Culver City Observer -

2/18/22: Last evening I listened to a City commission zoom meeting, then tuned in 20 minutes late to the "Developer-hosted zoom meeting" regarding the large development proposed for Ocean Park and Lincoln.

The meeting was recorded and was scheduled to be made part of the City's public record for presentation to our Council. This was the developers' second attempt at a meeting. The first was sparsely attended and scheduled at the same time as a City Council Meeting.

There were just 4 images on the screen. The first two images were of two gentlemen who are the apparent project developers. Their names and company affiliations were not listed below their images, which is not a customary practice during zoom meetings.

There were images of two women directly below, both of whom remained unnamed, which is also not customary practice.

The number of participants listening was listed, but the names of participants and/or their images were not shown, even when each spoke. This too is unprofessional. A requirement of tuning in to last evening's meeting was to list one's full name and email address. I did so.

Within two minutes of tuning into the zoom call I noticed someone had posted eleven (11) comments in the chat column falsely attributed to my name. I then tried four times to post a note stating that someone was impersonating me and illegally using my name. I am aware of only one of the posts I submitted stating what was happening even appeared on the screen. It listed my phone and asked the hosts to call me to verify what was occurring. None of the hosts bothered to contact me during or after the meeting.

Then I raised my hand to speak and another person spoke, identifying himself by my name. Strangely, no images of speakers were shown during their allotted speaking time, The person who spoke stating he was John Alle, was not me.

Now I question the legitimacy of the entire meeting, the comments, chat section, and if the majority of other speaker participants were 'planted' by the developers and or meeting hosts.

In the future, no such meetings that are made part of the City record should be conducted in this fashion. All hosts and their company affiliation should be identified by name under their image for the entire duration of the zoom meeting.

I do not believe this zoom meeting recording should even be allowed to be submitted to the City as part of the record.

I believe this proposed development is the first large parcel to seek approval in Santa Monica under the new State Density Bonus laws. The means by which this development team is proceeding are flat out wrong.

I insist that it be noted and included in any submission of last evening's zoom recording, that I am completely against this development as currently submitted and reject its massive scale.

Sincerely, John Alle, Santa Monica property owner and local resident.