,100 residences along the corridor. Even before the light rail goes into operation, residents will have to live through 6-8 years of brutal construction and trenching just 10 feet from bedroom windows in some spots. I urge you to go walk the ROW at 170th Street in Lawndale and see for yourself just how close trenching operations will be to homes. I have attached a rendering to show you just how close petroleum freight and light rail will be to homes. On top of this, Metro will demolish hundreds of mature trees and a green belt along the ROW that (for better or worse), residents use as their only space for recreation. Replacing it with a small, 8-foot wide bike path for a few blocks is NOT a replacement or improvement for what residents already enjoy. Can you imagine giving up Hermosa Beach's cherished green belt (once a rail line) and building 3 tracks on top of it? It would be unthinkable. Updated construction timelines from Metro show that building the Hawthorne Blvd route will only take 8 more months than the Hybrid ROW (Hawthorne estimated to open in December 2036 and Hybrid ROW opening in March 2036). While Hawthorne Blvd is indeed $700 Million more expensive, both project options are SEVERELY underfunded at the moment and will require Metro to seek additional funding sources (they are $1.3 BILLION short for even the Hybrid ROW). Why not go after the extra money and build this project the right way? Again, I urge you to join your neighboring cities and vote to voice support for the Hawthorne Blvd route and not the ROW alignment.

Karen Ruby

Dear HB Councilmembers, We’re writing on behalf of residents in Lawndale, North Redondo Beach, and Torrance to thank you in advance for considering a position on the Metro C-Line Extension, and to urge you to stand with our communities in support of the Hawthorne Boulevard alignment and in opposition to the Hybrid ROW (Right-of-Way) route. As neighbors directly impacted by this project, we’ve seen firsthand the risks and harms the Hybrid ROW would bring: 200–300 trains per day, passing just feet from homes and schools Exposure to toxic air pollution (arsenic from the 100+ year old railroad ties during construction), vibration, and near-constant noise Years of disruptive construction, followed by a permanent rail line The destruction of one of the last green corridors in the South Bay Worse, Metro itself has acknowledged these impacts as "severe and unmitigable" and yet the project is still moving forward. We recently came across a formal comment letter from Torrance Logistics Company, which operates critical pipelines along the ROW, warning Metro of the same risks we’ve been raising: derailment, pipeline damage, and devastating consequences for residents and infrastructure. Their concerns confirm what we’ve been saying all along - this route is a disaster waiting to happen. This isn’t just about trains. It’s about safety. About livability. About protecting communities from unnecessary harm when a safer, elevated option down the wide median of Hawthorne Blvd exists. You have the opportunity to take a stand, to join us and say no to Metro’s dangerous ROW plan and yes to a smarter, safer solution. We hope you’ll join the growing list of cities and community groups calling for the elevated Hawthorne option. Your voice matters. Thank you for considering this urgent issue and for helping protect the South Bay. Karen Ruby South Bay Environmental Justice Alliance

Chelsea Schreiber

Response to Bob Wolfe's Comments on Agenda Item 17c – Metro C-Line Extension - To the Honorable Hermosa Beach City Council, With all due respect to Mr. Wolfe’s experience and enthusiasm for Metro, his comment letter supporting the Hybrid ROW route is a masterclass in detached idealism and dismissive oversimplification of the serious, life-altering impacts this project would bring to thousands of residents along the freight corridor. Let’s set the record straight: The Real Dangers of the ROW Mr. Wolfe calls opponents “fearmongers” spreading misinformation, but the facts say otherwise: Metro’s own Environmental Impact Report (EIR) calls the impacts of the Hybrid ROW alignment “severe and unmitigable.” Torrance Logistics Company, which operates fuel pipelines in the ROW, submitted a formal letter warning Metro about derailment risks, pipeline exposure, and threats to public safety. This corridor already carries freight trains with hazardous materials, and Metro’s plan would move those freight tracks closer to homes, schools, and parks, without a clear plan for emergency mitigation. Mr. Wolfe’s vision of riding to SoFi and the Lucas Museum is charming, but we don’t trade safety for stadium access. This isn’t a “not in my backyard” issue, it’s a “don't move a freight train 5 feet by to anyone’s home” issue. The “One-Stop Ride to LAX” Claim is False Mr. Wolfe suggests that Hermosa residents would lose a “one-stop ride to LAX” if the Hawthorne Blvd alignment is chosen. That is simply not true. Both the Hybrid ROW and the Hawthorne Blvd options connect directly to the K Line, which leads to the LAX People Mover. The transfer is the same either way. Saying otherwise is misleading and meant to create fear, not clarity. The Cost Argument Ignores the Human Cost Yes, the Hawthorne Blvd route costs more. But this is public infrastructure meant to last for generations. If spending more means keeping children from inhaling diesel particulate matter, or avoiding catastrophic freight derailments in residential neighborhoods, then it’s not a waste—it’s an investment in safety, health, and common sense. And for the record, the idea that it’s “disingenuous” for Redondo Beach to oppose this route because of an old transit center plan? Communities have the right to evolve and protect themselves as new risks emerge. That’s called responsive government. Transit Riders vs. Actual Residents Mr. Wolfe implies that those who live near the tracks simply don’t understand transit. In reality, many of us are both riders and residents. The difference is: we know what it’s like to live on the ROW, to have kids breathing that air, to watch our trees marked for removal and homes threatened by freight. He mocks concerns about property values, noise, and quality of life by comparing the South Bay to Cheviot Hills. But unlike Cheviot Hills, we're dealing with active freight lines, contaminated soil, and a complete lack of independent oversight. Additionally, the much-hyped bike path Mr. Wolfe refers to is just eight blocks long and connects to nothing. Metro is presenting it as a “bonus for the community” to win over cyclists, but they fail to mention that it’s a dead-end path no one asked for. Lawndale residents would much rather see this green corridor preserved in its current, natural state—not paved over for an isolated strip of concrete disguised as progress. The South Bay Stands Together When Hermosa Beach fought Big Oil, residents from Redondo, Lawndale, and beyond showed up. We fought for your safety like it was our own. Now, we’re asking you to do the same. This is not the time to cheerlead Metro’s lowest-cost option. This is the time to ask: What kind of future do we want to build—and who will pay the price if we get it wrong? Please stand with your neighboring cities. Support the Hawthorne Blvd alternative and reject the deeply flawed, high-risk Hybrid ROW.

Chelsea Schreiber

Good evening, Councilmembers, My name is Chelsea Schreiber, and I’m here tonight to ask you to stand with our neighboring communities - Lawndale, North Redondo Beach, and Hawthorne - by supporting the Hawthorne Boulevard route and opposing the Hybrid ROW route. When your city was fighting the oil companies years ago, I was a Redondo Beach resident who showed up here in Hermosa Beach to support you. We stood together because we knew that protecting one South Bay city protects us all. Tonight, I’m asking you to do the same for us - to stand with your neighbors. The communities along the Right-of-Way are facing a project that will move freight trains closer to homes, and run 200 to 300 trains per day, every four minutes, through densely populated neighborhoods. This would expose residents, many of them children and seniors, to toxic particulate matter, vibration damage, and constant noise, not for months, but for generations. Metro’s own reports admit that these impacts are “severe and unmitigable.” Yet they’re still pushing forward. We recently discovered a letter from Torrance Logistics Company - the operators of critical fuel pipelines in that same corridor - warning Metro about the very dangers we’ve been raising: the risk of derailment, explosion, and catastrophic damage to nearby homes. If Metro proceeds down the ROW, this isn’t a matter of if something goes wrong, it’s when. Stand with us to protect our communities, as we have done for you. The Hawthorne Boulevard route, by contrast, is the safer, smarter option. It runs through a wide commercial corridor, away from homes and schools, where impacts can be mitigated and safety can be ensured. Hermosa Beach has always been a leader in standing up for what’s right. Please stand with us again, stand with your South Bay neighbors, and tell Metro that the Hybrid ROW route is not acceptable. Thank you.

Bob Wolfe

Please see attached .pdf for a detailed analysis. Ideally, the Hermosa Council should support Metro staff's Hybrid Option, or at a minimum, support the project w/o weighing in on the issue of routing, given the voluminous record and the limited time available for this agenda item. The Hawthorne Option is the worse possible alternative.

Jill Klausen

I am a neighbor in Redondo Beach, having lived in the South Bay for 31 years. I would like you to take a position against the Metro ROW route and in favor of the Hawthorne route for the extension of the Green line. The ROW is not only wrong because it will adversely affect homeowners asking the route, it's also bad for commuters and for local businesses, as it has no place to stop for people to get to jobs or to patronize businesses. The Hawthorne route will be a boon for the local economy and far more convenient for commuters. Thank you for your consideration.

MC Guerry

I urge you to not take a position on the K (C) line extension to Torrance. This does not affect the city directly and you should not waste the city's time on this matter. If you do take a position, I urge you to support the Hybrid LPA option. It will be built sooner and is the best use of taxpayer funds. It also connects to existing and planned bike lanes. As a frequent public transportation user, cyclist, and resident of this city, I see this as the best option for those who would use this line.

(Senior Management Analyst Ken Bales)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council:

  1. Consider whether to take a position on the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) C Line extension into Torrance; and
  2. Authorize Interim City Manager, if a position is taken, to provide a letter representing the City’s position to the Metro Board.

17.d

REVIEW OF THE CITY’S RESIDENTIAL AND EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT PROGRAMS - 25-AS-080

Millie Velasco

I own The Artist Mill & utilize the employee parking permit. Over summer there was a lot of construction on Hermosa Ave for weeks. Machinery took up many of the parking spots. Currently, there’s a lack of employee parking on Hermosa Ave. I’m frustrated the city took away parking for employees & businesses. I often wait at least 30 min to an hour, esp on weekends for parking on Hermosa Ave. There are times when I have to give up and park at Valley/Ardmore even though I pay for employee parking permits. It makes it extremely difficult to open up in a timely manner. I am also frustrated that I have to pay for the previously free 15 min parking. There is no loading zone by my store, and need to load/unload merch & supplies often. Pls provide MORE employee parking & FREE loading zone for businesses. Thank you.

Stephen Stafford

The Business Parking Permit is currently only available to those on Hermosa Avenue. What about for employees who work on Upper Pier? Hopefully, there can be some accommodations for employees on Upper Pier – it currently costs $3,430 per year to park at a meter (245 days * $14) & with the new rates it will cost $5,145 (245 days * $21). Thank you!

diane krause

the Business Parking Permit is currently only available to those on Hermosa Avenue. What about for employees who work on Upper Pier as we do not qualify for that permit? Hopefully, there can be some accommodations for employees on Upper Pier in the near future – it currently costs $3,430 per year to park here at a meter (245 days * $14) & with the new rates it will cost $5145 (245 days * $21). Thank you!

Randy Balik

My position as "for" here means that I am for a revamp of the residential parking pass program such that the pendulum swings back the other way. While I agreed the last time around that the pass system needed to be changed such that abusers could be flagged and eliminated, I did not agree with the drastic nature of all of the changes. Not to mention, the City lost out on some important revenue in a time when the City is looking for revenue. It was an unnecessary cut to the City's income. I believe we should do the following: 1) INCREASE the number of passes from three to four. This is more representative of what most families look like and what the true needs are. No number of passes will please everyone, but from my many conversations with those who are affected and my own experience (30 years living in the parking pass zone in various sized properties with various living situations and now a family of four), this number makes a lot more sense. 2) Allow people to appeal for more if they can PROVE that they need them. Some families are bigger. 3) BRING BACK THE PARTY PASSES - it has become nearly impossible to entertain during busy months and those passes, which are not used very often and do generate incremental revenue, make it more possible to entertain - they don't make it easy, but they do at least facilitate the possibility for occasional social gatherings without having to worry about all of our guests getting parking tickets.

Michelle Crispin

Dear Mayor, Councilmembers, and City Staff, On behalf of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and our business community, I want to share feedback regarding the current Employee Parking Program. While we appreciate the City’s efforts to manage parking fairly, recent changes have created challenges for both employees and the businesses that rely on them. Under the current structure, employees are now limited to parking only at yellow-cap meters on Hermosa Avenue, one of the City’s busiest commercial corridors. This not only makes it harder for some employees to find parking close to work but also reduces the availability of prime parking spaces for visitors, customers, and tourists. Hermosa Avenue should be available for short-term customer parking that directly supports local business activity. We respectfully urge the City to expand employee parking access to include other levels of Lot C (not just the top floor) as well as all yellow-cap meters throughout town, particularly in lower-demand areas. A more flexible and strategic approach will help ease congestion, support local businesses, and make the program more equitable for workers across Hermosa Beach. Thank you for your continued commitment to our business community. Sincerely, Michelle Crispin President & CEO Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and Visitors Bureau

Claudia Berman

There were 2 surveys on the largest Hermosa Beach FB group on parking. 1) 80% think that there is generally not enough street parking - total 185 respondents. 2) 60% think that the city should NOT relax parking permit restrictions, as it makes parking more difficult - total 144 respondents

Carolyn Petty

It is time to stop being punitive towards the residents. Council serves the residents, not the other way around. We all know that parking is always going to be a challenge in the coast zone – that will never change. Why forgo money by restricting the purchase of parking passes? Clearly revenues are dropping, based upon the numbers. The city / council keeps trying to raise revenues through various means, while at the same time purposefully giving up these revenues. Issue Two – there are SO MANY renters in the coastal zone. Let them get their guest passes! Issue Three - please realize that when tenants move out, landlords need to do work on the property. Oftentimes the trucks are larger, or there are materials that need to be stored in the garage. Removing the ability of landlords to buy passes was (for some reason) retribution against landlords who just want to maintain their property. A landlord could have numerous tradesmen working at the same time on a property. This isn’t about a landlord who is so desperate to have that parking pass and take advantage of the situation. But it becomes a huge problem when there is turnover of a rental property, because the tradesmen can’t get parking for more than one hour. Issue Five – FYI, if a parent buys a car for their child, they CANNOT title the car in a minor’s name. This rule is silly. Again, the idea was to be punitive, as if there are so many people with 4 cars, that the council had to punish that family. Hopefully with Massey off the council, this continued punishment of the community will stop. Thank you.

Nancy Schwappach

And I would like to respond to Todd, who I have recently met and seems a thoughtful person. The number of permits issued are not, necessarily, indicative of cars parked on the street. We have two cars which 99.9% of the time are parked in our two car garage, and have 3 car parking in our driveway. We park on the street, maybe, 10 days a year. Mostly if we have friends and family visiting who put their beach toys in our garage and park in our driveway. So, in my experience at least, parking passes issued does not, necessarily, correspond to cars on the street. But are essential to allow those of us in the impacted zone the same rights as those not in the zone - an ability to park on the street in front of our homes. Todd didn't say this, but others have, it is somehow a "privilege" to park on our street in front of our home, and have our guests, as many as we want, do the same without paying a meter or limited to one hour. Really? For those outside the zone, who is telling you how to use your garage, and how many guests can you have? Why is our residential permit "free parking" when you park in front of your house for free and I am paying the same taxes you are but I have to pay a meter? Or, if I'm in the one hour zone, can't even park? Again, this whole exercise to change the residential parking pass program was creating a straw man to knock it down. Honestly, were there not enough real problems for Council to address that they needed to make this one up? Tweaks may have been helpful. See my earlier comment.

Nancy Schwappach

When the craziness was happening a few years ago, I re-watched every Council meeting where the residential parking program was discussed. And then I learned about what came out at the other end, which often bore no relation to what was discussed. We did though, eventually, get back a guest "hang tag" which did not need to be tied to a vehicle registration. That was a small miracle. That said, in connection with recent unrelated advocacy efforts, I have heard a LOT about the residential parking program. My key takeaways are: 1. Folk generally agree with a cap on number of permits per residence. However, 4 (vs 3 unless you have special circumstances) would have picked up something like 97% of the permits when this was first discussed (there is a chart out there, I can't find it right now). The outliers (11, 12, 23) were not specifically investigated and, I think, should have been, there were a very small number of them. So why not go with 4 for everyone, including the guest "hang tag"? 2. The landlord passes were done away with thoughtlessly, in my opinion. I don't think a landlord pass per unit is needed. But a landlord pass per property is needed, I think, for contractors and others providing services to the property. This is most important in the one hour zone. If a landlord needs a plumber in the summer, where are they supposed to park? At least in the metered parking (where I am) we can just pay the meter. Restore 1 landlord pass per property, at least in the one hour zone. 3. The new proof of residency requirements were, in my opinion, made up out of whole cloth by staff. The old system worked fine. Why are we punishing our part time residents who contribute just as much in property taxes and frequenting our businesses as full time residents? "I own or lease this property, I have a utility bill or other proof thereof, and I own this vehicle per the registration." That person should get a parking pass for that vehicle. The system was not materially broken and, in my opinion, staff and Council brought a bazooka to an issue where a pea shooter would have sufficed. The 23 parking passes were, I believe, a guy running a used car lot on north Hermosa Ave and putting a parking pass on each of them. That could have been solved a different way. Thank you to the Council members who brought this matter back for discussion.

Todd Tullis

In 2025, the City sold over twice as many residential permits as there are yellow-meter and non-meter public spaces in the affected parking area (5,901 vs 2,817 - per 2019 Parking Management Study). Our policies should continue to encourage residents to park in private off street parking where it exists and support residents who truly do not have private off street parking. I favor continuation of the existing policies while preserving the City's ability to make exceptions for residences that truly do not have private off street parking.

Robert Aronoff

My concern is Issue Four in the staff repor, Elimination of Event Permits. It needs to be restored! I had relied on them since 1988 for the one or two gatherings each year. The Event Permit is more important than just allowing me to pay for my guests’ parking, It allows them to relax while visiting and not have to leave so as to pay the meter. In short I believe the elimination of the Event Permit has not allowed me to be the host I want to be. Please restore this very valuable perk for living in Hermosa Beach. No one, Councel Member, staff or citizen with whom I have spoken can remember any discussion when the current parking plan was adopted about eliminating Event Permits. I have had Council Members claim they did not vote to eliminate Event Permits. It is interesting the staff report only says, “This option has been removed under the current program.” There is no explanation of how and no one is taking credit. If you as a Council Member are going to vote to elimante the Event Pemit please explain your reason to the public at the Council meeting.

(Revenue Services Supervisor Paul Avila)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council:

  1. Receive an update on the City’s Residential and Employee Parking Permit Programs; and
  2. Consider any changes or modifications to the Programs.

17.e

DISCUSSION REGARDING AMENDING THE HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION ORDINANCE - 25-CDD-147

(Community Development Director Alison Becker)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council discuss and provide direction regarding amending the Historic Preservation Ordinance.

17.f

INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTIONS OF TITLE 2 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE TERMS OF OFFICE, APPOINTMENT, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY COMMISSIONS - 25-CCO-042

Todd Tullis

Consistent dates makes sense for commissioner roles; as do the smaller changes recommended in the Staff Report.

CEQA: Determining the ordinance is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act
(City Clerk Myra Maravilla)

• Recommended Action:

  Staff recommends City Council:

  1. Introduce by title only and waive first reading of an ordinance (Attachment 1) titled “An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach amending various sections of Title 2 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code to update the terms of office, appointment, and responsibilities of City Commissions and determining the Ordinance is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act;” and
  2. Shorten the current terms of the Civil Service Board by 15 days and the Public Works Commission by four months to align all commission terms with the new end date of June 30.

18.

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

This is the time for Councilmembers to schedule future agenda items and to ask questions about the status of previously approved future agenda items. No discussion, debate, or public comment will be taken. Councilmembers should consider the city's work plan when considering new items. The tentative future agenda items document is provided for information only. 

18.a

TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - 25-CMO-070

Attached is the current list of tentative future agenda items for Council’s information.

19.

CITY MANAGER REPORT

20.

INFORMATIONAL ITEMS

This is reserved for items that do not require City Council action. The City Council may request a future agenda item to discuss an informational item. Otherwise, discussion of informational items will not be taken.

21.

ADJOURNMENT