Reject Option 1: Pico Shouldn't Bear the Burden of Upzoning Again

Letter to the Editor: The Pico neighborhood has again been asked to absorb the city's burdens first and receive protections later. Dear Editor: On Tuesday, September 8, 2026 the Santa Monica City Council will vote on an ordinance implementing SB 79 development standards. The Pico Neighborhood Association (PNA) Board of Directors strongly opposes Option 1. Our opposition is rooted in the history and reality of environmental racism in the Pico Neighborhood. The construction of the I-10 Freeway cut through and isolated the Pico Neighborhood, demolishing homes, displacing residents and leaving remaining families to live with decades of freeway noise, air pollution, traffic impacts, and physical division. Now, Option 1 threatens to continue and compound that history. Option 1 is problematic because it appears broader than necessary. If the goal is simply to qualify for temporary exclusion, the city should not impose a major zoning change on more homeowners and residents than required. The City is acting under legal uncertainty. The staff report acknowledges that SB 79 is unclear about how to calculate exclusion criteria for TOD zones that cross city boundaries, such as Expo/Bundy, which includes both Santa Monica and Los Angeles parcels. Santa Monica requested guidance from HCD but had not yet received a formal answer. The Council should not upzone 89 parcels before receiving definitive guidance from the State's HCD. The better path forward is clear: Continue Item 12-B. Do not introduce the ordinance until the City provides the analysis supporting its decision. Pico has too often been asked to absorb the city's burdens first and receive protections later. We urge the City Council to reject Option 1. Sincerely, Pico Neighborhood Association Board of Directors Maria Loya, Freddy Luis, Brian O'Neil, Cris McCleod, Esther Hickman, Berenice Onofre, Gina de Baca, Mary Cornejo, Marisela Herrera, Irma Santiago Kiana Choy