2025-12-02 CC Agenda - Public Communications related to Item D11 - Candy Cane LaneOutlook
................. � �' M 2 C AGENDA mwmw. .m.......
M:IACIK T
PM_)BLM C COMMC'WATMON I M :M.A FED "TO VTBW DI I ... CANDY CANE M.....AM' E
Request to Restrict Commercial Sales from Residential Homes and Outside Vendors During Candy
Cane Lane Holiday Tradition
From Robert Turnbull <rturnbu11361 @me.com>
Date Tue 11/4/2025 2:51 PM
To *ALL CITY COUNCIL <allcouncil@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>
Cc ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS <ALLELECTEDOFFICIALS@elsegundo.org>
Dear Mayor Pimentel, Members of the El Segundo City Council and Recreation, Parks and Library
Director Aly Mancini,
We are writing as long-time El Segundo residents and supporters of our cherished Candy Cane Lane
holiday tradition. This annual event has long been a symbol of community pride, generosity, and
neighborly collaboration — values that make El Segundo such a special place to live.
Over the past several years, however, there has been a significant increase in commercial sales and
vending activities occurring on Candy Cane Lane and the surrounding neighborhood during the
holiday season. These include sales conducted from multiple private residences as well as operations
by outside vendors who are not residents of the area. While we appreciate the enthusiasm this event
generates, such activities have begun to alter the character of the tradition and raise legitimate
concerns regarding:
• Health and public safety, including pedestrian and traffic congestion from additional foot and
vehicular traffic and vehicle access for emergency services.
• Neighborhood disruption due to vendor setups, noise, and the large amount of litter dropped on
the sidewalks and streets that the presence of trash cans does not resolve.
• Zoning and permitting compliance, as residential areas are not intended for commercial use or
commercial profit.
• Liability and regulatory issues associated with unpermitted sales that goes unenforceable by the
City, County or State.
• Erosion of the community -centered nature of Candy Cane Lane, shifting the focus from
celebration to commerce.
To preserve the integrity and original intent of this beloved tradition, we respectfully request that the
City Council consider adopting clear restrictions on all commercial sales and outside vending
occurring on Candy Cane Lane and the surrounding neighborhood during the event period.
Specifically, I urge the Council to:
• Prohibit commercial sales of any kind from residential homes or properties within the designated
Candy Cane Lane area.
• Restrict outside vendors from setting up or conducting sales in adjacent public spaces or rights -
of -way during the event.
• Enhance enforcement of existing zoning, permitting, and business license regulations during the
holiday season.
Candy Cane Lane has always been about community — neighbors coming together to spread joy,
creativity, and holiday spirit. By taking these steps, the city can help ensure that this treasured El
Segundo tradition remains safe, family -oriented, and true to its roots.
For those that want the opportunity to raise money, there are numerous other City sanctioned,
Chamber sponsored, or service club sponsored special events throughout the year that El Segundo
residents with or without 501 c3's or business licenses can legitimately sign up for to enhance their
cause. Candy Cane Lane is not the one to commercialize.
Thank you for your time, consideration, and continued commitment to preserving the character and
quality of life in our community.
Jenn & Bob Turnbull
1200 Block of East Acacia Ave
Fw: Street vendors
From Jennings, Mishia <MJennings@elsegundo.org>
Date Wed 11/5/2025 8:36 AM
To Truax, Susan (City Clerk) <struax@elsegundo.org>; Sandoval, Lili <Iandoval@elsegundo.org>
This should have been sent to you,
Mishia Jennings I Executive Assistant- City Council
City of El Segundo
350 Main Street El Segundo CA 90245
310.524.2302 1 mjenningsL@elsegundo.org I www.elsegundo.org
E L S E G U'N D
From: Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 4, 2025 3:34 PM
To: Jennings, Mishia <MJennings@elsegundo.org>
Cc: George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>
Subject: Fw: Street vendors
For Council
From: Margie Underwood <margiecunderwood@icloud.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 4, 2025 1:43 PM
To: Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>
Subject: Street vendors
Dear Ms Mancini,
My name is Margie Underwood and I am a resident of ES who lives on East Sycamore. It has been
brought to my attention that Candy Cane Lane may possibly have street vendors selling their products
during the holiday season. I'm opposed to any kind of retail sales on an already over crowded
neighborhood. I appreciate the temporary garbage cans and portable toilets provided for the crowds
and the shuttle service is an added bonus for the residents on the west side. Unfortunately, all of these
are at Sycamore Park and additional people on the sidewalks and streets who want to sell items impacts
several blocks. We have had our property damaged with urine filled water bottles lawn decorations taken
or damaged, and vandalism to our cars parked in our driveway. Please consider those of us adjacent to
Candy Cane Lane that we are negatively impacted and controlling the pedestrian traffic is the most
critical factor against all the cars trying to drive and find parking. Please consider the entire East side in
your decisions.
Thank you for your understanding regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Margie Underwood
Sent from my iPhone
S Outlook
Fw: CANDY CANE LANE
From Jennings, Mishia <MJennings@elsegundo.org>
Date Wed 11 /5/2025 8:37 AM
To Truax, Susan (City Clerk) <struax@elsegundo.org>; Sandoval, Lili <Iandoval@elsegundo.org>
Here's another.
Mishia Jennings I Executive Assistant- City Council
City of El Segundo
350 Main Street El Segundo CA 90245
310.524.2302 1 mjenningsL@elsegundo.org I www.elsegundo.org
EL,SEGU , N DO`
Im"I 0 @ r] 0
From: Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 4, 2025 3:33 PM
To: Jennings, Mishia <MJennings@elsegundo.org>
Cc: George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>
Subject: Fw: CANDY CANE LANE
For Council.
From: Debra Mitchell <buzzoff3@pacbell.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 4, 2025 3:20 PM
To: Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>
Subject: CANDY CANE LANE
Good Afternoon,
We have proudly lived on Candy Cane Lane since 1995...
It has become a real nightmare the last few years with the arrival of larger crowds, parking issues,
rudeness, dogs and let's not forget the VENDORS and MERCHANTS both on the street "&" now on
private property. What used to be a joyful event on our street has now been overshadowed by this extra
layer of money and greed. Candy Cane Lane started as a fun local event but it has evolved into chaos,
thanks to the Internet. While I'm not opposed to visitors from outside of the area, I do object to all the
vendors that come to sell their wares. Now we have residents selling hot chocolate, popcorn and
tamales. What a mess both on and off our street. I wake up to litter EVERY MORNING in my yard, hot
chocolate on the sidewalk and overall trash!
This is not a county fair! I strongly urge the city to ban all vendors and merchants from Candy Cane
Lane... If Torrance can do it so can El Segundo!
Sincerely,
Debra & William Mitchell
1212 E. Acacia Avenue
El Segundo. 90245
Sent from my Pad
Outlook
Request for Fair and Transparent Resolution Regarding Holiday Cocoa Stand
From Jen McCullough <jennifermccullough04@gmail.com>
Date Tue 11/11/2025 3:50 PM
To ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS <ALLELECTEDOFFICIALS@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>;
Palmer, Linnea <Ipalmer@elsegundo.org>
Cc mayberrychristmas.isla@gmail.com <mayberrychristmas.isla@gmail.com>;
mayberrychristmas.caden@gmail.com <mayberrychristmas.caden@gmail.com>;
mayberrychristmas.shannon@gmail.com <mayberrychristmas.shannon@gmail.com>;
mayberrychristmas.jen@gmail.com <mayberrychristmasjen@gmail.com>
Dear Members of the El Segundo City Council and Parks & Recreation Department,
I am writing to request fairness and clarity regarding the recent handling of our holiday cocoa
stand on East Acacia Avenue. We want to ensure that decisions affecting Candy Cane Lane
are made transparently, equitably, and in a way that represents all voices.
We have concerns about the ongoing dialog through Parks and Rec. A previously scheduled
meeting with Aly to discuss this matter was canceled, leaving us without an opportunity to
communicate, collaborate, or provide context for a continuation of our cocoa
stand. Instead, we were asked to attend a public meeting about the matter at 1pm on a
weekday. The attendees were skewed toward elderly individuals who want to do away
with Candy Cane Lane as a whole and one or two disgruntled neighbors who don't like our
cocoa stand tradition. An informal vote was taken without considering the lack of attendance
from parents and residents supportive of our position — these are people who would like to see
our cocoa stand continue but have jobs that make it difficult to attend a 1pm weekday
meeting on short notice.
Regarding the concerns raised by those who oppose our cocoa stand, we appreciate them not
wanting to over commercializing an event that is supposed to provide free enjoyment to
families. But we also believe in a balance, where residents — not outside vendors —
can enhance visitors' experience by offering food and drinks, especially when those residents
are teens learning about entrepreneurship and social enterprise. Surely there is a way to find a
pragmatic balance here, especially when multiple Yelp reviews about Candy
Cane Lane confirm that visitors enjoy our cocoa and popcorn as part of their experience.
Furthermore, we also believe there are pragmatic solutions to the concerns raised about
trash and neighborhood impact. The teens who run our cocoa stand would be more than
happy to do street sweeps to pick up trash at the end of each night and during if need
be. Additionally, we can modify the location of our stand to alleviate long lines. We'd be
happy to discuss these mitigations, but the conversation has been overly focused on the
problem without collaborating on solutions.
The cocoa stand represents more than a neighborhood dispute to us. It is
a tradition that represents hardworking teens and families giving back to our community,
fostering holiday spirit and creating memories for neighbors and children.
We respectfully request that our cocoa stand be allowed to continue for this year and put in to
the proposed plan for the event. We stand ready to collaborate on solutions that alleviate the
concerns of a few neighbors while allowing our children to continue a tradition that is
uniquely theirs.
We believe in El Segundo, in our community values, and in our ability to work
together. Thank you for your time and attention, and we look forward to working
collaboratively toward a fair resolution.
Sincerely,
Jen McCullough and A Mayberry Christmas owners
,, Outlook
Letter To The City Council re: Candy Cane Lane Street Closure
From Dan Obegi <dan.obegi@gmail.com>
Date Wed 11/26/202S 4:09 PM
To *ALL CITY CLERKS <ALLCITYCLERKS@elsegundo.org>
Dear City Clerks,
I spoke with the City Attorney on Monday and he told me that I can send a letter to all City
Council members by sending it to you. Please forward the message below to all City Council
members and the City Attorney.
Thanks,
Dan
Dan Obegi & Emily Malito
1107 East Acacia Ave
El Segundo, CA 90245
an.Ob eg,i gmail.com
310-383-2913
November 25, 2025
El Segundo City Council & City Attorney
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
Re: Objection to December Street Closure During Candy Cane Lane Event
Dear City Council Members and City Attorney:
We write to express our objection to, and serious legal concerns regarding the City's plan to
prohibit all resident vehicular access to our street from 4:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. for two weeks in
December in connection with the City -sponsored Candy Cane Lane event. We respectfully
request that the City reconsider the necessity, scope, timing, execution, and legality of the
proposed closures.
Earlier this week, I spoke with the City Attorney who indicated that certain statutes authorize
temporary street closures for public safety, but he could not identify the specific provisions being
relied upon. At the Parks & Recreation meeting, a staff member stated that the policy change
was prompted by "an incident" last year, but no details were provided. When asked, the City
Attorney declined to describe the incident or the additional bases for the change beyond the
generalized reference to "public safety." We have not been informed of any formal discussion of
the matter by the City Council, nor of any alternative options evaluated and rejected.
Because no statutory authority, factual justification, or procedural foundation has been
disclosed, we are left to guess at the City's reasoning for adopting an unusually restrictive and
disproportionate policy with deficient notice and in apparent violation of the procedural
requirements governing such actions.
I. Legal Justification
The City Attorney was unable to cite any laws that were being used to justify the street closure
so we can't respond to the specific code. Generally, the implementation of road closures
requires:
1. Necessity -a defined public safety issue that can't be resolved without the specific
intervention
2. A resolution and/or ordinance
3. Formal analysis of alternative solutions
4. Formal analysis of the impact on residents and for emergency access
5. A solution that's the least restrictive of all viable options
6. A solution where the costs (both financial and non -financial) are proportional to the
benefits
7. Reasonable public notice
8. Public discourse
As far as we can tell none of those requirements have been met.
2. Procedural Due Process and Adequate Notice
California law requires reasonable notice and an opportunity to be heard when City action
significantly restricts property access. While no fixed statutory notice period applies to all
special -event closures, municipal norms of 30 — 60 days are generally considered sufficient
procedural notice.
Some residents, including us, received no notice of the public discussion at the next City
Counsil meeting, and some learned of it through inconsistently distributed flyers and emails.
Assuming formal notice of the closure occurs at the next Council meeting, it will equate to 11
days' notice before a multi -week prime -time access restriction —far below what is customary
for significant impairment of access rights. This is not an emergency or newly planned event,
and as such limited notice is neither reasonable nor legally adequate.
3. California Constitutional Protections for Property Access
California courts recognize that property owners have a constitutionally protected right to
reasonable ingress and egress:
- Substantial impairment of access constitutes a compensable injury.
Government restrictions must be reasonable and proportionate.
A long -planned, recreational, City -promoted holiday event cannot justify repeated, significant
impairment of access without clear necessity and procedural compliance.
4. The Proposed Closure Is Not Narrowly Tailored to Any Stated Safety Need
Even assuming general "public safety" authority, the City must demonstrate that the chosen
restrictions are:
- Necessary
- Proportionate
• The least restrictive means of achieving the safety objective
Closing a residential street to its own residents for six hours per night over 12 consecutive
nights is far more restrictive than required for general pedestrian safety in the absence of any
known threat, and dramatically more burdensome than the measures used for all other City
events including the Main Street Holiday Parade, the Classic Car Show, the Halloween Frolic,
and local 10K races —all of which employ temporary, movable wood barriers with periodic
openings for local traffic.
If pedestrian safety alone justified closure without limits, the City would be compelled to close all
streets at all times, since eliminating vehicular traffic would eliminate all possible pedestrian -
vehicle collisions. Public -safety policy requires context, proportionality, and public engagement -
not just risk mitigation. None of these elements appear to have been satisfied.
The City has known for decades that Candy Cane Lane occurs every December. The lack of
timely notice and public discussion is therefore unjustifiable. Limited, inequitable
accommodations —such as directing some residents to park two blocks away on Imperial —are
neither reasonable nor feasible, especially for elderly residents, residents with small children, or
those whose garages have been repurposed in reliance on years of consistent, uninterrupted
access to street parking.
5. Reasonable Alternatives Exist
California municipalities consistently favor targeted solutions over broad prohibitions.
Reasonable, less -restrictive alternatives include:
1. Resident -only access passes with moveable barriers like in previous years
2. Shorter closure windows, limited to peak -traffic nights and hours
3. Traffic -control officers to manage resident traffic
4. Limiting the event to one week, or weekends
We previously proposed a practical alternative but received no response: position police
cruisers or large City utility vehicles at each entrance. These vehicles are already owned by the
City saving money, and are heavier than temporary barriers so they can prevent vehicular
intrusion. A police officer can temporarily move one vehicle as needed to allow local access like
in previous years. This solution would likely cost less than the stated $30,000 barrier
expenditure and maintains both safety and access.
The City has provided no explanation for rejecting this or any other alternative, nor has it
disclosed the reason why after 50 years, exponentially more restrictive policies need to be
adopted this year, or even what specific risk the proposed barriers are intended to mitigate and
why the city is all of a sudden so worried about that risk.
6. Summary
Our goal is not to obstruct the City's efforts to maintain a safe and enjoyable holiday tradition.
Last year was our first Candy Cane Lane as residents, and it was truly magical. We appreciate
the spirit and community the event creates.
However, the proposed policy change is unprecedented, inadequately supported, procedurally
deficient, and likely to cause substantial and unnecessary disruptions. It also has clear
implications for property values: eliminating vehicular access for two weeks will deter potential
buyers and diminish the desirability of homes on the 1100 and 1200 blocks of East Acacia. We
initially didn't buy a home on the 1100 block of East Acacia because we didn't want to deal with
the disruptions caused by the Candy Cane Lane event but later reconsidered, in part because
of the accommodations the city made for residents including opening the barriers to let
residents drive in and out and nightly cleaning. We have other neighbors who didn't buy on the
1200 block because of the street closures during December and bought on the 1100 block only
to have this block closed starting after they purchased. People already think twice about buying
on Candy Cane Lane and adding exponentially more inconvenient restrictions will further
decrease the universe of potential buyers. Less demand equals lower home values. Even a
modest 5% reduction in market value would equate to approximately $6 million in damages to
residents of the 1100 and 1200 blocks of East Acacia —wholly disproportionate to any
undisclosed or speculative public -safety concern.
7. Requests
We respectfully request that the City:
1. Identify the specific ordinances or resolutions authorizing the closure and confirm that all
procedural requirements have been satisfied.
2. Disclose what event happened last year that's partially responsible for the policy change
this year
3. Provide the factual findings supporting the necessity of a two -week, nightly closure.
4. Provide the factual findings supporting the proportionality of such a restriction.
5. Respond publicly to the alternatives proposed by residents, including the reasons for
rejecting them.
6. Refrain from implementing any policy that does not comply with legal and procedural
requirements.
7. Provide legally adequate notice and opportunity for discussion before adopting any policy
affecting resident access.
8. Explain how the resulting impact on property values is justified and why the City considers
that financial harm necessary.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns. We appreciate the City's willingness to work
collaboratively with residents to ensure that public events remain safe, enjoyable, and fully
compliant with California law.
Sincerely,
Dan Obegi & Emily Malito
* Outlook
Read into the record at the December 2, 2025 Council Meeting
From Peg Kehl <dpkehl@yahoo.com>
Date Wed 11/26/2025 4:29 PM
To Pimentel, Chris (Mayor) <cpimentel@elsegundo.org>; Baldino, Ryan (Mayor Pro Tem)
<rbaldino@elsegundo.org>; Boyles, Drew (Council Member) <dboyles@elsegundo.org>; Giroux, Lance
(Council Member) <Igiroux@elsegundo.org>; Keldorf, Michelle (Council Member) <mkeldorf@elsegundo.org>;
George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>; Truax, Susan (City Clerk)
<struax@elsegundo.org>
As long time residents of Candy Cane Lane, we would like to let you know that we love putting
in all the work to bring the joy we see on the people's faces who come to see our lights! In the
past it was a fun and exciting event but in the last several years it has become a "circus" with
the vendors and residential selling. It no longer feels like a wonderful Christmas event bringing
holiday cheer but a commercial enterprise where others are profiting off our hard work. Those
that are selling say they are teaching their kids business lessons and to be entrepreneurs. The
spilled hot chocolate, empty cups and popcorn really make a mess! Again we are not doing all
of this for their benefit, it is for the delight on all the faces we see pass our home! So no selling
is what we would like to see enforced.
Don & Peggy Kehl
1221 E Acacia Ave
Outlook
Candy Cane Lane concerns
From Phoebe Shinn <phoebepshinn@gmail.com>
Date Wed 11/26/2025 4:32 PM
To ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS <ALLELECTEDOFFICIALS@elsegundo.org>; Giroux, Lance (Council Member)
<Igiroux@elsegundo.org>
Dear elected officials of El Segundo,
I would like to tell you about our neighbor who has a handicapped parking space in front of their
house. They must have access to the front of their house to park their car. I won't share their concerns
as it is not my place to say, but suffice to say, their not having their car in front will be an enormous
safety issue.
We are planning to have dinner guests during those two weeks. Where are our guests supposed to
park?
We are expecting to have packages and food delivered --how will delivery drivers be able to do this
without parking in front of our house?
Preventing residents from parking in front of our houses is a big hardship. I can understand if it's only
for ONE night, like opening night, but not for 2 weeks. We did not agree to this when we moved into
the neighborhood. Those on ACTUAL Candy Cane Lane were aware when they moved in. It is not right
that you are preventing us from parking in front of our house between 4-10 when most of us get
home from work or school or activities. We are not even officially Candy Cane Lane. And then to add
insult to injury, to not even give the north side of Acacia Ave a parking permit on Imperial is even
more frustrating and disheartening.
We moved to El Segundo for the community, but unfortunaely, we are finding that there seems to be
little care from those who govern the city.
Sincerely,
Phoebe and Kris Shinn
Read into the record at December 2, 2025 Council Meeting regarding Candy Cane Lane
From Shelly Brunnenkant <dillimom@gmail.com>
Date Wed 11/26/2025 4:44 PM
To Baldino, Ryan (Mayor Pro Tem) <rbaldino@elsegundo.org>; Pimentel, Chris (Mayor)
<cpimentel@elsegundo.org>; Boyles, Drew (Council Member) <dboyles@elsegundo.org>; Giroux, Lance
(Council Member) <Igiroux@elsegundo.org>; Keldorf, Michelle (Council Member) <mkeldorf@elsegundo.org>;
George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>; Truax, Susan (City Clerk)
<struax@elsegundo.org>
I am a very long time resident of Candy Cane Lane and would like to voice my opinion on some of the
issues. We enjoy the event and the smiles it brings to so many. It used to be a fun quaint event,that
has now become quite a bit larger due to social media and the movie. That being said, some things
have gotten out of control. the main thing that comes to mind for me is the Selling from peoples
driveways and yards with hot chocolate, popcorn and goodies which make a total mess and long lines.
We want the selling to stop. It creates a trash nightmare and also other issues, with kids throwing
popcorn at our displays and hot chocolate being spilled everywhere. The trash and cleaning costs for
the city will just get larger and larger if we let this continue. We do this for Christmas Joy and don't feel
that someone should be profiting off of our hard work, it takes the meaning of Christmas Joy right out
of it. We aren't here to help kids become Entrepreneurs, there are plenty of other City events that are
made specifically for that. Also last year people let the Chochky and tamale vendors set up in their
driveways and yards, we would love to get rid of those all together, but understand there is a state
regulation of 350 feet. But if we ban all selling otherwise it will help with those that are doing it from
their yards. We just want people to come walk down the street, enjoy the lights and a quick visit with
Santa and be on their way. The longer people stay the more likelihood something will go wrong and
the worse traffic and parking get. I also believe that the County of Los Angeles has regulations for
selling from your home, that are all just being overlooked by the city.
There is a parking and traffic issue and I am not sure what can be done about that, but some very
good ideas were brought up at the residents meeting that Aly Mancini held at the library, but I am
sure it is too late for this year, but maybe some of those items can be implemented next year.
Thank you for your time
Shelly Brunnenkant
Outlook
Please add this in your subject line: Read into the record at the December 2, 2025
From Judy Doukakis <jgdoukakis@aol.com>
Date Sun 11/30/2025 12:09 PM
To Pimentel, Chris (Mayor) <cpimentel@elsegundo.org>; Baldino, Ryan (Mayor Pro Tem)
<rbaldino@elsegundo.org>; Boyles, Drew (Council Member) <dboyles@elsegundo.org>; Giroux, Lance
(Council Member) <Igiroux@elsegundo.org>; Keldorf, Michelle (Council Member) <mkeldorF@elsegundo.org>;
George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>; Truax, Susan (City Clerk) <struax@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly
<amancini@elsegundo.org>
When Candy Cane Lane started in 1986, our intention was to give joy to the city of El Segundo.
However, since social media and television coverage, CCL has become overwhelmingly
popular. The City is now involved in participating with safety measures and accommodations
for services. Since then, I understand complaints from neighboring streets having to deal with
crowds which they did not sign up for. I understand the City's need to block traffic on California
and Acacia. I just don't understand why trucks and police cars as was done last year would
work again. It works for the Farmer's Market.
Another issue is vendors and I understand that they now need to be 300 feet from CCL which is
great. However, we have a few residents on the 1100 and 1200 block that sell hot chocolate,
popcorn, coffee, etc. I would rather we did not have any selling on our street. We started CCL
with a food donation wagon that accepts canned goads and a tip jar for pictures with Santa (not
required to pay for photo) and those donations we give to charity. The problem with individuals
who want to sell is the street is packed with foot traffic and when you have vendors, it starts to
get congested with lines and people have a hard time walking through to see lights and it
prevents an even flow. Also, from our last meeting at the library, we heard from the few who sell
that they want to teach their children about business. Of course, they do not donate all the
money they make to charities but enjoy the income personally. I don't believe they should
benefit from all our hard work that we do to make CCL happen. If they want to sell, they can
sell 300 feet from CCL as well. This will keeps costs down for the City as well without extra
trash collection.
just think we are losing sight of what we started; we have a handful of residents who were here
in the beginning and I don't think this is what our intention was which is why we didn't accept
donations from the hotel and other surrounding businesses in the beginning.
Regards,
Judy Doukakis
I have been doing this for 36 years since the reboot of CCL. Never once in that 36 years has any of
my sons or grandchildren made profit off of our hard work. This has never been done for anyone's
personal gratification or profit. We have done this year after year for the joy and happiness it
brought the City and now because of social media for the masses. Those who want to profit of
never participated at the end of the block decorated or volunteered to help in any way. I do not feel
it's right to commercialize what was a love of Christmas. Those of us who have been here a long
time and carry the brunt feel the same way. We've been doing this a long time and want it to
continue in the spirit it was meant. The City seems intent in spending more money in an effort to
accommodate the few.
Regards,
Rick Doukakis
12-1-2025
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing with my great concern over proposed recommendations for our street which is
adjacent to Candy Cane Lane. We have resided at 1127 E. Acacia for over 20 years but I am
also a lifelong resident with deep roots in the community. Along with a family business my
grandfather and his partner had for over 40 years, a grocery store that some residents still talk
about. My father Ralph Lanphere was city treasurer for 12 years here and greatly enjoyed
working for the community. We love El Segundo and the wonderful small town it is. I am a huge
advocate for encouraging people to live in our wonderful town. Years ago I came to the city
council with other residents expressing concern for safety for our neighborhood children as well
as other small children in the street with a barrage of cars driving past them. At that time, the
city decided to close our street with resident only access. We have been very happy with the
way this has been handled for our street. Closure that allowed residents to park by their homes
and restrict other traffic for a few hours each night.
What has been suggested as a change now takes away the rights of the residents that spend
time and money each year to create a nice positive atmosphere for everyone. Instead of
respecting our residents' need to easily access their home, the focus has shifted to the concerns
of visitors. Unless you live in the 1100 and 1200 block you cannot fathom what the residents
deal with each year. If permits are granted, all residents need them. We cannot be asked to
park elsewhere and move our cars back and forth. We are on the north side of Acacia with no
driveway, it's hard as it is without a driveway to park.
Additionally, we have a handicap parking space in front of our house the city issued in 2018 as
my husband became very disabled and needs ready access to our home. He and I both have
handicap placards for different reasons and I could not walk to an alternate location to retrieve
our vehicle which I use to transport him, especially if there was an emergency. I feel it is a
violation of ADA to restrict our access that was granted by the City that is necessary. I have
spoken to Aly but cannot attend this mtg to speak on my own due to urgent medical needs of
my husband. If a resolution cannot be had, open the street and let residents park as they always
did. As a resident it is very disappointing that we even need to be addressing this in a formal
way. In the future I could see residents deciding not to decorate and or go to the effort they do if
our need to have easy access to our homes cannot be met. There would be little incentive to do
what we do each year to help create the joy of the Candy Cane Lane experience. Please share
this correspondence with the city council.
Sincerely,
Teresa Lanphere-Ames & Jeffrey Ames
tlan hereames (m il.com
310-600-9726
* Outlook
Read into the record at the December 2, 2025 Council Meeting.
From Michelle Hudspeth <mhudspth@pacbell.net>
Date Mon 12/1/2025 2:30 PM
To Pimentel, Chris (Mayor) <cpimentel@elsegundo.org>; Baldino, Ryan (Mayor Pro Tem)
<rbaldino@elsegundo.org>; Boyles, Drew (Council Member) <dboyles@elsegundo.org>; Giroux, Lance
(Council Member) <Igiroux@elsegundo.org>; Keldorf, Michelle (Council Member) <mkeldorf@elsegundo.org>;
George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>; Truax, Susan (City Clerk)
<struax@elsegundo.org>
have lived on Candy Cane Lane for 21 years. It has been a great community event full of joy
and camaraderie. Recent years there has become a commercialization of the event that is in
direct conflict to the original intent and spirit. The last few years specifically (post pandemic)
have seen an increase in the vendors (on the street and surrounding blocks) which add to the
congestion on the street, excessive trash and spilled messes. It feels more like Main Street at
Disneyland than a charming neighborhood tradition. In years past there was the occasional girl
scout troop or high school team that would sell hot chocolate for a fund raiser. These events
were 1-2 days and were obvious community fundraisers. Now it is every night congestion.
Candy Cane Lane used to be a 30-45 min walking visit; there were no vendors, no public
bathrooms, no additional commercial activity. Other than `Opening Night', this allowed for a
reasonable churn in visitors. Now with the commercialization — CCL has become a holiday
`destination' - a Christmas Market of sorts - with food and drink. This extends the length of the
visits — which is compounding the parking problem.
believe providing dedicated parking close enough so as to not require shuttle service would be
a great convenience for the event (and would contribute to get people in and out more
efficiently). One of the public lots at PCH and Walnut could be hired for evening CCL parking.
That will provide guest parking from PCH before the cars get into the neighborhoods driving
around. The walk down Walnut is short enough not to warrant shuttle service. Most guests
visiting from out of the area would welcome a specific parking solution and pay a nominal fee
(i.e. $5).
Every year, my friends and family spend an inordinate amount of time setting up for the
celebration. We don't make any money, nor do I think we should. But I don't believe anyone
else should be making money off of our hard work. Vendors should not be a part of this
neighborhood event specifically not on the Lane.
thank you for listening
Michelle Hudspeth
1214 East Acacia Ave
Please read into the record at the December 2, 2025 Council Meeting - Request to Deploy
Dedicated Zero Tolerance Proactive Police Enforcement In and Around Candy Cane Lane and
Restrict Commercial Sales from Residential Homes and Outside Vendors During ...
From Robert Turnbull <rturnbu11361 @me.com>
Date Mon 12/1/2025 7:50 PM
To ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS<ALLELECTEDOFFICIALS@elsegundo.org>; George, Darrell
<dgeorge@elsegundo.org>; Rodriguez, Saul (Chief of Police) <srodriguez@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly
<amancini@elsegundo.org>
Dear Mayor Pimentel, Members of the El Segundo City Council, City Manager Darrell George, City
Clerk Susan Truax, Police Chief Saul Rodriguez, and Recreation, Parks and Library Director Aly Mancini,
Preface: 1 am sending the letter below to be read by the City Clerk into record on Tuesday, December 2,
2025, City Council Meeting Public Communications if in fact my work prevents me from attending in
person. Thank you!
I am writing as a long-time El Segundo resident, retired law enforcement leader, and supporter of our
cherished Candy Cane Lane holiday tradition. This annual event has always been a symbol of
community pride, generosity, and neighborly collaboration — values that make El Segundo such a
special place to live.
Over the past several years, however, I have witnessed a significant increase in commercial sales and
vending activities occurring on Candy Cane Lane and the surrounding neighborhood during the
holiday season. These include sales conducted by multiple private residences as well as operations by
outside vendors who are not residents of the area. While I appreciate the enthusiasm this event
generates, such activities have begun to alter the character of tradition and raise legitimate concerns
regarding:
Health and public safety, including pedestrian and traffic congestion from additional foot and
vehicular traffic, and restricted vehicle access for emergency services.
a Neighborhood disruption due to vendor setups, noise, and the large amount of litter dropped
on sidewalks and streets that the presence of trash cans does not resolve.
• Zoning and permitting compliance, as residential areas are not intended for commercial use or
commercial profit.
• Liability and regulatory issues associated with unpermitted sales that currently go unenforced by
the City, County, or State.
a Erosion of the community -centered nature of Candy Cane Lane, shifting the focus from
celebration to commerce.
Since 2019, Candy Cane Lane has unfortunately gotten out of control due to the lack of proactive police
involvement. Without visible enforcement of municipal codes, unpermitted vendors and commercial
activity have flourished, creating traffic hazards, litter, and safety concerns. A stronger police presence is
e r r d reduci
To preserve the integrity and original intent of this beloved tradition, I respectfully request that the
City Council adopt clear restrictions on all commercial sales and outside vending occurring on Candy
Cane Lane and the surrounding neighborhood during the event period.
Specifically, I urge the Council to:
• Prohibit commercial sales of any kind from residential homes or properties within the
designated Candy Cane Lane area.
• Restrict outside vendors from setting up or conducting sales in adjacent public spaces or
rights -of -way during the event.
• Enhance enforcement of existing zoning, permitting, and business license regulations
during the holiday season.
• Direct the El Segundo Police Department to proactively enforce municipal codes on -site
during the event, ensuring accountability and immediate response to all violations, in
support of the one City Code Enforcement Officer
• Establish a visible police presence in and around Candy Cane Lane to deter unpermitted
vending, manage illegal parking, traffic congestion, and safeguard emergency access
routes.
Candy Cane Lane has always been about community — neighbors coming together to spread joy,
creativity, and holiday spirit. By taking these steps, the city can help ensure that this treasured El
Segundo tradition remains safe, family -oriented, and true to its roots.
For those who wish to raise money, there are numerous other City -sanctioned, Chamber -sponsored, or
service club -sponsored special events throughout the year where El Segundo residents — with or
without 501(c)(3) status or business licenses — can legitimately participate to enhance their cause.
Candy Cane Lane is not an event to commercialize.
Thank you for your time, consideration, and continued commitment to preserving the character and
quality of life in our community.
Bob Turnbull
1200 Block East Acacia Ave
Outlook
Candy Cane Lane Closures
From Kelly Posey <kbposey02@gmail.com>
Date Tue 12/2/2025 9:44 AM
To *ALL CITY CLERKS <ALLCITYCLERKS@elsegundo.org>
Cc Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>; Pimentel, Chris (Mayor) <cpimentel@elsegundo.org>; Baldino, Ryan
(Mayor Pro Tem) <rbaldino@elsegundo.org>; Boyles, Drew (Council Member) <dboyles@elsegundo.org>;
Giroux, Lance (Council Member) <Igiroux@elsegundo.org>; Keldorf, Michelle (Council Member)
<mkeldorf@elsegundo.org>; Hensley, Mark <mhensley@hensleylawgroup.com>; Mike Posey
<mikejposey@gmail.com>
Dear City Council Members & City Attorney,
In advance of this evening's meeting, my husband and I wanted to echo the sentiment and
frustrations outlined by our neighbors, Dan & Emily, below. We feel the hard closures are an
unnecessary burden to place on our block during the busiest time of the year. The parking
solution offered on Imperial is unacceptable as we do not feel comfortable leaving our cars
there overnight, nor do we want to go get them at 11 pm every evening. Beyond my husband
commuting and not returning home until after 6pm, we have various activities for our children
in the evening that require both of our cars to be accessible.
We truly hope a better solution can be determined.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Kelly & Mike Posey
1110 E Acacia Ave, El Segundo, CA 90245
From: Dan Obegi <dan.obegi a gmail.com>
Date: November 26, 2025 at 1:33:06 PM PST
Subject: updated letter
Dan Obegi & Emily Malito
1107 East Acacia Ave
El Segundo, CA 90245
Dan.Obegi@gmail.com
310-383-2913
November 25, 2025
El Segundo City Council & City Attorney
350 Main Street
El Segundo, CA 90245
Re: Objection to December Street Closure During Candy
Cane Lane Event
Dear City Council Members and City Attorney:
We write to express our objection to, and serious legal
concerns regarding the City's plan to prohibit all resident
vehicular access to our street from 4:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. for
two weeks in December in connection with the City -
sponsored Candy Cane Lane event. We respectfully request
that the City reconsider the necessity, scope, timing,
execution, and legality of the proposed closures.
Earlier this week, I spoke with the City Attorney who indicated
that certain statutes authorize temporary street closures for
public safety, but he could not identify the specific provisions
being relied upon. At the Parks & Recreation meeting, a staff
member stated that the policy change was prompted by "an
incident" last year, but no details were provided. When asked,
the City Attorney declined to describe the incident or the
additional bases for the change beyond the generalized
reference to "public safety." We have not been informed of
any formal discussion of the matter by the City Council, nor of
any alternative options evaluated and rejected.
Because no statutory authority, factual justification, or
procedural foundation has been disclosed, we are left to
guess at the City's reasoning for adopting an unusually
restrictive and disproportionate policy with deficient notice
and in apparent violation of the procedural requirements
governing such actions.
I. Legal Justification
The City Attorney was unable to cite any laws that were being
used to justify the street closure so we can't respond to the
specific code. Generally, the implementation of road closures
requires:
1. Necessity -a defined public safety issue that can't
be resolved without the specific intervention
2. A resolution and/or ordinance
3. Formal analysis of alternative solutions
4. Formal analysis of the impact on residents and for
emergency access
5. A solution that's the least restrictive of all viable
options
6. A solution where the costs (both financial and non-
financial) are proportional to the benefits
7. Reasonable public notice
8. Public discourse
As far as we can tell none of those requirements have been
met.
2. Procedural Due Process and Adequate Notice
California law requires reasonable notice and an opportunity
to be heard when City action significantly restricts property
access. While no fixed statutory notice period applies to all
special -event closures, municipal norms of 30 — 60 days are
generally considered sufficient procedural notice.
Some residents, including us, received no notice of the public
discussion at the next City Council meeting, and some
learned of it through inconsistently distributed flyers and
emails. Assuming formal notice of the closure occurs at the
next Council meeting, it will equate to 11 days' notice before
a multi -week prime -time access restriction —far below what is
customary for significant impairment of access rights. This is
not an emergency or newly planned event, and as such
limited notice is neither reasonable nor legally adequate.
3. California Constitutional Protections for Property
Access
California courts recognize that property owners have a
constitutionally protected right to reasonable ingress and
egress:
• Substantial impairment of access constitutes a
compensable injury.
• Government restrictions must be reasonable and
proportionate.
A long -planned, recreational, City -promoted holiday event
cannot justify repeated, significant impairment of access
without clear necessity and procedural compliance.
4. The Proposed Closure Is Not Narrowly Tailored to Any
Stated Safety Need
Even assuming general "public safety" authority, the City must
demonstrate that the chosen restrictions are:
• Necessary
• Proportionate
• The least restrictive means of achieving the safety
objective
Closing a residential street to its own residents for six hours
per night over 12 consecutive nights is far more restrictive
than required for general pedestrian safety in the absence of
. , any known threat, and dramatically more burdensome than
the measures used for all other City events including the Main
Street Holiday Parade, the Classic Car Show, the Halloween
Frolic, and local 1 OK races —all of which employ temporary,
movable wood barriers with periodic openings for local traffic.
If pedestrian safety alone justified closure without limits, the
City would be compelled to close all streets at all times, since
eliminating vehicular traffic would eliminate all possible
pedestrian -vehicle collisions. Public -safety policy requires
context, proportionality, and public engagement- not just risk
mitigation. None of these elements appear to have been
satisfied.
The City has known for decades that Candy Cane Lane
occurs every December. The lack of timely notice and public
discussion is therefore unjustifiable. Limited, inequitable
accommodations —such as directing some residents to park
two blocks away on Imperial —are neither reasonable nor
feasible, especially for elderly residents, residents with small
children, or those whose garages have been repurposed in
reliance on years of consistent, uninterrupted access to street
parking.
5. Reasonable Alternatives Exist
California municipalities consistently favor targeted solutions
over broad prohibitions. Reasonable, less -restrictive
alternatives include:
1. Resident -only access passes with moveable
barriers like in previous years
2. Shorter closure windows, limited to peak -traffic nights
and hours
3. Traffic -control officers to manage resident traffic
4. Limiting the event to one week, or weekends
We previously proposed a practical alternative but received
no response: position police cruisers or large City utility
vehicles at each entrance. These vehicles are already owned
by the City saving money, and are heavier than temporary
barriers so they can prevent vehicular intrusion. A police
officer can temporarily move one vehicle as needed to allow
local access like in previous years. This solution would likely
cost less than the stated $30,000 barrier expenditure and
maintains both safety and access.
The City has provided no explanation for rejecting this or any
other alternative, nor has it disclosed the reason why after 50
years, exponentially more restrictive policies need to be
adopted this year, or even what specific risk the proposed
barriers are intended to mitigate and why the city is all of a
sudden so worried about that risk.
6. Summary
Our goal is not to obstruct the City's efforts to maintain a safe
and enjoyable holiday tradition. Last year was our first Candy
Cane Lane as residents, and it was truly magical. We
appreciate the spirit and community the event creates.
However, the proposed policy change is unprecedented,
inadequately supported, procedurally deficient, and likely to
cause substantial and unnecessary disruptions. It also has
clear implications for property values: eliminating vehicular
access for two weeks will deter potential buyers and diminish
the desirability of homes on the 1100 and 1200 blocks of East
Acacia. We initially didn't buy a home on the 1100 block of
East Acacia because we didn't want to deal with the
disruptions caused by the Candy Cane Lane event but later
reconsidered, in part because of the accommodations the city
made for residents including opening the barriers to let
residents drive in and out and nightly cleaning. We have other
neighbors who didn't buy on the 1200 block because of the
street closures during December and bought on the 1100
block only to have this block closed starting after they
purchased. People already think twice about buying on Candy
Cane Lane and adding exponentially more
inconvenient restrictions will further decrease the universe of
potential buyers. Less demand equals lower home values.
Even a modest 5% reduction in market value would equate to
approximately $6 million in damages to residents of the 1100
and 1200 blocks of East Acacia —wholly disproportionate to
any undisclosed or speculative public -safety concern.
7. Requests
We respectfully request that the City:
Identify the specific ordinances or resolutions
authorizing the closure and confirm that all procedural
requirements have been satisfied.
2. Disclose what event happened last year that's partially
responsible for the policy change this year
3. Provide the factual findings supporting the necessity of
a two -week, nightly closure.
4. Provide the factual findings supporting the
proportionality of such a restriction.
5. Respond publicly to the alternatives proposed by
residents, including the reasons for rejecting them.
6. Refrain from implementing any policy that does not
comply with legal and procedural requirements.
7. Provide legally adequate notice and opportunity for
discussion before adopting any policy affecting resident
access.
8. Explain how the resulting impact on property values is
justified and why the City considers that financial harm
necessary.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns. We
appreciate the City's willingness to work collaboratively with
residents to ensure that public events remain safe, enjoyable,
and fully compliant with California law.
Sincerely,
Dan Obegi & Emily Malito
S Outlook
READ INTO THE RECORD ATTHE DECEMBER 2, 2025 COUNCIL MEETING
From SCOTT BRUNNENKANT <scottyb1958@yahoo.com>
Date Tue 12/2/2025 10:11 AM
To Pimentel, Chris (Mayor) <cpimentel@elsegundo.org>; Baldino, Ryan (Mayor Pro Tem)
<rbaldino@elsegundo.org>; Boyles, Drew (Council Member) <dboyles@elsegundo.org>; Giroux, Lance
(Council Member) <Igiroux@elsegundo.org>; Keldorf, Michelle (Council Member) <mkeldorf@elsegundo.org>;
George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>; Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>; Truax, Susan (City Clerk)
<struax@elsegundo.org>
City Council members,
am a 36 year Candy Cane Lane resident. In recent years, commercial activity has increased from local youth
groups , boy scouts, girl scouts, etc., to several people selling every night, hot chocolate, popcorn, lighted stuff,
whatever, creating more and more trash and mess. This has changed from the original intent of our Candy Cane
Lane, which is to provide a fun holiday experience for us to share with our community. I prefer to see no sales of any
kind! I understand the concerns of our neighbors for traffic and parking, and I feel not having anything for sale during
the program, along with not having public restrooms, would encourage visitors to spend less time loitering around the
area, net result would be less mess and trash, which has been discussed at previous meetings as a significant cost to
the city. Regarding traffic, i believe one way traffic on the 1100 block of Acacia eastbound, exiting on California
southbound would be a good start. Additionally, residents need access to their homes. For the last 30 odd years,
security has escorted the few people who need to get in or out. This has worked fine in the past, adding a contact
number for residents to call for assistance when the need out might be an option. I have observed the explorer cadets
in the area, doing nothing! Could they be utilized to assist residents? In the event you decide to allow home sales,
residents should not be allowed to have random people sell from their front yards. Thank you for your time and
service. Have a Merry Christmas!
SCOTT BRUNNENKANT
1217 EACACIA AVE
EL SEGUNDO, CA. 90245
Outlook
Read into the Record at the December 2nd, 2025 Council Meeting
From Mark Phillips <mtphil2009@gmail.com>
Date Tue 12/2/2025 11:38 AM
To Pimentel, Chris (Mayor) <cpimentel@elsegundo.org>; Baldino, Ryan (Mayor Pro Tem)
<rbaldino@elsegundo.org>; Boyles, Drew (Council Member) <dboyles@elsegundo.org>; Giroux, Lance
(Council Member) <Igiroux@elsegundo.org>; Keldorf, Michelle (Council Member) <mkeldorf@elsegundo.org>;
George, Darrell <dgeorge@elsegundo.org>
Cc Mancini, Aly <amancini@elsegundo.org>; Truax, Susan (City Clerk) <struax@elsegundo.org>
Sent from my iPad
> Dear Council Personnel & Staff: This is Mark Phillips. My wife Jane and I live at 1218 E. Acacia Ave and
we've been here since 1988.
> Is there a common Council email address so we don't have to send individual emails to each Council
person? If so, please let me know. If not, please forward my message to any other Council people and
Staff that I might have missed.
> This message is to inform the Council how we oppose all Sales (commercial & Private) on our street
during the Candy Cane Lane program. We've lived here in El Segundo a very long time and we've always
opposed any type of sales during the CCL program starting December 13th through the 25th this year.
> The other issue we oppose since we live on the south side of the street, is closing down 1100 & 1200
blocks of East Acacia between 4 PM and 10 PM each night. This is not a good solution. My wife and I are
both over 70, we need to have access to our car especially if there is any emergency that arises. In the
past, the City has used City vehicles to block the egress to the 1100 & 1200 E. Acacia blocks in question
The city also provided a person to walk down the street with the cars so no one gets hit. This has worked
out very well in the past and we hope that this procedure can be used again this year. Also it will save the
City money being spent on renting the non -removable objects to block our street.
> Jane and I hope you'll consider our recommendations for Candy Cane Lane this year.
> Thank you,
> Mark & Jane Phillips
> 310-322-4069
> Sent from my iPhone