The Santa Monica City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to establish new transparency standards for supportive and transitional housing projects, following weeks of community outcry over a proposed behavioral health facility that residents said appeared without adequate notice.
The measure, brought forward by Mayor Lana Negrete, directs city staff to develop coordination protocols with Los Angeles County and project developers to ensure community engagement before supportive housing projects move forward. The vote came after extensive debate among council members over legal concerns and the specific language of the directive.
It came just a day after a proposal to put housing for severely mentally ill individuals on Ocean Ave was canceled by Los Angeles County following weeks of fierce opposition by local residents.
"I'm trying to make it simple in plain language," Negrete said during the meeting. "We have a crisis on our streets. It's a national problem. We have homeless people. We have folks that are experiencing mental illness that need to enter medical facilities and have treatment."
The mayor's original proposal called for seven key components: coordination between the city and county on outreach efforts; establishment of best practices for community engagement; clarification of zoning requirements and notification procedures; a comprehensive review of land-use regulations; creation of a communications framework; development of a citywide site inventory for potential projects; and retrospective review of existing facilities.
The framework would require that City Council receive official written briefings whenever such projects are first discussed or potential sites are evaluated, ensuring transparency "at all stages." The proposal also called for a communications system including an accessible webpage, designated hotline, and clear response protocols.
However, the path to approval proved contentious, with Council Member Dan Hall proposing significant amendments that sparked debate over intent and political messaging.
Hall's changes included adding language to keep certain sites confidential "knowing that these sites might one day serve extremely sensitive and vulnerable patient populations to include rape victims, domestic abuse survivors and child sex trafficking survivors." He also proposed adding a clause stating that nothing in the item should be executed if deemed contrary to state housing law, referencing a 2022 "builders remedy" situation that resulted from a non-compliant housing element.
Additionally, Hall requested that retrospective reviews be privileged with legal advice and that the city manager's October 13 email timeline regarding the recently terminated Ocean Avenue projects be made public.
Negrete pushed back against some of Hall's additions, particularly the builders remedy reference and what she characterized as "dramatic language" about vulnerable populations.
"That has nothing to do with this," Negrete said of the builders remedy language. "That's a statement. Let's be honest. That's a statement. I think if we're all moving in the same direction, supposedly we're all rowing in this direction."
She questioned whether Hall's amendments were politically motivated rather than substantive, saying the reference to rape victims and child sex trafficking survivors was "really for shock value" and had "nothing to do with what I'm asking for."
"I don't need you to explain. I'm just saying it has nothing to do with this," she added. "If it makes you feel better, I'll go for it, because I'll be the bigger person."
Hall defended his amendments as necessary public education and legal protection, not political statements. "Part of why it's important to outline the types of victims in patient populations living in places like this is so that the public can understand that sometimes projects have to remain confidential to a certain point," he said.
He emphasized that the builders remedy language was meant to protect the city from falling out of compliance with state housing law. "I do not want to risk falling out of compliance with our housing element, and that is incredibly important," Hall said.
Negrete shared personal connections to the issue, revealing that she has a family member who utilizes such facilities. "One has saved one of my family members' lives," she said. "So I think we just have to come up with an outreach, coordination, standards and best practices."
Council Member Jesse Zwick raised concerns about whether the framework could conflict with state housing laws that require supportive housing to be treated the same as other residential uses in multifamily zones. Interim City Attorney confirmed that state housing element law generally requires transitional supportive housing be considered residential use, subject only to restrictions applied to similar housing.
"When it comes to the permitting of these sites, the city is obliged to process supportive housing service-based forms of housing the same way it would process any other housing in a given multifamily zone," Zwick noted.
Council Members Ellis Raskin and Natalya Zernitskaya both expressed support for transparency while cautioning about the need to avoid stigmatizing homeless populations and maintain legal compliance with state fair housing laws.
"These projects involve general populations, involve people who are going through traumas, and involve people who need discretion," Raskin said. "We need to think about how these processes and opportunities for engagement don't further stigmatize populations that have already been so stigmatized."
Council Member Barry Snell said he supported the measure and hoped it would lead to more equitable distribution of such facilities across the city. He noted that according to the map Negrete provided, Sunset Park has five such facilities, while wealthier neighborhoods have fewer.
The measure drew overwhelming support from public comments and consistent criticism of the council for its handling of the recently terminated Ocean Avenue behavioral health facility projects. Residents described feeling "blindsided" by projects approved without adequate notice and expressed frustration with what they characterized as the council's "secrecy."
Many comments specifically praised Mayor Negrete for her October 9 memo addressing the issue, with residents thanking her for providing "a clear roadmap toward a balanced approach that supports mental health initiatives while prioritizing accountability, transparency, and respect for Santa Monica residents."
Some comments alleged that other city council members knew about these projects and kept that information quiet.
The motion, as amended by Hall and seconded by Raskin, ultimately passed unanimously. City staff will return with recommendations after working with the city attorney to ensure all provisions comply with state housing law.