September 2008 – The Situation for the Arts on Ocean Front Walk

By Samuel Brantley

The writer has experienced the change in the area’s creativity from what was once free and vibrant to what is now oftentimes quite stifling under the influence of the city’s approach to the new regulations on the lottery system. At first, the experience had been enlightening. It was a time of befriending and being befriended in turn. The writer began to recognize a self-imposed structure.

For those in the Venice Beach arts community, there seemed no possible better place to be, this paradise where the wind blows over and by the palm trees as the seagulls floated above. It was a carefree environment in which the sun reflected its colors with playful warmth. There existed a world of dreams on the west side of Ocean Front Walk – the artists’ side. The east side was the far-different world of the merchants, facing their own challenges of paying their astronomically high rents.

These years were filled with learning what it’s like to a part of the greater collective, humanity itself. 

The artists were a tight knit group organized around the ideal that they were making a difference with their actions as they tried to keep the spirit of those who came before them alive.

The Venice arts community at the beach was identifiable according to the particulars of their output. It was free and without leadership. The vibrancy of art permeated the local and the wider community. Encounters with different artistic traditions brought greater self-realization. It was a time for passion.

Things changed after 2005 with the coming of the first lottery system for assigning spots for artists and performers. The lottery was seen as the solution to various complaints. However, with the new system came its enforcement. The artists were told they must conform or else there would be a police-enforced response. Many of those in the arts community understood the new system to be the bully approach. 

The city seemed to be ignoring that that community had built the Venice arts environment into the free, vibrant, and dynamic scene that it had become. There was a growing sense of outrage over the city’s lack of recognition of their contribution to an arts scene that had established an international standing. The truth is that these artists represented the continuing spirit of Abbot Kinney and Arthur L. Reese from 1914. The city must learn that this free spirit is something to treasure rather than to suppress.

The beach had long been in the vanguard of free speech, which was under attack. That attack intensified with a new and harsher lottery system that was forcibly put in place in 2008. The new system attempted to place the artists, performers, and others into a framework of an I zone and a P zone. Not only is the new system very confusing to artists including the writer, even the police admit that they do not understand it. When questioned about the meaning of the newly posted signs, they say they are not exactly sure of what is required. As a consequence, they do not use the language of the signs for guidance. However, the city attorney has encouraged the police to break the remaining spirit of Abbot Kinney. Many in the creative community responded as best they could, but others stood by and watched as the police rousted the guardians of that spirit. This may have represented a planned divide-and-conquer strategy by the city. The city seemingly rejected the community’s intention to work with it.

By way of background, the lottery system seems to have sprung from a new and repressive attitude by some of those in power. One freelance writer for The Los Angeles Times wrote a story on the Venice beach caretakers, whom the city had begun to see as a wild and bizarre bunch who were more a blight than a delight. This was reflected in the contract the city wanted the caretakers to sign in order to be able to use the west side of the walk. Once in place, the lottery system employed the police to break the spirit of the arts community.

The sudden increase in police oversight led to the city’s representative meeting with some of those in the arts community. However, the meeting was inconsequential because of the absence of the city’s real leaders. Soon those who had been free-spirited artists were being cited by the police for violating the new rules.

The artists of Venice Beach were told to give the city time to adjust its plan. But from the first the plan was doomed because there were no competent leaders to develop an effective plan. Instead, the plan went forward with the apparent mission of pushing the artists away from Venice beach. After all, they were seen as little more than troublemakers.

The artists felt they could not be wrong for protecting a dead founder’s wishes. Those who read the new regulations as summed up in handouts and posted on signs were troubled by the city’s apparent willingness to ignore previous commitments of a lifetime agreement and to force artists to give their work for free to anyone who asked for it. It seemed that the city was willing to break the law in order to break the artists. In 2008, the police have been treating the artists as vagrants to be pushed around, lied to, and threatened. There must be more for the police to do at Venice beach than harassing and ticketing artists.

The new twist on the lottery came at the same time as the boardwalk was redesigned with new trash cans spaced 30 feet apart. Their design makes emptying them difficult and the result is that accumulated trash and dog waste can sit rotting for weeks and drawing vermin until the city gets around to emptying the containers. By now nearly everyone has noticed the infestation of Venice beach with biting flies, which had never been a problem in past years, but the city has ignored the problem this year. A further consequence beyond the degradation of the environment for the artists and visitors is that there is much less space available for artists to present their creations. 

The handouts and signs summarize the ordinance as requiring the restriction of free speech and the loss of the right to private property. The activities allowed in any spot are prescribed and proscribed. Artists are forced to give away their property to anyone asking for it, even to their competitors. Beach users get this art in the name of the city, but the cost is borne by the artists. How can it be constitutional in America to force people to give away their private property to others? Artists cannot be expected to work for nothing. It must be remembered that the artists at Venice beach have become a tourist destination known around the world. The artists are already doing their part to support their city. Yet, those who resist are arrested, handcuffed, and treated like common criminals. It must be remembered that the original lottery system of 2005 had promised the artists that the agreement was lifetime. However, the new system overturned the protections of the original one, leading to the ex post facto problem. The city had unilaterally terminated a lifetime agreement with the artists without their permission. That was unfair. Years before there had been a permanent injunction granted to protect free-speech rights at Venice beach. That injunction remains in force, but the city seems to be covering it up and confusing its citizens. To the extent the city itself is a lawbreaker, the city is an outlaw and its officials are criminals who are abusing their power to serve the community.

In response, a small group of artists has made citizen arrests of those who violated the lifetime permanent agreement of the first lottery. At City Hall their names were called out, but they did not flee. So they remain under arrest according to law. The artists are seeking that the city attorney enforce these citizen arrests.

Currently, 75 artists have asked the U.S. Attorney’s office to enforce the laws. The police are only doing what the city asks of them. However, the abrasive contacts between police and artists are shocking and traumatizing to the artists.

Of course, conflicts with police often lead to deaths in this city. Artists have begun to think about what these conflicts might mean for them. Artists deserve greater appreciation and respect. They are merely trying to make a living in these difficult times. The city should treasure them, not disrespect them. 

A balance needs to be found between the interests of the city and those of the Venice beach community. The present tumult is an unnecessary complication. There are two renowned artists of Venice beach who should be turned to: Larry Bell and Robert Graham. They live and work near the boardwalk. Both are supporters of the artists of Venice beach.

In order to deal with this festering problem, the city council should show leadership by putting together a team to allow Venice beach to continue to be the artistic showcase that has been its tradition. The city’s actions to this point suggest the existence of a hidden agenda of pushing the artists out so as to benefit some more powerful and influential constituency. 

Samuel Brantley has been a California State Assembly-appointed Commissioner of Art, Music and Culture since 2005. He is writing from the point of view of one who has been homeless in Venice for the past six years and is a witness to the area’s transformation.

September 2008 – Another View of Spy Cameras

By Laddie Williams

I read and reread last month’s article, It’s Spy Camera’s vs. Street Dealers in Oakwood, and I have these thoughts as a born and raised Venetian. 

I will tell you that the demise of our community is not just the drugs and the homeless, it is the lack of total respect for the entire community of Venice. They complain of the drugs being sold and the people who are hanging on their corners and bringing their precious property values down, and all I can think is, what about actual humans caring about humans. 

The Big Brother is watching you idea just takes me over the top because here we live in a free society and we are being watched by cameras (we have one at 678 San Juan Ave attached to a light pole), and are being told with posters with skull and cross bones that you are being filmed and this will be given to the LAPD and you will be prosecuted (check out the signs on Westminster and 6th Ave – attached to electric poles and posted on fences). 

That huge grant that was given to buy cameras could have been used to assist people with better ways of living and educating them making them feel that someone behind those tall insidious fences cares, and that they are willing to assist instead of jailing people for a victimless crime. If these people care to hug them talk, to them assist them in some small way, this would be the greatest gift of all. 

Please don’t tell me it cannot be done because I have done it all my life and to see individuals come back and say “Laddie, you don’t know what that did to me for you to hug me and say you care. It changed my life forever. I am clean and sober and doing well.” That is love – not cameras posted so you can take and give to LAPD – to do God knows what with? 

The entire vibe of our precious community has changed and “Big Brother Watching You,” is another nail in the coffin of humans caring. It is being eroded away because you want to talk about property values more than human values.

Secret meetings – let me know that you have more to say behind closed 12-foot fences (illegal according to the Los Angeles Penal Code) about your neighbors who don’t fit the mode and life style that you deem important to you. 

Eradicate drugs? Well if that is the real attempt in the great USA/Oakwood Community we all know how the government/LAPD can end this epidemic. The cameras are a temporary band-aid to a very old, old business.

Love One Another!

September 2008 – Letters

• More on Spy Cameras - Anonymous 
• Long Live Poets! - Krista Schwimmer
• We Are All “Arch” Conservatives – DeDe Audet

————- 

More on Spy Cameras

Dear Beachhead,

I noticed your first page article, written by Ingrid Boon and felt I needed to add to what she wrote. I have known about the cameras for quite some time now, and was surprised to see it “outed,” even though I have seen signs posted locally. Frankly, I perceived them as a warning to dealers. 

A couple of folks I have spoken to, told me that cameras had already been placed on several corners, for some time now and some had been placed mid block on designated streets, as well. I understand, more will be added over time in places they see fit. Word has it that people are working on identifying some of the people selling and buying drugs on already recorded data.

Anonymous 

————–

Long Live Poets!

Dear Beachhead,

Once again, I enjoyed your recent newspaper. I particularly found the story about the Venice Car Wash workers informative, as well as the tale of the Beachhead’s beginning. 

Being a poet myself, I always enjoy the poetry sections and really am impressed at how much room you give to poets and poetry. I never knew Philomene, but was very glad to discover her through your newspaper (Definitely liked the poem, “Philomene and The Lady”). 

Long live poets!

Krista Schwimmer

————–

We Are All “Arch” Conservatives

Dear Beachhead, 

I understand that architect Eric Owen Moss designed a 65 foot tall building for a corner of Venice and Lincoln. Regarding the project, via several emails, Laura Silagi calls attention to a statement made by this prominent architect. Mr. Moss says that the way to circumvent the NIMBYism of neighborhood activists is to call them “arch conservatives.”

Some of my neighbors might be a bit put off by being called either a NIMBYist or an arch conservative. But I believe that many persons in Venice, CA will wear the badge of “arch conservative” with honor.

The arches of Venice, CA are world famous—the centerpiece and soul of our community And it’s nice to hear that architect Moss is calling attention to our local architecture. So let it not be said that Mr. Moss’ reminder falls on deaf ears.

Because the arches of Venice on Windward, inspired by Abbot Kinney, our founder, are so remarkable and so well known, it is appropriate to honor this feature of local architecture by convening the neighborhood arch conservatives. 

Not, of course, to compare with other famous arches built or inspired by one person such as the Arch of Constantine in Rome and Arc de Triomphe in Paris. Or nature’s arches such as Delicate Arch of the Utah desert.

 What could be wrong in honoring our own arches? These arches here may not be so grand. Yet there are certainly more arches in one place in Venice, CA than in any other tourist destination. Well, maybe not more than in Venice, Italy. But who wants to quibble?

And what could be more fitting than to invite Mr. Moss to the inaugural event of the Arch Conservatives of Venice, CA? He can give us pointers on more ways to circumvent NIMBYism or, perhaps, bring more and more NIMBYists into the reality of Arch Conservatism.

I look forward to such an event.

Venice has had plenty of name-calling episodes as the community struggles to respond to new ideas without losing the community. I recall a time when all the kids came home from San Francisco and told us to respond to criticism with love. Let’s give our critics some arch love. 

DeDe Audet

September 2008 – With Enough Shovels

By Jim Smith

Groundbreaking for new metered parking spots on Tabor Court, Aug. 14, behind the Abbot Kinney stores, saw Councilmember Bill Rosendahl and various city of Los Angeles bureaucrats wielding shovels on a pile of dirt brought in just for the occasion. The shovels were painted gold, perhaps, to emphasize to Venetians that $800,000 of their Surplus Property Fund had been expropriated to create metered parking, the proceeds of which will go to the L.A. general fund. According to the May Beachhead, $800,000 was taken from the Venice fund, “to cover design and construction of urgently needed metered parking in Venice’s central business district.” (Tabor Court).

The short-term parking will be built on the former Red Car railroad right-of-way. History buffs should hurry to see the historic rails that remain on Palms Blvd. According to Vahik Vartanians, a Bureau of Engineering civil engineer, the rails will be ripped up. Following the year-long project there will be no reminders that we once rode throughout the Southland on fast, environmentally-sound rail cars instead of gas guzzling automobiles. Nonetheless, many in the crowd swelled with pride at the progress this project will bring to Venice.

One concern not addressed was the reduction of access to the coast due to restricted parking caused by the installation of meters in the existing lots. According to the California Coastal Act, beach access in the Coastal area (Lincoln to the beach) must take precedent over other uses of the land. It remains to be seen whether anyone will appeal to the Coastal Commission.

With only two questions allowed from reporters, it was not possible to discover whether Rosendahl publicly favors much needed affordable housing on top of the parking lots as has been proposed by the Venice Community Housing Corporation. Nor was it possible to find out if he would publicly support overnight parking for those who are forced to sleep in their vehicles.

Whether the new metered parking will help business on Abbot Kinney Blvd. as is being hyped, or will cause shoppers to divert to Santa Monica where they can park for free for two hours is debatable. One observer at the dedication told the Beachhead that businesses would be better served by closing Abbot Kinney Blvd. to automobiles. “Then people would flock to AKB for its novelty,” he said.

For this reporter, this is another example of how Los Angeles continues to loot Venice of its resources (nearly a million dollars of our money will be converted into parking fees and tickets for L.A.). Rosendahl admitted to the crowd at the dedication that Venice’s loss of cityhood in 1925 was probably a mistake. Will Venetians continue to beg for crumbs at L.A.’s table or will they stand up for their right to run their own affairs?

September 2008 – City of L.A. Approves Overnight Permit Parking Throughout Venice

Measure Aimed at Homeless but Homeowners and Renters Will Bear Burden of Cost

Appeal Period Ends Sept. 5 at 5pm.

The L.A. Bureau of Engineering has disregarded the overwhelming opposition expressed at the June 26 hearing and has approved the overnight permit parking districts in Venice. Appeals may be filed within 10 days of the date of the decision, Aug. 26.

An appeal may be faxed or e-mailed, stating the name, address and telephone number of the applicant and appellant, the date and nature of the decision being appealed, the Coastal Development case number and identification of the proposed development. When the appellant utilizes this procedure, he or she must follow up by transmitting a completed Notice of Appeal.

At the three and a half hour hearing on June 26 on overnight parking districts (OPDs), more than 80 percent of the speakers strongly rejected the city’s scheme which could require all Venetians to pay to park in front of their homes At the same time, it would force those who live in mobile homes out of their vehicles and on to the streets. 

As in court trials, the decision is supposed to be based upon the facts presented at the hearing. In this case, the decision was so vague it could have been written long before the hearing took place.

Text of the Decision

The following coastal development permits (CDPs) were approved without conditions:

CDP No. 08-07: OPD 520 – Oxford Triangle Area

CDP No. 08-08: OPD 521 – Presidents Row Area

CDP No. 08-1 1 : OPD 526 -Villa Marina Area

The following CDPs were approved with a condition:

CDP No. 08-09: OPD 522 -West Venice Area

CDP No. 08-10: OPD 523 – East Venice Area

The following is the condition placed on CDP No. 08-09:

“Extend the operating hours of Parking Lot 800, located along Pacific Avenue between Windward Avenue and Venice Way in OPD 522, to overlap with the OPD restriction period (2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.), with a maximum of 4 hours of parking during 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.”

The following is the condition placed on CDP No. 08-10:

“Extend the operating hours of Parking Lot 740, located near the intersection of Main Street and Rose Avenue in OPD 523, to overlap with the OPD restriction period (2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.).”

A copy of the Final Staff Reports and Coastal Development Permits are available for review at http://eng.lacity.org/techdocslemglEnvironmental~Review~Documents.htm.

September 2008 – A Profile in Courage – Venice Resident, and Secretary of State, Debra Bowen Makes Good

Debra Bowen got her start in politics as the attorney for the Venice Town Council. When she was elected California Secretary of State in 2006, like any good Venetian, her first act was to ban electronic voting machines. This courageous act earned her the attention of the Kennedys. Both Ted and Caroline attended her award ceremony at the John F. Kennedy Library.

The Beachhead salutes Debra Bowen for keeping the faith!

——

“When a comprehensive review of California’s new electronic voting machines revealed that election results could be altered on the new machines, Secretary of State Debra Bowen did not wait for things to go wrong on election night. . .” – Caroline Kennedy

——

“Her position was highly unpopular, but she didn’t hesitate. She began the daunting task of ensuring fair and accurate voting. Last August, she courageously decided that she had to do something about it herself, and she de-certified three of the most widely used electronic voting systems in the state.” – Sen. Ted Kennedy

——

Acceptance Speech by Debra Bowen

To the Kennedys, what a joy to be amidst your family. To the outstanding board and staff of the John F. Kennedy Library Foundation, the distinguished members of the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award Committee, thank you for this most humbling honor. 

You have caused me to think about the nature of courage, but not much has become clear.

There is one thing that I know though, and that is that courage is not the same thing as fearlessness. I am often introduced as being “fearless,” but that is not true – and because I know that I have inspired at least a few young people, I feel a great responsibility to ensure that they know that fear is not a disqualifier for a life in public service.

For me, the equation is simple – I fear my own inner critic more than I fear the condemnation of others. I would rather be greeted with cynicism and criticism by the editorial board of a large newspaper than to live with the certain knowledge that my actions, or failure to act, did not come from a deep place of justice and integrity. 

I know that sense of justice and fairness is what motivated me in junior high school to organize a sit-in outside the principal’s office, over faculty censorship of the student newspaper. 

It is why, in ninth grade, I orchestrated a protest over a school policy that did not allow girls to wear pants to school. My geometry teacher kicked me out of class for wearing pants, and I got a zero on the test. But I was not in trouble at home, because my parents had taught me that you do not have to accept the status quo if you think improvements can be made, and that standing up for what is right can never be wrong.

My family did not have a VW van with a bumper sticker that said, “Question authority.” I grew up in the district of a courageous liberal Republican congressman, John B. Anderson of Illinois, whose integrity in office served as a role model for me. He continues to serve as a role model as the president of an organization called FairVote, which acts for universal access to participation in elections and majority rule with fair representation for all.

Despite my background of organizing protests at school, I am an accidental politician. I never set out to run for public office. I got involved with Neighborhood Watch in about 1987, working as a volunteer on local issues, and one thing led to another. I was simply too naïve to know that you didn’t just run for a seat in the California Legislature, and so I did in 1992 and, as they say, the rest is history. 

But I learned growing up that nothing happens by itself, that citizens must act if they desire change. During my three years at the University of Virginia law school, I became aware that democracy itself does not sustain itself – that, as Thomas Jefferson said, eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. And I am sure this is what John F. Kennedy meant in noting that democracy is not a “final achievement,” but rather “a call to an untiring effort.”

While democracy does not sustain itself, it is self-correcting over time. 

As a nation, we are prepared to fight for our ideas, to vote, and then to accept the results, win or lose, knowing that the discourse will continue and that the next election will present another opportunity. And in trust of this, we have laid down arms, turning to ballots rather than to bullets to further the choice of leadership in our country.

But that only works if citizens believe that our elections are free, fair, and open, and if citizens can verify for themselves that the results are accurate.

My task as Secretary of State is to ensure that the fundamental tools of democracy – our voting systems – are up to that extraordinary responsibility.

That was the basis of the first-of-its-kind top-to-bottom review of voting systems that I commissioned in 2007. I wanted – on behalf of all voters – to know whether the systems we use to cast and tally our votes are secure, accurate, reliable, and accessible.

I invited the public to participate as fully as possible. I am grateful to all of those who criticized and commented, including elections officials in California, who helped me self-correct in the very design of the review.

The proprietary software itself poses a particular challenge. If people themselves are not allowed to analyze the computer code running the system, and 99% of people could not verify that the code accurately reflects the will of the people even if they could see it, how could I, as the chief elections officer of California, give them nothing more than a request to “trust me?”

Our democracy is not built on trust alone. The checks and balances – the mechanisms of self-correction – anticipate that errors in judgment will sometimes be made and that trust will sometimes be violated, but that the system will be tough enough to discover the truth and to recover its bearings.

With the scientific analysis of the top-to-bottom-review as my guide, I chose to favor the transparency of voter-marked paper ballots, which can readily be recounted, coupled with the accuracy and speed of the computer to do the tedious work of counting multiple races. I required strict post-election audits, to make sure that the scanners and all the computerized equipment have performed correctly, because that’s something we cannot know simply by observation.

That meant sidelining some expensive equipment, but how do you argue that voters deserve less than the best we can provide?

Our work on California voting systems is only the beginning of my pledge to work for a system that moves us towards President Reagan’s abiding principle: Trust, but verify. Play, but cut the cards.

It is up to each and every one of us to cut the cards as we continue the work first begun by our nation’s founders over two centuries ago. Had our democracy not evolved, more than half of the people in this room and in this country, would not be voters – because you had to be white, male and, in most states, own land in order to vote. Of course, we have evolved to include all citizens in our electorate, and we must continue the quest for progress in all aspects of our government.

 

I have been inspired by the grassroots and the netroots who have pushed for a voting system worthy of our democracy. I would not have run for the office of Secretary of State without their encouragement, support, and hard work.

So I will accept this award on behalf of every person who believes that there is nothing partisan about ensuring that every eligible voter has the opportunity to vote, and that every ballot is counted as it was cast.

And I share this award with every voter who has had the courage to question our electoral process, and with everyone whose untiring effort protects the integrity of our democracy.

September 2008 – The Never Ending Neighborhood Council Meeting

By C.V. Beck

At this meeting, (which didn’t start until 7:20pm and didn’t end until 10:40), had an 8-page agenda which was largely unreadable to anyone over 30. My feeling was that it was like a cruel and unusual punishment. It was dimly lit by fluorescent lights, chairs were hard and uncomfortable. The auditorium was about three-quarters filled. There were several tables in dark places with informational materials and snacks.A water container leaked all over the floor. The meeting was very slow in getting started and pretty much moved at a glacial pace for much of itself. However, the agenda was gotten through. The public had their two minutes of comment and everyone else had all the time they wanted. At 7pm, in another room, elections were going on until 9pm on other matters. The meeting was chaired quite well by Mike Newhouse. 

Results of this Board of Officers meeting are as follows: Announcements were made about upcoming meetings and programs such as Emergency Preparedness and Drills, Neighborhood Preparedness Program (three Saturdays Sept. 27, Oct. 4 and 11 from 9-1pm at Fire Station 5, contact Mona Curry at Emergency Management Dept., 213-473-9921. An October Town Hall meeting and 3rd quarter newsletter were announced. Various other announcements and requests for assistance for putting away chairs were made. 

There was a presentation by a representative of the owners of the Breezes Del Mar (Holiday Venice) Apartments, GH Capital, by Monique LaShey. These are 14 apartment buildings through the Oakwood area, 246 apartments within 14 buildings, project-based section 8 (low income). GH Capital wants to prepay the existing mortgages and apparently replace these with new shorter mortgages. There was present the threat of not renewing the section 8’s, instead going to market rate. This was denied by LaShey. 

People from the community spoke in favor of respecting what the residents of these apartments are trying to achieve in their negotiations and there was a lot of support for them from the community. There were some neighbors who spoke about drug dealing and fear on certain streets. After discussion, it was decided to hear this matter again on October 8, which would give enough time for the desired communications to occur between the residents and the landlords, with a final hearing by Board of Officers now scheduled for October 21.

The next item was the Arts and OFW Committee regarding approval of a letter of support for a Venice Beach Concert Series by Mickey Schuman to begin in September and continue through October, a total of four concerts in a pilot program. 

LAPD Officer Williams was not in favor of this concert series, being concerned with public safety and crowd management. Other concerns of this nature, like parking, were expressed. The concert promoter assured people that there would be security backed up by the police, parking would be finessed and he did not envision untoward events. After more discussion it was approved, with four separate permits but would not set any kind of precedent.

In public comment, Dennis Hathaway, East Venice, spoke about 2 pieces of land belonging to the City in the Venice Trust, which he felt would be good to use for open space, community gardens, parks or affordable housing, once it’s gone, it’s gone forever. Mark Lipman spoke about opposing the war, forming an antiwar committee and was shut down after his two or three minutes were up. He was told that he could put his comments on the email and it would be available in their entirety online. A speaker from Venice 2000 stated that they needed help from the VNC with the mayor and Councilperson Rosendahl in continuing funding for their programs in Venice. Also that the Senior Citizen Prom will be held on September 27 at the Oakwood Rec Center.

In the matter of 660 Venice Boulevard, a presentation was made regarding this proposed art gallery by “L&M, LA, LLC” and was approved with conditions regarding lighting, parking and valet parking. Also a historic plaque commemorating Ray Bradbury is to be displayed in a publicly visible location.

Regarding 612 San Juan Avenue, recommendation was made by the LUPC that this fence variance be approved because of extenuating circumstances. After much discussion, included more reports on drug dealing on this street, this was approved.

Mr. McKomis spoke about drug dealing and hostility in this area.Phyllis Des Verney spoke about her experiences. Jed Parker said this variance was setting a precedent even though the Fences and Hedges Subcommittee has not yet finished its work. 

In the matter of the elections, the ratification of Hugh Harrison was approved. The other four items, regarding proposed bylaws changes failed per vote of the people present at this meeting, after the elections in the separate room, held at the same time the Board of Officers meeting was being held. This room, also was not well lit. You had to stand or sit facing the people running the election, not a comfortable situation not private either.)

Item D3, Marina Pacific hotel was discussed at length and was denied. It was stated that the applicant had been asking “for the moon.”

In public comment, Jed Parker expressed his belief that with the board actions regarding the fence variance, that precedence has been established and that the Venice Neighborhood Council does not care about the law. Meeting ended at 10:40 pm.

September 2008 – City Not Policing Developer; Oxford Triangle Residents Protest

By Reta Moser

Stand tall Triangle residents. Hopefully, you are about to make a change for the Triangle in reference to JPI. Hopefully, this change will affect all Venetians…maybe all city neighborhood councils.

You with your emails; you with your protesting. Hopefully you are about to change the L.A. City Planning’s ability to ever cripple a neighborhood again; you are about to see citizens take over.

Howard resident Challis Macpherson, chair of Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC), will present a policy statement Wednesday night at the LUPC that will eliminate this after-the-fact dealing without resident due diligence. See following story “LUPC Meet to Discuss Policy Affecting JPI, All of Venice.”

Pedestrian fire exit gate is getting some changes from Building and Safety Inspector David Tsau. See following story “JPI Given Corrective Action Notice.”

Keep your emails coming. Tell them you want the Oxford Triangle Specific Plan (OTSP) honored, upheld. See paragraphs under What We Want. Email LA Planning Director Gail Goldberg at gail.goldberg@lacity.org; Fire Inspector II Terrence O’Connell at two2802@lafd.lacity.org; Fire Inspector II Michael Ng atMichael.ng@lacity.org; Councilman Bill Rosendahl at Bill.Rosendahl@lacity.org; Council office assistant Planning Deputy Marina Martos at Marina.martos@lacity.org; Council office assistant Planning Deputy Whitney Blumenfeld at whitney.blumenfeld@lacity.org; and cc Venice Council Representative Arturo Pina at Arturo.Pina@ lacity.org; LUPC@VeniceNC and Board@ VeniceNC.org. More have gotten into the picture.

Sequence of Recent Events

• Triangle Update headlines story 8 August about LA Planning refusing to enforce Oxford Triangle Specific Plan. Requests residents to write in protest.

• Triangle Update newsletter of August 19 explains how residents’ due diligence has been preempted by LA Planning and how this addition of gates, etc. after the conditioning process is truly a developer’s delight. Requests residents to write in protest.

• Thatcher resident Mary Margaret Martinez tapes the JPI leasing agent stating that residents could park on Thatcher and use pedestrian fire emergency gate for entrance by tapping in the code. Violation of OTSP. City officials did not heed cry of residents about the fire gate being intended as or used as an entrance until they were told it was on tape.

• Mary Margaret Martinez gets residents to protest at the corner of Jefferson Way and Lincoln last Saturday.

• Berkeley resident Elizabeth Wright rallies the Triangle with her flyer to write City Hall. Requests residents to write in protest.

• Howard resident and Chairman of the Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) of the Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) Challis Macpherson is proposing a policy change that would allow the LUPC to have control over projects that have significant changes after the conditioning process.

History

The 298-unit JPI apartment house at 3221 Carter, behind the homes on Berkeley and Thatcher went thru the LA Planning process from 2003 thru 2005. Demolition started at the end of 2005, construction followed. JPI is about to get their certificate of occupancy. Many of the buildings have temporary occupancy status now. After the complete project receives a certificate of occupancy, the process of making a change to the project becomes harder.

Residents made sure during the planning years that this project included conditions to their benefit. 

But a fire gate at Thatcher was added by the fire department after the conditioning process even though the fire department attended all the conditioning hearings. This fire gate had a code, a keyed lock, and a handle on the Thatcher side for firemen to enter yet was a pedestrian emergency fire exit gate for tenants.

A space from the southwest corner of project to the turnstiles, passageways became evident. The fire gate had hardware to be used as an entrance. Carter from the vehicle exclusion gate at Carter-Berkeley allows pedestrians entrance. All–the fire gate, the southwest corner gap, the Carter opening violate the Oxford Triangle Specific Plan paragraph 9.C.4 that states there shall be no ingress or egress from the C4-OX (high density, JPI) to the R-1 single-family homes.

Meanwhile LA City Planning refused to allow the gate to be conditioned, require a fence at the southwest corner, require a fence from Carter-Berkeley vehicle exclusion gate to southwest corner of Brennans’ Pub, all in accordance with the OTSP. Planning’s claim was that they had an “unwritten policy” preventing such conditioning after the conditioning process. This “unwritten” policy violates a City Ordinance, the Oxford Triangle Specific Plan, 170,155. This violation turns into a developers delight and denies the residents of the Triangle due process.

What We Want

  Fire Gate—We want all exterior (Thatcher side) hardware removed. It is a pedestrian fire exit gate. We want signs on interior and exterior stating that this is a fire gate, for fire only. We want the gate hot-wired with a loud siren so that the gate will not be accessed casually. We want the fence next to the gate to be high enough so that one cannot step over. We want the gate tall enough to prevent someone on Thatcher side from leaning over the gate and hitting the handicap bar. We want mesh surrounding the gate to prevent one from opening from the Thatcher side.

  This was done for Mirabella after the conditioning process in 1998, prior to certificate of occupancy, for four fire gates on Thatcher…32 feet from JPI project. Present LA Planning “unwritten” policy is not to condition such.

Safety Issue—Understand that this gate is rear access to 16 homes that abut the property. It is a safety issue. Mirabella and Marina Point have both had experiences of burglary, robbery, etc using fire exit gates not properly attended. Robbers enter/exit via fire gates and enter/exit via Triangle. Sixteen homes are accustomed to commercial establishments behind their homes having security. Southpark had security guards 24/7. When building was abandoned, fire resulted. All sixteen homes were in jeopardy.

  A casually opened fire gate is an invitation for access.

  Southwest Corner—We want a fence from southwest corner of building to turn still. Two motorcycles and a motor scooter were photographed Saturday accessing the Triangle via the gap. This is a violation of the OTSP.

  Carter—We want a six-foot cement block fence from the vehicle fire gate at Carter-Berkeley to the edge of Brennan’s Pub. Right now a chain and two white plastic water containers are the only thing preventing vehicle access; pedestrian access is without problems. Part of property will revert to Brennans’ Pub but it had a fence before. Return what was there. We want it fenced to prevent pedestrian and vehicle access into the Triangle in accordance with the OTSP.

 JPI Given Corrective Action Notice

Building Inspector David Tsau issued a notice for corrective action to JPI to blank out the code portion of the hardware on the pedestrian fire emergency exit gate and to put signs on both sides of gate.

The sign on the project side of pedestrian fire emergency exit gate will say “Emergency Exit Only.” The sign on the Thatcher side of gate will say “Fire Department Access Only.”

Experience of Triangle residents is that if management has a key, the door will remain open or it will be opened for convenience of management.

Triangle residents see this as an entrance in eyes of JPI. The sixteen homes abutting property consider this a high priority safety issue.

Also at issue and remedied this week was the right side of the gate that was open, without a fence. A cement block wall was added; the wall would have allowed anyone to walk up to wall and step over fence. Fence height was increased on right side to prevent such and mesh was added to prevent one from hanging over to hit the push bar.

The perplexing part of this gate is that L.A. Planning says it is for the safety of the tenants to get out. Fire department says it is necessary for firemen to get in. Next to this gate on Thatcher is the vehicle fire gate. Don’t firemen arrive on fire trucks? If they enter via the vehicle fire gate, they can use the push bar on the project side to open gate. Or are they going to be fighting tenants in flight. Firemen rushing to get in; tenants rushing to get out, particularly the handicapped. Something is wrong with this picture. Since when do firemen need both vehicle fire and pedestrian fire gates for entry?

September 2008 – Presidential Campaigns Start on Labor Day – Where Will They End?

By Jack Neworth

While Labor Day is upon us, I confess that lately I’ve been doing very little “labor,” unless you count clicking a remote control. With the Olympics, the Democratic Convention, and the U.S. Open I haven’t wasted this much time since the O.J. trial. 

Labor Day isn’t really about labor anymore. It’s a day set-aside for mattress and tire sales, barbecues, and bidding farewell to summer. With the advent of outsourcing and NAFTA, we’ve been basically trashing labor for the past thirty years. The first thing Ronald Reagan did as president (after removing the solar panels from the White House – what a visionary) was to break up the Air Traffic Controllers union. 

Labor used to be the backbone of the middle class. Now the middle class is disappearing. The American dream included good wages so families could own their own homes and send their kids to college. Today the divide between rich and poor hasn’t been this great since the Depression. (A depressing thought.) I read recently that the average CEO makes more money in one day than the average worker does in one year. Instead of Labor Day maybe we should have CEO Day? After all, they’re the one’s celebrating.

In the U.S. there are far more workers than employers and far more poor and middle-class than rich. Woody Allen said it best in his 1975 comedy “Love and Death” set in czarist Russia. Boris (Woody) says to Sonja (Diane Keaton) “The serfs should rule the country.” “The serfs?” Sonja asks incredulously, “Why them?” “Because they do all the work,” Boris replies. 

The upcoming presidential election will be a battle of working class versus ruling class. Obama was raised by a single mother while McCain came from military aristocracy. (Father and grandfather were admirals.) After dumping his first wife, he married into Cindy’s beer fortune and is so rich he doesn’t even know how many houses he has. (He also doesn’t know the difference between Shia and Sunni or that Iraq and Pakistan don’t share a border.) I say people who live in glass houses (Keating 5, etc.) at least ought to know how many they own. 

Joe Biden also grew up in a working class family and currently has a negative $300,000 net worth. As of this writing, McCain’s likely VP is Mitt Romney whose father was Chairman of American Motors Corporation. Romney has a net worth approaching half a billion dollars. Of course he and McCain think the economy is solid because, for them, it is. 

The late Jesse Unruh, the former Speaker of the California Assembly, often said, “Money is the mother’s milk of politics.” Republicans always have a huge edge in money, although this year it may be different. Actually, as devastating as the last eight years have been you’d think the Democrats would be a shoe in but they usually manage to shoot themselves in the foot. That somehow reminds me of the Will Rogers’ quote, “I’m not a member of any organized political party, I’m a Democrat. 

Why does labor lose at the polls? For one, they don’t own any media outlets. (Unless you include the Beachhead!) And, when they’re tricked by wedge issues, like gay marriage, they wind up not voting their self-interest, if they vote at all. (Given the choices, who can blame them?) 

The Republicans also have a huge in sleaze. If mud slinging were an Olympic sport they’d get the gold medal every time. This rich (sick?) tradition goes back to McCarthy to Nixon’s “dirty tricks” to the evil genius of Karl Rove. During Vietnam, Bush was a draft dodger while Kerry was a hero. To that potential problem Rove reportedly said, “By the time I’m done with Kerry people won’t know which side of the Vietnam War he fought for.” He was right of course.

The height (or bottom) of Republican dirty tactics has to be in 2002 during Max Cleland’s bid for re-election to the U.S. Senate from Georgia. The Republicans took a photo of this Vietnam vet triple amputee and put it next to Osama Bin Laden’s. Whenever anyone tells me the ethics of the two parties are the same, I ask them when did Democrats ever question the patriotism of a triple amputee. Surprise, surprise, Cleland’s opponent, Saxby Chambliss, didn’t happen to serve in Vietnam. (He had a rather convenient knee injury.) 

John McCain promised he’d run a clean campaign. That lasted as long as it took to accuse Obama of treason, i.e. being willing to lose a war just to win an election. So much for clean. After Labor Day the race really begins. Mattress and tire sales and barbecues aside, in celebrating the holiday I only hope we remember to honor the labor part of Labor Day.

September 2008 – Food Not Bombs – Serving the Community

By Mark Lipman

Often when you speak to people they will tell you that they “Do lots” to help the community, but then suddenly become hard pressed and defensive when you ask them to provide concrete examples. The reason behind this is that “Lots” usually amounts to nothing more than tending to their personal, private, fenced in gardens and complaining about their neighbors. The sad fact is that very few of us care anything for the well being of those around us. “Just give me my privileged lifestyle and leave me alone,” is too often the case. So it is no wonder why the media has such a difficult time finding anything positive to report. This however is not one of those articles.

If by chance on a Sunday afternoon you happen to be strolling down Ocean Front Walk, you might see mixed in with all the commercial jewelry and T-shirt vendors a small group of people up on the grass giving out free food to anyone who wants it. This group is Food Not Bombs.

Food Not Bombs traces its origins to the Spanish Civil War in the 1930’s, when anarchists banded together to help feed the poor. They were later mercilessly crushed by General Franco’s dictatorship, yet the seed they planted took root.

In the United States, Food Not Bombs first appeared in Cambridge, Massachusetts in 1980, organized by anti-nuclear activists concerned with social justice issues. The Cambridge chapter was instrumental in helping to close down the Seabrook nuclear plant in Seabrook, New Hampshire, a small coastal community much like our own.

Today, Food Not Bombs is one of the fastest growing groups in the world. 

The local Venice/Santa Monica chapter was started in 2001 by two homeless men, David Bush and Calvin Moss, in response to their concern for the plight of the poor and less fortunate. Though David has moved on, last seen helping the tenants at Lincoln Place fight their unlawful evictions, Calvin is still there, joined by Peggy Lee Kennedy, Eden, Demetrius, Char and Karen, who form the nucleus of the local group today.

Though they shudder at being defined – there are no leaders and not everyone considers themselves anarchists – it is clear that they adhere strongly to non-violent principles and all decision making is done in the Quaker tradition of group consensus. “It is a free association,” Calvin says. “We use food as a way of protesting war and poverty.”

“There is nothing like this kind of direct action,” Peggy adds, “because you literally change the world each time you feed someone.”

Though giving out food to those in need might be considered by some as honorable, charitable work, following in the traditions of Mother Teresa, Gandhi and Jesus, there are others who would consider it subversive and even anti-American to help thy neighbor. In fact, it has been anything but easy going for Food Not Bombs.

Over the years the group has fallen victim to a string of harassments and abuses by the city and the LAPD, including the false arrest of Peggy in 2006, so much so that they recently had to sue the City of Los Angeles in federal court for a second time (Venice Food Not Bombs vs City of Los Angeles).

Thanks to that battle, which they won, anyone can now distribute food along the boardwalk and by federal mandate the new ordinance that restructured Ocean Front Walk now includes two spots, P53 and P89 solely for free food distribution.

So, why are they still up on the grass? According to Calvin it is because the commercial vendors just move in and are even encouraged to do so by the LAPD and the Parks and Recreation Department.

Twice he was even physically assaulted by the vendors for trying to serve food in the specified locations. Food Not Bombs was told that they could get the LAPD to escort them in, but calling the same police that are harassing the very people they are trying to help they feel runs against their moral beliefs, so they stay on the grass until another solution can be found.

All in all, it continues to be an uphill battle, so much so that one could wonder why they would bother to keep fighting the system to feed others? But as Calvin says, “It just fit in with what I thought was the right thing to do.”