Save Our Seal Beach
Save Our Seal Beach

For Press Info please call Tim Bueler at 310-855-3460

 

VOLUNTEER               DONATE

 

Dear Supporters,

Our NO on Z signs are being stolen in many locations. The Seal Beach Police Department was contacted and an action plan was developed. If you have a sign stolen or you see someone stealing a sign, CONTACT Officer A. CABRERA (ID 193) at 562-799-4100 x1633.

Please contact him as soon as you know a sign has been stolen or you see someone stealing a sign.

 

Dear Supporters,

This is a reminder regarding where to position No on Z yard signs. We want to display on any private property that we have permission. In general, display yard signs where other campaigns are displaying signs.

Please do not put them on public property including the parkways (the two feet of grass closest to the street) or the medians.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Eldon Alexander

 

The Orange County Register on Seal Beach Measure Z:

"This measure would establish a 25-foot height limitation for residential buildings in Old Town Seal Beach. This is a brazen assault on property rights and an attempted regulatory taking that will reduce the value of properties and sap the city of creative designs by attempting to lock in the current look of the downtown area, regardless of its impact on individual rights. We recommend a no vote."
Orange County Register
Sunday, October 19, 2008

 

"A downzoning regulation like Measure Z can only further suppress real estate values in today's volatile market. Our data shows needless over-regulation and rules changes like Measure Z hurt local real estate. Buyers are wary of purchasing when they cannot rely on stability of property use, value, and return on their investment. We strongly recommend a ‘NO’ Vote on Measure Z.”
Pacific West Association of Realtors President Terry Robertson
Friday, October 17, 2008

 

 

Measure Z is NOT about high rises or becoming “Huntington Beach.” It does not affect EVERY lot in Old Town, but only a small number.

In fact Measure Z:

  • Affects fewer than 80 single family homes for which there is any economic incentive to ever build a 3rd story on the back half of the property.  

  • All other qualifying lots already are “grandfathered,” benefitting from income producing apartments worth more “as is” than 3 story homes.

  • Even those advocating Measure Z have admitted that probably no more than 30 3-story single family homes are ever likely to be built.  

  • 3rd stories are allowed ONLY over the garage area on qualifying lots. You probably have never noticed the mere 16 that exist in Old Town.

 

 

 

View TV commercial (0:30)

No on Z TV

 


P.O. Box 986 Seal Beach, CA 90740

PRESS RELEASE

October 31, 2008

Seal Beach, CA – In yet another astonishingly desperate maneuver to try to break the election momentum of the “NO ON Z” property rights defenders who are fiercely battling the City-brought downzoning ballot measure in the town of Seal Beach, Mayor Charles Antos called a extraordinary City Council meeting late Thursday – on inadequate public notice – seeking to initiate legal action against television ads being run by his opposition.

The attempt, clearly intended to intimidate and silence “NO ON Z” forces resisting the downzoning agenda of Measure Z’s residential height limitation, was initiated by Antos.  It was unclear Thursday night whether City Council in closed session directed the City Attorney to file litigation to try to force the “NO ON Z” sponsors, Antos’ political opponents of the Save Our Seal Beach Committee, to “cease and desist” their television advertising.  Under dispute is a two-second screen shot of the City of Seal Beach corporate seal, used iconically to identify the jurisdictional limits of the Measure’s electoral boundary, with the disclaimer “Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach, Inc” running beneath it.  Such use of the City seal by citizens is perfectly legal and protected under Gov. Code 34501.5 and Elec. Code 18304.

Property rights attacks like Measure Z are nationwide, and citizens are fighting back against government eminent domain abuse and regulatory takings. There is no hotter property rights battle in the country than the Measure Z downzoning vote placed before the small town of Seal Beach in traditionally conservative Orange County.  Opponents this weekend were hit with a classic SLAPP suit, and now the City itself is moving against them.  Clearly, this is a fight against a rabidly downzoning, special interests, crony-riddled City Hall that is not going quietly.

Save Our Seal Beach is successfully alerting voters to the perils of lowered property values and increased taxes that Measure Z will bring to all Seal Beach residents.  Defeat of the risky Initiative Measure “Z” is vital to protect already plummeting property values and preserve property rights.  SOSB for three years has fought to keep the zoning in place that has served Seal Beach well since 1975.  That existing zoning code has provided family-sized homes in Old Town, with a very few third-stories in the back half only of larger properties.  The present “Z” –type ban was soundly rejected by residents already in the mid-1990's and in 2006.

Mary Lewis of SOSB, said, "It is sad that such abuse under color of authority is once again being used by Antos and his cronies.  They have now pathetically resorted to a feckless litigation against us, in hopes of silencing our message and pushing forward their dangerous measure.  This is a transparent and belligerent attempt to use our own taxpayer money against us to stifle political free speech and intimidate those who have a more property-value wise, economically fair and family-friendly vision of our town’s future.  Antos’ antics will NOT dissuade or distract us from reaching Seal Beach voters with the need to Vote NO ON Z."

Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach • PO Box 986 • Seal Beach, CA 90740    www.SaveOurSealBeach.com

 


P.O. Box 986 Seal Beach, CA 90740

MEDIA ADVISORY

October 27, 2008

Seal Beach, CA – Property rights are under attack all over the nation, and citizens are fighting back against municipal governments’ eminent domain abuse and regulatory takings. There is no hotter property rights battle in the country than the Measure Z downzoning vote placed before this small beach town of Seal Beach in traditionally conservative Orange County.  As every important regional newspaper and local network affiliate has recently reported, this is a fight against a rabidly downzoning, special interested, crony-riddled City Hall that is not going quietly.

This weekend, in an attempt clearly intended to intimidate and silence “NO ON Z” forces resisting the downzoning agenda, a classic “SLAPP” lawsuit was filed against Save Our Seal Beach, Inc. (SOSB) and 24 of its individual supporters.  Since 1992, California protects citizens from such a “Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation” via Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16.

Save Our Seal Beach is successfully alerting voters to the perils of lowered property values and increased taxes that Measure Z will bring to all Seal Beach residents.  To protect plummeting property values and preserve property rights means defeating the risky Initiative Measure “Z” is critical.  SOSB has mobilized local residents and property owner opponents of Seal Beach City’s downzoning aggression for nearly three years. SOSB has fought to keep the zoning in place that has served Seal Beach well since 1975 and that has provided family-sized homes in Old Town.  The present downzoning measure was considered in the mid-1990's and in 2006 and was soundly rejected by residents each time.

Mary Lewis of Save Our Seal Beach, said "It is sad that Yes on Z fanatics have desperately resorted to suing our organization and our supporters, who are their neighbors and fellow residents of Seal Beach, to push their dangerous measure.  This is a transparent and belligerent attempt to stifle political free speech and intimidate those who have a more property-value wise, economically fair and family-friendly vision of our town’s future. The lawsuit is utterly without merit."

Save Our Seal Beach has been targeted because it has successfully organized local residents and property owners against City Hall and its entrenched “pull up the ladder” special interests for nearly three years. Since 2006, SOSB has managed through citizen referenda to halt three revisions of the city’s Zoning Code loaded with new restrictions and reductions of property use and value that favor a privileged few.  SOSB is battling City Hall now to defeat Measure Z, a new height limitation upon certain family-sized lots of the beachside Old Town district.

Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach • PO Box 986 • Seal Beach, CA 90740    www.SaveOurSealBeach.com

 

Save Our Seal Beach is a proud member of the California Alliance to Protect Private Property Rights

 

Featured news and opinion:

In Seal Beach, change versus charm on the ballot

"This is a reverse-growth agenda and it is economically harming the town," said Mary Lewis, who has worked for Ronald Reagan and is a professional issues advocate." [Read more]

Los Angeles Times
October 21, 2008

 

Foreclosure Outlook for the Gateway Cities Subregion

A report by the Southern California Association of Governments [this is a large pdf file and takes several minutes to load]

 

 

 

 

full text

map

argue in favor

argue against

OCTOBER 6, 2008

CONGRATULATIONS SEAL BEACH!

THIRD REFERENDUM CERTIFIED!
YOU’VE TOLD THEM AGAIN NO DOWNZONING
BUT CITY HALL STILL WANTS TO TAKE YOUR PROPERTY!

VOTE NO ON Z

 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2008

WAY TO GO SEAL BEACH – YOU DIDN’T LET THEM CHANGE OUR CITY!

THANK YOU FOR TELLING THEM “DON’T CHANGE THE CODE”!!!!

FAIRNESS MATTERS -- SHAME ON THE “I’VE GOT MINE” CROWD

Seal Beach is a town of great folks and good neighbors. Save Our Seal Beach deeply appreciates your trust and support. Together we will restore integrity in City Hall!

 



119 8th Street, Seal Beach, CA 90740
Phone: (562) 431-0950

 

September 10, 2008

9:30 AM

I, Mary Lewis, have been duly authorized by the Save Our Seal Beach Committee to submit to the City Clerk, City of Seal Beach, the following Committee-documented results of the Referendum Against Ordinance Number 1576:

Total pages of documentation submitted:  18,706
Total number of Referendum Petition pages:  18,705
Total number of new Voter Registration forms for registrations entered 09/10/08:  0
Total number of petition binders: 29
Total of estimated Petition signatures:  2,531

If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 562-234-5540.

Sincerely,                                                                                                
signature           signature
Mary P. Lewis                                    Eldon L. Alexander
President, Chairman of the Board       Member, Board of Directors
Save Our Seal Beach, Inc.                  Save Our Seal Beach, Inc.

 

Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach PO Box 986 Seal Beach, CA 90740 
www.SaveOurSealBeach.com

 



119 8th Street, Seal Beach, CA 90740
Phone: (562) 431-0950

 

September 10, 2008

I, Mary Lewis, have been duly authorized by the Save Our Seal Beach Committee to submit to the City Clerk, City of Seal Beach, the following Committee statement regarding our citizen’s Referendum Against Ordinance Number 1576:

We, the petitioners, object comprehensively to and seek relief against the contents, philosophy, intents and effects of Ordinance 1576, in their entirety.  Relevant to Ordinance 1576, this includes but is not limited to the entire Ordinance’s General Provisions, Base District Regulations, Overlay District Regulations, Regulations Applying in Some or All Districts, Land Use and Zoning Decisions, and Terms and Definitions.

We, the petitioners, object to and seek relief against the Ordinance’s instigation of new and novel Floor-to-Area-Ratios, daylight planes, landscaping, open space and green area requirements, increased parking and garage allocations, and effectual architectural review and design control of new construction by the City Planning Commission.

We object comprehensively to and seek relief against the facts that regarding intrinsic and constitutionally guaranteed rights of ownership and disposition of private property, Ordinance 1576 repudiates the City General Plan; it violates California governmental Codes, most egregiously by omitting provision of any Housing Element; it stealthily advances a small special interest’s “zero-growth” economic and zoning agenda against the repeated expressed will and the common good of the general City electorate; it financially persecutes a discrete, unprotected minority of private property owners with unjustified and disproportionate regulatory takings; it discriminates against younger and/or larger families, multi-generational living arrangements and those families attempting in-home elder care accommodations, racial and ethnic minorities who culturally favor extended family or multi-generational households; and economically punishes all other City property owners, especially businesses, with downzoning provisions affecting neighborhoods Citywide.

We object that no best practices of appropriate notification, public policy planning or stakeholder consensus were pursued on the public’s behalf.  Enactment of Ordinance 1576 has been attempted without the public’s informed advance knowledge or consent, and without substantive opportunity for their informed deliberation or democratic participation in critical public policy decisions with far-reaching economic and demographic implications.

 

Page 2

We object comprehensively and seek relief against the outrageous and unjustified extension of government power asserted in the publicly stated claim by the City Council, the Planning Commission, and City Staff that they could make any change they wished in zoning codes based on inherent police powers of local legislatures over land use.  This despite the fact that California and Seal Beach statutes governing land use show legislatures can make changes only when they can demonstrate evidence of code alteration necessary to preserve the health, safety, or general welfare of the community. Neither the City Council, the Planning Commission, nor City Staff have cited any reasons for code changes based on health, safety, or general welfare within the new Ordinance 1576.  Throughout the last three years of coercive attempts at unlawful zoning changes, even when citizens requested that the City provide data and health studies when light, air flow, privacy and “mold” were briefly cited by downzoning advocates, and even when an economic impact analysis of the residential and commercial code changes being sought by Staff and promoted by the Planning Commissioners were repeatedly requested by citizens and representatives of the Committee for public review, the City refused to provide such.

We object that when any mention of reasonable “investment back” expectations by homeowners and business owners was made during the truncated public hearings held regarding the massive 624 page Ordinance 1576, those concerns were utterly disregarded, ignored in the same dismissive fashion by City Council and City functionaries that virtually all concerns by private property owners attempting to participate in the earlier, sham “study session” process were – by being pejoratively labeled and publicly derided as the  concerns of “developers” motivated by only “greed” and “profit” (and now “obscene profits”) without any legitimate policy issues to raise regarding the City’s agenda of regulatory takings or the legal and procedural irregularities the City has perpetrated in that process.

We object that while those Seal Beach citizens and property owners concerned over respect for property rights were routinely dismissed from the policy process and their recommendations generally ignored, the City Council and Planning Commission accepted specious arguments from a special interest minority of residents that wished to raise the alleged “blocking of sea breeze and sunlight” by any new construction to the level of nuisances – even though California courts have refused to allow air, light and view to be considered nuisances leading to extended use of police powers by local governments.

We object that the City Council and Planning Commission fecklessly and groundlessly claimed they were representing the majority of Seal Beach residents in passing Ordinance 1576, ignoring the only recent data on these issues:  Citywide Referendum signature gathering of 3,422 and 3,600 voter signatures in earlier 2008 and 2006 Referenda against Ordinance 1569 and Ordinance 1553, plus the election returns of Proposition 90 of 2006 that considered the definition of regulatory takings as it exactly applies to the situation of

 

Page 3

downzoning within zoning codes. The Statement of Votes for Proposition 90 shows it passed overwhelming in each of the five Council Districts of Seal Beach. 

However, Mayor Antos has repeatedly refused to be guided by the sense of the full community in seriously considering these results, and has continued to falsely assert that in downzoning, he is acting in the will of the majority.

We object that Mayor Charles Antos has publicly admitted that reducing the residential home height limit from 35 feet to 25 feet would only affect a small number of properties, smaller by an approximate factor of 10 than the affected property number publicly disseminated by the City. However, he is determined at any cost that a discriminated-upon minority should bear the burden of his stated objective to “preserve the quaint character” of the whole community by downzoning, even if unsupportable in law and justice.

FURTHER:  We the petitioners, object comprehensively to and seek relief against irregular and extraordinary City Council votes and manipulation of legislative procedures attendant to both the City Council’s prior passage and temporary rescission of Ordinance 1569 and its passage of subsequent Ordinance 1576, which violations of the public trust compelled the pursuit of this Referendum against Ordinance 1576.  Such conduct affords every appearance of personal advancement, political pay-offs and an obvious illicit procedural ploy to preempt and thereby obviate the validity of the citizens’ right to the Referendum process.  Mayor Antos directed City Staff to bring forward various odious elements of Ordinance 1569 piecemeal “as soon as possible” immediately upon passage of the Council’s “temporary recission.”  Such conduct violates every norm of decent and fair democratic process; and such conduct fails to protect the good name and sense of community of the City of Seal Beach, and disgraces and scandalizes the obligations of stewardship entrusted to the City Council by the citizens.

As is well known, the Brown Act (Government Code §§ 54950-54962) governs meeting access and procedures for local public bodies.  It states that meetings of public bodies must be "open and public," actions may not be secret, and action taken in violation of open meetings laws may be voided (§§ 54953(a), 54953(c), 54960.1(d)).  Serial meetings or individual meetings amongst City Council on issues that should be discussed in open meetings are likewise prohibited. 

This prohibition applies substantively to the initial passage of Ordinance 1569.  The Committee believes that Seal Beach Mayor Charles Antos, City Councilman District 1, has clearly and repeatedly conspired to violate the Brown Act in establishing a chain quorum within the Seal Beach City Council.   Recent passage of Ordinance 1569 would not have been possible to effect in the irregular manner of City Council actions without Mr. Antos manipulating the appointments and votes of two newly appointed City Council members Gary Miller and David Sloan – possibly with the illicit collusion of District 3 Councilman Gordon Shanks.


Page 4

On June 26, 2006, following abuse of their Moratorium power and much public rancor, the Seal Beach City Council voted to approve a ban on 3 story homes in Seal Beach under Ordinance 1553.  This set an immense public debate in motion that, after the collection of over 3600 voter signatures sent to the Orange County Registrar of Voters, set the Ordinance on track for a public Referendum.  Faced with the public outcry, the Seal Beach City Council ultimately revoked Ordinance 1553 to ban third stories, and sent the issue to the Planning Commission for study with citizen input.

For more than the next 14 months, interested citizens of Seal Beach and the Planning Commission worked on a zoning amendment package that was reputed to contain a compromise of residential structure size and height.  Although these “study sessions” directed by City Staff cavalierly dismissed virtually all concerns and compromise positions put forth by the Committee’s representatives, still, in the end, the citizens and Planning Commission of Seal Beach rejected Mr. Antos’ outright third story ban in the resulting recommendations and draft zoning amendment.  Even in proposed Citywide residential downzoning, larger lots in District 1 were left with the option to build a reduced-sized third floor.

Mr. Antos, desperate to enforce his ban on 3 story structures, then to all public presumption, acted to establish an illegal chain quorum, with the specific intent to conceal from the general public the citizen zoning negotiation outcomes, and override the Planning Commission’s recommendations, even though he is clearly aware of the public’s right to know about and participate in such matters – and of the public’s right to be notified in advance of actions being contemplated or taken by the City Council.  To all appearances, he could only have effected the vote outcome on Ordinance 1569 banning third stories and drastically downzoning homes in every District of Seal Beach by privately lobbying two new City Council members who were not publicly elected but are merely recent temporary Council appointees – Mr. David Sloan and Mr. Gary Miller.

On Monday February 11, 2008, the City Council picked David Sloan to fill a vacancy in one of the Council Districts.  "He seemed to be well up on issues and well rounded," said Mayor Charles Antos, during a vote for appointment by the Council. "He's my number one choice."  Yet banning 3 stories or overriding the Planning Commission’s hard-gained recommendations was not publicly discussed.  This is evidence that Mr. Antos had private conversations with Mr. Sloan about the complex zoning issues.  He demonstrated prior conviction that Mr. Sloan would vote for such a ban not recommended by the Planning Commission, and may well have offered his vote for Mr. Sloan’s appointment in exchange for Sloan’s support of Antos’ ban, as well as other political favors.

Later, on April 14, 2008 the new Council member, David Sloan, and yet another new Councilman appointee, Gary A. Miller, voted on the issue when they had not been involved or present in the long-term zoning debate or any public sessions.  Miller had just been sworn in as a Council member the very night the City Council vote was taken for

Page 5

the new Ordinance 1569 – and therefore under the Brown Act, Miller should have recused himself from active participation or any vote on these matters.  The 3 story ban was suddenly introduced against the Planning Commission’s recommendation in a late-night surprise move, with no public notification.

These new Councilmen and Councilman Shanks voted on this complex 600 page Ordinance 1569 with Mr. Antos’ sudden midnight revisions including the 3 story ban, without any visible surprise, comment or question, following Antos’ lead.  Indeed, Mr. Sloan offered his exuberant second to the motion before Mr. Shanks had even finished his motion.

The debate that had taken countless hours during the prior two years was settled contrary to public consensus with nary a word from these newly appointed City Councilmen, and without any prior public notification that an outright ban of 3 story structures was again to become “in play” in the zoning code Ordinance 1569.  This is not just negligence or incompetence; this is direct evidence of a Brown Act violation choreographed by Mr. Antos.   He did it with the intent to create a secret concurrence through a chain quorum amongst the Council for his pet issue – the 3 story ban.

On Monday, April 21, in a meeting called only one week later, and still NO public notification of the change in code enacting new height limitations on residential properties, a change not recommended by the Planning Commission, the “new” City Council voted 4-1 to approve the zoning amendment with the added 3 story ban.  Mr. Miller, Mr. Antos, Mr. Shanks and Mr. David W. Sloan voted in favor.  Mr. Michael Levitt, voting alone against the measure declared that, “Doing this is wrong.”

We, the petitioners, therefore comprehensively object and seek relief against all apparent abuse of the democratic process, violations in spirit and letter of the Brown Act, and all other failures of protection of the rights of responsible self-government by the City of Seal Beach on behalf of the citizens thereof in the enactment of Ordinance 1576 and all prior and subsequent City Council actions pertaining thereto.

Sincerely,

signature           signature
Mary P. Lewis                                    Eldon L. Alexander
President, Chairman of the Board       Member, Board of Directors
Save Our Seal Beach, Inc.                  Save Our Seal Beach, Inc.

 

Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach PO Box 986 Seal Beach, CA 90740 
www.SaveOurSealBeach.com

 

AUGUST 23, 2008

THEY HAVE DONE IT AGAIN!

HELP US STOP ILLEGAL DOWNZONING
ONCE AND FOR ALL!
SIGN THE NEW REFERENDUM
AGAINST ORD. 1576!

cartoon
The Seal Beach City Council did it yet again! They passed an ILLEGAL Downzoning Ordinance taking property value and use from our small businesses and homeowners. When will they ever STOP?

STOP THE SEAL BEACH
CITY COUNCIL
WRECKING CREW

Sign the REFERENDUM
To Kill This Ordinance

Protect Your Property — Join the Fight
Go to www.SaveOurSealBeach.com

Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach, PO Box 986, Seal Beach, CA 90740

 

 



P.O. Box 986 Seal Beach, CA 90740

Dear Seal Beach Residents,

As much as we regret having to bring yet another referendum and signature gathering process to you again, the corruption of Seal Beach City Hall leaves us no choice.

The lying, unlawful, unethical conduct of Councilmen Charles Antos, Gordon Shanks, Gary Miller and David Sloan, along with Planning Director Lee Whittenberg and City Attorney Quinn Barrow, forces us once again to bring petitions before you to defeat their eminent domain abuses. They have passed another downzoning ordinance that illegally and unfairly reduces the value and use of private property in Seal Beach.

After residents loudly rejected downzoning Ordinance 1569 in April of this year, the City Council passed an urgency rescission of that law – but after only a few months, they now are slyly pursuing a divide and conquer strategy to bring back most of it by moving to first aggressively downzone our small businesses, and then come back to downzone our residential properties.

This new Ordinance 1576 targets businesses with unneeded limitations that reduce use and value of the property, diminish functional square footage, and restrict design options.  These downzoning measures on commercial property will be later applied to residential property.

If you take an hour to look around your neighborhood at the remodeled homes, just ask yourself what is wrong with what your neighbors have done. You will find that you like about 95% of what has occurred.  Some features you may not have liked at the time they were built, but now you are used to them, and they do not seem as objectionable as they did when the “look” near you first changed (this is particularly true as colors fade and landscaping matures).

Now, City Hall wants government to step in and put regulatory limits on what residents can do or force you to design your home the way they think a street should look.  Setback increases here, second story stepped back further there, you must reconfigure your garages if you want additional bedrooms, you must move your garages around so the doors do not face the street.

 These reductions and intrusions and more are in the new downzoning Ordinance 1576, yet the City Council still has given no reasons as required by state law for making these zoning changes.  They have violated California Government Code §65000 et seq by acting without a complete City Plan with a consistent Housing Element. They know their actions are unlawful, but they are determined to shrink the rights, prosperity and freedom of Seal Beach residents.

Why should we let City Hall limit future commercial and residential improvements, and set harsher restrictions than those of the last 30 years, throughout our neighborhoods? Why should we let them reduce the use and value of our property by 5-14% with Ordinance 1576, and 16-45% with the next downsizing ordinance they have said they will bring in the near future?

Ordinance 1576 mostly downzones our business properties by 30-47% with Floor Area Ratios (FAR) and daylight planes, but they have said they will impose these restrictions AGAIN soon on residences. Letting Ordinance 1576 pass on our small businesses only encourages them to come back with still greater downzoning restrictions on the residential portions of our town. Sign the Referendum Petition to defeat Ordinance 1576. Stop the Incredible Shrinking of Seal Beach.


Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach • PO Box 986 • Seal Beach, CA 90740    www.SaveOurSealBeach.com


THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING
SEAL BEACH

                  

                    1973                                               1985                             1995                   2006
                   Downzoning                                  Downzoning               Downzonin        Downzoning

The City Council is downsizing Seal Beach with an illegal ordinance once again and this time they are targeting reductions on our struggling small businesses. Their piecemeal downzoning hits merchants hardest — but downsizing will come back to hit your residential property soon.

And once again they have given no reasons, even when resident after resident has asked them to explain WHY. California state law requires they act only to protect public health, safety and welfare. Still no answers. You must not let them SHRINK the economy, prosperity and rights of Seal Beachers. Sign the referendum petition to STOP their illegal eminent domain abuse!

REDUCTIONS

   LAST TIME                  THIS TIME

    30-47% on Businesses             30-47% on Businesses

   16% The Hill, CPE, CPW            5-8% The Hill, CPE, CPW

    30-45% Old Town                      9-14% Old Town

     
Don’t be fooled! This will affect YOU! The City Council has ALREADY asked the planning staff to bring back Floor Area Ratios and daylight planes (additional downsizing measures) on residential property next. Sign this referendum and tell them once and for all we want absolutely NO DOWNZONING in Seal Beach.

STOP THE INCREDIBLE SHRINKING

SEAL BEACH


Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach PO Box 986 Seal Beach, CA 90740  www.SaveOurSealBeach.com



P.O. Box 986 Seal Beach, CA 90740

Dear Seal Beach Resident,

As a courtesy to Seal Beach voters Save Our Seal Beach would like to inform you of the political campaigns coming over the next several months. Because of the failure of good government at City Hall, several types of reform action are now imperative. Below are a brief description, which district(s) the campaign affects, and the date of the election (or range of dates). The City Clerk, Linda Devine, acts as the official election officer for Seal Beach and she can be contacted about any of this information at 562-431-2527 x1305 or ldevine@ci.seal-beach.ca.us.

Referendum on Ordinance 1576 Citywide – The City Council passed Ordinance 1576 on Monday, August 11, 2008. This is another downzoning ordinance. Signature gathering will be conducted between August 12 and September 10. The City Council can rescind this zoning code again and there would not be an election. If an election is held, it will be February – March  2009.

Measure Z – Citywide – This is an initiative brought forth by the City Council that changes the existing zoning code to limit the height of building development in Old Town to 25 feet. For many decades, property owners in Old Town with a lot and a half or greater, can build to 35 feet on the back half of the lot. This is the 3-story/2-story issue. The election will be on November 4, 2008.

District 2 Election of Councilperson – This office is a four year term and the election is conducted during the presidential election year. The election will be on November 4, 2008.

District 4 Election of Councilperson – This office is a four year term and the election is conducted during the presidential election year. The election will be on November 4, 2008.

City Clerk – Citywide – This office is a four year term and the election is conducted during the presidential election year. The election will be on November 4, 2008.

Recall Antos – District 1 – The Petition to Recall Charles Antos, councilman in District 1, has been approved. Signature gathering will be conducted between August 20 and October 16. An election will be held in February, March, or April of 2009.

Recall Shanks – District 3 – The Intention to Recall Gordon Shanks, councilman in District 3, will be served soon. There are too many variables to determine when the election for this recall will be conducted, but it is estimated that it would be March, April or May of 2009.

Paid for by Save Our Seal Beach • PO Box 986 • Seal Beach, CA 90740    www.SaveOurSealBeach.com

 

  JULY 21, 2008

  Letter to Linda Devine (City Clerk) re:
   Freedom of Information Act:

 

  JULY 19, 2008

  See the NOTICE OF INTENTION TO CIRCULATE
   RECALL PETITION at RecallAntos.com

 

  For less recent posts from our home page, please see our archive page.


Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '<' in /home4/alan8112/public_html/sealbeach/t_foot.php on line 1