Failed Boardwalk Ordinance Leads to Abuse of Power

By Greta Cobar

As the Beachhead fore-saw in its January 2012 issue, the new Ordinance regulating free speech on Ocean Front Walk (OFW) is not being enforced, and vending is in full swing (http://bit.ly/13dLKrQ). The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) have displayed full power and control over selective enforcement, choosing to ignore vendors of mass-produced items and targeting local performers with tickets and arrests.

On March 20 Solomon the Snake Man, also known as Willie Lee Turner, was arrested on a panhandling charge. The incident was video-tapped by Vivianne Robinson and highly publicized online (http://bit.ly/11Txvne and http://bit.ly/11SkLBd).

The LAPD proceeded to confiscate all of Solomon’s belongings, which they kept even after he posted the $100 bail fee. After performing the same show, in the same spot, for the last twelve years, how much sense does it make for the LAPD to tell him that he cannot do it anymore? And how much sense does it make for the LAPD to confiscate Solomon’s rubber snakes and everything else he used to put on his show? Is the LAPD implying that he should just sit on a street corner or on OFW truly panhandling, mocking the LAPD officers’ charge for taking him to jail?

How easy do you think it is to lose your way of earning an income? And who gives the LAPD that type of power?

All of that while more than half of OFW free speech spots are once again taken by out-of-town vendors, re-selling made-in-China merchandise bought downtown. That was exactly what the new OFW Ordinance, which took effect late January 2012, was supposed to eliminate.

Some of us had our Summer 2011 plans derailed by the city of Los Angeles’s decision to hold dozens of meetings concerning the new OFW ordinance. Although Venetians did not sit back, but instead, like myself, attended each and every one of those meetings during the summer months, input from the community was completely ignored, and once again downtown higher-ups drafted their own version of the legislature.

One of the points that we did not agree with was the punishment proposed and finally provided for in the 2012 Ordinance. All repeat offenses carry misdemeanor charges with possible $1000 fines and six months in jail.

Previous to this latest Ordinance, all offenses were categorized as infractions, not misdemeanors, did not carry a minimum charge and definitely did not have a jail sentence attached to them.

Besides being opposed to the fines and punishments for non-compliance, Venetians also asked that the First Amendment be mentioned in the Ordinance, opposed artists being called “vendors”, and the free speech zone being divided into “designated” spaces, but none of our suggestions were incorporated into the final draft of the Ordinance. Who would have ever thought that free speech could be limited to a marked box?

The back-bone of the Ordinance, stating that all spots are to be occupied on a first-come basis, was a failure from the beginning, as the same people occupy the same spots day in and day out.

All of these legislations created by downtown higher-ups who chose to ignore our outspoken community activists did not make provisions for enforcement. As previously reported by the Beachhead (bit.ly/13dLKrQ), at the Dec. 15 2011 Friends of the Boardwalk meeting Lieutenant Paola Kreefft stated that the LAPD does not have a plan to enforce the new ordinance going into effect at the end of January 2012. Not surprisingly, the LAPD shied away from enforcing the Ordinance, but proved to be blunt when it came to selective enforcement on several instances (http://bit.ly/XKdWuz and http://bit.ly/WZwKZL).

Just in case you are thinking that a new Ordinance needs to be drafted, remember that this is the sixth revision of the Los Angeles Municipal Code 42.15, first introduced in 2004. The previous revision, of 2008, established the lottery system of allocating the 205 designated spaces on OFW. It was deemed unconstitutional by U.S. District Judge Dean Pregerson in October 2010 on the grounds that it violated the First Amendment.

Although many OFW artists and vendors did not agree with the lottery system of allocating spaces, the very vast majority of them bought into it. Solomon was one of the very few who never joined the lottery system.

Just a few months ago a highly popular online video of an LAPD officer in Venice (http://bit.ly/XjMVMS) abusing his power resulted in public outcry, which led to the ticket being dismissed and the officer being disciplined. The same thing is bound to happen regarding Officer Gonzalez’s arrest of Solomon, which was deemed as abuse of power and selective enforcement not only by the Beachhead, but even by websites that have traditionally been supportive of the LAPD.

Please contact your local police officials to let them know that you are against LAPD engaging in selective enforcement.

California Coastal Commission Silences Pacific Gas & Electric’s Airguns

By Krista Schwimmer

On Wednesday, November 14, 2012, the California Coastal Commission unanimously and vehemently denied Pacific Gas & Electric Company a permit that would have allowed them to conduct a high energy seismic survey off shore of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant, along the Central Coast of California. To accomplish this goal, the Research Vessel, Marcus Langseth, would have towed numerous airguns, sending out high level sound impulses, in excess of 240 decibels, every few minutes, 24 hours a day, for a minimum of 12 days. No one in the room disagreed that such a barrage of sound would have some kind of a harmful effect. The question before the Commission then was whether or not P G & E could prove the survey’s benefit outweighed its inevitable harm.

The hearing, which took place in the Santa Monica Auditorium, lasted the entire day, reflecting both the enormity of the issue and the passion it stirred in a diverse set of people unified by this one issue. The California Coastal Commission received between 150 and 170 speaker cards to testify. As the day progressed, it became evident that all but P G & E were there in protest.

The California Coastal Commission opened the hearing with background history and then, their staff findings.  The lengthy and complex backstory included the passage of Assembly Bill 1632 requiring an assessment of the potential vulnerability of the state’s two nuclear plants; the Energy Commission’s report requesting P G & E to update their plant’s seismic hazard assessment; and the California Public Utilities Commission directives to P G & E for their 2014 licensing renewal. Although the California Commission’s own staff recommended the denial of P G & E’ s request, the company was granted the hearing under a “special approval” clause called the Coastal Dependent Industrial Facility Override Policy.

Making the case for P G & E was Mark Krausse. Krausse claimed that 3D high-energy offshore studies were needed to evaluate geometry and potential intersection of offshore faults. As for the use of such powerful airguns, he sited bridge piling, with its 250 decibel sound source, as a precedent. In his closing statement, Krausse argued that the “essential issue” was “one of public safety pitted against environmental protection.” Krausse’s hopeless position before the Commission was reminiscent of the song, “Alice’s Restaurant”, when Officer Obie, with his 8×10 color glossy pictures as evidence, watches in dismay as the judge walks in with a seeing eye dog. (Though, in this case, Krausse was up against a Commission and coastal community with hawk eyes for vision!)

At this point, a group of 9 environmental notorieties – including Surfriders, Sierra Club, and NRDC – led the seismic attack. The day-long testimony consisted of intelligent, passionate, and spiritual arguments against such a form of surveying that one grandmother said, would create “an acoustic prison” for the more than 2,000, friendly, Morro Bay porpoises who reside there. There was the organized presentation of environmentalists that showed the potential injury to the marine life there, as well as the ripple effect of it on the whole Marine Protected Area network. There was the fishermen and City of Morro Bay itself that spoke of the negative economic effect in that area. There were grandmothers, physicians, lawyers, and the 12 year old Aaron from San Luis Obispo who told the Commission that “the choices that you make now define integrity for our children.” Whether it was the fact that the harbor porpoise can suffer injuries at merely 164 decibels of sound or the dismissal of the ridiculous notion that it was ok for the endangered otters there as they hold their head above water, the crowd came well-prepared. Such levels of sound, too, could actually harm swimmers and surfers, unaware of the testing.

Some of the most moving testimony was given after lunch by speakers for the Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation. Fred Collins, Tribal Administrator for the Northern Chumash, began by reflecting on the very close connection his people have always had for the animal and plant nations. His own family, he said, comes from the village where Diablo Canyon is built. He called this issue, “the biggest issue that ever has been along our coastline.” The second Chumash speaker, Mati Waiya, went more deeply into the Chumash tribe’s longtime connection to this land – 30,000 years, according to his elders. He called his tribe, “the dolphin people”, who teach their children the relationship to the dolphins and the memory that “our whales carry. As families, (the whales) travel in pods and they mourn the death of their loved ones. Just like you do.” He told the Commission that “you carry the tear of the whales in your hand,” advising them to see truth through the smoke and mirrors before them.” He ended by asking them not to “wake up this land by this testing. Because you’ll regret it. This is what our ancestors say.” He also indicated, like the speaker before him, his trust in the Coastal Commission. “No one has the permit to take lives,” he concluded.

At the end of the hearing, when it came time to vote, the audience soon learned how seriously the California Coastal Commission took this request. Not only did each Commissioner vote against it, many shared stories of his or her unique connection to the ocean and its inhabitants. Dr. William Burke spoke of how he had once wanted to be an ichthyologist; but now has 9 salt water tanks at his home, filled with what he deems are “his children.”  Commissioner Connie Stewart mentioned how she, too, once touched a whale and found it powerful.

For many compelling reasons – ranging from the scientific to the spiritual – the California Coastal Commission denied P G & E that day. In doing so, they showed that they can be powerful allies to the coastal inhabitants – whether they live in or along the water. It was, indeed, a marvelous victory for marine life and lovers.

And yet, in the shadow of this victory, lies another, pressing concern, brought up throughout the day by commissioner and citizen alike. Should Diablo Canyon Power Plant even be there anymore? Rather than renewing their license in 2014, should we instead be scurrying to find solar and other energy solutions?

Answering this question could indeed be California’s next seismic matter.

The Venice Drum Circle (Free Expression)

By Ronald McKinley

The police routinely stop the Venice Drum Circle. The time is never the same, sometimes sunset, sometimes not. Sunday, November 25, at 5:10 P.M. the circle was stopped. The sunset was beautiful.

The First Amendment to the American Constitution, part of the Bill of Rights, gives us the Freedoms. The freedom to worship in your own church if you so choose, not one created by government. The freedoms of speech, press, assembly and the right to petition the Government for a redress of grievances, is what makes the First Amendment the most important.

The First Amendment protects the people’s freedom to associate with others in groups that express messages of love, peace, brotherhood and sisterhood. The traditional public forums are hard to find, regulated to death.

The VDC is not a Rave, it is not a party. It is about an alternative way of expression. It is not about getting drunk or high. That is not why I go. I go to bond with my fellow earthlings.

I go despite the fact that some are altered. When I play, I transcend. Time and space are no more. The very molecules around me are energized.

At a meeting I went to recently, a man remarked that the police don’t protect and serve us, but protect and serve the law. All laws flow from the Constitution. When the police are sworn in, they take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

One police officer said, “My sergeant will be upset if he sees you on the sand.” My First Amendment rights denied because some sergeant would be upset. I just want to play my drum. I am not asking for special treatment, just my rights as an American. “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

If you do not exercise your rights, you lose them. I am amazed that people don’t know their rights. I am amazed how people don’t question what the police tell them. Don’t take what the police say as gospel; they are just humans with guns.

This has been a long time coming, shutting down the VDC incrementally. First the VDC is criminalized, then it can be stopped.

The VDC is free, it don’t cost a cent. There are not many things you can do that don’t require money. Free Expression means free. You don’t have to have a pedigree to join in. Love of music is all you need.  Enjoy it while you can. Some person with a lot of money and the ear of some government official will be its death.

A man visiting from Germany asked me why the police stopped the Drum Circle. I told him, “Because they have guns.” Welcome to America.

Commissioner Burke Speaks to Beach Curfew

By John Davis

The most fundamental resource the California Coastal Act protects is access

to the beach, day or night, by anyone, of any color, or of any income bracket. The beach is our public trust. Over twenty years ago the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance locking the public out at night. In 2010 former Executive Director Peter Douglas declared that the City beach curfew violated the Coastal Act, and our State Constitution. He further stated the local curfew ordinance was not legally enforceable.

At the November 15th Coastal Commission meeting Commissioner William Burke indicated the Commission might be preparing for legal action against the City. He told the CCC Chief Legal Council and the Deputy Attorney General that they “better get out the letter machine and the lawyer machine and start it rolling… because the people are being penalized.”, to the sound of applause. He also said the City was “fit to be tied” referring to the Commission’s refusal to privatize parking at the beach.

Burke is a Los Angeles resident and perhaps he did not like the idea that he too could end up behind bars if he decided to visit the beach in the evening hours. The Commissioner is known for not taking things sitting down. He wants the City to know it is the State that is in charge, not the municipal corporation residing within it.

Jack Ainsworth, Deputy Director, said that he had held several meetings with the City, and one was held between 12 and 2am at the beach. He further indicated that one issue was driving the City, the homeless issue. He said it is really complex and difficult to deal with.

The Deputy made that statement while trying to explain why the City violation had not been placed on the agenda on behalf of Charles Lester, the new Executive Director. Lester’s failure to bring the violation before the Commission for judgment has led to the arrest of ordinary people who wish to use the beach, and it has festered for over twenty years. The homeless appear to be the City’s primary target. Fortunately, the Coastal Act does not discriminate against citizens as homed or homeless. It guarantees access for everyone, discriminating against none.

Thirty-Five year Venice resident David Ewing delivered this elegant message:

“This Commission communicated to the City the curfew is illegal. I just want to ask you Commissioners, how is this protecting the Citizens of California? How is this defending the Coastal Act if the delay in enforcement allows the city to accomplish its ends despite the coastal act?”

Other public comments pointed to violations of the U.S. Constitution for prohibiting the rights of assembly, free speech, and the right to exercise religion. All are prevented by the City curfew at night. Complaints against selective enforcement, (discrimination), and unwarranted arrests abounded. One speaker pointed out that staff was suppressing evidence of over 1000 “open cases” from the Commission. That term is used by staff to disguise violations. Another concern was that the Executive Director was engaging in misconduct by refusing to place the known violation on the agenda.

Lester stated it would be impossible to enforce the Coastal Act by bringing all cases to the Commission for action, which includes the curfew violation. Contradicting his boss, Deputy Director Ainsworth described an exchange of letters “back and forth which were quite acrimonious and nasty.” He finally declared to the satisfaction of the Commissioners and people that if progress towards a Coastal Development is not made that,  “we will move forward with enforcement action.”

Currently, the City may arrest, fine, and jail anyone who goes to their beach after 10pm.

Burke characterized the City’s resistance to the Coastal Act as being caused by a war between Councilman Rosendahl and the Coastal Commission because the Commission denied the parking regulation that was enforced by the City.

He indicated that Ainsworth should be talking to the decision maker, the full City Council, rather than only speaking to Councilman Rosendahl, the City Attorney, and the Parks Department. Only the full Council could make the decision to apply for the necessary Coastal Development Permit, Ainsworth responded.

Commission Staff have kept this violation away from the public and Coastal Commission since 2008. Finally, after relentless pressure by Venice residents, the Agency may soon stop the City from enforcing the archaic curfew. By passing the ordinance, the City Council believed it could override the California Coastal Act, the State, and Federal Constitutions in order to appease a handful of people who have beachfront homes. The ordinance clearly favors those few individuals at the expense of everyone else. On behalf of those homeowners, Rosendahl and the City are clearly putting the cross-hairs on impoverished persons who are exercising their right to beach access 24/7.

Stealth Flood Control Project

By John Davis

On September 26, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers announced a major flood control project to protect the Playa Vista development. Internal documents estimate the cost at $100-200 million to the taxpayers.

The agencies working in concert are the California Coastal Conservancy, the Santa Monica Bay Restoration Commission, the Department of Fish and Game, and the Army Corp of Engineers Los Angeles District.

All are engaging in a stealth marketing campaign to spin the real nature of the project. They call it a “wetlands restoration,” but it is anything but that. Major wetlands and watercourses will be dredged, then filled. Valuable wildlife will be killed and scattered. State groundwater resources will be negatively impacted.

Proposition 12 and 50 funds, approved by the public, were supposed to be spent in part for environmental restoration and acquisition of wetlands. Part of that public money has been misused by the California Coastal Conservancy to propel only one project agency documents call the, “preferred alternative.” The public had no formal voice in this plan. Preferred by who, is the question begged.

The project would serve the interests of the private Playa Vista development. It was constructed in a well-known floodplain flooded by storm waters in 1938.

The plan is to dredge a big basin for polluted water, then pile the wetlands material into 20-40 foot dirt levees on Lincoln, Jefferson, and elsewhere near the Marina and Playa del Rey. The mounds of dirt will stand taller than most houses, and never move. This will ruin the great views of wetlands that drivers see everyday.

The developers knew the project would flood again, sooner or later. So did the City planners. But, it was built anyway. With an eye to short term profits, the developers only hoped the project would not flood until after they took the money and ran.

Now the people are being asked to bail the developers out of their bad real estate gamble by footing the bill to protect a private corporation from floodwaters that are sure to come again.

It’s the destruction of Malibu Lagoon all over again, only on a monumental scale.

When you hear the project shopped as a “wetlands restoration,” don’t take the bait. It is a flood control plan to protect Playa Vista, a private development at public expense.

There is still hope to preserve the wetlands. You can support your local environmental groups including the Grassroots Coalition, the Ballona Ecological Education Project, and the Ballona Wetlands Land Trust, all of which share concerns about this proposal.

The Sierra Club, the oldest grassroots environmental group in the world, opposed the project at the Airport Marina Regional Group. John Muir founded the club long ago and its accomplishments have been instrumental in the preservation of California’s natural heritage

Venice – Where Art Meets Sublime

By CJ Gronner

The Hammer Museum came down to put on the “Venice Beach Biennial” (which the materials all keep calling a “tongue in cheek” play on the Venice Biennale in Italy – Thanks, we get it.), where a bunch of “Museum” artists joined the Venice artists that are down on the Boardwalk every day, to showcase both styles of art. But art is ALL art, no?

There was a real old style Carnival in Windward Circle put on, interestingly, I thought, by the LAPD. Interesting, considering there are always talks about budget cuts and not enough officers to get the jobs done, but they can throw up a bunch of rides and man-power to watch all the additional people said carny rides bring out? Is it perhaps a little bit to help the image, or what? Interesting, that’s all I’m saying.

I’m not that into rides that are thrown up in a few days, so that whole deal was pretty much a bike through all weekend, but I’m glad the little kids had fun.  The great thing for me was seeing the focus on ART again at the beach. On the beach artists, to be specific, as though the Hammer project brought their artists down, they were not nearly as visible as the people crafting and selling their work every day of the week down there. Aside from the big show pieces nearest Windward Circle, it was nearly impossible to differentiate who came from where … it was just ALL art. And beautiful. If you couldn’t get down there, let me take you on a little stroll of the day with me. Imagine the sun warming your back as you walked, the sea salt breeze making it all perfectly comfortable, music everywhere, and the childhood smells of a day at the beach … except with the sage, incense, and weed smoke moments of now.

The day was so gorgeous out, it was a piece of art unto itself. One thing about the Hammer works was that they weren’t labeled or identified in any way other than a dot on a map they gave out, so people weren’t really sure what they were looking at. So I guess it was just look and enjoy.

Big Easter Island Moai sculptures by Alex Israel had everyone taking attention away from the skaters in the Skatepark for a minute. So cool.

Big pink balloons marked booths where artists were being featured by the VB Biennial, but most of them appeared to be the people that can usually be found down there, like colorful pieces by SKY (Stacey Kai Young).

I spoke to Arthure “Art” Moore who was the featured artist on the materials for the VB Biennial, with his Funky Pussy painting as the logo for the whole deal. He was stoked on it all, and said that the Boardwalk artists were selling more than ever, and really being recognized for their work. VENICE was being recognized as a destination for art again, and that was important to everyone involved. I saw plenty of people holding their own version of Funky Pussy, so Moore, with his homemade eye patch, was taking full advantage of his new celebrity.

In fact, we couldn’t chat too long as we were constantly interrupted by people who wanted their photo with him. Moore was happy to oblige and offered up his signature middle finger (with a smile) to all passersby and tourist photographers. Very Venice, very awesome.

Thank goodness Rara Superstar was back from showing his art all over Ibiza in time to partake in the Biennial, as his colorful pieces are a crucial part of the Boardwalk landscape. He too was kept busy all day taking photos with people and selling them a new memory for their home collections, while reminding them that “Love always wins”.

The day could not have been more pristine, so it was a complete pleasure to amble along and spend more time than you normally would really looking at everything. The bright sunny mood was infectious, and people were open and friendly and into it. One of those days like what could be bad.

All the art looked great against such a beautiful beachy background, that it made you want to get a piece from everyone you passed by. I made a lot of notes on who to return to when I need a perfectly Venice gift for someone. I think a lot of that was going on, really. What better souvenir to bring someone back than a piece of art from someone most likely painting it right there off the sand?

There were street performers and Hammer performers (none of whom did I see all day), and I was stoked to get my own little rap from Dr. Geek … Hey, Blondie, I like the way you wear your laundry … Rad.

Ibrahim was performing in full voice and drums down by the Venice Bistro, and it gave the day a wonderfully authentic soundtrack of badassness.

Art showed up in all mediums, from paintings to jewelry to crazy little heads of figures from Bob Marley to Wilma Flintstone, if that was your thing.

Humor was everywhere – also very Venice – as even the Funky Pussy official materials were pretty funny. Some guys were hawking “Official Bum signs – For just 1 dollar you can own your own bum sign!” yelled some very official looking gentlemen who had made funny cardboard signs for your purchasing pleasure. They wouldn’t let me take a photo. Of course.

I was just beaming all day at how fun and cool life can be, especially here in Venice. I think the best thing I overheard all day was from a middle aged couple – clearly tourists -  walking down the Boardwalk. The man said, “I think we’re going the wrong way.” The woman smiled and said, “I think we’re in the right place to be going the wrong way.

Exactly. She got it. I get it. In that moment, we got each other. And that’s what days like these are all about.

Beach Curfew Violates Law

By John Davis

The Beachhead has reported on an ordinance of the City of Los Angeles that violates the California Constitution and the California Coastal Act. Former Executive Director Peter Douglas of the Coastal Commission agreed with the public that the City curfew has violated the law from the beginning. He stated that the City curfew was “unenforceable.”

Yet the City continues to arrest people to prevent them from legally using the public trust lands whenever they like, night or day. Some people work in the day so the only time they can enjoy the beach is at night. The same is true of fishermen when the bite is on at night or people who like to view the full moon in all its splendor as it illuminates the shining night sea.

But the L.A. City Council, particularly Councilperson Bill Rosendahl of CD 11, implies that there are Boogie Men who may roam the beach after sunset, creating such wild mischief that the public must be kept away. The City implies it cannot afford to provide a police patrol at night, even though untold millions of tax revenue is generated by Venice annually.

What is really happening is that Councilman Rosendahl is riding point for his posse so those who can afford beachfront real estate will enjoy higher property values.

Removing the public from the beaches they own provides exclusivity to certain property owners. If you owned a nice beachfront home in Venice, like former Congressperson Jane Harman does, would you prefer to see poor people on your beach after sunset? Of course not, they would ruin the view, and God forbid, reduce the value of the real estate. What better way to stop this than to imprison them! Bill is their man. Atop his high horse, he bugles the cry to sweep up the homeless from their home and to cleanse the beach. But he not only wants to remove the homeless. He wants all of us to get off the beach by sundown, or else his dark posse will ride down and punish you.

But the story goes ever further. Dockweiler State Park has three sections. One is south of the Marina Del Rey main channel, the other is just north, 11 acres (Least Tern Reserve) and most importantly, three acres where the Venice Pavilion once stood.

The City entered into an agreement with the State Department of Parks and Recreation in 1943 to lease and operate Dockweiler State Park. That agreement ended in 1998.

Currently, the City has no legal authority over the Park nor does the County, which provided maintenance and lifeguard services to the City while the lease was current. This places major liabilities on the State Park System, which is now responsible for any injuries that occur on State Park lands. The City no longer holds the State harmless and indemnifies it, (the State is now responsible for loss not the City). I met with and informed the Superintendent of the State Park, Craig Sap, of this matter on June 13.

At no time, even when the City leased the State Park, did it ever have the authority to impose a curfew on the public parklands. The Regulations that govern the State Parks system only allow the Executive Director, Ruth Coleman, to impose a temporary curfew, and only for minors.

The State Parks Commission needs to consider this matter as soon as possible to make the City straighten up and fly right.

Andrew Willis, enforcement officer of the Coastal Commission, said the Commission is discussing the matter with the City and is encouraged the City will soon apply for a Coastal Development Permit. However, when I spoke to Rosendahl’s trusty sidekick, Arturo Pina, he informed me the City had not yet applied. How many years does it take to fill out an application?

Andrew Willlis has said the same thing for years, but with no visible result. The Commission has failed to place this on its agenda as a violation of the Coastal Act.

Alex Halprin, Senior Staff Legal Counsel, sent the last formal letter to the Commission on February 3, 2011 reiterating Peter Douglas, “Because no such authorization has been granted, it is the position of the Commission’s Legal Division that the Beach Curfew is currently of no legal force or effect.”

Willis indicated that the Commission might be sued if it attempts to enforce the Coastal Act. I responded the Commission should welcome such a suit because a legal motion for dismissal or summary judgment would easily defeat it. I said the public would be enraged if the City fought to keep the people off of their beaches. The City would then back down. Willis would not even acknowledge this as a possibility, but focused only on not bringing the violation before the public Commission for enforcement.

Perhaps he and the Commission are in fear of the L.A. City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, who stated on October 1, 2010 that the City needs no permit from the Coastal Commission, which is attempting to exercise the powers of a “super-legislature or court with power to effectively veto or nullify the laws of Charter Cities….Indeed, your interpretation of the Coastal Act is contrary to separation of powers defined by the Constitution of the State of California… A development in the Coastal Act always refers to physical structures and things: buildings, walls, fences, etc.” (Note: The Coastal Act also defines development as change in access according to the Coastal Act).

Trutanich went on to state that “the Commission is not a Court….We trust the concept of the democratic process is not completely lost on the Commission and its Staff…The Commission obviously intends its investigation, (into the illegal curfew), to harass the City…The ongoing investigation ….represents retaliation against the City.”

Trutanich fails to even address the issue of constitutional access to public trust lands because there is no logic in which the City can override the Constitution of the State.

As for the Coastal Commission, they have known about the violation since 2008. The Commission staff has hidden well over 1,000 other known violations from the public by failing to place them as enforcement matters before the Commission. This allows the staff, behind closed doors, to decided who can violate the Coastal Act and who they will let get away with the crime. It is the Commission at a public meeting that is to decide, not staff.

My opinion is that the Commission is not afraid of the City, but is working with it behind closed doors and with no written record to allow the violations to continue without intervention.

The non-enforcement of the Coastal Act further encourages the City’s ongoing violation and is green lighting to all other coastal communities up and down the coast that they too can remove the public in order to prop up real estate values for certain financially privileged individuals.

Sun Exposure: Benefits and Cautions

By Marisa Peck

The summer is a time of abundance. Food, friends, fiestas, and yes our blessed Sun. We Venetians have to be extremely careful when it comes to the Sun. With so many benefits, come so many cautions. We all know that sunshine can brighten our mood, fuel our gardens, light our way, and just 15 minutes in the sun gives us our recommended daily allowance of bone strengthening vitamin D! But we know the brutal reality of sun damage to our skin. This summer there is much you can do to protect yourself, to strengthen your body and pamper your skin so you can be fit to enjoy summers to come.

The number one thing you can do on a daily basis to help mitigate the effects of the sun is to eat a diet rich in antioxidants. Antioxidants turn harmful, unstable particles that damage healthy cells (aka free radicals) into harmless stable particles that have little to no effect on our bodies. UV rays create free radicals. Loading up on antioxidants will increase your body’s natural ability to fight off these free radicals and thus prevent the damage that they cause (such as discoloration, wrinkles and cancer). Talk about an all-natural sunscreen! Some of my favorite antioxidant packed summer foods are Sunflower seeds, kale, spinach, artichokes, red peppers, watermelons, blueberries, oregano, green tea and chocolate. Oh yes, all natural dark Chocolate (just a few bites).

Another consideration Venetians should be taking seriously this summer is our wardrobe. Cover up people! Hats, long sleeve shirts and pants are the best protection from the Sun that money can buy. Be aware that many fabrics do not completely shield you from the UV rays. If you are like me you love being outdoors, you might consider investing in some clothes that are specifically suited to sun protection.

About now you may be thinking to yourself, “what about sunscreen?” I am so glad you asked. Sunscreen is questionable at best and should be used with extreme caution. For starters, most sunscreen products only protect against UVB (the rays that cause burns) and not UVA (the rays that cause age spots and cancer). This means that although you may be avoiding an uncomfortable burn, you are still being exposed to dangerous cancer causing rays. There are some expensive products out there that claim to protect against UVA, but due to an FDA loophole that allows any products that block out 20 percent of UVA rays to state that it “protects against UVA rays”, these claims are often bogus.

Furthermore, some of the compounds in commercial sunscreen have been found to be very dangerous, even carcinogenic. Vitamin A, for example, and ingredients related to Vitamin A are unstable and have been show to increase the rate at which malignant cells multiply when used on the skin and exposed to extreme heat. The FDA has funded and supervised multiple studies over the last decade that prove ingredients related to Vitamin A can be carcinogenic when used in sunscreen, but the FDA knowingly withheld the results of these studies for years until consumer protection groups such as Environmental Working Group published their own (and very damming) studies of sunscreen and pressured the FDA to release its own (also very damming) data. Other chemicals commonly found in sunscreen, such as Oxybenzone, penetrate the skin and enter the bloodstream disrupting the body’s hormones. And many others have yet to be studied at all. If you do choose to use sunscreen (some of us absolutely must), safer options include organic, mineral based products containing nano free zinc oxide or titanium.

So be aware, and take good care. Remember that an annual skin cancer screening by a licensed dermatologist is a must for all adults. There are a number of dermatologists who offer free or low cost skin cancer-screening clinics. You can go online and find a clinic at a time and location that works for you. Get screened, eat right, cover up and live your life. Enjoy the summer! I’ll see you at the beach.

Two Views of the Zip Line: Zipped, Not Taxed

By Dean Henderson

The vote for the zip line at Windward Plaza was probably a foregone conclusion, possibly a classic example of bait and switch salesmanship. Regardless, at its May 15 meeting the Venice Neighborhood Council voted (with some dissension) to approve a proposal permitting a 3 month trial period for a zip line at the beach. After the fiasco of the big wheel, any project promoted by the Recreation and Parks Dept. would likely be an improvement.

Ian Green, co-founder of Greenheart/Flightlinez and 3 of his staff gave a brief presentation illustrating previous projects as well as artist’s renderings of the Venice pavilion zip-line proposal. Two of Greenhearts staff members are Venetians and will be teaching classes and workshops to area children; one of the 15 conditions recommended for the proposal.

Among other conditions attached to the project are that the zip-line be removed at the end of the 3 month trial. And that permanent structure is subject to review by the City of Los Angeles and the California Coastal Commission and the VNC. Also, that 2/3 of the gross revenue received by the City of LA is spent on maintenance and services at Venice Beach. And also the VNC reserves “meaningful consultation” rights regarding maintenance and services. Other conditions cover security, lighting, signage, a monthly review of operations by the Parks and Recreation, LA Council District 11, the VNC and community members. Finally, Condition 15 permanently rejects the “Great Observation Wheel” aka Big Wheel.

Public opinion during the comment period was evenly divided. With criticism of the project including the view that the zip-line may be a president for other commercial ventures and Venice does not need an attraction, the beach is the attraction. One community member commented that the parks are public and should not be made a revenue source. This is exactly what the Parks and Recreation does not seem to understand. In years past the city was able to maintain the beach and it facilities without having to resort to commercial partnerships. When most of the buildings along Ocean Front Wall were residential and there was little commerce on the beach area, the city found money to clean restrooms and remove garbage. Now that Ocean Front Wall s almost entirely retail and dining and “Silicon Beach” is a buzzword, the city can no longer pay for services it had in the past.

Where did the tax receipts go? Business license fees or the city’s share of the massively increased property values (via tax) that even in this post real estate bubble time are still far above the not so distant past.

The crux of the issue is not any individual project. The Big Wheel stunk, the zip-line seems far less intrusive and more in harmony with the community. But why must we be told that these sorts of projects are needed to pay for services our tax monies once covered? If this is to be the new model for funding city services then there will be more ventures such as the zip-line and the Big Wheel  here in Venice and throughout the City. The limit will only be reached when the public says NO but at the VNC, on May 15,that did not happen.    

Two Views of the Zip Line: Zipped or unzipped?

By Katy Crenshaw

At the Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) meeting held on May 15, the Zip Line proposal appeared on the agenda. The VNC recommended the installation of the structure by Greenheart/Flightlinez productions (a Canadian based company) with a few conditions.

First, and foremost, the Zip Line should get a three month trial period. And, thereafter the structure should be dismantled. At the end of the trial period the attraction would be subject to environmental review by the City of L.A., the California Coastal Commission, and to input from the VNC, and the community regarding; noise impact, parking, visual blight, security & safety, crowd control and revenue earned.

Among other recommendations provided by the VNC included nighttime lighting and security, local entertainment opportunities, financial packages provided for at-risk minors, local artistry opportunities to dress the towers, financial incentives for Venice residents, monthly benefits for local non-profits hosted by the Greenheart, and permanent rejection of the “Great Observation Wheel” in favor of a location elsewhere in the City where it may generate community support.

Greenheart Productions offered a half-hour pitch where they offered a big-hearted effort to win over the community. Addressing the concerns of local residents, the team explained the Zip Line project and the fundamental concept for the installation of the Zip Line structure. Ian Green, co-founder of Greenheart/Flightlinez productions (http://www.greenheart.ca) is based out of Vancouver but works worldwide to provide conscious, nature-based entertainment. Canopy walks and flightlines are developed and aimed at nature conservancy and giving back to the community. The company also has structures located in Las Vegas, San Diego and Bootleg Canyon in Nevada.

Ian Green assured the crowd that he is only interested in providing a Zip Line that is not “too showy” and developing something that fits into Venice Beach. Green also insists this is an opportunity for conservation of Venice parks and Venice Beach. The Greenheart team includes locals from the Venice community that support the idea and would work with the community to integrate the culture of the community as well as maintain the artistic integrity of Venice. Included in the planned events for the three-month trail period include a school that would offer classes for Trash Art, Ocean Awareness, Empowerment Through Bravery for young girls and Costuming class.

During the public comment time period member of the community raised their voices. One commenter supported the idea of a family-friendly attraction, even at the cost of visual blight to customers from his Sidewalk Café, yet he still requested more information. Others had serious reservations including safety concerns and one resident told the VNC, “Don’t REC our PARKS!”

The VNC listened and voted with eight in favor, six opposed, and three abstentions. The Zip Line is approved for permitting. Now the major hurdle that stands in the way of Greenheart productions is the California Coastal Commission (CCC). An email from Ian Green to the Beachhead stated that Kevin Regan of Rec and Parks was working to get the Zip Line on the Commission’s June Agenda. As of May 30, the Zip Line is not on the June Agenda. According to Chuck Posner, of the CCC, the City has not yet submitted an application for the permit. Since the Zip Line structure is on the coastline it must have a permit for any structural coastal development. The earliest this could occur would be July’s CCC Agenda.

Do the math. One ride at the attraction will cost $20 bucks. During the 90-day trial period Greenheart projects about 250 rides on a good day. This equals a potential for $450,000 in revenue for the Zip Line project.  After covering the total costs of the structure ($300,000) the potential return on the investment is $150,000.

How much will go to the City of L.A.? And how much will trickle into Venice? Possibly, there could be a return in revenue to the City of L.A. of $90,000, if they are given 20 percent of gross revenue. Is this gonna happen? It is recommended that two-thirds of the revenue from the City be returned to Venice. This is a ballpark figure of about $60,000. The Greenheart team also stated they anticipate hiring 3-4 people for the Zip Line crew from the local community. The total impact on Venice from the Zip Line project remains to be seen.

If you are interested in filing an appeal form with the California Coastal Commission, FAQs are located here:  www.coastal.ca.gov/cdp/appeals-faq.pdf