Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press for stronger enforcement as council pauses CSI security contract and staff advances dining-district approach
Summary
Long Beach residents criticized a proposed $350,000 annual contract extension for CSI Patrol Service and urged greater oversight; Council agreed to lay the contract over for further review while the city pursues a broader "Dining and Coastal Enjoyment District" of rules and a business-fee funding model to improve late-night enforcement in areas such as Belmont Shore.
Public comment and council debate over a proposed extension of a private security contract in Belmont Shore dominated the consent and later public-safety discussion.
During consent public comment, neighborhood residents described repeated late-night disturbances on 2nd Street: loud crowds, open containers, trash, fights, and alleged failures by private-security staff to intervene. "CSI is not impactful in its current role of approach," said Michelle Simon, urging the council not to "rubber stamp" a contract increase from $250,000 to $350,000 annually and warning an up-to-$1.75 million five-year extension would be a poor use of parking-meter revenue. Michael G. and other commenters characterized the vendor as insufficiently transparent and called for audits of incident reports and call logs.
Councilmembers acknowledged the public concerns. Councilmember Duggan, who had pulled item 12 for questions, moved to continue the item to the next meeting so staff could return with more information and to prevent a break in service the city manager said he would authorize an interim short extension. "We need to take a look at this and see if there is a better use of this money," Duggan said. The motion to carry over the item was approved.
City staff presented a broader public-safety memorandum and a proposed policy toolkit for nightlife corridors during a later hearing. Chief Wally Hebesch described citywide crime trends and targeted enforcement strategies; staff proposed a new Title 5 "Dining and Coastal Enjoyment District" tool that would allow the city to require standardized security, noise controls, camera-sharing for investigations, coordinated closing practices, and a modest business-license fee to fund enforcement in defined hotspots. Christopher Koontz (Community Development) said the district approach provides faster, citywide regulatory teeth than conditional-use permits and could include fees to pay for late-night code enforcement and policing support.
Residents pressed for stronger enforcement and more resident input into district design. Business representatives said they support safety but warned fees and extra permit layers could burden small operators. City staff said formal ordinance proposals would return in late summer after additional outreach and that enforcement and site-specific parking changes could begin sooner under existing authorities.
What happened: Council continued the CSI contract item for additional review and directed staff to pursue the nightlife-district policy work, with an emphasis on community engagement and draft rules to return later in the year.
