The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPacket 06232025Coyote Messaging & Outreach Efforts Seal Beach City CouncilJune 23, 2025 Presentation Overview Background Information Outreach Efforts Reporting Portal •Drafted by Seal Beach in partnership with Long Beach Animal Care Services and City staff after a surge in coyote- related calls. •Balance humane wildlife stewardship with public-safety obligations. •Spell out legal limits (no relocation without CDFW approval, state ban on feeding wildlife). •Background & Ecology – explains why eradication and relocation fail, and the ecological role coyotes play. •Three-Pronged Strategy – public education, strict enforcement of no-feeding laws, and a tiered response plan •Hazing & Volunteer Program – step-by-step training guidelines •Resident Yard-Audit Checklist •Data & Monitoring – calls and online reports feed a central log for trend analysis and hotspot mapping. Coyote Management Plan Under Review and Pending Update Background OUTREACH EFFORTS Press Release Social Media Briefing Room Community •Seal Beach City Website ⚬www.sealbeachca.gov/coyote •My Seal Beach App ⚬Apple App Store & Google Play •Direct E-mail ⚬animalcontrol@sealbeachca.gov •By Phone ⚬(562) 799-4100 ext. 1606 Coyote Reporting Portal Questions? Seal Beach Police Non-Emergency: (562) 594-7232 Life-or-Death Emergency: 911 Reducing conflict between coyotes and humans and pets Dr. Ted Stankowich Professor of Biological Sciences Director of Mammal Lab •Pervasive in every major metropolitan area of North America •“Wild” vs Urbanized coyotes •Focus on how coyotes perceive and learn about natural prey and use this knowledge to reduce conflict with humans and pets Our Approach •Wildlife monitoring •Behavioral studies of captive and wild coyotes •Behavioral studies of prey behavior 26 Wildlife Monitoring Stations have been installed in Orange County Anaheim Orange Garden Grove Silverado Human food items in 14% of scats Cat remains in 14% of scats (other urban areas find 1-7%) Rita Collins M.S. 2018 •How does the interaction of warning coloration and noxious scent influence predator behavior? Coyote Behavior toward Prey Models Holly Schiefelbein ‘16 Coyote Learning about Skunks •Do predators have an innate phobia of warning colors or must they learn to avoid them via negative experiences? •Conditioned to attack brown prey •Trained to avoid spraying skunk model •Tested for Generalization across patterns Caitlin Fay M.S. ‘16 •How do contrast and pattern structure influence coyotes’ willingness to approach “skunks”? Kathy Vo M.S. 2021 Using aversive learning to reduce human-wildlife conflict: coyotes vs. domestic cats Coyote-Pet Survey & Outreach •Anonymous survey asking about pet experiences with coyotes •1,874 responses collected for analysis •How do cat and dog breed, size, coloration, and time spent outdoors influence the risk of more intense negative interactions with coyotes? •Cats that spend more time outdoors have more negative interactions with coyotes. No effect in dogs. •Smaller dogs are at higher risk of negative interactions with coyotes. •Dogs with more contrasting colored fur have fewer negative interactions with coyotes. Coyotes in California •Mating Jan-March (greater aggression towards larger dogs) •Young born March-May •1 litter/yr •Avg 5-6 pups, Range 1-11 pups •Feed on their own at 5-7 weeks •Leave parents at 6-9 months •Pairs remain together for years – social stability is good! Coyotes in California Natural Wild Diets Urban Diets Small Mammals (rabbits, rodents, squirrels) Small Mammals (rabbits, rodents, squirrels) Dead animals Garbage, Pet food Fruits (berries, apples)Domestic Pets Vegetation (grasses, seeds)Dead animals Birds Fruits (berries, apples) Insects Vegetation (grasses, seeds) Birds Insects Coyotes in Seal Beach •No formal estimates of coyote population size •Typical urban coyote densities range from 0.5 to 2.5 coyotes per square mile •Seal Beach = 13 square miles; >50% natural, undeveloped land •Best guess is 30-40 coyotes but that could vary seasonally •Coyotes don’t follow city boundaries Variation in Human Personality Boldness/Aggressiveness in Natural Wild Coyote Populations Most aggressive and not fearful of humans Normal (wild) fearful behavior of humans Coyote Boldness Coyotes willing to move into and live among humans in urban areas Boldness/Aggressiveness in Natural Wild Coyote Populations Coyote Boldness Human – Coyote Conflict •Normally elusive & avoid contact – wary of humans •Urban coyotes may show reduced fear of humans. •Abundant food in residential areas accelerates the process •If not harassed, may become more aggressive, taking pets more often and approaching pet owners. •The most aggressive “problem” animals may stalk or even attack children or pets being walked on leash •More than 160 attacks in CA since the 1970’s, 1 fatal •SoCal has higher rates of attacks than other areas Human – Coyote Conflict •Older studies and models show that 75% of coyotes must be killed annually to control numbers in isolated areas, and elimination would take decades. •Toxicants and poisons are restricted and will kill non-target species •Capture-relocation is not legal in CA •Widespread lethal extermination (especially of dominant pairs) often leads to a younger age structure. •Reduces competition •Increases litter size •So 2 – 1 = 4 •Doesn’t move the distribution curve of boldness •Unlikely to ever get rid of all coyotes in SB What CAN We Do? •Coyote proof fences are expensive. •Sounds, strobes, flagging can be effective in the short term, but coyotes will habituate. •Targeted removal of hyper-aggressive “problem” animals •Can re-instill fear in remaining population •Current best practice is an ACTIVE public program: •Negative Reinforcement: Encourage residents to haze all coyotes to re- instill fear. •Remove attractants: •Enforce removal of garbage, dense backyard vegetation, pet food, and fallen fruits. •Keep small pets indoors or in enclosed outdoor kennels. •Cite those that intentionally feed coyotes. Thank You!theodore.stankowich@csulb.edu Support our research: www.csulb.edu/supportmammallab Larger dogs are at lower risk of severe interactions with coyotes Dogs with more contrasting color patterns have less severe interactions with coyotes Water Safety Craig Covey – Division Chief - OCFA Division 1 OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor What is Drowning? https://youtu.be/hw5eefaviJQ OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor What is Drowning? ”The process of respiratory impairment from submersion or immersion in liquid”. - World Health Organization Drowning Outcomes: •Fatal •Non-fatal OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Drowning Risk Factors •Gender •Ethnicity •Age •Lack of Supervision •Lack of Barriers •Swimming Ability •Special Needs OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor 2024 Orange County Drowning Statistics Did You Know? In 2024, the total number of drownings in Orange County was 111, up from 104 in 2023 and even with 111 in 2022 Drowning is the leading cause of accidental death for children under the age of 5. Children can drown in as little as two inches of water! OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Age Group Breakdown 2024 TOTAL INCIDENTS FATAL INCIDENTS NON- FATAL INCIDENTS 0 - 4 Yr. Old Victims 45 5 40 5 - 14 Yr. Old Victims 9 1 8 15 - 19 Yr. Old Victims 3 1 2 20 - 34 Yr. Old Victims 10 9 1 35 - 64 Yr. Old Victims 22 16 6 65+ Yr. Old Victims 22 20 2 Unknown 0 0 0 Total 111 52 59 Orange County Statistics OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Orange County Statistics 2024 Drowning Factors: •Lapse in supervision •Lack of Barriers •Medical Issues •Intoxication OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor 2025 Orange County Drowning Statistics 2025 Orange County Drowning Statistics Incident Count 2025 Total Incidents 27 Fatal Incidents 12 Non-Fatal Incidents 15 Incidents involving children under age 5 8 0 Fatal 8 Non- Fatal Incidents involving adults age 50 & older 12 10 Fatal 2 Non- Fatal OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Time is Important TIME ACTION 20 Seconds Child can become fully submerged in water 30 Seconds Infant can lose consciousness 60 Seconds Adult can become fully submerged in water 2 Minutes Child can lose consciousness 5 Minutes Brain can suffer irreparable damage 10 Minutes Brain death can occur If a child is missing, always check the water first! OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor ABCs of Water Safety OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Active Adult Supervision Children are within eyesight and reach of the person responsible for their safety. Assign a “Water Watcher” •Sober adult •Able to swim •Watches the water at all times •Avoids social activities, phone calls, reading, cooking, and any other distractions •Rotate every 15-20 mins if possible According to the CDC, 88% of children who drown are under some form of “supervision” OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Barriers •Isolate pool/spa from home and play areas •Install multiple barriers for protection such as safety covers, self-closing fences, self-latching gates, gate alarms, door alarms, and motion - detection devices •Maintain and check regularly •New Technology 2017 Pool Safety Act now requires 2 of 7 safety features OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Classes •Learn to swim •Recreational vs. Survival Lessons •Teach and enforce pool safety rules •Learn CPR/AED •Take a first aid class •Learn and practice rescue techniques OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Pool Safety •Most drownings in children ages 1-4 are occur in pools •69% of drownings of children under the age of 5, they were not expected to be in or near the water •80% of child drownings, the child was last seen safe in the home 5 minutes prior to being found in the pool •66% of clinicians don’t know that drowning deaths are more common than toxic ingestions or firearms There is NO such thing as a SAFE pool OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Drain Safety •Keep children away to avoid entrapment and entanglement – hair, jewelry, clothing •Keep long hair tied back and remove dangling earrings/necklaces •Install compliant safety drain covers •Install automatic shut-off pump systems •Know where the pool and spa pump switch is and how to turn it on and off Photo courtesy of How Stuff Works OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Flotation Devices Life vests are recommended for anyone who cannot swim or is not a strong swimmer. •U.S. Coast Guard approved •Specific to age and weight •Comfortably snug •Zippers vs Buckles In open water, life vests are for everyone! Flotation devices are not a substitute for active adult supervision! OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Additional Water Sources Bathtubs Open Water Boating OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Drowning Myths Drowning is silent Children and adults drown without a sound MYTH REALITY If a person is drowning:If a person is drowning: They will be screaming for help They will be gasping to breathe Their arms will be up and waving Their arms will be underwater moving to try and keep afloat They will be splashing in the water They will be bobbing in the water with their head tilted back and mouth at water level OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Top 10 Pool/Water Safety Tips 1.LEARN TO SWIM 2.Always swim with a buddy or near a lifeguard 3.Supervise children closely – “Water Watcher” - NO DISTRACTIONS 4.Wear a life jacket 5.Be aware of hazards 6.Use layers of protection - Install mandated pool safety equipment 7.Stay away from drains 8.Know what to do in a water emergency - How to help, how to call 911, and how to provide CPR 9.Don’t enter head first; look before you leap or dive 10.Swim sober OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Remember… Water is the great equalizer…..it does not discriminate Drowning is FAST Drowning is SILENT Drowning is PREVENTABLE Just because you can SWIM, doesn’t mean you can’t SINK OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Public Safety Message https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTkhm4NU8Cg OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor Drowning – are you watching? OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor For more information, visit ocfa.org or call 714 -573 -6200 Never swim alone and always watch the water! OCFA Division 1 - Proudly serving the cities of Garden Grove, Los Alamitos, Seal Beach, Westminster, Midway City, and Rossmoor 1 Brandon DeCriscio From:JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> Sent:Monday, June 23, 2025 8:29 AM To:Lisa Landau; Nathan Steele; Joe Kalmick; Ben Wong; Patty Senecal; Patrick Gallegos; Michael Henderson; nghirelli@rwglaw.com; Gloria Harper; Brandon DeCriscio; Karen Pickering; Ask City Hall; budget; info@sealbeachchamber.org; Joe Bailey; Alexa Smittle; Barbara Arenado; Iris Lee; Tim Kelsey; Shaun Temple; Deb Machen; Anthony Nguyen; Nicholas Nicholas; Mike Ezroj; Julia Clasby; ctuchalski@bestversionmedia.com; info@bestversionmedia.com; editor2@sunnews.org; cpenaorg@gmail.com; Brian Gray; Nick Bolin; hr@sealbeachca.gov; Megan Coats; Jessica Salvador; Chris Hendrix; sealbeachcityrotary@gmail.com; sfuruvald@bestversionmedia.com Subject:Public Comment - The City Manager Has To Live In The City To Be Eligible, So Did You Move Back? 🏡Congratulations Patrick, All Love - Seal Beach City Council Meeting 6/23/25 Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Flagged Psilocybin Mushrooms in Their Natural Habitats - by Paul Stamets https://www.target.com/p/psilocybin-mushrooms-in-their-natural-habitats-by-paul-stamets/-/A-94272297 Waska: the cost of spiritual healing in the Amazon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jG6B0o1QfQ This Deadly Drug Can Also Erase Addiction ‘Virtually Overnight’ | WSJ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBz2TTEdFSs Two Videos Above Are Why I Advocate For Locally Grown And Facilitated GOD Given Medicine. Marcus Finnie | The Art of Listening Drum Clinic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oimZ5dzewic The REAL Danger Of The Post WWII Consensus And Is It Too Late? | Jonathan Pageau https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ug88C6Zgcs See the stunning first images from the Vera C. Rubin Observatory https://www.technologyreview.com/2025/06/23/1119129/first-images-vera-c-rubin-observatory/ Why That Scary Statistic Might Not Mean What You Think – Understanding Scientific Risk and Probability in the Media https://caveatscientia.com/2025/04/02/why-that-scary-statistic-might-not-mean-what-you-think-understanding- scientific-risk-and-probability-in-the-media/ Cancers can be detected in the bloodstream three years prior to diagnosis https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/newsroom/news-releases/2025/06/cancers-can-be-detected-in-the- bloodstream-three-years-prior-to-diagnosis Students For Sensible Drug Policy - Just Say Know Drug Education https://ssdp.org/our-work/just-say-know/ D.A.R.E. Drug Abuse Resistance Education 2 T.R.U.T.H. Teaching Responsibility Uniting Trusted Healers I'll Let You Know How Its Going With A Lawyer, JO ౱౲౳౴౵౶౷౸౹N On Monday, June 9th, 2025 at 10:53 PM, JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> wrote: Record High: Study Finds Growing Cannabis Use Among Older Adults (7% Of 9500 = ~665 Residents Of Leisure World May Have Used Cannabis In The Last Month; Assuming A Rough Conservative Guess Of 1/4 Oz Usage Per Month Per Currently Using Resident @ $40 Per Month For Locals = $319,200 And Potential For Deferring Leisure World Water Increase To Cannabis They Are Likely Already Buying That Goes Exclusively To Paying For Water/Sewer (Are Leisure World Residents Even Allowed To Grow Cannabis?); Ability For Cannabis Grower To Negotiate Volumetric Water Rate With Increased Usage For Growing https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2025/june/cannabis-use-older- adults.html Superwood is Here! This Amazing New Material Could Change The World! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4-v3ntYZAs MIT engineers develop a new battery-free solar desalination system, capable of producing up to 5,000 liters of water per day > a solution for remote areas https://ecoinventos.com/nuevo-sistema-de-desalinizacion-solar-sin-baterias-capaz-de- producir-hasta-5000-litros-de-agua-al-dia/ Dietary Sugar Intake and Incident Type 2 Diabetes Risk: A Systematic Review and Dose- Response Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2161831325000493 KILL Every Mosquito In Your Whole Yard | GUARANTEED SAFE METHOD For 1 Gallon Mosquito Spray Repellent: (*In this video I made for 4 gallons) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBPWGPmpE40&t=741s The Delivery Drones Are Finally Here https://www.flyzipline.com/  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAh-zCpmERY "It's Happening Now" - The Unstoppable Threat: Inside the Sinaloa Cartel's Unstoppable Submarine War (Ironclad) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3CP0aTETak Dino Mavrookas - Fmr. Navy SEAL (DEVGRU) / CEO of Saronic Technologies | SRS #205 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJsbSC20Gv0 GPS devices, trackers, and other Iridium satellite communicators https://www.iridium.com/product-type/personal-communicators-messengers-trackers/ Please Forward The Following To Dave Min: 3 Psilocybin-assisted treatment for alcohol dependence: a proof-of-concept study https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25586396/ Part 1: Korea’s Magic Mushrooms 한국의 환각버섯 https://medium.com/%40Hong_Gildong/part-1-koreas-magic-mushrooms- %ED%95%9C%EA%B5%AD%EC%9D%98- %ED%99%98%EA%B0%81%EB%B2%84%EC%84%AF-b5259491d35d Current situation regarding psychedelics and magic mushroom in Korea https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11862319/ Hong (2021) The Psychoactive Mushrooms of Korea https://www.scribd.com/document/617371685/Hong-2021-The-Psychoactive- Mushrooms-of-Korea Magic mushrooms are woven into the historical and contemporary cultural fabric of Korea. There are many Korean fables regarding the 웃음버섯 (useum beoseot), or laughter mushroom. The famous Korean mycologist 조덕현Dr. Cho Duck-Hyun wrote an excellent paper on the legends of poisonous and magic mushrooms in Korea titled 독버섯의 비밀, or The Secret of Poison Mushrooms. It’s only available in Korean language, but I highly recommend reading it if you can get it translated. You can find it here: http://www.kacn.org/data/story/500403.pdf My favorite account in Dr. Cho’s paper is an ancient story in which nuns at a Korean Buddhist monastery go mushroom hunting in the mountains around the monastery. They combine all their mushrooms into a big pot of soup and become wildly intoxicated after consuming the soup. In contemporary times, magic mushrooms occasionally appear as plot devices in Korean television shows. For example, in one episode of the Korean drama 푸른거탑, or Blue Tower, an army platoon was stricken with uncontrollable laughter and hallucinations after consuming wild “laughter mushrooms.” You can watch the 2-part episode on YouTube: Part 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6KcxYzWT8w Part 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PeaRDTCcKo (Note: viewers outside Korea might need a VPN linked to Korea to watch the videos) The local Korean names of magic mushrooms often reveal the social attitudes towards these mushrooms from 미치광이버섯속 or “maniac mushroom” for the Gymnopilus genus and 환각버섯속 or “hallucinogen mushroom” for the Psilocybe genus, as well as “laughter mushroom” for some Gymnopilus and Panaeolus species. Despite the cultural significance of magic mushrooms in Korea, international mushroom literature demonstrate a limited knowledge of magic mushrooms native to Korea. Gastón Guzmán’s “A Worldwide Geographical Distribution of Neurotropic Fungi”, which is one of the biggest global reviews of magic mushrooms, only lists four magic mushrooms from Korea and the famous book “Psilocybian Mushrooms of the World” by Paul Stamets makes no mention of Korea. 4 In neighboring Japan, on the other hand, Guzman mentions 28 potential magic mushrooms and Stamets cites 10. Such inconsistencies likely stem from a number of factors, including limited access to or familiarity with Korean sources, and a comparatively larger breadth of relevant Japanese sources. Nevertheless, Korean mycological sources do mention the existence of numerous, potentially magic mushrooms in Korea. In upcoming blogs, I will investigate and review 26 potentially magic mushrooms found in Korea. There is a lot of interesting and exciting information to be shared, and I hope to set the record straight! Are We Going To Have A Proclamation For Every Ethnicity And Religion? JO8N On Monday, May 26th, 2025 at 3:04 PM, JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> wrote: This Is Your Final Warning. Fear GOD. Legal Action Will Be Considered If The Public Record Is Not Corrected Through These Acknowledgments During The Seal Beach City Council Meeting On 5/27/25: 1. I Request Public Acknowledgment Of Ongoing Seal Beach Police Intimidation To Chill My 1st Amendment Right To Free Speech At Public Assemblies Because Of Viewpoint Discrimination Before/During My Public Comments For Years And Guarantee Of An Immediate End To These Behaviors Or Similar: (A) Directing An Officer To Use A Police Dog To Specifically Target My Person/Belongings/Scent Without A Warrant Or Reasonable Suspicion Of A Crime Additionally Violating My 4th Amendment Right (B) Directing An Officer To Move Behind The Sight Line Of The Camera To Sit In The Public Audience Exactly When I Go Up To Give My Public Comment (C) Physically Moving Directly Next To My Person In The Public Audience Section Before Public Comments At Two Separate December Meetings In Order To Give Me Extra Intimidation During The Pressure Of Greater Audience Attendance Than Usual And Holiday Performances (D) Suggesting/Telling Me Not To Write My Name Down In Order To Be Called Upon To Give My Public Comment 2. I Request Public Acknowledgment Of A Previous Lie By Omission From Seal Beach Police Stating That Psilocybin Mushrooms Are Completely Illegal In California And A Correction Of The Record Stating The Whole Truth That The California Cities Of Oakland, Santa Cruz, Arcata, Berkeley, And San Francisco Have Successfully Mandated Personal Use And Possession Of Certain Psychedelics As The Lowest Law Enforcement Priority. 3. I Request Public Acknowledgment Of The City Attorney's Failure To Recognize At Best And Complicit Encouragement At Worst Of The Ongoing Seal Beach Police Intimidation Specifically Directed At Me, A ~27 Year Resident. 4. I Hereby Request A Public Acknowledgment From The City Attorney Regarding Prior Acts Of Omission And Potential Violations Of My First Amendment Rights. Specifically, These Violations Occurred 5 Immediately After I Publicly Announced The Religious Nature Of My Practice And The Founding Of My Church. Following This Declaration, The City Attorney Issued A Blanket Legal Statement Asserting That Psilocybin Mushrooms—Referred To By Their Non-Religious, Secular Name—Are “Illegal In California.” This Statement Was Delivered Without Addressing The Constitutional Protections Afforded To Religious Practice, And Was Made In Direct Response To My Religious Expression Invoking The Name Of JESUS CHRIST. This Action Effectively Undermined The Legitimacy Of My Sincerely Held Religious Beliefs And Sacramental Use Of JESUS CHRIST's Flesh And Blood. It Promoted A Preference For Traditional Or Mainstream Christian Interpretations Over Nontraditional Or Indigenous Spiritual Practices. It Also Violated The Establishment Clause And Free Exercise Clause Of The First Amendment To The United States Constitution, Which Together Prohibit Government Hostility Toward Minority Religious Practices, Government Endorsement Of One Religious Interpretation Over Another, Interference With Religious Expression In A Public Forum, And The Chilling Of Protected Religious Speech. Furthermore, The City Attorney Omitted Critical Legal Context, Implying That My Religious Practice Was Categorically Illegal Under State Law—When In Fact, The Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) And The Gonzales V. O Centro Espírita Beneficente União Do Vegetal (UDV) Supreme Court Decision Provide A Clear And Recognized Pathway For Religious Exemption To Controlled Substance Laws. The UDV Case Affirmed That A Sincere Religious Use Of A Federally Controlled Substance May Not Be Prohibited Without The Government Meeting The Highest Level Of Legal Justification—Known As Strict Scrutiny. The Burden Is On The Government To Show A Compelling Interest And That It Has Chosen The Least Restrictive Means To Advance That Interest. By Failing To Disclose This Legal Framework, The City Attorney Not Only Misled The Public, But Also Attempted To Dismiss My Constitutionally Protected Religious Rights Through Misrepresentation And Selective Omission. This Public Statement, Issued By A Government Official In A Civic Forum, Not Only Dismissed The Spiritual Framework I Had Explicitly Articulated, But Also Attempted To Reframe My Protected Religious Exercise As A Criminal Matter—Thus Chilling My Religious Speech, Discrediting The Legitimacy Of My Sacrament, And Reinforcing State Entanglement With Religious Interpretation, Contrary To The Principle Of Government Neutrality In Religious Matters. This Act Of Governmental Overreach Echoes The Historical Violation Of Indigenous Religious Freedom On This Land—An Ongoing Legacy Of Cultural Suppression And Spiritual Violation. Lastly, I Assert That I Am Under No Obligation To Prove My Religious Exemption Through Man-Made Legal Mechanisms Unless And Until I Deem The Matter Ripe. My Exercise Of Faith Exists Prior To And 6 Beyond Civil Authorization, As Protected By The Constitution And Recognized By Precedent. This Is Anchored In The Foundational Principle That Religious Liberty Is An Inalienable Right, Not A Privilege Bestowed Or Regulated At The Discretion Of The State. 5. I Request Public Acknowledgment Of Two Separate Brown Act Violations. During (4), The City Attorney Gave A Public Response To My Public Comment Without Agendizing The Item To Give Me A Chance To Respond With The Omitted Information. During (2), The City Mayor Gave A Public Response To My Public Comment In Which Police Were Asked About Psilocybin Mushrooms. This Item Was Not Agendized And I Was Not Given The Chance To Respond With The Omitted Information. Because The Item Was Illegaly Agendized Twice Without A Public Hearing, I Request A Legal Placement On A Future Agenda With A Chance For The Public To Speak. If The Public Record Is Corrected By Acknowledgment Of All 5 Issues, Behaviors Are Promised To Change, And Placement On A Future Agenda Occurs During The Seal Beach City Council Meeting On 5/27/25, I Will Drop All Consideration Of Legal Action With Handshakes Of Forgiveness. 42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil Action For Deprivation Of Rights https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1983 https://steeringlaw.com/police-misconduct-attorney-seal-beach/ https://www.moseleycollins.com/police-misconduct-lawyer-in-seal-beach- ca.html https://pba.memberclicks.net/search-member-directory#/ https://firstamendmentcoalition.org/ https://www.terrapinlegal.com/ https://www.thefire.org/ https://www.aclu.org/ Satan Drives Out Satan All Around Me The I AM Holds Me Together Sin Tempts You With Momentary Peace Division Never Lasts Forever Love Verbatim Word For Word Literally, In The Flesh And Blood Remember Ear Cut By Sword Here Forever, Good Is Evil's Judge ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ If theft is still a problem in the Target shopping center, it might be time to look into employees giving tips/insider theft. Can Amazon's security be 7 consulted to see vulnerabilities in Target shopping center as I believe Amazon uses Palantir? If the water and sewer rates are passed, we need to see recognition of exactly where the funds are going to certain parts of the city - I foresee a situation in the future when other, more recently built parts of the city need new pipes and I want a record of the fact that the more recently built parts of the city helped fund older parts of the city before.   If that many pills shown in the drug take back are over prescribed by big pharmaceutical companies, how is that not considered racketeering conspiracy with big insurance companies?   Make an AI Police Lawyer like siri that can be a real time intermediary for police officers and citizens to talk with together in 99% of the time non- violent interaction. In regards to drug enforcement, the best defense is a good offense - right now alcohol is your offense when it should be cannabis - alcohol is a gateway to cocaine/meth/opioids and cannabis is a gateway to psychedelics. Why This Russian Drone Developer Isn’t Impressed by U.S. Tech ([Probably Some Propaganda In There] Fiber Optic Cable Drone Seems Most Applicable For Civilian Police - Better Connection, No Enemy Jamming/Detection, More Battery Because Video Feed Does Not Take As Much Energy; Or Large Mother Drone To Improve Connection/Distance Of Wireless; Starlink Naval Drones; Lasers To Destroy Drones) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmfNUM2CbbM Police warn of small cameras camouflaged in yards across the country https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEQircxHdHQ Experimental drones developed in Chicago area to neutralize mass shooters, disable weapons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eiz2GzAEVbg Is This An Organized Crime Syndicate? James Freeman (Local Public Government Is Better Than The Alternative Or Else It Would Create A Vacuum With Less Accountability/Standards/Morality/Etc., But It Is Not The Best - Religion Is) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NaPJKi_MW0 How Police Control the Media (Overly Liberal Video Among Some Overly Republican Videos, But Copaganda Has Obvious Truth In Seal Beach With Terrible Local Journalistic Integrity Regarding My Experience So Far, Unless There Has Been Publicly Published Writing About Cannabis/Psychedelics That I Have Not Seen) 8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NB0IW8ihS0 Tim Tebow - Fighting For Our Children | SRS #199 Shawn Ryan Show https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FeVFs0dVcCc Notorious Green Beret’s WARNING to Soldiers Coming Home Johnny Glenn Julian Dorey (IMO Adrenaline Addiction Through Constant Survival Competition At War Creates Hyper-vigilance Devoid Of Rest With GOD That Does Not Integrate Into The Marathon Of Life) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0NnjKXZRFc The Real Threat: Why the U.S. Could Declare War on Chinese Gangs (w/ Former DEA, Ray Donovan) Ironclad https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKNiaMqfwA Why Other Countries LAUGH at American Homes (Build New Headquarters By The Beach Out Of Concrete/Local Earth Geopolymer) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTghEBfZ_D8   Wasp 3D-prints eco-homes from local raw earth for $1K https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MLJs1KRa0Y In 2018, the team printed their first home in 10 days using local earth (30% clay, 40% silt, 30% sand), 40% chopped rice straw, 25% rice husk, and 10% lime. “Gaia” cost 900 euros (1,000 dollars) in materials for 30 meters of wall. The round-shaped structure relied on a wooden roof and beams for support. Why 3D Printing Buildings Leads to Problems (Modular Prefab Concrete For Non-Unique Building Parts + 3D Printed Concrete For Unique Building Parts Seems Like Sweet Spot) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhAwPFIUF_4 Comment: “I’ve worked closely with a leading concrete 3D printing company for several years now, so I hope my insight into the actual construction process provides some perspective. First, one clarification: There is no gravel aggregate in 3D printing concrete. It is only sand. You're right that the vertical integration is very strong in this industry, but there is already internal pressure to break that up. I expect in 10 years or so, you'll see more open-access tools available to architects and construction companies alike. I can't be too specific and honor my non-disclosure agreements, but there is recognition that the ability for architects to play with shape is very limited for now, which also limits the primary advantage of concrete 3D printing over other methods: complex shapes cost the same as simple ones. The primary reasons IMO for the vertical integration is 1) that there has been a high learning curve for the industry and 2) the business case relies on minimizing labor costs and the strategies for dealing with that 9 are still being prototyped. Normally trivial things like laying foundations, running plumbing, tying roof timbers into the frame, and lintels as you mentioned, are difficult for concrete 3D printed construction. It's only in the last year or so that acceptable, repeatable solutions have been identified for most of these and are finding their way into standard design practices. But even then, there are still maybe 5 or 10 years more of on-the-ground construction needed to establish best practice. It's not too different from the way building materials and building science radically changed in the 1980's, leading to a decade of extremely poorly built houses prone to water damage and short lifespans. It wasn't until maybe 20 years after that best practices for high-quality construction had been standardized. I would push back on the lack of repairability, though. This has always been an issue with concrete construction, and it's likely to become increasingly common for plaster or stucco finishes to be applied to internal walls, allowing for intrusive renovations to be reintegrated. Structural stability is not likely to be an issue since all walls have reinforcement every half meter anyway and often exceed building strength standards by an order of magnitude. Further, virtually all concrete 3D printing for now is slab-on- grade construction, which already has the same repairability issues you mention but is already widely adopted and has best practices for dealing with things like electrical and plumbing repair. I would also point out that the timber frame construction that we love so much is largely an anomaly unique to the U.S. where wood is abundant and cheap. Concrete 3D printed homes have the (so far unrealized) potential of being many decades or centuries more durable than frame buildings, which will change the design requirements that often contribute to design choices that later need renovations and repairs. I would also push back on the criticism of how windows and doors are seated in the concrete homes. I don't doubt that many early concrete 3D printed homes were sealed with silicone only, but 1) the gap between windows and walls is already standard in frame construction and addressed with shims, spray foam, and trim and 2) the 3D printing companies have already started to adopt the same building techniques used by frame construction. Echoing much of what you said, IMO concrete 3D printing has a high potential for unique design that won't be unlocked until architects are given freer access to the tools and pre-fab construction is a necessary companion to this industry, but there is still a lot of building science that is being worked out. There are already some serious advantges, such as all walls having a native R40 insulation rating, but these will be tempered by the inherent limitations. I don't expect to see a rapid adoption of 3D printed construction for another 5 or 10 years and for the U.S. market share to cap around 20% and primarily remain in the residential and light commercial construction spaces. I also think that the current bare-wall aesthetic will fall out of favor out in that timeframe since it will prove difficult to clean. I also expect that 10 environmental costs will remain high as long as cement production relies on fossil fuels and concrete aggregate relies on mined sand. I also expect that a future use case for heavy construction is using 3D printing to create forms for much thicker concrete constructions, particularly for foundations, buttresses, and pillars, such as you see in airport construction.” I Investigated Utah’s DEADLY Soda Addiction… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlNJc_OLbYw https://playactivate.com/ Increased sedentary behavior is associated with neurodegeneration and worse cognition in older adults over a 7-year period despite high levels of physical activity https://alz-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/alz.70157 Parkinson's patients who take 'magic mushrooms' see key benefits, study finds https://www.foxnews.com/health/parkinsons-patients-who-take-magic- mushrooms-see-key-benefits-study-finds Trump surgeon general pick praised unproven psychedelic therapy, said mushrooms helped her find love https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/15/health/casey-means-psychedelic- therapy Military Land Is 4,336 Acres Or 60.7% Of Seal Beach... JO8N On Monday, March 31st, 2025 at 6:34 PM, JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> wrote: On Sunday, March 23rd, 2025 at 4:53 PM, JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> wrote: Dear Lisa, Nathan, Joe, Ben, Patty, Patrick, Mike H., Nick G., And Gloria, I am writing to formally express my concerns regarding what I believe to be ongoing violations of the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.) during public meetings conducted by Seal Beach’s City Council. The fundamental purpose of the Brown Act is to ensure that the public has the ability to meaningfully participate in local government proceedings, which includes the right to make public comments and receive fair treatment under open meeting laws. 11 Specifically, I wish to address the following concerns: 1. Inability to Respond to False or Misleading Statements: * It has been observed that after I make public comments, members of the council and/or city staff respond to my remarks. However, I am not afforded the opportunity to address their responses within the same meeting, effectively silencing my ability to correct or clarify statements that may be false, misleading, or deceptive by omission. This directly undermines the principle of open and meaningful discourse as envisioned by the Brown Act.  * The California Supreme Court has reinforced the importance of open and fair discussions in McKee v. Los Angeles Interagency Metropolitan Police Apprehension Crime Task Force (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 354, where the court emphasized that restricting public input while allowing government officials to comment without challenge is inconsistent with the transparency goals of the Brown Act.  2. Prohibition on Addressing Staff: * The restrictions placed upon me and other members of the public from directing comments toward city staff—especially when they are the ones providing statements that require public scrutiny— appear to be an unreasonable and arbitrary limitation on public participation. Furthermore, this may give the staff a feeling of false sense of security protecting their statements from legal scrutiny. The Brown Act does not prohibit the public from addressing staff members during public comment, and such restrictions seem inconsistent with its purpose of transparency and accountability.  * In Chaffee v. San Francisco Library Commission (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 109, the court affirmed that public participation is a fundamental aspect of government meetings and should not be unduly restricted, emphasizing the need for fairness in addressing public concerns.  3. Discussion of Public Comments Without Proper Agenda Notice: * Members of the council have engaged in discussions regarding my public comments without first properly agendizing the topics I address. This practice violates the Brown Act’s requirement that discussions and deliberations on non-agendized items not take place, as it deprives the public of advance notice and the ability to participate fully in the discussion.  * I am grateful that the city council is listening and willing to speak even momentarily in response to public concerns. However, even an extremely time- limited agendized discussion would add fairness and transparency to misleading statements by staff. By failing to agendize discussions about my comments, the council is creating an imbalance in the exchange 12 of information, which the Brown Act seeks to prevent.   * Additionally, in my public comments, I am using meta-communication to agendize the process by which we agendize. The term “agendize” itself is a completely made-up word that devalues public discourse and reflects a bureaucratic approach that obstructs meaningful public participation rather than facilitating it. This concern aligns with the ruling in White v. City of Norwalk (1990) 900 F.2d 1421, where the court emphasized that public meetings should foster meaningful participation and that arbitrary restrictions on discourse can infringe upon First Amendment rights.   * The word "agendize" does not appear anywhere in the Brown Act (Government Code § 54950 et seq.). The law refers to "placing an item on the agenda" or "agenda requirements," but "agendize" is not an official legal term. It is a bureaucratic jargon word that has become commonly used in government settings but lacks formal recognition in the Brown Act itself.  4. Process for Placing an Item on the Agenda: * The process for placing an item on a city council agenda varies by jurisdiction, but under the Brown Act, it does not require a unanimous decision by the council. Instead, different cities have different policies: * Individual Council Members: Some cities allow one or two council members to request an item be placed on a future agenda. The exact number required depends on the city’s local rules or policies. For example, in Los Angeles, a single council member can introduce a motion to be considered in a future meeting. Similarly, in San Diego, two council members are required to place an item on the docket.  * Majority Vote: In some cities, adding an item to a future agenda requires a majority vote of the council at a meeting. This process ensures that council members collectively decide whether an issue warrants further discussion. The City of Berkeley, for instance, follows this model, requiring a majority vote to place an item on the agenda.  * Courts have upheld the importance of agenda- setting transparency. In Preven v. City of Los Angeles (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 925, the court ruled that public participation in government decision-making is a core right under the Brown Act, reinforcing that the public and individual council members must be given fair opportunities to introduce topics for discussion.  These practices create an unfair and unbalanced environment where public voices are effectively suppressed, while city officials retain unrestricted latitude to control discourse without public challenge. Such actions may constitute a violation of both the letter and spirit of the Brown Act. 13 I respectfully request that the city review its meeting procedures and take immediate corrective actions, including: * Allowing public speakers the opportunity to address responses made to their comments within the same meeting.  * Eliminating any restrictions that prevent members of the public from addressing staff when their statements are at issue.  * Ensuring that discussions related to public comments follow proper agenda procedures to comply with the Brown Act’s transparency requirements. * Switching to Individual Council Member placing of items on the agenda to emphasize the sanctity of every individual living in Seal Beach  Failure to address these issues may necessitate further action, including but not limited to submitting a formal complaint to the appropriate oversight agencies and seeking legal remedies to ensure compliance with state law. I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and request a written response outlining the steps the city will take to address these concerns. Please respond within 30 days of receipt of this letter. P.S. Still Waiting On That Seal Beach City Legal Document Stating The Boundaries Marking The Well. Your Opinion About Me And My Right To Stand In A Public Area Moving My Body Completely To Myself Is Worthless Without The Written Proof Of The Well Boundary. I Submit The Evidence That You Are Able To Be That Close To Gloria’s City Clerk Area, And In Fact, Encouraged To Be In Order To Pick Up, Fill Out, And Submit Necessary Documents, Including Supplemental Material For Public Comments. My Standing In The Exact Symmetrically Opposite Area Was Supplemental Material For My Public Comment About The Decriminalization Of Psilocybin Mushrooms And The Agenda Item Of Daylighting. Lastly, The Wells I Have Seen Are Round In Shape And Symmetrical Without Parts Hanging Off The Side (To Conveniently Fit Your Narrative) 42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, 14 injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia. ןמא ןמא ⭼⭽⭾⭿⮀⮁⮂ ၒၓ ࿬࿭࿮ ⯴⯵⯶ ⍾ י ו 8 נ ן Ἰωάνν8ς  Jo8annes  JO8N On Tuesday, March 18th, 2025 at 6:11 AM, JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> wrote: Dear Lisa, Nathan, Joe, Ben, Patty, Patrick, Mike H., Nick G., And Gloria, I am writing to formally request an investigation into a matter of significant public concern regarding potential interference with my ability to communicate with city officials. Specifically, I have reason to believe that my emails to members of the Seal Beach City Council and city staff may have been intentionally blocked or filtered by someone within city administration in the Fall/Winter of 2024. As a resident of Seal Beach, I understand that I have a right to communicate with my elected representatives and city staff regarding matters of public interest. Any directive or policy that restricts this communication raises serious legal concerns under the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code §§ 54950–54963), the California Public Records Act (CPRA) (Government Code §§ 6250–6270), and the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. The Brown Act ensures transparency and public participation in local government. Blocking my emails to city officials may constitute an unlawful restriction on my ability to engage in civic matters and access public information. Likewise, the 15 CPRA mandates that governmental communications be open for public scrutiny. If city staff have deliberately restricted my access to communicate with officials, it could be an unlawful attempt to circumvent public records laws and governmental accountability. Furthermore, the First Amendment guarantees my right to petition the government for redress of grievances. Any action taken by city staff to suppress my communication, particularly if done based on viewpoint discrimination, could amount to a constitutional violation. Relevant case law, such as Lindke v. Freed and O'Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier, suggests that when public officials act in their official capacity, they must not engage in viewpoint-based censorship, including blocking communications from constituents. To ensure transparency and accountability, I respectfully request an internal review and disclosure of the following: 1. Any internal directives, policies, or communications instructing city staff or IT personnel to block, filter, or otherwise restrict emails from my email address jo8n@proton.me or any other specific senders.  2. A list of email addresses, domains, or individuals that have been blocked from contacting city officials and staff in the last year.  3. Any internal discussions or justifications for implementing such restrictions, including whether such actions were directed by city officials or staff members.  4. The criteria and procedures used by the city’s IT department to filter or block external communications.  If such a policy or directive exists, I request an explanation of its basis, legal justification, and the process by which it was implemented. If no such directive exists, I ask that immediate steps be taken to ensure my emails are properly received by their intended recipients. I would appreciate a written response within 30 days confirming the receipt of this request and outlining the next 16 steps in addressing this matter. If necessary, I am willing to file a formal Public Records Act request to obtain relevant documentation. Thank you for your attention to this important issue. I look forward to your prompt response and a resolution that upholds public trust and the right to open communication with our local government. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/ codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode =GOV§ionNum=54950 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/ billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180 SB31 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/ codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode =CONS§ionNum=SEC.%202.&article =I ןמא ןמא ⭼⭽⭾⭿⮀⮁⮂ ၒၓ ࿬࿭࿮ ⯴⯵⯶ ⍾ JO8N On Monday, March 10th, 2025 at 6:44 AM, JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> wrote: Dear Lisa, Nathan, Joe, Ben, Patty, Patrick, Mike H., And Nick G., Police intimidation that chills free speech is well recognized under First Amendment jurisprudence. In Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972), the Supreme Court held that government action that deters individuals from 17 participating in public discourse— whether through direct harassment or other forms of coercion—can violate First Amendment rights. In Feiner v. New York, 414 U.S. 632 (1974), the Court underscored that police conduct which disrupts or deters political expression, even if ostensibly aimed at maintaining order, must not infringe on the constitutional right to free speech. Moreover, Ward v. Rock Against Racism, 491 U.S. 781 (1989) illustrates that any regulation or enforcement action must be content neutral and carefully tailored to avoid suppressing speech based solely on its message. These cases establish that if police officers single out individuals for the content of their speech or for the topics they plan to address—such as advocating for "psilocybin mushroom" decriminalization, Religious Freedom, 18 Jesus Christ or discussing other politically charged issues—the resulting intimidation can constitute an impermissible infringement on First Amendment protections. Additionally, lower court decisions have consistently found that law enforcement actions that create a chilling effect on political participation are subject to strict scrutiny. When officers position themselves near a speaker, not to maintain public safety but to deter expression, it may be seen as targeted harassment. In December 2023's Seal Beach City Council Meeting, Mike H. of police staff entered the public section of the council chambers. He decided to sit near me when the choir sang. In December 2024's Seal Beach City Council Meeting, Mike H. entered the public section once again. He decided to stand directly next 19 to me during the National Anthem and when the choir sang. As I was in two completely different places in the room each year, this establishes a patterned targeting that could potentially be viewed as apparent police intimidation that chills my free speech before my public comment. In addition, Nick N. and Yosa of police staff have entered the public section of the council chambers directly behind the podium in view of the camera numerous times. This happened exactly during my public comment, to the point where I took time away from my allotted time to acknowledge the repeated pattern. I can only assume that this was a directive given by Mike H. of police staff due to his body language and the potential intimidation's regularity. “Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is 20 taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny." (Matthew 5:25-26) ןמא ןמא ⭼⭽⭾⭿⮀⮁⮂ ၒၓ ࿬࿭࿮ ⯴⯵⯶ ⍾ JO8N On Sunday, March 9th, 2025 at 2:22 AM, JO8N <JO8N@proton.me> wrote: Dear Lisa, Nathan , Joe, Ben, Patty, Patrick, Mike H., And Nick G., I am formall y request ing a correcti on of the public record pursua 21 nt to the Brown Act (Califor nia Govern ment Code § 54960. 1) due to mislea ding and incomp lete statem ents made by city staff during the Februa ry 10, 2025 Seal Beach City Council meetin g. Additio nally, I am raising concer ns regardi ng a potenti al violatio n of my First Amend ment religiou s rights in connec tion with a previou s statem ent 22 made by the city attorne y when I publicly announ ced my Church ’s use of "psilocy bin mushro oms" as one of its sacram ents. Summ ary of Brown Act Violati on During public comme nt, I addres sed the council regardi ng the decrimi nalizati on of "psilocy bin mushro oms". After I had finishe d speaki ng, Lisa asked Mike H. from police staff a clarifyin g questio 23 n about the legal status of "psilocy bin mushro oms". He respon ded by stating that "psilocy bin mushro oms" are illegal under Califor nia law but failed to mentio n that multipl e Califor nia cities, includin g Oaklan d, San Francis co, Santa Cruz, and Arcata, have decrimi nalized "psilocy bin mushro oms" for years. This omissio n misled the 24 public and the council by falsely implyin g that local govern ments lack the ability to depriori tize "psilocy bin mushro oms" enforce ment, which is demon strably untrue. This is not the first time city officials have engage d in mislea ding statem ents regardi ng "psilocy bin mushro om" law. One year ago, after I announ ced the formati on of my church, which 25 uses "psilocy bin mushro oms", "N,N- Dimeth yltrypta mine", and "N,N- DMT/M AOI" as sacram ents, the city attorne y similarl y respon ded that "psilocy bin mushro oms" are illegal under Califor nia law— without acknow ledging religiou s protecti ons under federal law. Further more, both the city attorne y and police staff failed to disclos e critical person 26 al informa tion that I present ed regardi ng my own case: I was hospita lized after consu ming a psyche delic but not charge d with any crime (which I am eternall y grateful for) and also found in posses sion of "psilocy bin mushro oms" and "N,N- DMT" within Seal Beach. The repeate d omissio ns by both the city attorne y and police staff created a false 27 narrativ e that "psilocy bin mushro om" decrimi nalizati on has not been succes sfully implem ented in some Califor nia cities and ignored key eviden ce— includin g my own experie nce— showin g that local authorit ies have already adopte d compa ssionat e de facto decrimi nalizati on practic es for the well being of residen ts. Potenti al First Amend ment 28 Violati on Under RFRA & Gonzal es v. UDV (2006) My concer n goes beyond transpa rency violatio ns under the Brown Act. The city attorne y’s respon se a year ago, when I announ ced the formati on of my church, raises serious questio ns about whethe r my First Amend ment religiou s rights were dismiss ed or underm ined in violatio n of the Religio us Freedo 29 m Restor ation Act (RFRA) and the Gonzal es v. O Centro Espírita Benefic ente União do Vegetal (UDV) Supre me Court case. Legal Preced ent: Religio us Use of Contro lled Substa nces In Gonzal es v. UDV (2006), the U.S. Supre me Court ruled that a religiou s organiz ation could legally use a federall y controll ed substa nce ("ayahu asca") 30 under RFRA protecti ons, as the govern ment failed to demon strate a compel ling interest in prohibit ing its religiou s use. Under RFRA (42 U.S.C. § 2000bb -1), the govern ment cannot substa ntially burden religiou s exercis e unless it can prove a compel ling govern ment interest and that the restricti on is the least restricti ve means of achievi ng that interest . 31 The DEA and federal courts have recogni zed that some religiou s groups may legally use controll ed substa nces like "peyote " and "ayahu asca" under these protecti ons. By failing to acknow ledge these protecti ons when I announ ced my church, the city attorne y omitted critical legal context , implyin g that my religiou s practic e was categor ically 32 illegal under state law— when in fact, federal law provide s a pathwa y for religiou s exempt ions. This potenti al suppre ssion of my religiou s expres sion in a public forum could be seen as a violatio n of my First Amend ment rights. Reque sted Correc tive Action s To remedy this issue, I formall y request the followin g: 33 Public Correct ion of the Record – The city must acknow ledge the omissio n and issue a formal correcti on clarifyin g that: Multipl e Califor nia cities have already decrimi nalized "psilocy bin mushro oms" despite state prohibit ion. Religio us protecti ons exist under RFRA, and the UDV case establis hed that religiou s use of controll ed substa nces may be legally 34 protect ed under federal law. Agend a Item for Further Discus sion – Given the mislea ding statem ents made by city officials , I request that the council place "psilocy bin mushro om" decrimi nalizati on on a future agenda to ensure the discuss ion is based on accurat e and comple te informa tion. Accoun tability for Repeat ed Omissi ons – The city should 35 implem ent training or proced ural safegu ards to prevent city officials from selectiv ely omittin g key legal and factual informa tion, especi ally when addres sing the content s of public comme nts. Legal Review of First Amend ment Implica tions – The city should review its public statem ents and policies regardi ng religiou s use of controll ed substa nces to 36 ensure compli ance with RFRA and Supre me Court preced ent. Legal Basis for Brown Act Compl aint Under Califor nia Govern ment Code § 54960. 1, the city has 30 days to correct this violatio n or face potenti al legal action to nullify any decisio ns made under mislea ding or incomp lete informa tion. Failure to acknow ledge and correct this 37 omissio n could be interpre ted as a continu ed effort to obscur e public access to truthful and balanc ed informa tion, violatin g the core principl es of the Brown Act. I request a written respon se acknow ledging receipt of this letter and outlinin g the correcti ve actions the city intends to take. I appreci ate your attentio n to this serious matter 38 and look forward to your respon se. ןמא ןמא ⭼⭽⭾⭿⮀⮁⮂ ၒၓ ࿬࿭࿮ ⯴⯵⯶ ⍾ JO8N 311 Main Street, Suite 8 | Seal Beach, CA 90740 Phone: 562-493-7548 | www.levittlawca.com | scott@levittlawca.com June 20, 2025 Seal Beach City Council 211 Eighth Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 Attn: City Clerk gharper@sealbeachca.gov SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL RE: Opposition to Proposed Short-Term Rental Ban Near Schools Public Hearing on June 23, 2025 Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of the Council: This firm represents residents and property owners in Seal Beach affected by the possible municipal action being discussed which would prohibit short-term residential rentals (“STRs”) within a specified proximity to schools. While we support the City’s responsibility to safeguard minors and uphold public welfare, the proposed ban is not only overbroad and lacking evidentiary foundation, but it is also legally susceptible to challenge under both California and federal law. Such would create, more, unnecessary litigation which would be paid for by the residents of Seal Beach. Platforms such as Airbnb and VRBO currently employ comprehensive screening tools that incorporate identity verification and criminal background checks for all U.S.-based users, including hosts and guests. These checks are conducted in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., through certified consumer reporting agencies. Such screening includes review of national and state sex offender registries, county criminal records, and the U.S. Treasury’s OFAC list. Individuals convicted of serious felonies, including child molestation, rape, and violent offenses, are permanently barred from using these platforms. These systems are bolstered by layered user reporting, internal reviews, and automated detection algorithms. A categorical prohibition on STRs near educational institutions fails to consider these safeguards and imposes a blanket restriction without a compelling and narrowly tailored justification. As confirmed by the Ninth Circuit in HomeAway.com, Inc. v. City of Santa Monica, 918 F.3d 676 (9th Cir. 2019), local governments possess regulatory authority over STR operations, including licensing, taxation, and host verification. However, enforcement must conform to constitutional principles. Blanket prohibitions implicate rights protected by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 19 of the California Constitution, especially where they interfere with vested property interests and lack a demonstrable nexus to a specific harm. 311 Main Street, Suite 8 | Seal Beach, CA 90740 Phone: 562-493-7548 | www.levittlawca.com | scott@levittlawca.com In addition to the foregoing, the proposed short-term rental ban would conflict with the California Coastal Act (Pub. Res. Code § 30000 et seq.), which mandates the protection and enhancement of public access and low-cost visitor-serving accommodations within the coastal zone. Seal Beach lies entirely within the jurisdictional boundaries of the California Coastal Commission, and the imposition of geographic STR bans near schools would have the foreseeable effect of reducing public lodging opportunities, thereby impeding coastal access for non-resident families, educators, and economically disadvantaged visitors. Under Coastal Act provisions, including but not limited to Sections 30210, 30211, and 30213, any municipal regulation that effectively restricts affordable overnight lodging must be justified by substantial evidence and must avoid creating barriers to coastal enjoyment. The Commission has routinely advised that local coastal programs and ordinances seeking to regulate or eliminate STRs be narrowly tailored to avoid infringing on the public’s constitutional and statutory right to access California’s beaches and shoreline communities. This position was upheld in Kracke v. City of Santa Barbara (2021) 63 Cal.App.5th 1089, where the Court of Appeal found that local bans on STRs within the coastal zone cannot be enacted without prior Coastal Commission approval, and further emphasized that such restrictions may impermissibly interfere with public coastal access, a right protected by state law. Further, in Keen v. City of Manhattan Beach (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 142, the California Court of Appeal held that a municipal ban on STRs within the Coastal Zone, absent prior approval by the California Coastal Commission, constituted an unlawful de facto amendment to the city’s certified Local Coastal Program. The court emphasized that such restrictions, including geographic or conditional bans (such as those near schools), materially affect public access and therefore fall within the purview of the Commission. The decision reaffirms that cities located within the Coastal Zone may not enact STR restrictions that curtail access without Coastal Commission oversight and approval. The City would be better served simply through ensuring enforcement of the current ordinance, and without infringing on fundamental rights or exposing the City to potential legal challenges. Any proposed ordinance with restrictions discussed at prior council meeting(s), risks undermining lawful property use and reducing lawful accommodation options for family travelers, substitute educators, and visiting professionals, without yielding measurable public safety benefits beyond those that are already achievable through current technological enforcement tools and existing municipal oversight. We respectfully request that the Council decline to pursue and adopt any changes to the current STR Ordinance. As you are aware, there has been no evidence that any STR has led to an attack of a minor at a local school or in such area around a school. Further, the only reason this topic is before the Council is because the people near the STR in question simply don’t want to have a STR on their street. 311 Main Street, Suite 8 | Seal Beach, CA 90740 Phone: 562-493-7548 | www.levittlawca.com | scott@levittlawca.com Sincerely, Scott L. Levitt Scott L. Levitt, Esq. AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH AND PATRICK GALLEGOS That certain employment agreement by and between the City of Seal Beach ( "City ") and Patrick Gallegos Employee ") dated April 28, 2014, as amended ( "Agreement "), is hereby amended as of February 15, 2017 to read as follows: SECTION 4.B is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: S. Cost of Living Salary Increases. Effective with the first pay period after July 1 each year, Employee may receive annual Cost of Living salary increases applicable to Executive Management employees, as approved by the City Council, based on the change in the California Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers as calculated by the California Department of Industrial Relations for Los Angeles- Riverside Orange County for the immediately preceding April -April period, not to exceed three percent (3 %) in any fiscal year." 2. Section 5.A.10 is hereby ADDED to read as follows 11. Medical Maintenance Examination /Wellness Program. The City shall reimburse Employee, as a medical benefit, for Employee's actual documented expenses for medical maintenance exams or the cost of participation in wellness programs, in an amount not to exceed $850 per fiscal year. Reimbursable expenses shall include, but not be limited to, actual out of pocket expenses for annual physical examinations or other medical tests or examinations, participation in weight loss, stop smoking, fitness or other similar programs, or membership in a health or fitness club. All reimbursements shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Manager." 3. Section 5.E.2 is hereby amended to read as follows (text added is underlined): 2. Sick leave accrual balance will be paid to Employee upon termination at 25% of his /her base rate of pay in cash and, if Employee is not Eligible for Retiree Health Benefits as provided in this Agreement and the City's Personnel Rules, an additional 25% of the accrual balance shall be deposited by the City into a Retiree Health Savings Account to be established for the benefit of the Employee." 4. Section 5.G.6 is hereby amended to read as follows: 6. Not more than once in each fiscal year, Employee may, upon written request, receive cash compensation for up to 89120 hours of accrued vacation time provided that Emp ,.yee has taken at east 50 11GUFS ,.F....,...,,... «.,,,, ,.cr..,•.h:.. that fiWal yeaF, subject to the City's normal accrual and "cash out" policies and procedures." 5. Section 9.0 is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows: C. Employee - Initiated Termination. Employee may terminate this Agreement by providing City 30 days advance written notice. The City Manager may, in his or her sole discretion, waive all or part of this advance notice period." 2040722 6. Except as specifically amended herein, all other remaining provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. Executed by the parties to be effective as of the date set forth above. City of Seal Beach Employee 9 ::! 2040722 Patrick Gallegos APPR D AS FORM: i Craig A. Steele, City Attorney AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT between City of Seal Beach 211 - 8th Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 0 Patrick Gallegos 211- 8th Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 This Amendment No. 1, dated August 11, 2014, amends that certain Employment Agreement ( "Agreement') dated April 28, 2014 between the City of Seal Beach, a California charter city ( "City ") and Patrick Gallegos, an individual ( "Employee "). 1 RECITALS A. City and Employee are parties to the Agreement, pursuant to which Employee serves as Assistant City Manager for City. B. City and Employee wish to amend the Agreement as provided herein. AMENDMENT NOW, THEREFORE and in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and promises herein set forth, the parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows: Section 1. Section 9, Paragraph C of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: C. Employee Initiated Termination. Employee may terminate this Agreement by providing City 30 days' prior written notice." Section 2. All other terms and provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 1 to be executed and attested: CITY OF SEAL BEACH BM..- Attest: I. By: indd Devine, City Clerk e IN as to City Attorney E EMPLOYEE Patrick Gallegos EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT City of Seal Beach 211 - 8th Street Seal Beach, CA 90740 2 Patrick Gallegos 211- 8th Street Seal Beach, CA 90744, This Agreement is made as of April 28, 2014, by and between the City of Seal Beach, a California charter city ("City"), and Patrick Gallegos, an individual. H RECITALS A. The City of Seal Beach ( "City ") hired Patrick Gallegos ( "Employee ") on February 27, 2012. B. The City would like to promote Employee to be the City's Assistant City Manager, effective April 28, 2014. C. Employee represents that he is qualified to perform the duties of Assistant City Manager for City. D. Employee's terms of employment have previously been established by City's Terms and Conditions of Employment for Executive /Mid- Management Employees. E. City and Employee wish to enter into an Employment Agreement that sets forth the rights and obligations of both parties and remove Employee from coverage under City's Terms and Conditions of Employment for Executive /Mid- Management Employees. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions herein contained, City and Employee agree as follows: 1. TERM. The effective date of this Agreement is April 28, 2014. This Agreement shall be effective throughout the tenure of the Employee. 2. DUTIES AND AUTHORITY. Employee shall exercise the powers and perform the duties of -the position of Assistant City Manager as set forth in the City Municipal Code, personnel rules, regulations and procedures and Assistant City Manager job description. Employee shall exercise such other powers and perform such other duties as the City Manager may assign. 3. EMPLOYEE'S OBLIGATIONS. Employee shall devote his full energies, interests, abilities and productive time to -the performance of this Agreement, and utilize his best efforts to promote City's interests. Employee shall not engage in any activity, consulting service or enterprise, for compensation or otherwise, which is actually or potentially in conflict with or inimical to, or which materially interferes, with his duties and responsibilities to City. 4. COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT FOR EXPENSES. A. Gross Monthly Base Salary. City shall pay Employee for the performance of his duties under this Agreement a gross monthly base salary of 12,672.17. The City Manager may consider a merit adjustment after conducting a performance evaluation in accordance with the evaluation process pursuant to Section 6 of this Agreement. Employee's salary shall be subject to withholding and other applicable taxes, and shall be payable to Employee at the same time as other 2- employees of City are paid. Employee shall be exempt from the overtime pay provisions of California and federal law. B. iCost of Living Salary Increases. Salary increases are as follows: 1. First pay period on or following July 1, 2015 - CPI adjustment, up to 3% maximum, as measured utilizing the change in the California Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers as calculated by the Department of Industrial Relations for Los Angeles - Riverside - Orange County for the 12 months of April 1, 2014 — March 31, 2015. C. Expenses. City shall reimburse Employee for actual and necessary expenses incurred in the performance of his official duties that are supported by expense receipts in accordance with AB 1234 and any applicable City ordinances, resolutions, rules, policies or procedures. 5. BENEFITS. A. Health Insurance Coverage. 1. City shall provide Employee a group hospital, medical and dental insurance plan. 2. City shall contribute to the cost of medical coverage for Employee and his dependents, an amount not to exceed the California Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (PEMHCA) minimum contribution. 3. City has implemented a full flex cafeteria plan for employees. If Employee opts to participate in City's full flex cafeteria plan, he shall receive a monthly flex dollar allowance to be used for the purchase of benefits under the full flex cafeteria plan. The monthly flex dollar allowance shall be: For Employee 705.1 01month For Employee and 1 dependent MMA Mila For Employee and 2 or more dependentslg,311 4. A portion of the monthly flex dollar allowance is identified as City's contribution towards PEMHCA. Thus, for example, in calendar year 2014, a single employee's monthly flex dollar allowance is $705.10; of that amount, $119 has been designated by City as its required PEIVIHCA contribution to CalPERS. The monthly flex dollar allowance may only be used in accordance with the terms of the full flex cafeteria plan. 5. Effective January 1, 2015, and every January 1st during the term of this Agreement, City shall increase the contribution amounts above by the percentage of increase for basic plans published in the CalPERS circular letter setting health insurance premiums for the coverage year. 3- 6. Employee is required to pay any premium amount in excess of the above City contribution. Such amount will be deducted from his payroll check on the first two pay periods for each month. 7. The minimum employer contribution for participating in the PEMHCA will be adjusted annually to reflect any change in the medical care component of the Consumer Price Index. 8. If Employee meets the waiver criteria and elects to waive enrollment in City's full flex cafeteria plan, he is eligible to receive $310 per month (upon showing proof of health insurance coverage under an alternative plan). Election forms are available in the Personnel Office. 9. City shall not contribute a flex dollar amount for Employee during any month he is on leave of absence without pay or is absent from regular duties without authorization, for a full calendar month. City shall contribute to the cafeteria plan for Employee if Employee is receiving temporary payments from Workers' Compensation Insurance. B. life Insurance Program. Erriployee shall receive a $50,000 life insurance policy paid by City. C. Income Continuation Pro-gram. 1. Employee shall receive an income continuation policy to provide for income continuation of 66.67% of his monthly salary, up to a maximum of 5,000 per month, whichever is lesser. 2. Said income continuation shall commence on the 31 st day of sickness or other bona fide absence or upon expiration of sick leave, whichever occurs later, and continuing thereafter while Employee is absent from work for a period of up to age 65. D. Retiree Health Insurance. 1 . Employee shall have the option upon retirement, to continue participating in City's health insurance program at his expense. 2. In the event Employee retires from City, he shall be eligible to receive a City contribution not to exceed the PEMHCA minimum employer contribution towards health coverage under CalPERS, as determined by CalPERS from time to time. 3. In the event Employee resides in an area where the health plans provided by City are not in effect, he shall be entitled to receive in cash each month an amount equal to the monthly contribution City would otherwise have contributed toward his health insurance premiums. 4- E. Sick Leave. 1. Employee shall accrue sick leave at the rate of one day eight hours) per month. The maximum accumulation of sick leave hours shall be 520 hours. 2. Upon termination of employment, sick leave accumulated balance will be paid to Employee at 25% of his base rate of pay. 3. Employee shall not accrue sick leave hours during authorized leaves of absence without pay. F. Leaves of Absence. 1. Leave of Absence Without Pay. a. Upon -the approval of the City Manager, Employee may be granted a leave of absence without pay in cases of an emergency or where such absence would not be contrary to the best interest of City, for a period not to exceed 180 working days. b. Upon written request of Employee, the City Council may grant a leave of absence, with or without pay, for a period not to exceed one year. C. At the expiration of the approved leave of absence, after notice to return to duty, Employee shall be reinstated to the position he held at the time leave was granted. Failure on the part of Employee to report promptly at such leave's expiration and receipt of notice to return to duty shall be cause for discharge. d. During any leave of absence without pay, Employee shall not be eligible to accumulate or receive benefits, except as otherwise specifically provided in City policy, except Employee shall receive his monthly flex dollar allowance and City shall contribute to Employee's disability insurance plan, and life insurance plan for the first 30 days of leave of absence without pay. 2. Bereavement Leave. City shall provide Employee with 40 hours paid bereavement leave in case of a death in the Employee's immediate family. The bereavement leave shall not be chargeable to or accumulated as sick time or leave time. "Immediate family" is defined as spouse, registered domestic partner, father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, grandparent, grandchild, step- mother, step- father, step - child, mother -in- law, father -in -law, domestic partner -in -law or dependent relative living with Employee. 3. Military Leave of Absence. a. Military leave shall be granted in accordance with the provisions of State law. Employee shall give the City Manager an opportunity within the 5- limits of military regulations to determine when such leave shall be taken. If possible, Employee shall notify the Department Head of such leave request ten working days in advance of the beginning of the leave. b. In addition to the provisions of State law, City shall continue to provide Employee on military leave, the monthly flex dollar allowance under the cafeteria plan and disability and life insurance and retirement (if applicable) for the first three months of military leave. During said period, Employee shall be required to pay to City the amount that exceeds the monthly flex dollar allowance (if applicable). After the first three months of military leave, Employee may continue said benefits at his cost. 4. Family Leave. Upon a demonstration of need and subject to the following conditions, Employee may take leave or unpaid leave to care for his newborn infant, whether through parentage or adoption, or to care for a seriously ill or injured member of Employee's "immediate family" as defined in sub - section 5.F.2. a. Proof of the birth or adoption of a newborn infant or the serious illness /injury of the family member must be submitted to City. b. Requests for family leave must be submitted in writing to the City Manager at the earliest possible date preceding the time when the leave is to begin. C. Operational needs of City shall be relevant in determinations regarding the granting of family leave in accordance with the provisions of State and Federal Family Leave laws. d. In the event of an extended family leave, Employee may be required to periodically report on the status of the situation giving rise to the leave. e. Family leave may be granted only upon the approval of the City Manager consistent with the provisions of State and Federal Family Leave laws. G. Vacation. 1. Effective April 28, 2014, Employee shall begin accruing 120 hours of vacation leave in his first year as Assistant City Manager. Employee shall accrue eight additional hours of vacation leave for each year of full -time continuous service each year after such first year. 2. Employee shall only be allowed to accumulate a maximum of 320 hours of vacation. This maximum can only be exceeded with approval of the City Manager. In 3. Vacation shall not accrue during any period Employee is on leave of absence without pay. 4. Employee is encouraged to use at least the amount of vacation hours earned each fiscal year. 5. City will not approve vacation leave time prior to it having been earned, unless prior, special arrangements have been made with the City Manager. Employee shall not take any vacation leave unless the City Manager has provided prior written approval. The City Manager may consider workload and other staffing considerations, such as but not limited to, the previously approved vacation schedule of other employees, sick leave and position vacancies. 6. After Employee has completed at least one year of continuous service, Employee, not more than once in each fiscal year may, upon request, receive compensation for up to 80 hours of accrued vacation time provided that Employee has taken at least 50 hours of vacation time off within that fiscal year. Employee may, upon request, receive compensation for up to 120 hours of accrued vacation time provided that Employee has taken at least 80 hours of accrued vacation time off within that fiscal year. mlnl City shall grant Employee the following holidays with pay: F-H-oliday IF-- Date New Year's Day January 1 st Luther King Day 3rd Monday in JanuaryMartin Presidents' Day 3rd Monday in February Memorial Day Last Monday in May Day July 4thIndependence Labor Day First Monday in September Veteran's Day November 11 th Thanksgiving Day Fourth Thursday in November Calendar day following Thanksgiving Day Eve December 24thChristmas Christmas Day December 25th Floating Holiday discretion of employee) Total of 12 holidays annually Floating Holiday must be taken during each fiscal year (July 1st through June 30th) and may not be carried forward. 2. Holiday Closures. The City Manager may designate up to five specific work days in each calendar year between Christmas Day and New Year's Day during which all employees, including Employee, may be required to take time off, 7- charged to leave without pay, Employee's accumulated compensatory time, vacation, floating holidays, or a combination thereof, as determined by Employee. The days must be consecutive for Employee. If Employee does not have sufficient accumulated time off in his account to cover the required time off, he may request, and will be granted, sufficient advance on his vacation accrual to cover the uncovered balance. This advance will be recovered with the next vacation accruals earned by Employee. Time off of work under this provision shall not be deemed a layoff. Retirement System. 1. The retirement program provided by City shall consist of a pooled Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) plan which includes the following provisions: Section 20042 - One Year Final Compensation Section 20965 - Credit of Unused Sick Leave Section 21024 - Military Service Credit 2. Retirement Plan. Employee is required to participate in City's California Public Employees' Retirement System (CaIPERS) retirement program and to make an employee contribution toward the program in the amount of 7% of his compensation earnable. City will pay, on behalf of Employee, a portion of the required employee contribution to CalPERS, as follows. City shall pay the following amounts toward the Employee's CalPERS required contribution of 7% of his compensation earnable: a. a. Effective first pay period on or following July 1, 2014: 1 % (Employee pays 6%). b. b. Effective first pay period on or following July 1, 2015: nothing (Employee pays 7%). 3. City shall include Employee in CalPERS Section 21354 - 2% @ 55 for miscellaneous members. J. Seniority Bonus. Employee shall receive a 5% increase in base salary effective on the tenth anniversary of his uninterrupted employment with City. 11it Employee shall receive a monthly mobile phone allowance of $75 in accordance with City Policy 200-19. F-01 L. Administrative Leave. Employee shall receive 48 hours of administrative leave each fiscal year. Administrative leave days may not be carried forward to succeeding years nor may they be turned in for cash value. I - -. City shall contribute the equivalent to 3.5% of base salary per payroll period into a deferred compensation program for Employee. Employee may participate in City's Catastrophic Leave Pool Program subject to the following conditions: 1. Catastrophic Leave will be available only to Employee if Employee has exhausted his own paid leave through bona fide serious illness or accident. 2. Employee cannot receive catastrophic leave at the same time he receives Long-Term Disability payments. 3. Employee must have 40 hours • paid leave available after making a donation to the pool. 4. Sick Leave cannot be used for this program. 5. In order to donate, Employee must sign an authorization, including specifying the specific employee to be the recipient of the donation. 6. Donations will be subject to applicable tax laws. 7. The availability of Catastrophic Leave shall not delay or prevent City from taking action to medically separate or disability retire Employee. 8. Catastrophic Leave due to illness or injury of an immediate family member may require medical justification as evidenced by a Physician's Statement that the presence of the Employee is necessary. 9. Catastrophic Leave due to the illness or injury of the Employee will require medical justification as evidenced by a Physician's Statement as to Employee's condition. 10. Employee must maintain the confidentiality of a donation. 6. ANNUAL EVALUATIONS AND SALARY REVIEW. On or before June 30, 2015, and every June 30 thereafter, the City Manager may conduct an evaluation of Employee's performance. During that evaluation, the City Manager and Employee shall 91 mutually establish performance goals and objectives to be met by Employee during the following year. In addition, the City Manager shall review Employee's salary and benefits as part of the evaluation process and may do so at any other time. 7. INDEMNIFICATION. Except as otherwise permitted, provided, limited or required by law, including without limitation California Government Code Sections 825, 995, and 995.2 through 995.8, City will defend and pay any costs and judgments assessed against Employee arising out of an act or omission by Employee occurring in the course and scope of Employee's performance of his duties under this Agreement. 8. OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT. The City Manager may from time to time fix other terms and conditions of employment relating to the performance of Employee provided such terms and conditions are not inconsistent with or in conflict with the provision of this Agreement or other applicable law. A. Termination by City without Cause. Employee is employed at the pleasure of the City Manager, and is thus an at-will employee. The City Manager may terminate this Agreement and the employment relationship at any time without cause. Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with the right of City to terminate the employment of Employee. City shall pay Employee for all services through the effective date of termination. In addition, Employee shall receive severance to the extent provided in Section 10 and shall receive no other compensation or payment. B. Termination by City with Cause. City may terminate this Agreement and Employee's employment with City if: 1. Employee refuses or fails to perform the powers and duties of Employee as specified in Sections 2 and 3 of this Agreement or Municipal Code; 2. Employee has engaged in: corrupt or willful misconduct in office, any illegal act involving personal gain or willful malfeasance constituting grounds for removal from office due to an indictment of the grand jury; any act of dishonesty; actions that have or may have a substantial and adverse effect on City's interest; or is convicted of any felony or any misdemeanor involving moral turpitude. In no event shall a minor traffic offense or moving violation be considered a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude. In the event Employee is under investigation for any of the foregoing reasons, City may withhold part or all of any severance payment, until it is determined if charges will be filed, and if charges are filed, until final judgment is rendered. If charges are not filed, or if Employee is found innocent, City shall pay any severance to which Employee is entitled; or 3. Employee breaches this Agreement, including, without limitation, any provision set forth in Section 2, "Duties and Authority," of this Agreement. 5Us C. Employee Initiated Termination. Employee may terminate this Agreement by providing City 90 days' prior written notice. 10. SEVERANCE. A. If City terminates this Agreement (thereby terminating Employee's employment with City) without cause pursuant to Section 9.A, City shall: 1. Pay employee all vacation benefits earned, and 2. Pay Employee an amount equal to four times his then - monthly base salary; and B. Notwithstanding any other provision or the term of this Agreement, the maximum severance and health benefits that Employee may receive under this Agreement as a result of termination, shall not exceed the limitations provided in Government Code Sections 53260- 53264. C. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event Employee is convicted of a crime involving an abuse of office or position, Employee shall reimburse City for any paid leave or cash settlement (including separation benefits or severance, if applicable), to the extent and as provided by Government Code Sections 53243- 53243.4. 11. INTEGRATION OF AGREEMENT. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior oral and written agreements, understandings, commitments, and practices between the parties concerning Employee's employment. Each party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representations, inducements, promises or agreements, oral or written, have been made by any party, or anyone acting on behalf of any party, which is not embodied herein, and that no other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this Agreement shall be valid or binding on either party. 12. METHOD OF AMENDMENT. Amendments to this Agreement are effective only upon City Council and Employee written approval. 13. NOTICES. All notices pertaining to this Agreement shall be sent to: EMPLOYEE: Patrick Gallegos City of Seal Beach 211 - 8th Street Seal Beach, California 90740 CITY: City Clerk City of Seal Beach 211 - 8th Street Seal Beach, California 90740 SEE Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered, transmitted by facsimile, or when mailed, 48 hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service. 14. GENERAL PROVISIONS. A. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect. If any provision is held invalid or unenforceable with respect to particular circumstances, it shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect in all other circumstances. B. This Agreement shall be interpreted and construed pursuant to and in accordance with the City Charter, applicable laws of the State of California and all applicable City codes, ordinances and resolutions. Executed by the parties as of the date below at Seal Beach, California. ATTEST: Linda Devine, City Clerk Quinn M. Y'arrow, City Attorney 5V2 Employee Patrick Gallegos Date: T 12- 3 // RESOLUTION 7199 A RESOLUTION OF THE SEAL BEACH CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS WITH THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE/CITY TREASURER, CHIEF OF POLICE, AND MARINE SAFETY CHIEF THE CITY COUNCIL HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approves the Amendments specified herein to the existing Employment Agreements of various dates (the Employment Agreements") between the City and the following employees: 1. Assistant City Manager Patrick Gallegos 2. City Clerk Gloria Harper 3. Director of Finance/City Treasurer Kelly Telford 4. Director of Public Works Steve Myrter 5. Chief of Police Phil Gonshak 6. Marine Safety Chief Joe Bailey (collectively "the Employees") SECTION 2. The Employment Agreements are amended as follows, upon acceptance of this Resolution by each of the named employees: 1. Each of the Employees' individual base salaries shall be increased by 3.6% effective July 1, 2021. Each of the Employees shall be entitled to receive future annual increases, subject to approval by the City Council, tied to the increase in the applicable Consumer Price Index ("CPI") year over year and not less than 2% no more than 4% in any future year. 2. The Employees shall be eligible for tuition reimbursement for career -related college or graduate level degree programs under the program rules applicable to all other City employees. 3. Each of the Employees who is not provided a City vehicle for job duties shall receive a monthly automobile allowance of $350 to reimburse the employees' full cost of business use of personal automobiles. 4. Each of the Employees shall be entitled to 80 hours of administrative leave per year under the existing rules for such leave. SECTION 3. Each Employee's signature below shall signify acceptance and agreement of the foregoing amendments, and the City Manager is authorized to execute on behalf of the City. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Seal Beach City Council at a regular meeting held on this 27th day of September, 2021 by the following vote: AYES: Council Members: Kalmick, Massa-Lavitt, Moore, Sustarsic, Varipapa NOES: Council Members: None ABSENT: Council Members: None ABSTAIN: Council Members: None - Joe Kalmick, Mayor ATT T: D. Ha er Cit ClerkGloriaY APPROVED AS TO 0RM:',c.,& 1 Vb4 Stee'le, City Attorney STATE OF CALIFORNIA } COUNTY OF ORANGE } SS CITY OF SEAL BEACH } I, Gloria D. Harper, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is the original copy of Resolution 7199 on file in the office of the City Clerk, passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular meeti . g held on September 27, 2021. Gloria D. Harpe', City Clerk ACCEPTED AND AGREED: Employee City Manager 3JiII. Ingram