Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReceive and File this Report of Proposed Initiative for Citi (2) ,57CTo^ 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach,CA City of Huntington Beach APPROVED6480 TO RECEIVE ;, .51 THE REPORT & DIRECT STAF • �`F '•UNTV 4°` N..00 TO COME BACK W/A RESO CP CALLING FOR THE ELECTION WITHIN 30 DAYS File #: 25-087 MEETING DATE: 2/18/2025 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members SUBMITTED BY: Travis Hopkins, Acting City Manager PREPARED BY: Jennifer Carey, Deputy City Manager Subject: Receive and File this Report of Effect of Proposed Initiative for Citizen Initiative to Repeal Ordinance No. 4318 by Deleting Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 2.66 - Community- Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library materials, and Adding Section 2.30.090 -Selection and Use of Library Materials; and Consider Options on How to Proceed Statement of Issue: On January 21, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-04 accepting the Certificate as to Verification of Signatures from the Orange County, Registrar of Voters for a citizen initiative, "To Repeal Ordinance No. 4318 by Deleting Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 2.66 - Community-Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library materials, and Adding Section 2.30.090 - Selection and Use of Library Materials." Additionally, the City Council ordered a "Report of Effect of Proposed Initiative" for the citizen initiative to return for the City Council's review within 30 days. Staff is now returning to provide this report and seek direction from the City Council on how to proceed. Financial Impact: Based upon the City Council's recommendation, the Registrar of Voters estimates the cost to submit this initiative to voters will range from approximately $340,515 to $1,315,402. This cost will be in addition to the amount already due to the Registrar of Voters to conduct the certified verification of signatures contained in the petition in the amount of$54,702.60. Recommended Action: A) Receive and file this Report of Effect of Proposed Initiative for citizen initiative, "To Repeal Ordinance No. 4318 by Deleting Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 2.66 - Community- Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library materials, and Adding Section 2.30.090 - Selection and Use of Library Materials;" and, B) Adopt Ordinance No. 4239, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by Deleting Chapter 2.66 Thereof and Adding City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 4 Printed on 2/13/2025 powered by LégistarTM 423 File#: 25-087 MEETING DATE: 2/18/2025 New Section 2.30.090 Thereof;" OR C) Submit Citizen Initiative to the Voters at the next General Municipal Election on November 3, 2026 OR, D) Call for a special election to be held not less than 88 days, nor more than 103 days after the order of the election, and: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-09, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Calling for the Holding of a Special Election on a Date to be Determined by City Council for Submission to the Voters an Initiative Ordinance to Amend the Huntington Beach Municipal by Deleting Chapter 2.66 Thereof Entitled 'Community Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library Materials' and Adding Section 2.03.090 Thereto Entitled 'Selection and Use of Library Materials'."; and, 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-10, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange to Render Specified Services to the City Relating to the Conduct of a Special Election to be Held on a Date to be determined by the City Council."; and, 3. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-11, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Setting Priorities for Filing a Written Argument(s) Regarding a City Measure and Directing the City Attorney to Prepare an Impartial Analysis."; and, 4. Adopt Resolution No. 2025-12, "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for City Measures Submitted at Municipal Elections." Alternative Action(s): Do not approve, and direct staff accordingly. Analysis: On January 21, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-04 accepting the Certificate as to Verification of Signatures from the Orange County Registrar of Voters for a citizen initiative, "To Repeal Ordinance No. 4318 by Deleting Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 2.66 - Community-Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library materials, and Adding Section 2.30.090 - Selection and Use of Library Materials." Additionally, the City Council ordered a "Report of Effect of Proposed Initiative" for the citizen initiative to return for the City Council's review within 30 days. Staff is now returning to provide this report for this initiative. Pursuant to Elections Code 9215(c),"[w]hen the report is presented to the legislative body, the legislative body shall either adopt the ordinance within 10 days or order an election [...] Should the City decide to order an election, the election "shall be held at the jurisdiction's next regular election City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 4 Printed on 2/13/2025 powered by LegistarT" 424 • File#: 25-087 MEETING DATE: 2/18/2025 occurring not less than 88 days after the date of the order of election," pursuant to Elections Code 1405(a). The City may also "call a special election for the purpose of submitting an initiative measure to the voters before the date on which the initiative measure would appear[...]," pursuant to Elections Code 1405(b).. Article VII, Section 700 of the City's Charter provides for general municipal elections to be held in the City on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in each even-numbered year. The next general municipal election would fall on November 3, 2026. There are no conflicts of the City's Charter with Elections Code Sections 1000, 1001, 1405, and 9215. Cost of the Election: The City Clerk's Office worked with the Orange County Registrar of Voters (OCROV) to determine costs of submittal for the initiative to the voters. Should the City Council decide to hold a special election for this initiative, the estimated cost would range from $1,190,478 to $1,315,405. The next General Election would be November 3, 2026. Should the City Council elect to submit for this date, the cost would range from $340,515 to $399,499. If the City Council decides to include the second citizen initiative ("An Ordinance to Amend the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by Adding New Section 2.30.100, Entitled "Public Operation of Library Services"), an additional cost of approximately $8,500 would be incurred for both scenarios. The referenced costs are in addition to the amount due to the OCROV for the verification of signatures totaling $54,702.60. Should the initiative pass, the cost for implementation and long-term operations would be minimal. Environmental Status: This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Strategic Plan Goal: Non Applicable -Administrative Item Attachment(s): 1. Ordinance No. 4239 - "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by Deleting Chapter 2.66 Thereof and Adding Section 2.30.090 Thereof' 2. Resolution No. 2025-09 - "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Calling for the Holding of a Special Election on a Date to be Determined by City Council for Submission to the Voters an Initiative Ordinance to Amend the Huntington Beach Municipal by City of Huntington Beach Page 3 of 4 Printed on 2/13/2025 powered by Legistar" 425 File#: 25-087 MEETING DATE: 2/18/2025 Deleting Chapter 2.66 Thereof Entitled 'Community Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library Materials' and Adding Section 2.03.090 Thereto Entitled 'Selection and Use of Library Materials' 3. Resolution No. 2025-10 - "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange to Render Specified Services to the City Relating to the Conduct of a Special Election to be Held on a Date to be determined by the City Council" 4. Resolution No. 2025-11 - "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Setting Priorities for Filing a Written Argument(s) Regarding a City Measure and Directing the City Attorney to Prepare an Impartial Analysis" 5. Resolution No. 2025-12 - "A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Providing for the Filing of Rebuttal Arguments for City Measures Submitted at Municipal Elections" • City of Huntington Beach Page 4 of 4 Printed on 2/13/2025 powered by LegistarTTM 426 7 f ORDINANCE NO. 4239 / , AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AMENDING THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE BY DELETING CHAPTER 2.66 THEREOF AND ADDING NEW SECTION 2.30.096 THEREOF The City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION l: / Chapter 2.66 of Title 2 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code is stricken. SECTION 2. A new Section 2.30.090 of Title 2 of the Huntin crn Beach Municipal Code is added to read as � � p follows: 2.30.900. Selection and Use of Library Materials Director and Library Services AA/establish policies for the selection and use of library materials,provided that such policies adopt the following requirements: A. The Library serves as a center for voluntary inquiry and the dissemination of information and ideas. B. Library materials shall not be excluded from the library collection because of the origin,background,or views of those contributing to the creation of the materials,or because of the topic addressed by the materials or the views expressed in the materials. C.Library materials should be provided for the interest, information,and enlightenment of all people,and should present diverse points of view in thecollection as a whole. D. The public has the right to receive access to a range of social,political,aesthetic, moral,and other ideas and experiences. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on 2025. Mayor A T EST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: /itY Clerk City Attorney NO ACTION TAKEN 24-15693/366036 427 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-09 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CALLING FOR THE HOLDING OF A [GENERAL] [SPECIAL] ELECTION ON TUESDAY, ,20_, FOR SUBMISSION TO VOTERS AN INITIATIVE ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE HUNTINGTON BEACH MUNCIPAL BY DELETING CHAPTER 2.66 THEREOF ENTITLED `COMMUNITY PARENT GUARDIAN REVIEW BOARD FOR PROCUREMENT OF CHILDREN'S LIBRARY MATERIALS' AND ADDING SECTION 2.03.090 THERETO ENTITLED `SELECTION AND USE OF LIBRARY MATERIALS WHEREAS, pursuant to authority provided by statute, a petition has been filed with the legislative body of the City of Huntington Beach, California, signed by more than 10 percent of the number of registered voters of the city to submit a proposed ordinance relating to selection and use of library materials; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Registrar of Voters examined the records of registration and ascertained that the petition is signed by the requisite number of voters, and has so certified; and WHEREAS,the City Council has not voted in favor of the adoption of the ordinance; and WHEREAS,the City Council is authorized and directed by statute to submit the proposed ordinance to the voters, NOW,THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA,DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California relating to charter cities,there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Huntington Beach, California,on Tuesday, , 2025, a[General] [Special] Municipal Election for the purpose of submitting the following proposed ordinance: Shall the Ordinance to Amend the Huntington Beach YES Municipal Code by Deleting Chapter 2.66 Thereof Entitled `Community Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library Materials' and Adding Section 2.30.090 Thereto Entitled `Selection NO and Use of Library Materials' be adopted? / SECTION 2. That the text of the ordinance submitted to the voters is attached hereto as Exhibit A. NO '_*C'!1 N TAKEN 428 1 . i .RE801,1.1110N:140„2025-49 1 1i SECTION 4:"That.OP vote requireineritfof the theaStire to,paSsiia 0141grity:(59.%+0.0. the v(ite, cast.. , 7 R;0 r T 0 NI:4,That the ballots to be used at the electiOn4114:beitl,fOrrn and content as . . required by law: ,,,.. SECTION-S:That the Orah:ge County Registrar of Votersis authorized/instructedand _ . directed to procure furnishand :any'and:alfoffieial ballots,notieea„:prititecttii.*'.and all supplies,equipment andparatthernalia that May'bei,necessary irt,order to priptorlyand lawfully 'I conduct election.: / SECTI.- ON"&That, :the:Vote,Cent- eraShall:'..be-Opmatseven 0.'clock.a.ra....ofthe day. of the 1 election and shaittemain opensomitinuouslyfrom thattisnentil'.:8.:a O'clock tilm;ate same 1 ... 4ayAxibene-the vote centers Shall be closed,riiiittiatitto Elections.C4de §102:42 except as otherwise provided the Elections Code State of Califarilia. 1 / SECTION 7,Thatin all tiartWaO-Ootlecited iuthikresalution,the election shall be held '1 and conducted asIiroVidedbylOrfOrtaitT 1111.1tikipai liediOn : 1 ,SECTION 8.That tiofice Of:ter:04V and 04" fholding the election is given and the City Clericsa4thOrit4 instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of election,intime,form and mafineras required Iv .4% 1 SECTION 9-,,That the City Clerk certify to ihe'pasSage.and adoption of thia. - i - 1-- resolution and enter itinto the boo.kofori&al'resolUticamt. :PASSED,-APPROVED AND ADO-TED:brie City Council'ofthe tity'etiunt*gton Beach at aregulatineeti4 thereof/held oil ., ATTS17.! 1,4.4yor / OVED AS TOFORM" _ . . . , , .,..APPR . . . - i I .i. . , tif.Y Clerk ,t,„City Attorney 1 1 I. 1. 2 1 1 245.6141363on 429 The People of the City of Huntington Beach do hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Chapter 2.66 of Title 2 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code is stricken. / _. SECTION 2. / A new Section 2.30.090 of Title 2 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code is added to read as follows: 2.30.900. Selection and Use of Library Materials / Director and Library Services shall establish policies for the selection and use of library materials,provided that such policies adopt the following requirements: A. The Library serves as a center for voluntary inquiry{and the dissemination of information and ideas. / B. Library materials shall not be excluded from,tlie library collection because of the origin,background,or views of those contributing to the creation of the materials,or because of the topic addressed by the materially/or the views expressed in the materials. C.Librarymaterials should be provided=for the interest,information, and enlightenment of all people,and should p,resent diverse points of view in thecollection as a whole. / . D. The public has the right to recete access to a range of social,political,aesthetic, moral,and other ideas and experiences. / . , / 24-15693/366039 430 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUESTING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ORANGE TO RENDER SPECIFIED SERVICES TO THE CITY RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF A [GENERAL] [SPECIAL] MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, ,20 WHEREAS, a [General] [Special] Municipal Election is to be held in the City of Huntington Beach, California, on , 20 ; and WHEREAS, in the course of conduct of the election/is necessary for the City to request services of the County; and /' WHEREAS,all necessary expenses in performing these services shall be paid by the City of Huntington Beach, NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE,DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That pursuant to the provisions of§ 10002 of the Elections Code of the State of California, the City Council requests the Board of Supervisors of the County to permit the County Election Department to prepare and furnish the following for use in conducting the election: 1. A listing of county precincts with number of registered voters in each, so city may consolidate election precincts into city voting precincts, and maps of the voting precincts; 2. A list of polling places(vote centers) and poll workers the county uses for their elections; 3. The voter record of the names and address of all eligible registered voters in the City in order that the City's consultant may: a. Produce labels for vote-by-mail voters; b. Produce labels for voter information guides; c. Print Rosters of Voters and Street Indexes; 4. Voter signature verification services as needed; 5. Make available to the City election equipment and assistance as needed according t state law. 7 n ; NC . .,rr TECN 11-1 a 431 • n.SOLUTIONN:(12004.0' :$,FOUQ.N2Ti itThEtity 4t4,11 toir,0:4$04140-;:0,0034 for§qrviceg*ifo iteld*hollho 70.voiki§tditeet0a."344it'opo'pv0$004494,:t0hpieity-of4 properly approved bilL SECTION 3 That the City 0*.kjititifeditdAla forward without delay to the Board goet41 .0.adoittotp,Coppj(Elation t)oarlihoiti:e-aeh:A.Oottite4 opy.-cirt,10,51.0011#19ii.. SECTION 4. That the 10:4'qea'sligt:ccititria:th6J0.§*0014,adoption $0461000.. :VA$fitD,-M.P.govgD AND ADOPTED by theCfty Colincii3Othe .$1C.44.4.449.gularniddtatittlieti044 oti .„ „„ . ,1025;:// . , Mayor] . ,A'rIESTi OPROyg,D A$1.0 FQgmi; 4 - • . . 04r,CII0k • OityAtooey. • f 24,tsA.34 30*• 432 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH SETTING PRIORITIES FOR FILING A WRITTEN ARGUMENT(S)REGARDING A CITY MEASURE AND DIRECTING THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN IMPARTIAL ANALYSIS WHEREAS, a[General] [Special] Municipal Election is to be held in the City of Huntington Beach, California, on , 20 ,at which there will be submitted to the voters the following measure: Shall the Ordinance to Amend the Huntington Beach YES Municipal Code by Deleting Chapter 2.66 Thereof Entitled `Community Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library Materials' and Adding Section 2.30.090 Thereto Entitled`Selection NO and Use of Library Materials' be adopted? NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE,DE LARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the City Council authorizes the following member(s) of its body (Council Member In Favor)or (Council Member Against) (Council Member In Favor) or (Council Member Against) (Council Member In Favor) or (Council Member Against) (Council Member In Favor) or (Council Member Against) (Council Member In Favor)or (Council Member Against) (Council Member In Favor) or (Council Member Against) (Council Member In Favor) or (Council Member Against) to file (a) written argument(s) not exceeding 300 words regarding the City measure as specified above, accompanied by the'printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, in accordance with Article 4 Chapter 3, Division 9 of the Elections Code of the State of California. The arguments may be Changed or withdrawn until and including the date fixed by the City Clerk after which no arguments for or against the City measure may be submitted to the City Clerk. The arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed,with the printed name(s) and signature(s) of t author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization,the name of the organiza 'on, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers who is the au or of the argument. The arguments shall be accompanied by the Form of Statement T Be Filed By Author(s) of Argument. NO ACT!1 N TAKEN 433 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-11 SECTION 2. That the City Council directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the measure to the City Attorney,unless the organization or salaries,of the office of the City Attorney are affected. a. The City Attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis of the measure not exceeding 500 words showing the effect of the measure on the existing law and the operation of the measure.. If the measure affects the organization or salaries of the office of the city attorney, the city clerk shall prepare the impartial analysis. b. The analysis shall include a statement indicating whether the measure was placed on the ballot by a petition signed by the requisite number of voters or by the governing body of the city. c. In the event the entire text of the measure is not printed on the ballot,nor in the voter information portion of the voter information guide,there shall be printed immediately below the impartial analysis, in no less than 10-point type,the following: "The above statement is an impartial analysis of Ordinance or Measure— If you desire a copy of the ordinance or measure,please call the elections official's office at(insert phone number) and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you." d. The impartial analysis shall be filed by the date set by the City Clerk for the filing of primary arguments. SECTION 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. PASSED,APPROVED AND ADOP l'hD by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on ,2025. / ATTEST: / Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Clerk/ t„...-City Attorney 2 24-15693/363029 434 /RESOLUTION NO. 2025-12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS FOR CITY MEASURES SUBMI 1"1"hD AT MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS .. WHEREAS, § 9282 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides for written arguments to be filed in favor of or against city measures not to exceed 300 words in length; and WHEREAS, § 9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California authorizes the City Council,by majority vote, to adopt provisions to provide for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures submitted at municipal elections, NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That pursuant to Section 9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California, when the elections official has selected the arguments for and against the measure (not exceeding 300 words each) which will be printed and distributed to the voters,the elections official shall send a copy of an argument in favor of the proposition to the authors of any argument against the measure and a copy of an argument against the measure to the authors of any argument in favor of the measure immediately upon receiving the arguments. The author or a majority of the authors of an argument relating to a city measure may prepare and submit a rebuttal argument not exceeding 250 words or may authorize in writing any other person or persons to prepare, submit,or sign the rebuttal argument. A rebuttal argument shall not be signed by more than five authors. The rebuttal arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed, with the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization,the name of the organization,and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers, not more than 10 days after the final date for filing direct arguments. The rebuttal arguments shall be accompanied by the Form of Statement To Be Filed By Author(s)of Argument. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the direct arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the direct argument which it seeks to rebut. SECTION 2. That all previous resolutions providing for the filing of rebuttal arguments for city measures are repealed. 4ECTION 3. That the provisions of Section 1 shall apply at the next ensuing municipal elect' 'n and at each municipal election after that time. NO ACU4N TAKEN 435 1 / RESOLUTION NO:20254V / SECTION 4. Thatthe City Clerk64,co1rtittr to the passage and adoption of this/ - 1 Resolution-aria Wet it to the book.Pt Priginal Reaolutiona. / . PASSED,APPROVED AND-ADOPTED by the City Council-ate City.of/Huntington .,Baatt at a regnlarnleeting thereof held.= „.2025;. ir i Mayor / 5 0 , I ATTEST:. 1 APPROVED AS,TO FORM 0.1V Clerkpv, City Atidiney F / / / / I / 1 i / ; / 1 t 1 i I I 1 7, 2445:623/46363/ 436 '�� ...... G.. CITY OF I_ HUNTINGTON\ ti BEACH To: Honorable Mayor and City Council CC: Travis Hopkins,Acting City Manager From: Jennifer Carey, Deputy City Manager Date: February 18, 2025 Subject: Supplemental Communication for Item No. 22 (Community-Parent Guardian Review Board) For your review and consideration, staff is attaching an updated document as Late Communications to Item 22 on the February 18, 2025 agenda. This Financial Impact Report provides additional details related to the staff report for Item Number 22. 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach,CA 92648 I www.huntingtonbeachca.gov „ ,,UST It4.6T0��o�r�........ ...���L CITY OF ��tpT� HUNTINGTON�. BEACH Ve:VORrAl cDUNTV GP�•• • ,..li To: Honorable Mayor and City Council CC: Travis Hopkins,Acting City Manager From: Jennifer Carey, Deputy City Manager Date: February 18, 2025 Subject: Financial Impact Report— Community-Parent Guardian Review Board I. Description of the Initiative On October 28, 2024, a citizen initiative petition (the "Initiative”) was submitted to the City Clerk's office to repeal Ordinance No.4318 by deleting Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 2.66-Community-Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library Materials, and add new Section 2.30.090 - Selection and Use of Library Materials. A prima facie review was conducted on October 28, 2024 that qualified the number of signatures collected at 17,034. On October 29, 2024, the Petition was delivered to the Orange County Registrar of Voters (ROV) with a request to conduct a signature verification exercise. A total of 13,247 signatures was required to qualify for submission to the voters, and 13,257 signatures were verified. The ROV delivered a Certificate to Verification of Signatures on Petition (Certificate) for Petition on December 13, 2024. On January 21, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-04 accepting the Certificate as to Verification of Signatures from the Orange County Registrar of Voters for the Initiative. II. Legislative Authorization and Use of the Report by the City Council This report is authorized by California Elections Code Section 9212. This section of the elections Code authorizes a City Council to request a report analyzing the effects of a proposed Initiative (including, but not limited to, the initiative's effect on the fiscal health of the city, land use, and infrastructure). On January 21, 2025, the City Council directed that the report be presented at the February 18, 2025 City Council meeting. This report is designed to help inform members of the City Council and City residents about the possible effects of the Initiative. The City Council will then use this information when it takes action in accordance with the Elections Code. III. Estimated Cost of a General or Special Election a. Fiscal Impact Studied Should the City Submit the Initiative to a Special Election The City Clerk's Office worked with the Orange County Registrar of Voters to determine costs of submittal for the initiative to the voters. Should the City Council decide to hold a special election for the Initiative, the estimated cost would range from $1,190,478 to $1,315,405. The breakdown of these costs are as follows: 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach,CA 92648 I www.huntingtonbeachca.gov CITY OF . HUNTINGTON BEACH .ram a. The cost of the voter information guide (with standard-length text) is estimated to be $150,000. b. The cost of the stand-alone election is estimated to be $914,736 - $1,033,726. c. The cost of postage for vote by mail ballot return envelopes is estimated to be $74,108 - $80,041. d. The cost recovery for 2019-20 purchase of new election equipment is estimated to be $43,134. e. The cost of one measure (estimate based on 3000 words and 2 pages) is estimated to be $8,500. b. Fiscal Impact Studied Should the City Submit the Initiative to a General Election. The next General Election would be November 3, 2026. Should the City Council elect to submit the Initiative to the general election, the cost would range from $340,515 to $399,499. The breakdown of these costs are as follows: a. The cost of the consolidated election is estimated to be $211,290 - $264,112. b. The cost of postage for vote by mail ballot return envelopes is estimated to be $76,959- $83,120. c. The cost recovery for 2019-20 purchase of new election equipment is estimated to be $43,767. d. The cost of two measures (estimate based on 3000 words and 2 pages) is estimated to be $8,500. If the City Council decides to include the second citizen initiative ("An Ordinance to Amend the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by Adding New Section 2.30.100, Entitled "Public Operation of Library Services"), an additional cost of approximately $8,500 would be incurred for placing both initiatives on the ballot. The referenced costs are in addition to the amount due to the OCROV for the verification of signatures totaling $54,702.60. Should the initiative pass, the cost for implementation and long- term operations would be minimal. 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach,CA 92648 I www.huntingtonbeachca.gov From: Russell Neal To: 5uoolementalcommCalsurfcity-hb.org Subject: Agenda Items 22 and 23 Date: Friday,February 14,2025 2:41:44 PM I view the two petitions in question as part of the overall attempt to keep inappropriate adult sexual material in the children's section of our library. For some reason, what used to be considered criminal is now somehow supposed to be praiseworthy. I commend the Council and Gracey Van Der Mark for standing against this evil. No one should think this has anything to do with book banning or privatizing the library when it is all about pushing inappropriate adult sexual material on children. Whatever action you take on the petitions, I urge you to continue focusing on the true issue and fighting for what is right, remembering that we must all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Russ Neal 714-316-6179 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 2/18/2025 Agenda Item No. 22 (25-087) From: Maria Suaraneq To: suoolementalcommCa)surfcity-hb.orq Subject: City Agenda Date: Saturday,February 15,2025 9:30:14 AM 1) $7,000 for a plaque is ridiculous. Don't do it. 2) A light show in Central Park will disturb our prized habitat. Move it to the beach. 3) Accept the petitions the citizens of HB signed.Move on from this issue. 4) Please pay attention to city issues not national ones Maria Sugranes HB homeowner since 1973 SUFP'LEMENTAL COMMUNICATION , Meeting, ate . 2/18/2025 Agenda.Item:No. 22 (25-087) From: drvnersonCalearthlink.net To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAF9 suoolementalcomm(alsurfcity-hb.orq Subject 2-18-25 Council Meeting Date: Saturday,February 15,2025 2:00:04 PM As the city council considers items 22 and 23 regarding the two petitions to protect our library on the agenda for February 18th,you have choices to make. You can simply accept the actions requested by the petitions,you can put the items on the next general election ballot, or you can call for a special election for those ballot measures. Let's take agenda item 22,the request to repeal the ordinance that created the book review committee,first. The ordinance has been in place since March of 2024,yet that commission does not exist, nor has it done any work. Given that you have a stated goal to make the government more efficient and to cut costs, clearly the most appropriate choice for this item is to simply accept and adopt what the petitions request:the deletion of Chapter 2.66 of title 2, i.e.,the abolishment of the Community Parent Guardian Review Board. That decision essentially costs the city nothing to implement and actually saves money by not having to buy multiple copies of books for review. It also streamlines operations by removing the minimum twice a year commission review process that could easily take over a year to approve or reject a book. The second most responsible decision you can take is to simply decide to put the measure on the next general election ballot. Again, since the commission does not exist and is performing no work,there is no negative impact on operations, and putting a ballot measure on a general election ballot is the least expensive path to a city-wide election. Calling for a special election is the most expensive optiori, and,given the city's financial straits, clearly an irresponsible choice. The choices for item 23 regarding public operation of the library system are much the same. Accepting what the petitions request has zero financial impact unless the council once again tries to outsource library operations. And given that the library's operational costs are a very small percentage of the city's budget, it's not the most fruitful place to look for cost savings. Perhaps you might look at the city attorney's office whose personnel cost increased 35%since 2022 and whose primary attorney has amongst the highest compensation of any municipal attorney in the state. Once again,the second most responsible action is to place the measure on the next general election ballot. As with item 22,the most cost-effective method to hold an election is the council chooses not to accept the first option. And, like with item 22,choosing to call for a special election is the most expensive and least responsible choice to make. (And we all remember that you chose to spend an extra$300K- $400K to put measures A, B,and C on the primary ballot, rather than waiting for the general election.) So we will all be watching closely to see if you really care about being fiscally responsible, or if it's just a buzzword you like to use to attack programs that don't knuckle under to you,while ignoring the fiscal implications of things you like. Next, on to item 20—the supposed 50th Anniversary Library Plaque. By now, it cannot be lost on you the amount of outrage that the public has over this abomination of a plaque. Fully 90% of the speakers at the Library and Community Services Commission meeting opposed the plaque in its current form. Supplemental communications were essentially universal in their condemnation. No one is opposed to a plaque celebrating our library—that's what the plaque is supposed to do. The proposed plaque had zero public input,is a massive departure from established design guidelines,violates the library own posting guidelines, and is a celebration of your political point of view—not a celebration of our library. You may think this is some clever one-up on your political opponents, but it's really just another wedge creating more divisiveness in our city. You should be ashamed. Finally,we come to the Flowers of the Sky proposal—item 24. You saw the public outcry when you tried to slide it through on the consent calendar. You have taken little, if any,of the feedback you received. There have been no public meetings, no discussion of how noise, light,and parking will affect the surrounding neighborhoods and wildlife. The EIR amendment glibly states that lights and speakers are"angled away"from neighborhoods. That shows a fundamental misunderstanding of wave theory and how sound and light propagate,which is omnidirectionally. It also seems to state that, because mats are being used for the walkway, no damage to the area will occur. Really? How about the grandstands,the water basin for the fountains,the walls or fences to partition the area off from the rest of the park? How can these items be in place for eight months of the year without doing damage? How was the$50,000 restoration fee calculated? Is that per year, or over the three-to-four-year life of the contract? What recourse does the city have if the restoration is not up to snuff? You were encouraged to consider other sites. I see no evidence that you have done so. The only change I see from your previous attempt is that there is now a contract for us to review. What I don't see is any financial analysis the suggests what the net revenue the city can hope to gain from this event. And I emphasize net revenue, because, like in the airs how settlement,you are committing the city to provide parking, parking attendants and enforcement, public safety,etc. So,we are incurring expenses for the benefit of the promoter, but I don't see anywhere those expenses are explicitly covered. They apparently are supposed to come out of our revenue from ticket sales and parking, but I see no analysis for the citizens to review. And frankly,with at least two other similar established shows within easy driving distance, I'd like to see some market analysis on the appetite for such shows. Three to four shows a night for six months every year for three years is over a million people a year—more than three times the total population of Huntington Beach. What evidence do you have that there's a market for 3-4 million visitors for this show? Maybe the decision should be based on something a bit more factual than the fact that Tony's consultant buddy from Ventura brought this to the city council. David Rynerson From: Carol Daus To: 5uoolementalcommCa�surfcity-hb.orq;CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAFFS Subject: Items 22&23 Date: Saturday,February 15,2025 11:15:29 PM Dear City Council, Since holding a special election is costly, it only makes sense to accept the petitions as written. A 21-member library review board is expensive and unnecessary. If it were vital to the community it would have already been implemented. It's been suggested since the fall of 2023! Outsourcing operations of our library is expensive and that's why LS&S pulled out. Let the HB taxpayers have a say in these matters involving our public library. Let's move on to more serious matters affecting our community such as a deteriorating infrastructure. Thanks, Carol Daus HB resident for 30 years From: Julie Bixby To: suvolementalcomm(aisurfcity-hb.orq Subject Re:Council agenda 2/18/2025,multiple items Date: Sunday,February 16,2025 7:46:41 AM You dirt t often e erroralgmjulae bct y org Learn w ythasis importan i t To Council persons of all genders, faiths and creeds: RE: Item 25-102 - Design of Library Anniversary Plaque The City Council is blatantly using a City resource for its own political gain. The font size of the front-and-center MAGA acrostic is so much larger than that of"Huntington Beach Central Library", and there's so much star- spangled fluff around it, that the plaque looks like it's recognizing 50 years of MAGA, a well-known political movement, rather than the City's Library. Further adding to the plaque's political message, it displays the individual names and offices of the loud and proud MAGA elected officials. The City's Code of Ethics - you did read it, didn't you? - says "I do not use my office or the resources of the City for personal or political gain." Plastering a political logo/acronym with your name and office on a City resource sounds very much like using a City resource for political gain, which violates the Code of Ethics. RE: Items 25-087 & 25-126 pertaining to placing the Citizens Initiatives on the ballot Deputy City Manager Jennifer Carey, who prepared these two RCAs, gets creative - to put it politely - with the fiscal impact of placing the citizen initiatives on the General Election ballot. She writes for both 25-087 & 25- 126: "The next General Election would be November 3, 2026. Should the City Council elect to submit for this date, the cost would range from $340,515 to $399,499. If the City Council decides to include the second citizen initiative... an additional cost of approximately $8,500 would be incurred for both scenarios." This makes it sound like the cost of including a single initiative on a GE ballot is an astounding six figures, yet somehow tacking on a second initiative adds a mere $8,500. This is a false narrative. Less than a year ago, the text of a similar RCA, 24-465, which was co-written by Carey, read simple and clear: "The estimated additional cost to place one Charter amendment measure on the November 5, 2024 General Election ballot is $10,000, bringing the total estimated cost for the November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election to $310,000. (emphasis added) Funds to cover this amount are budgeted in FY 2024/25 Election Account No. 10010201.69505." How in the world did the cost of adding one item to a GE ballot go from $10,000 to $300,000+ in less than a year? It didn't, although the phrasing of the current RCAs implies that it did, thereby misleading the public (and possibly the Council) that adding just one ballot initiative would be an enormous expenditure it can't afford. Moreover, RCAs 25-087 & 25-126 don't mention that funds are always provided in the City's budget to cover basic General Election costs, expanding the false narrative that the City can't afford to put the (supposedly costly) citizen initiatives on a GE ballot. Had the current RCAs been written in the same clear verbiage as the prior 24-465, this false impression wouldn't exist. The City Council needs to stop playing games and stop fabricating excuses (including the "were you lied to" survey) to avoid placing the lawfully submitted citizen initiatives on the 2026 General Election ballot. RE: Item 25-017 — Flowers of the Sky License Agreement I'm disturbed by the City's selling out of its parkland to try to make a quick buck. The ends don't justify the means. I'm also particularly dismayed by the vendor's obligation of "Shall provide a complimentary hospitality package that includes 400 complimentary VIP hospitality passes for the event per year for use by City's employees and representatives." 400 VIP passes per year? It seems a rather excessive number of freebies being doled out. It also begs the question of how, exactly, these hundreds of yearly freebies serve "a legitimate public purpose of the City... consistent with state law"per Resolution No. 2013-23. (emphasis added) Requiring the distribution of 400 VIP passes sounds awfully like bribery to me, a "pay to play" scheme (aka, we'll let you hold your event if you give us a bucket load of free passes to attend it). The City doesn't need to be so greedy. Cutting the number of passes in half to 200 (or cutting even fewer to 100), you still have a generous allotment for whatever "legitimate public purpose" premise you come up with. Julie Bixby Huntington Beach From: )en Bledsoe To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CM0 STAFF);suoplementalcommC)surfcity-hb.orq Subject: Library plaque Date: Sunday,February 16,2025 8:33:05 AM Some people uhcr received this message don't often getemall from}enb(edsoe66Cu grnalf com Learn why en'r� Hello, I am writing to voice my objection to the proposed plaque in honor of the library's 50th. As for the plaque,the presence of the eagle at the center top bears distinct resemblance to the symbol of the luftwaffe (hopefully this was a mistake). The actual library logo is quite small, and I see that you intend to enshrine your names on the plaque which is meant to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the library. The black and gold color selection is offensive as well (proud boys colors, hopefully also a mistake, and not a pattern when considered together with the eagle). To cry about budget shortfalls,while wasting money on this disingenuous "commemoration" in an attempt to flex is petty and divisive. For a town who relies on tourist dollars, I hate to see our city in the national news for stunts like this. As for the library petitions,I have not received the emails that others have which question whether those who signed were misinformed or misled as to the contents of the petitions. Nor have I received phone calls questioning the same. So, I'd like to get out in front of that: I knowingly signed both petitions, having read their contents ahead of time. Please stop stalling and obfuscating. The signatures were in excess of the number needed, and the OC Registrar of Voters certified. This should proceed to the next step. Please do the will of the people. And I'm still opposed to the proposed light show in Central Park,though I appreciate Casey's response to my prior email. Jennifer Bledsoe From: Elizabeth Callaghan To: supplementalcommCa surfcity-hb.orq Subject Library plague Date: Sunday,February 16,2025 8:45:17 AM You don t often gptemal from elizabethann cafaghan©amael•corn Learn why this is important The plaque does not represent the library at'all! It is very ugly...I support moving forward with the library ballots and keep this institution the way it has been the previous 50 years!!! Elizabeth Callaghan " resident of HB for 40 years From: cornetto454earthlink.net To: suoolementalcommaa surfcity-hb.orq;CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAFF) Subject: item 22,25-087 Date: Sunday,February 16,2025 9:18:59 AM Dear City Council, Please take option 1 and adopt the petition request Charles Jackson, a 23 year resident of Huntington Beach From: Mark Tonkovich To: suoolementalcommt surfdty-hb.orq Subject Flowers of Light and Library plaque Date: Sunday,February 16,2025 9:27:30 AM Dear Mayor Burns,Mayor Pro Tem McKeon and City Council members, Hope you all are doing well. This e-mail reflects the thoughts of my wife,son and I,two homeowners in HB. We do not feel it is proper of Symphony of Flowers to take over a good portion of our Central Park.This is not a small task and will deprive us of this area of the park for months upon end.It will disrupt the use of the park and have an effect on the surrounding area. Please do not enact this. As for the library plaque,We voted for Trump 3 times,I have several MAGA hats and Trump flag.We voted for all of you too.As much as I agree with MAGA, we do not feel its incorporation into the plaque is the right thing to do, it actually seems immature.We recommend redesign it without the MAGA. We also feel the library petitions are just wasting our taxes.How much was spent on signature verification?If,in fact,this has to move forward,use the least costly method,a General Municipal Election,not a special election to cut our losses. Thank you for the consideration. Best, Mark Tonkovich and family. From: Sue Welfrinaer To: suonIementalcommt@surfcity-hb.orq Subject: Re:Administrative Items 25-087 and 25-126 Date: Sunday,February 16,2025 2:08:38 PM I support the statements on both petitions: • Repeal Ordinance No.4318-We do not need a politically-appointed committee to choose what books should be in our library. • Adopt Ordinance No.4330, assuring our community that our public libraries will be operated by our city and not an outside entity. This council has made it abundantly clear that you do not care about the voices of library patrons,volunteers, and supporters. I ask you: please consider the actual people, real- live Huntington Beach registered voters, behind THOUSANDS of signatures on these petitions. Sadly, I know that I ask in vain. I have yet to see a single, independent thinker on the current council. I expect you will do whatever you can to dismiss our voices. Incidentally,the fact that I received four emails questioning whether I knew what I was doing when I signed the petitions is insulting. It feels like bullying. It feels like over- reaching government. It feels like desperation. Be better than that. Sincerely, Sue Welfringer HB Resident&Community Volunteer since 1997 From: Judv Brusslan To: suoolementalcommCalsurfcitv-hb.orq Subject: NO on MAGA Library Plaque,NO on Symphony of Flowers,YES on library petitions Date: Sunday,February 16,2025 8:04:07 PM youl-dont oftenget email.from brusslanlab©gmailcorn ream why'thi"s is trr portan The MAGA plaque is partisan and our library is not. The Symphony of Flowers will destroy wildlife habitats in our Central Park. The petitions were approved by the OC Registrar and the people in HB should be given the chance to vote on the petitions they signed. I had the ordinance in hand when people signed the petition. They could read the word "PROCUREMENT",this is not moving books, this means not purchasing books. This is the definition of book banning: they cannot be procured by the library. Maybe you need to look up the word "PROCUREMENT"? Thank you, Dr. Judy Brusslan Huntington Beach Resident From: Lindsay K To: suoolementalcomm(asurfcity-hb.orq Subject Receive and File this Report of Effect of Proposed Initiative for Citizen Initiative to Repeal Ordinance No.4318 by Deleting Huntington Beach Munidpal Code Chapter 2.66 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 9:01:58 AM Hello HB City Council, I'm writing regarding agenda items 25-087 and 250126. I personally have received an email attempting to discredit the library petition gathering process and have heard others have received phone calls from an out-of-state number inquiring about the petition as well. Stop harassing HB citizens who have signed the two library petitions and put them to a vote by calling a special election. Let the citizens of HB and the democratic process determine the fate of our beloved Huntington Beach Public Library. What are you so afraid of? Sincerely, Lindsay Klick Mother, HB Resident, Librarian From: Linda Rose To: suoolementalcomm 5)surfcity-hb.orq Subject: My message to our city council Date: Monday,February 17,2025 11:15:45 AM [You don't often get email from lrlindarose3@icloud.com.Learn why this is important at bttps://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderidentiftcation] Council members,why do you encourage devision in our city?City council is not supposed to be political.You encourage this by using a MAGA sign on our library.Two past mayors,Shirley Dettloff and Ralph Bauer, were in different parties but no one knew this and we own the beautiful and well used Senior Center that they worked hard to establish.We should not even know what party you belong to but you propagate it! I thought your party stands for individual rights,less government.Now you are proposing taking away our public library and deciding what books our children can read?Should that not be a parent's right to choose? I have been a homeowner here in over 40 years and am tired of paying for the law suits you loose by refusing to follow CA laws.Wouldn't you be happier in Florida.Tito Ortiz is where he belongs. Linda Rose Sent from my iPad From: JEAN GARREN To: suoolementalcommCa surfcity-hb.orq Subject: Everything going on Date: Monday,February 17,2025 11:25:25 AM Th 77,: 3 You dorc`r often.c et errrad from burn44@aoE coon 'Parnrwhy thtc rngortanr ti 1. Leave the library alone. 2. Get the maga sign off the library. 3. Stop supporting trump and muskrats horrible agenda that is hurting most Americans!! 4.Bring back diversity to HB. 5. Good riddance to Micheal Gates. Thank you Jean Garren I Sent from the all new AOL app for iOS From: Paula Schaefer To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL,CMO STAFF);supolementalcommesurfcity-hb.orq Subject Save$$$and Adopt Proposed Ordinance-25-087 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 2:43:35 PM City Council Members: I urge you to save money by adopting the proposed ordinance to rescind the Book Review Committee and return curation authority to the City's librarians. You can do this on 2/18/2025. I personally spoke with over one thousand HB voters about the Book Committee. The vast majority of these voters believe that the proposed Committee restricted their rights as parents or guardians to make the appropriate selection of reading material for their children. The Library's professionals have shown that, in tandem with parents and guardians,the City's libraries are a source of enriching reading material for everyone. Stop your culture war antics and focus on the obligations that you swore an oath to uphold. Focus your efforts on the City's budget, improving the City's infrastructure, and putting an end to the politically motivated litigation. These are the efforts that are worthy of your time and effort. Paula A. Schaefer From: Tim Holland To: suoolementalcomm(aisurfcity-hb.orq Subject: The Public Library issues Date: Monday,February 17,2025 2:47:47 PM You,dori often get email from tim holiand2Q@yahoo coat I aarnwhy this is important The Public Library issues have been legally proposed and forwarded by signatures of Huntington Beach citizens. The legal process now has the next step to be determined by the city council people.So please end these childish delays and hidden agenda attacks on the process and let those citizens that followed legal processes to get the questions before all voters to decide the questions.Your bias should be put aside to allow the process to move forward.Your opposition to the issues is your opinion.You have done a great disservice to the reputation of the city council by bending the truths to meet your interpretation and thwart the voice of the citizens.Thats fine--that's your right but it is also the right of citizens with differing view to vote on the issues.Personally I think it is shameful the tact you have taken. It's a public library not yours not mine.I don't have any right to decide what neighbor kids read and neither do you. That is a parents right only.A public library is public so all citizens should be able to raise their own kids not letting a committee of strangers decide what information is available in a public library. Thanks,Tim Holland From: Neidi Pallares To: suoolementalcomm(aisurfcity-hb.orq;CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAFF) Subject Public Comment for 2/18/25 City Council Meeting:Agenda Items 25-102,25-087 and 25-126 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 3:15:58 PM Sarre peopl vuhia received this messagedo s`toften get email from heidiFngpr@hctmail•cam learn whytfr imOpraar) To the Huntington Beach City Council- I plead with you to please listen to the residents of this community about what is happening at _ our library. Elements of this message were sent to the Community and Library Services Commission last week for their meeting regarding the anniversary plaque design, and each of you were copied. Despite the outreach from myself and 300+others (as reported in multiple media outlets); in addition to the dozens who spoke out against it in person, did not impact the voting of the commission. It seems clear that their minds were already made up to approve it, regardless of the passionate public input from residents. I hope that is not the case for the City Council, and that you listen to your constituents who you were elected to represent. You owe it to each and every resident in Huntington Beach. I may be one resident representing a family of four, but I speak for many others who are as troubled as we are about what is happening in Huntington Beach. I am a lifelong resident of Huntington Beach who has been a visitor to the public library at Central Park since my childhood in the 1980's. I now relish taking my own two children there to foster their love of reading and discovering new books and authors. We love the circular walkway down to the lower level, the fountain - all of the things that remind me of my own childhood days in the library, and places my son and daughter get to discover themselves. When I read about and saw the proposed plaque that will be discussed and voted on for the library's anniversary, I gasped. It is the least appropriate and subtle way to try and insert the MAGA agenda into our beloved library system.The "Magical,Alluring, Galvanizing, Adventurous" reference is offensive and inappropriate. No one is fooled by this design or its intention. The alternate design from Councilmember Williams adding, "Through hope and change our nation has built back together to the golden era of Make America Great Again," is even more offensive. You are not listening to the people you represent.This is, in fact, ignoring the pleas of concerned residents and doubling down on your own personal agendas to attract attention for yourselves.This is not what the residents of Huntington Beach need or want. Although the current HB city council is aligned in their politics, I would like to remind everyone in city leadership that you are meant to represent ALL residents. We do not all share your views about national politics, nor how you are trying to display them so overtly throughout our city. I spoke to several neighbors who agree we do not want to commemorate our library's anniversary with a plaque that divides our residents and insults the community cohesion and curiosity fostered inside the library, and the foundation on which it was built 50 years ago. Please do not approve a plaque that will tarnish the legacy of our beloved library.There are many other words and designs that would better mark this occasion and honor what the library means to everyone in Huntington Beach. Additionally, you owe it to this community to take the two library petitions seriously and adopt the initiatives in Agenda items 25-087 and 25-126. Our library books and stellar operations are not in need of further disruption from this council.The library belongs to the residents of this community and we do not want its reputation tarnished with the council's actions. There are numerous issues in our city that absolutely need your attention and action. Housing. Homelessness. Budget. Infrastructure.These are big items that require strategic planning and coordination with stakeholders across the community. I want nothing more than to focus my attention to these matters and to hopefully support your efforts to improve the lives of all who live in this city. I hope this is something we can all agree on. Sincerely, Heidi Pallares From: vanessawebOaol.com To: suoolementalcomm(Dsurfcity-hb.org Subject Council Meeting Date: Monday,February 17,2025 3:19:16 PM Dear Members of City Council, Three comments..... It seems that council members are ready to sell out our Central Park to recoup money they have wasted. I'm with Steve Engel that this would only disrupt our flora and fauna including mating bald eagles. It doesn't seem feasible to repair our park after the shows. Parking seems to be a big issue as well. The plaque honoring the anniversary of our beautiful library and the dedicated people who have worked/work there should not be a bizarre,unattractive partisan effort to keep your names in the public eye. Remember that your job is non partisan. The two petition library items must be put on the ballot for our citizens to vote on. The petitions have been verified and now our citizens deserve a chance to have their voice heard. Thank you,Vanessa and Jeff Webster 40 year residents Sent from the all new AOT,app for iOS From: J.,aura Janssen To: suoolementalcomm4surfcity-hb.orq Subject: Agenda Item 25-087 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 3:50:20 PM Dear Council Members, I support the Citizen Initiative to Repeal Ordinance No. 4318. It should be put to the vote by the citizens of our community. I don't agree a parent-guardian review board that would oversee the book titles selected for our library, and that is appointed by the current city council, would be fair and impartial. This is government over reach, pure and simple. Thank you. Sincerely, Laura Janssen From: }i Meyers To: suoolementalcommCa surfcity-hb.orq Subject City Council meeting 2/18/25 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 5:16:59 PM I urge you to oppose agenda item#20,the plaque for the Huntington Beach library's 50th anniversary.This is a divisive and blatantly political plaque that does not honor the library.IIf the City Council wants to honor the library, it should support its work instead of interfering with professional librarians and threatening to outsource the library's management. Please select option C in agenda items#22 and 23 to show actual support for the Huntington Beach library. I also urge you to vote against agenda item#24 regarding a light show in Central Park.The proposed light show would cause multiple harms to the environment,degrading the habitat for birds and other creatures.The negative impacts would far outweigh any financial or other supposed benefits. Thank you, Hildy Meyers Huntington Beach resident K From: Jan Madnick To: suoolementalcomm( surfcity-hb.org Subject Agenda item 25-087 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 5:25:22 PM Aside from the fact that the City Council members are working hard to discredit the hard work of HB citizens who obtained the sufficient number of signatures to qualify putting the issue of the Community Parent-Guardian Review Board to a vote of HB Citizens,there is no real reason you just can't accept Ordinance 4239 and move on. We don't have to have the expense of an election.Patrons of the library have ALWAYS had the power to complain about books they think are inappropriate. Just acknowledge the fact that librarians ARE NOT"groomers"and"pedophiles"and actually do have the knowledge and good sense to purchase appropriate books for our library system. Cities like Irvine are spending more money on their libraries,books,AND the hiring of librarians,and we have and are losing many of our beloved librarians because of this false narrative. At a time when the City Council is bemoaning the state of the City budget,maybe the expense of whatever books would have to be purchased and reviewed for this committee(21 copies of each?)might be another argument against it. Watching how the Library Commission bowed to the horrific plaque proposal,however,indicates just the kind of citizens who would be picked for this Board---which would make it,too,unrepresentative of HB citizens. Just accept Ordinance 4239, Jan Madnick From: Pat Goodman To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAFF);suoalementalcomm(a)surfaty-hb.orq Subject: Vote Yes on Agenda Item 22 B)and Agenda Item 23 B) Date: Monday,February 17,2025 6:06:29 PM Please vote yes on Agenda Item # 22 Deleting Huntington Beach Municipal Code Chapter 2.66 - Community-Parent Guardian Review Board for Procurement of Children's Library materials, and Adding Section 2.30.090 - Selection and Use of Library Materials; and B) Adopt Ordinance No. 4239, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by Deleting Chapter 2.66 Thereof and Adding New Section 2.30.090 Thereof;" And vote yes on Agenda Item # 23 Proposed Initiative for Citizen Initiative "An Ordinance to Amend the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by Adding New Section 2.30.100, Entitled `Public Operation of Library Services';" B) Adopt Ordinance No. 4330, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach Amending the Huntington Beach Municipal Code by. Adding New Section 2.30.100, Entitled `Public Operation of Library Services';" By voting yes on option B) of these two items you return operations of the library to the standard for a public library operated by professional librarians. For more than 100 years the city has engaged professional librarians to manage its operations with safeguards to protect against pornography and censorship as well as provide objective standards to curate the library collection. Vote yes on Agenda Items # 22 B) and # 23 B). Thank you, Pat Goodman Huntington Beach From: Buffie Channel To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CM0 STAFF;suoolementalcommOsurfdty-hb.orq Subject CC Meeting Feb 18,2025-Oppose Agenda Items 20&24 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 7:38:27 PM To City Council Members: Congratulations on your continued embarrassing political middle-school level stunts like the hideous library plaque that was clearly designed by Gracey, Luke and Valentina. It's ugly, juvenile and trashy. I have no doubt you'll vote for it because you are itching to get MAGA on the wall of the library. It's a juvenile design and an obvious lame attempt to put your names on a commemoration for the library that you had no hand in creating, improving, or protecting. It IS the perfect symbol of your hypocrisy though, so kudos for preserving your special "Sellout7" legacy. If you do decide to defy all of the speakers and letters from the public (whom you clearly detest hearing from), I'd go with design#2,just to solidify your historical mark as the worst City Council in Huntington Beach history, and to ensure laughs from residents for years to come. To clarify,I oppose agenda item 20 and this stolen heroism plaque with either of these two hideous designs and the names of the City Council members on the plaque, names of people that have done nothing but attack and try to destroy our beloved library. I vehemently oppose the Symphony of Flowers light show and agenda item 24. This is another short-sighted idea brought to us by Tony and his corporate cronies. Selling out our public parks is just a slap in the face to the residents who have paid for those parks to be maintained and restored and should remain for PUBLIC USE ONLY. Yet once again,the Sellout7 wants to destroy the things that mean the most to the citizens of our city. Find your revenue somewhere else. Don't sell our open space to the highest bidder. Weren't you all about "NO HIGH DENSITY,PRESERVE OUR OPEN SPACES, WE CARE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT"??HaHaHa.What a joke. If you were actually good at attracting business,you should actually, urn, attract business with long-term benefits that don't exploit our natural parks and open spaces that we hold dear. Do you ACTUALLY believe that we will sell out several shows a night for months and months? Where will everyone park? 2000 people several times a night?Really?Will the nearby residents suffer massive increased traffic and parking nightmares in their neighborhoods by attendees trying to avoid the parking fees? How will you build,manage and maintain a 180x50 foot water basin?Will it be a drowning hazard for kids?Will it be a mosquito haven? Will the walkways near the event site be closed to the public?That is not right. How will you protect the migrating birds?The Bald Eagle pair?The owls?All of the other birds and wildlife? You won't. Your$50.000 budget to manage repairs and damage to the area won't bring back the wildlife that will escape the chaos that this show will bring. Your "report" is useless because you don't know the TRUE impact this will have on the park and the wildlife. And....why the rush?Is the owner of the show promising Tony campaign donations?Tick tock. We can smell the corruption and back room deal a mile away. Library Petitions - stop trying to create some kind of doubt in the legitimacy of the petitions. Obey the law and either adopt the resolutions for both petitions or put them on the next election ballot. Stop with your weird breach of confidentiality survey emails and phone calls attempting to smear the petitioners- and acting like the citizens are stupid and didn't know what they were signing. Obey the law. Considering the budget shortfalls and failing infrastructure problems,the continued problems with downtown, and the need for long-term business and tourism attraction issues,perhaps you should focus on solving these problems and enhancing the lives of the citizens by ensuring our beautiful parks are for PUBLIC USE ONLY and our Central LIbrary receives the dignified celebration it deserves, instead of playing petty political games. Sincerely, B. Channel 36 year resident,homeowner and voter From: Tim Channel To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL,CMO STAFF1;suoolementalcommOsurfdty-hb.orq Subject: Agenda Items for 02182025 Council Meeting Date: Monday,February 17,2025 8:02:08 PM Hello, I urge the council to consider the below comments: Item#20 (25-102) - STRONGLY AGAINST. The library is for all residents and should never be politicized. Just because you control the council does not mean that the council owns the library. The obvious MAGA reference is inappropriate for a public non-partisan institution in the public square. Item#22 (25-087) -To use your own words "THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN" .Let the people vote. The signatures were approved by the OC Registrar of Voters. This item needs to be immediately approved or put on the ballot as soon as possible for the VOTERS TO DECIDE. Item#23 (25-126) - Congratulations if your intent was to destroy the careers of our city's experienced and dedicated library personnel for some anti-woke political victory. Some have left for greener pastures because it was obvious to them that you do not even support your own employees. To use your own words "THE VOTERS HAVE SPOKEN" . Let the people vote. The signatures were approved by the OC Registrar of Voters.This item needs to be immediately approved or put on the ballot as soon as possible for the VOTERS TO DECIDE. Item#24 (25-017) - STRONGLY AGAINST. Huntington Beach Central Park belongs to the citizens of this fair city. The enactment of this proposal would deny access to residents to parts of the park for extended periods of time. How is this good for us? Thank you for your consideration, Tim Channel Huntington Beach From: Celeste Rvbicki To: CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAFF);suoolementalcommOsurfcity-hb.orq Subject: Agenda item 25-102 Date: Monday,February 17,2025 10:32:26 PM Hello, I'm writing to request you reconsider the design of the plaque meant to commemorate the 50th anniversary of our great library. It's a lovely idea to have a plaque donated to honor HBPL but the design does not send a message of honor or respect to the intended recipients. There should be no religious or political messaging(per the library's own policy!).and the focus on "MAGA" is childish,both in the random and awkward adjectives chosen and in its trolling nature. There are plenty of non-controversial examples already existing on the library's walls and it would be so much more effective and less divisive to follow their formats. I'm also in support of both the library petitions either being accepted and adopted as is or I look forward to seeing them on the ballot in the general election. I am concerned that the plaque drama is a distraction tactic to take some of the heat off our city's "mediocre" infrastructure report card. I would like to see much more focus from the council on improving our city right now for its residents rather than all the flashy, grabby, fox news nonsense. Thank you 1 Huntington Beach City Council Meeting comments on Agenda for 2/18/2025 Mayor and City Councilmembers: APPROVE: Item 19—We recommend you approve of the City of HB proceeding with the Staff recommendation on Actions A and B,though we're puzzled that this represents accepting funding from CalPFA,a political subdivision of the State of California,via bonds,to subsidize HD housing,albeit for Seniors.Wondering how the CC(specifically McKeon) rationalizes that with HB suing the State over mandating precisely what this seems to be. Item 22—'Selection and Use of Library Materials'-We recommend you approve of the City of HB proceeding with the Staff recommendation on Actions A and B,or C.We don't approve of proceeding with Part D,as that would cost the City too much to pay for a Special Election when it could be held at a fraction of the cost in the scheduled 2026 General Election. Item 23—'Public Operation of Library Services'-We recommend you approve of the City of HB proceeding with the Staff recommendation on Actions A and B,or C.We don't approve of proceeding with Part D,as that would cost the City too much to pay for a Special Election when it could be held at a fraction of the cost in the scheduled 2026 General Election. DENY: Item 20—Deny or postpone the approval of the'Design of the Plaque Celebrating the Huntington Beach Public Library's 50th Anniversary as Recommended by the Community&Library Services Commission'. Under no circumstances should the design of this plaque reflect the letters MAGA in any configuration or composition that groups the letters together,or are emphasized in any other way. It is very clearly a biased political acronym that is universally recognized throughout the USA. It does not belong on this,or any other plaque,placed at any property considered to be Public or City property. Item 24—Deny or postpone the execution of a License Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and Flowers of the Sky Entertainment, LLC,for the management and operation of Symphony of Flowers at Huntington.Central.Park East,as well as the Addendum to the Final Master Environmental Impact Report(FMEIR)for Master Plan of Recreation Uses for Central Park,City of Huntington Beach, California, until one or more public forums can be scheduled by the City Council,Symphony of Flowers 'authorized' representatives and other City Officials to garner wider public comments and questions. At this juncture in time,there are still far too many questions and issues needing better definition and explanation to enter into any legal Agreement between parties.As the tentative date proposed to commence the opening of the shows isn't until September of 2025,we have adequate time to allow for one or more public forums to occur to more thoroughly address residents'concerns. Sincerely, Larry and Susan Slonim (714)357-9600 From: Sharon Hathaway To: CITY COUNCIL.(INCL.CMO STAFF);supolementalcomm(dsurfcity-hb,orq Subject: Regarding 25-087 Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 12:39:23 AM Some peapie Wha received this message.don toftemget email from hathawaystee@gmail.com.Learn why this is jrncortant e = i, -, N y 45 [ Thousands of residents, who are registered voters of Huntington Beach,felt it important to take a stand to repeal Ordinance#4318 on having a parent/guardian review board,taking the place of professionally trained Librarians in the procurement of Children's Library materials, that they freely signed a petition to repeal this ordinance. I urge the council to listen to these constituents, as you are supposed to represent the entire population of Huntington Beach,not just those that voted for you. Based on public comments, I am sure some of those signatures voted for you, but don't agree with the action you have taken. Will any of you stand up for the city as a whole? While your personal views, and your faith-based views are yours to live by, it is not your role to negate other personal views that may be different. I request that you repeal Ordinance#4318, or set an election date for the voters to decide. Thank You, Sharon Hathaway 25 year resident From: Levin.Shannon To: suoolementalcommC)surfcity-hb.arq Subject: RN:City Council Meeting 2/18/25 Comments Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:00:23 AM From:Chris Varga <christopher.j.varga@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 16, 2025 3:01 PM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:City Council Meeting 2/18/25 Comments Huntington Beach City Council, In regards to the agenda for Huntington Beach City Council Meeting on 2/18/25 I have the following comments : Agenda Item 25-102—NO to the MAGA plaque for the 50th Anniversary of our wonderful central Library.This brazen political statement has no place in our celebrating this milestone. Do we even need to waste money on any plaque? Agenda Items 25-087 and 25-126—In regards to both of these approved and signature validated petitions on the future of the Library I support either approving the petitions as is or put them to the people of Huntington Beach to vote on. There isn't another option. Agenda Item 25-017—NO to the Central Park Light show. What a hokey idea. Just leave the park alone! Sincerely, Chris Varga Huntington Beach From: Levin.Shannon To: suoolementalcomm(a surfcity-hb:orq Subject RN: Library petitions and signature gatherers Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:11:24 AM From: ellen riley<2ellenriley@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 12:47 AM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Library petitions and signature gatherers Some people who received this message don't often get email from 2ellenrileygmail.com.Learn why this is important My experience with the signature gatherers for the two Huntington Beach library petitions was that they were friendly, knowledgeable and willing to answer any questions those passing-by might have.There was no mis-information. Conversely,those complaining to the City Council may have been the very individuals who harassed and yelled at the signature gatherers. I saw one such threatening individual whom the collectors called HBPD on. HBPD showed up, counseled and told the harasser to move on. Subsequently there were other hateful, shouting individuals. Please respect the concerns of the thousands of library goers, many of whom supported Your election. Ellen Riley . warner avenue 2ellenriley(agmail.corn From: Levin.Shannon To: suoplementalcommC isurfcity-hb.orq Subject FW:Council agenda 2/18/2025,multiple items Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:17:59 AM From:Julie Bixby<julie@bixby.org> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 2:00 PM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Council agenda 2/18/2025, multiple items Some people who received this message don't often get email from julieftixby.org.Learn why this is important To Council persons of all genders, faiths and creeds: RE: Item 25-102 - Proposed Library Anniversary Plaque The City Council is blatantly using a City resource for its own political gain. The font size of the front-and-center MAGA acrostic is so much larger than that of"Huntington Beach Central Library", and there's so much star- spangled fluff around it, that the plaque looks like it's recognizing 50 years of MAGA, a well-known political movement, rather than the City's Library. Further adding to the plaque's political message, it displays the individual names and offices of the loud and proud MAGA elected officials. The City's Code of Ethics - you did read it, didn't you? - says "I do not use my office or the resources of the City for personal or political gain." Plastering a political logo/acronym with your name and office on a City resource sounds very much like using a City resource for political gain, which violates the Code of Ethics. RE: Items 25-087 & 25-126 pertaining to placing the Citizens Initiatives on the ballot Deputy City Manager Jennifer Carey, who prepared these two RCAs, gets creative - to put it politely - with the fiscal impact of placing the citizen initiatives on the General Election ballot. She writes for both 25-087 & 25- 126: "The next General Election would be November 3, 2026. Should the City Council elect to submit for this date, the cost would range from $340,515 to $399,499. If the City Council decides to include the second citizen initiative... an additional cost of approximately $8,500 would be incurred for both scenarios." This makes it sound like the cost of including a single initiative on a GE ballot is an astounding six figures, yet somehow tacking on a second initiative adds a mere $8,500. This is a false narrative. Less than a year ago, the text of a similar RCA, 24-465, which was co-written by Carey, read simple and clear: "The estimated additional cost to place one Charter amendment measure on the November 5, 2024 General Election ballot is $10,000, bringing the total estimated cost for the November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election to $310,000. (emphasis added) Funds to cover this amount are budgeted in FY 2024/25 Election Account No. 10010201.69505." How in the world did the cost of adding one item to a GE ballot go from $10,000 to $300,000+ in less than a year? It didn't, although the phrasing of the current RCAs implies that it did, thereby misleading the public (and possibly the Council) that adding just one ballot initiative would be an enormous expenditure it can't afford. Moreover, RCAs 25-087 & 25-126 don't mention that funds are always provided in the City's budget to cover basic General Election costs, expanding the false narrative that the City can't afford to put the (supposedly costly) citizen initiatives on a GE ballot. Had the current RCAs been written in the same clear verbiage as the prior 24-465, this false impression wouldn't exist. The City Council needs to stop playing games and stop fabricating excuses (including the "were you lied to" survey) to avoid placing the lawfully submitted citizen initiatives on the 2026 General Election ballot. RE: Item 25-017 — Flowers of the Sky License Agreement I'm disturbed by the City's selling out of its parkland to try to make a quick buck. The ends don't justify the means. I'm also particularly dismayed by the vendor's obligation of "Shall provide a complimentary hospitality package that includes 400 complimentary VIP hospitality passes for the event per year for use by City's employees and representatives." 400 VIP passes per year? It seems a rather excessive number of freebies being doled out. It also begs the question of how, exactly, these hundreds of yearly freebies serve "a legitimate public purpose of the City... consistent with state law"per Resolution No. 2013-23. (emphasis added) Requiring the distribution of 400 VIP passes sounds awfully like bribery to me, a "pay to play" scheme (aka, we'll let you hold your event if you give us a bucket load of free passes to attend it). The City doesn't need to be so greedy. Cutting the number of passes in half to 200 (or cutting even fewer to 100), you still have a generous allotment for whatever "legitimate public purpose" premise you come up with. Julie Bixby Huntington Beach From: Levin.Shannon To: suoolementalcommCalsurfcity-hb.orq Subject: FW:Agenda Items for meeting February 18,2025 Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:22:43 AM From:Sue Fullerton<stevie_fullerton@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 9:02 PM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Agenda Items for meeting February 18, 2025 Some people who received this message don't often get email from stevie fullertonc yahoo.com.Learn why this is important Agenda Item 25-087 yes repeal ordinance No. 4318 Agenda Item 25-126 - yes amend Municipal Code by adding New Section 2.30.090 From: Levin.Shannon To: sunolementalcommCalsurfcity-hb.org Subject FW:Please register my voice Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:23:01 AM From:Allie Plum <skyedawg007@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 17, 2025 9:43 PM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF) <city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Please register my voice Dear CC and Staff I wish to once again express my disapproval for the overpriced MAGA library plaque. It displays a tiny ode (books)to the actual library and a big eagle, a In God we trust, and some other furled drapes which seem more apt on money. Back to the drawing board for less please. I am also against The Symphony of Flowers in Central Park taking away a large part of the public park and possibly disrupting the local wildlife.This is too long in time and too invasive. Also the petitions which were signed clearly for the HB Public Library to go back to no interference by a "Board" appointed by the far right City Council.There is no balance or representation for the other half of HB. Please put it to the vote of the people. Thank you for having an open mind and collaborating to make the community included. Sincerely, Allison E. Plum 19251 Brookhurst St. HB From: Aoril Downs To: suoolementalcommCalsurfcity-hb,orq Subject Removal of Citizen Library Review Board Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:23:23 AM People in the community of spoken,and their wishes need to be followed.Allowing citizens to vote on whether we want random citizens deciding what's in our library is Not what we have chosen.This needs to be put to a citizen vote. April Downs Sent from my iPhone Huntington Beach City Council Meeting comments on Agenda for 2/18/2025 Mayor and City Councilmembers: APPROVE: Item 19—We recommend you approve of the City of HB proceeding with the Staff recommendation on Actions A and B,though we're puzzled that this represents accepting funding from CalPFA,a political subdivision of the State of California,via bonds,to subsidize HD housing,albeit for Seniors.Wondering how the CC(specifically McKeon) rationalizes that with HB suing the State over mandating precisely what this seems to be. Item 22—'Selection and Use of Library Materials'-We recommend you approve of the City of HB proceeding with the Staff recommendation on Actions A and B,or C.We don't approve of proceeding with Part D,as that would cost the City too much to pay for a Special Election when it could be held at a fraction of the cost in the scheduled 2026 General Election. Item 23—'Public Operation of Library Services'-We recommend you approve of the City of HB proceeding with the Staff recommendation on Actions A and B,or C.We don't approve of proceeding with Part D,as that would cost the City too much to pay for a Special Election when it could be held at a fraction of the cost in the scheduled 2026 General Election. DENY: Item 20—Deny or postpone the approval of the'Design of the Plaque Celebrating the Huntington Beach Public Library's 50th Anniversary as Recommended by the Community&Library Services Commission'. Under no circumstances should the design of this plaque reflect the letters MAGA in any configuration or composition that groups the letters together,or are emphasized in any other way.It is very clearly a biased political acronym that is universally recognized throughout the USA. It does not belong on this,or any other plaque,placed at any property considered to be Public or City property. Item 24—Deny or postpone the execution of a License Agreement Between the City of Huntington Beach and Flowers of the Sky Entertainment, LLC,for the management and operation of Symphony of Flowers at Huntington Central.Park East,as well as the Addendum to the Final Master Environmental Impact Report(FMEIR)for Master Plan of Recreation Uses for Central Park,City of Huntington Beach, California,until one or more public forums can be scheduled by the City Council,Symphony of Flowers 'authorized'representatives and other City Officials to garner wider public comments and questions. At this juncture in time,there are still far too many questions and issues needing better definition and explanation to enter into any legal Agreement between parties.As the tentative date proposed to commence the opening of the shows isn't until September of 2025,we have adequate time to allow for one or more public forums to occur to more thoroughly address residents'concerns. Sincerely, Larry and Susan Slonim (714)357-9600 From: Levin.Shannon To: suoolementalcomm@asurfcity-hb.orq Subject FW:Citizen against Parent-Guardian Review Board of HB Children"s Library Materials Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:24:09 AM Original Message From:Patricia King<jkpkkkmk@verizon.net> Sent:Tuesday,February 18,2025 6:54 AM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL.CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Citizen against Parent-Guardian Review Board of HB Children's Library Materials [Some people who received this message don't often get email from jkpkkkmk@verizon.net.Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification] As a resident of the City of HB for 35 years,I do not wish you to establish parent-guardian review board of HB Children's library materials. You have the right to say what your children read but you have no right the control what my children read. Patricia King,HB Resident From: Levin.Shannon To: suonlementalcommCalsurfcity-hb.orq Subject: FW:Opposition to library privitization and review committee Date: Tuesday,February 18,2025 8:24:49 AM From:johnkinghb@verizon.net<johnkinghb@verizon.net> Sent:Tuesday, February 18, 2025 7:10 AM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Opposition to library privitization and review committee Some people who received this message don't often get email from johnkinghbverizon.net.Learn why tis is important Dear City Council- I want to express my opposition to any libarary privitization efforts, as this will result in reduced services. My family members are active library users and have been for many years, and this would be a tragedy I also want to express my extreme concern regarding any review committee activities regarding book selection- this proposed activity is rediculous. As a 34 year resident of Huntington Beach and parent of two children who used the library extensively, library book freedom is essential in our society. John John King johnkinghb@verizon.net 714 262 0826 1 . Moore, Tania From: Jeannette Doeller <doellerj@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 4:56 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: City Council Motions February 18 2025 You don't often get email from doellerj@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important I oppose the MAGA Library Plaque. I oppose the City of Flowers contract for Central Park. I support putting the library petitions on the ballot. Thank you. Jeannette Doeller, PhD cell: 205.222.7348 1 Moore, Tania From: Sharon Petersen <spetersen3048@earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2025 5:32 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Cc: Lana Subject: LEAVE THE HB LIBRARY ALONE You don't often get email from spetersen3048@earthlink.net. Learn why this is important To Council Members: HB is fortunate to have a wonderful library. It has a team of dedicated library professionals who offer a wide range of service to our community. They provide activities from ESL classes to story time for children to offering Veterans information and assistance. Where else can all these services be provided FREE to our community? As an educator, I am shocked by the attempts to censor library materials from anyone. This is still a free country and we still have freedom of speech and the press. I suggest you read the US CONSTITUTION, and remember the people who fought and died to ensure that those values would remain forever. You are attempting to trample on the foundation of our democracy! If you truly take your oath of office to "serve the people of Huntington Beach" then get busy and fix the pot holes, repair broken sidewalks, maintain the grass and shrubs in our parks, protect our wetlands and waterfront and LEAVE OUR LIBRARY ALONE! ! ! Sharon Petersen 1 18601 Newland St. Huntington Beach, CA 92646 2 Moore, Tania From: Fikes, Cathy Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2025 1:21 PM To: supplementalcomm@surfcity-hb.org Subject: FW: Support Item 25-087 From:Stephen MacDowell<toyomo@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Tuesday, February 18, 2025 2:23 PM To:CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Support Item 25-087 Dear City Council members, • Please support and implement the Petition requests. Save HB costly elections and more infighting. The accusations that Petition signer didn't know what they were signing and that Petition gatherers were not honest, insults the residents of HB. Why do you claim that your neighbors are too stupid to know what they signed or too dishonest to present it in a way that meets your pleasing? Stephen MacDowell 5601 Middlecoff Dr HB, Ca 92649 1