Barnyard Bullies

By Ian Dean

The Neo-Venetians are at it again. Barely a month has passed since one Venice institution (Glencrest BBQ) has been forced to close due to gentrification, another is in potential jeopardy.

This time it’s your local hair parlor, Paper Scissors Rock. Potentially at the hands of the not so “Local Hangout since 2013,” The Barnyard.

The location that was formally “Benice,” and before that “The Ho,t” and many other institutions. None of the occupants of 1715 Pacific Avenue have been so brazen or greedy as to try and usurp the next door neighbors at 1711 Pacific Avenue. Until now….

Paper Scissors Rock is a slammin’ little building, covered in graffiti and bright blue paint. It lives up to its distinct name, both in practice and in spirit. When you walk inside, you can clearly see and feel the individuality and unique draw, compared to any other parlor. That individuality is included in the stylists that the “Floyd’s Barbershop” chains could only pretend to be. The place clearly sends a message to any who pass its threshold that this is no frou frou salon.

Opened in 1986 by 5 friends, who migrated to Venice from a salon in Santa Monica when they wanted to try something new. They set up shop on Pacific, and have been rocking the shears and buzzers ever since.

The shop and its inhabitants have seen three owners of the property come and go over the years, as land tends to swap hands. It was never was a problem, since the owners always tended to be fair,as long as the rent was paid. Now it would seem the best 2 out of 3 is just not enough.

It all started on March 19th, when one of the original 5 stylists, Masao Miyashiro, was sent a link from an acquaintance to a news item in a blog. It appeared on LA.Eater.com, titled “Paper Scissors Rock Could Fold For New Venice Restaurant.” The blog stated how the location property of 1715 Pacific (The Barnyard) had applied for a liquor license. The only problem is they applied for the license under the address 1711 Pacific, which is Paper Scissors Rock.

Interestingly enough, the same day this link was emailed to Miyashiro, a letter of notice was delivered to his home in the nearby apartments,  from the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. It stated that an application had been made for a liquor license for 1711 Pacific Ave, but the notice was dated March 13th.

Let’s not jump the gun just yet, and make assumptions. The Barnyard as a whole does not own the property it rests on, and it does not own the property of 1711. Itt could be just a mistake on the LAeater’s part, however one of the co-owners of The Barnyard restaurant DOES own both properties.

A mistake…riiiiiiiight.

The owner of both properties in which Paper Scissors Rock and The Barnyard stand, according to the public records I obtained from the County Assessor Office, is Jose Bunge. However, the application of the said liquor license, according to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, was filled out by two companies, under the names CFJ, LLC and HHHC95, LLC. Both offered very little information as to WHO exactly they were with some online fact checking.

I spoke to Deb Kennedy, the owner of Paper Scissors Rock, and the lessee of the space in question. She informed me the very day Miyashiro received the posted notice on his door, he printed a copy of the LAeater column to show her. The owner (Bunge) walked in to the shop, went straight to Deb and said, “I filed for a liquor license, what do you think?” Kennedy’s reply? “Yeah, we heard you want to build a restaurant,” as she turned to her supply box and and pulled out the printed copy of the online blog. Bunge immediately grew irate, and was taken aback. “Who wrote this?,” Bunge demanded. “It’s not true, that’s not what’s going on,” he insisted.

I asked Kennedy, “If that’s not what’s going on,  then what IS going on? Why would he be applying for a liquor license for a hair salon?” “That’s what I was wondering myself,” said Kennedy. “But he then went on to say how he would move me to one of his other spots, and he even showed me one, but it really was not to my liking. It had no parking, and we need space for our clients’ cars.”

Another interesting fact, aside from not informing Kennedy till after filling out the application, was the actual LACK of the paperwork for the Liquor License that was legally supposed to be properly displayed.

According to the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, a license that has been applied for must have a sign of notification placed in full view to the public on the window of the property in question. This notice was not put up at all for over a month, and when it finally was put up, it wasn’t the legitimate paperwork required by law, nor was it on the right window (it was posted on the door to 1711 1/2, the apartments just above Paper Scissors Rock).  The “notice” was just two separate pieces of printer paper scribbled in squarish letters with blue sharpie, that states on the first sheet ” POSTED ABC” and below it on the other sheet “LIQUOR LICENSE.”

The only official paperwork posted was not for the liquor license at all, but for a notice informing filming would taking place. Finally weeks after the fact, with phone calls complaining to Stacy Williams, the Licensing Representative for the Department of the ABC, a proper notice has been posted, but there is no date specified as to when the application was filled out, and certain sections are blacked out with sharpie, not indicating the proper fields.

Kennedy has a year lease left, and does not want to make waves to anger her landlord, or do anything to jeopardize her location while she still has it, but if one were to take a step back and look at the situation from a distance, this truly seems like Bunge is manipulating the situation, tweaking the laws regarding protocol to get what he wants.

When I brought up to Kennedy how this seemed very backhanded, and asked how it made her feel, she stated, “It’s his property, and I kind of understand why he is being sneaky about it, as he probably does not want to lose revenue till he is ready to set up his new project, but he did something similar to Benice next door, when he applied for a liquor license under the pretenses of it being for the benefit of Benice. But when the license went through, he gave the owner of Benice the boot and then opened up The Barnyard. I don’t think I have much time left here.”

This is one example of how this particular establishment is willing to mistreat its business neighbors, but what about its employees? Is there any difference in how they treat the locals that don’t have something The Barnyard wants, or stands in it’s way? Tamra Hernandez, a life long Venice resident, with a more than qualified resume of restaurant experience, was recently hired – and subsequently fired – by The Barnyard as a server. Hernandez is also putting herself through school, and her hours for class are a bit demanding. When interviewed for the position, Hernandez informed her potential employer about her class related schedule requirements. She had class till 4:00 pm, which means she could not be at the restaurant any earlier then 4:45pm. The manager of The Barnyard, Celia Barber (wife to the Head Chef, Jesse Barber) had informed Hernandez that it would not be an issue, as the Barnyard does not open till 5:00pm.

The first day on the clock, however, Mrs. Barber decided Hernandez would do better as a hostess than as a waitress, since she was not familiar with the selections of wine that could be paired with the food. This normally would not be too big of a problem, except for the fact that the hostess needs to be at the restaurant before opening to answer calls and take reservations. This meant Hernandez would be late to work every single day due to her school schedule. Two days in to her new position as a hostess rather than a server, Barber then demanded that Hernandez not only hostess, but bus tables, run food for other servers, and serve tables (the very task she had originally been hired to do but was then demoted due to “lack of wine knowledge”). Then, on top of it all, denied her any of the tips that were either put directly into her hand, earned from customers she had personally catered to. After two weeks of being continuously “late to work” due to the classes, Barber pulled Hernandez aside and shrewdly said to her, “I just don’t think you are a right fit here.”

On paper, the reason Hernandez was let go was because she was late for work, even though her boss knew she had class till 4:00pm, and could not be at the restaurant till 4:45pm. From Hernandez’s perspective, it had nothing to do with being late. In her mind, they clearly wanted a certain kind of person, both in their employment, and in their restaurant as customers. Tamra, nor anyone she knew, did not fit the bill.

“What confuses me is this place strives to be local and about the neighborhood, and they treated me like I didn’t belong,” said Hernandez. “When friends of mine, people I grew up with and I’ve known my whole life, people from the neighborhood who saw me through the window hosting, they would stop by to say hello, and ask me about the food. Each time someone I knew came by, I introduced them to Celia and told her who they were and what they did, and she would dismiss them as unimportant simply by the way they looked. So much for a local hangout, when you won’t even acknowledge the locals.”

I am not sure how many of you have graced the website for The Barnyard’s “About” section, but it has since been greatly altered to only showcase the Head Chef and Manager’s credentials, but that is not what it originally portrayed. I am willing to bet someone pointed out how stuck up they sounded with the original content, and that’s what prompted the change. When I first looked at the website, I found it difficult amid the hypocrisy and name dropping to not rip it apart word for word  A bigger person would be above doing such a thing …. unfortunately for The Barnyard, I am not that person.

The restaurant’s now changed self defining review of how local restaurants should be run around the neighborhood was nothing short of hilarious, especially when they openly criticized the other restaurants on Abbot Kinney, when they are a very similar establishment. With its smug hipster aura, it’s additionally ironic seeing how Jessie Barber worked at The Tasting Kitchen, which is located precisely on Abbot Kinney.

The website verbally pumped itself up about the building location, and how it’s been a local spot since the 60′s, despite the fact Barnyard only moved in late 2012, and only opened this year. They have virtually nothing to do with the memories or reputation the property has obtained over the years to make it so unique in the first place. The website actually bragged about being located next door to the “Blue Grafitti Box” aka Paper Scissors Rock, (the very building they want to take over) and the graffiti art proudly displayed on the building. The art was specifically created FOR Paper Scissors Rock, and they dropped the artist’s name (Asylum), when he has never even spoken to any of the management of The Barnyard. The site ranted about localism, when these very people have given locals nothing but the cold shoulder and a leering eye.

I laughed out loud when I read how the Head Chef, Jessie Barber, creates dishes with “lack of pretension,” but then in the next paragraph, he is described as a self proclaimed “purist” in terms of cuisine. He was not shy to flaunt that he had mentored under Thomas Keller at The French Laundry (so much for lack of pretension). There was also the self-proclaiming statement that it’s a place to get “an honest bite to eat.” I had very hard time finding anything honest about The Barnyard. I have ordered beer from there, and glanced at the menu. The prices were not exactly affordable, nor did they seem simple. The service was less then accommodating, never mind friendly towards me. My jaw dropped in disbelief at the very end, when they insist to, “Come as you are.” Clearly only if you are to their liking, and look like you have money.

This place screams of gentrification and social elitism in some of the worst ways. It leeches off the reputation and hard work of others that came before it. It prides itself on including the neighborhood, while stomping it flat into the ground. It cuts corners with legalities to get ahead, while underhandedly misinforming their neighbors, who without proper facts, can’t even attempt to halt the process.

I guess all I have left to say about The Barnyard and places like it is this … Support your local shops, not your local snobs.

Keep Venice Free – No OPDs

By Greta Cobar

What else could possibly be done to change the welcoming spirit that has been the trademark of Venice for as long as it’s been on the map? How about bringing in Overnight Parking Districts (OPDs) that would make it illegal to park without a city-issued permit from 2am to 5am.

The California Coastal Commission has voted against OPDs in Venice on June 11, 2009 and June 10, 2010. Because neither the legislature nor the circumstances have changed since, it is expected that the same vote will yield the same results come June 2013. The judicial system of the US is heavily based on precedent rulings.

The Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) was scheduled to hold a Town Hall meeting on OPDs on April 4, but that meeting was canceled and the next tentative date is May 6.

The reason the last meeting was cancelled and the date for the next one is still up in the air is because of disagreement between Linda Lucks, VNC President, and the Outreach Committee of the VNC, concerning who should be on the panel answering the public’s questions at the Town Hall.

“I’m not going to accept this,” Linda Lucks told the Beachhead about the current selection of panel members. They include Mark Ryavec of the Venice Stakeholders Association; Arturo Pena, Bill Rosendahl’s Chief of Staff; Jane Usher, former President of the Los Angeles City Planning Commission; and Tamara Martin, LADOT representative in charge of OPDs. All of these individuals are strong supporters of OPDs.

Town Hall meetings in Venice have historically been dominated by strong, outspoken opinions and enraged citizens on all sides of an issue. But the current effort of the VNC Outreach Committee is to have the next one be non-controversial and non-confrontational. According to this committee, the option of not having OPDs is not an option anymore.

Following the Coastal Commission’s 2010 ban on OPDs in Venice, Mark Ryavec’s Venice Stakeholders Association filed a lawsuit with the City of Los Angeles in which he argued that no Coastal Commission approval is needed in order to establish OPDs in Venice. City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, although at first against Ryavec’s lawsuit, changed his mind and joined forces with Ryavec against the Coastal Commission.

“An earlier, tentative settlement went to the Commission about a year and a half ago, but it was rejected by extremists on the Commission. In the intervening time the Commission membership has dramatically changed,” said Mark Ryavec,

Although the Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) Board voted to approve OPDs in 2010, then Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission Peter Douglas joined forces with the 38 Venice residents who had filed an appeal against OPDs by filing his own appeal.

As a result, the Coastal Commission in 2010 voted against the establishment of OPDs in Venice.

Unfortunately Peter Douglas passed away on April 1, 2012, and the Coastal Commission went from what the World Bank had previously called “the strongest in the world” to what Steve Blank, a Commission member, predicted at the time of Peter Douglas’s death: “Once he’s gone, this commission will implode in the blink of an eye and all we’ll be talking about is the color of the concrete used to pave over what’s left of the coast.”

Currently a tentative settlement between Ryavec and the Coastal Commission has been reached, which would allow OPDs throughout Venice if the Coastal Commission were to approve them. In addition, two-thirds of the residents of each block would have to sign the petition asking for OPDs in order for them to go into effect.

Linda Lucks, although not the most outspoken liberal member of the VNC Board in the past, is now taking a strong stand against the Town Hall panel being represented only by Ryavec and those who agree with him and his settlement with the Coastal Commission.

As a result, Ryavec and his Stakeholders Association on March 25 filed a request for an investigation of an ethics violation by Linda Lucks. According to the request, Lucks should recuse herself from involvement with deliberations concerning OPDs because she has a conflict of interest due to her position as Capital Campaign Coordinator at the Venice Community Housing Corporation, which has opposed OPDs.

“The ethics charges are groundless, I don’t have a conflict of interest,” Lucks told the Beachhead.

Ryavec has previously been a big advocate of the Oversize Vehicle Ordinance (OVO), which prohibits RVs from parking on certain streets between 2am and 5am. “Vehicle dwellers have simply moved to vans, small trucks, and SUVs, which are not subject to the restriction on oversize vehicles,” Ryavec stated.

“The city of Los Angeles cannot justify this proposal as a way to address homelessness,” wrote Kim Thompson, a San Fernando valley resident and regular visitor to Venice, in his 2010 appeal to the Coastal Commission against OPDs.

Undoubtedly public access to the beach would be restricted under OPDs. According to the Coastal Act of 1976, “the public should have 24 hour access to the beaches.”

The midnight to 5am curfew that is now in place in parts of Venice under LAMC 63.44.B.14(b) is not only selectively enforced, but also illegal. A person sleeping on OFW during that time is likely to be harassed by the police either with a ticket or an arrest, while someone walking his or her dog is likely to be ignored by those same cops.

According to the Coastal Act of 1976, “the public should have 24 hour access to the beaches.” Under that same act, the city needs a permit for “any sort of curfews or restrictive ordinances that have such a negative impact on coastal access” said Charles Posner, Coastal Program Analyst with the California Coastal Commission in a phone conversation with the Beachhead in January 2012. The city does not have such a permit.

OPDs come at a price to all residents: they cost money. And the fee will be increased on a yearly basis. All of a sudden we will have to pay to park in front of our own houses and will end up paying outrageous parking tickets when we forget to put up the permit. Our friends will have to leave in the middle of the night or pay for the ticket more than they would for a hotel room if they just decide to crash over. Or, even more trouble can come about if they decide to leave after drinking because they’re worried about getting a ticket.

Although OPDs would be a hassle to the residents, the more important issue to consider is the public’s right of access. Do we want Venice to become the equivalent of a gated community?

Just because certain fractions of the VNC are trying to make it seem as if OPDs are inevitable, the settlement reached by Ryavec is tentative, just like the ones reached in 2009 and 2010. The Coastal Commission cannot afford to discredit itself by issuing a ruling opposing its previous decisions. Neither can it afford fighting and losing, based on the Coastal Act and on precedent rulings, the lawsuits that would inevitably follow.

The Coastal Commission is going to hold a hearing on the settlement on either June 12, 13 or 14 at the Long Beach City Council Chambers, at 333 W. Ocean Boulevard, in Long Beach. The public cannot attend this meeting, but letters opposing OPDs can be mailed in. Also, keep an eye out for the Town Hall meeting, currently scheduled for May 6, and come to voice your opinion during the Question and Answer section.

Poverty and the Profit Motive

By Mark Lipman

Disparity is all around us, pocketed by great bunkers of wealth.  Fortified swimming pools and Rolls Royces share the same intersections as shopping cart homeless.  Invisible to all, poverty is everywhere.

The common theme we see from California to New York, from Benton Harbor to New Orleans, is that in every single community in this country there is an out and out war on the poor and dispossessed, with a mishmash of local “quality of life” ordinances targeting and criminalizing the weakest among us.  Any sign of community or compassion is jeered at and attacked relentlessly by vigilante neighborhood watch groups.

The wealthiest and well-connected do not want to have to see poverty; do not want to be directly confronted with the by-products of the system that made them rich – the system that supports their every need and desire – as only money can for the few.  They do not want to feel guilty, so they get angry and look for someone to blame.

Unable to find a mirror, they instead turn their fury to the very victims of the system, convincing themselves that the poor are there because they are lazy and don’t want to work.

That, however, would better describe trust-fund socialites than the family of four trying to scrape by, in a system that has trained them to be dependent on factories and corporations – dependent on the next paycheck – which then overnight took all the jobs away, casting aside countless of middle aged workers, who are then left unprepared for survival in a jobless economy.

Those, who somehow think that merely “working hard” is the solution, have forgotten the founding principles that govern the economic system known as capitalism.

For every “boom” in one corner of the world, a “bust” is required in another.  The very cornerstone of the profit motive is founded on the exploitation of others, of disposable workforces and communities that are used up for their resources and labor, and then quickly discarded as soon as a cheaper means of production – through both the use of robotics, and the exportation of local manufacturing to unregulated markets abroad.

Poverty is a necessary and inevitable pillar of capitalism, for the greater the poverty, the more widespread the destitution and destruction, the more wealth that is accumulated and hoarded by those at the very top.

At this very moment, while America reels from one financial crisis after another, with tens of millions of families living in abject poverty, the richest one percent are sitting on a combined wealth of $4 trillion, which lies stagnant outside of the economy in private coffers and offshore accounts.

Any attempt to tax or redistribute this wealth for necessary social programs is immediately scoffed at by politicians, who are indentured to corporate lobbyists and campaign contributions, in order to maintain their own positions of privilege and power.  The ability to concentrate wealth enables the capitalists to also concentrate power, leaving all those without out.

Without poverty and the massive debt it ensnares, capitalism would not be able to function.  Therefore, when we speak of overturning the system of capitalism we are going directly after the root causes of the poverty that we see in our everyday lives.

Sidewalk and Bus Stop Taken Over by Owner of Venice Historical Post Office

By Greta Cobar

Joel Silver, the new owner of the historical building that formerly housed the Venice Post Office, does not have permits to block the sidewalk and the bus stop around his property, but he does not seem to care.

The public needs to call inspector Ed Oddone at 213-252-3085 for the limits on Silver’s building permits to be enforced.

However, according to real estate attorney Michael King, “the city is very lackadaisical about temporary fence installation enforcement because the contractors move it when the inspectors show up and move it back when they leave.”

First Silver denied public access to the historical building, then he claimed ownership of the Edward Biberman mural that is still the property of the USPS, and now he is taking over the entire sidewalk, a lane of street traffic, and a very busy bus stop.

Unabated, he might extend his fence to the entire Windward circle and beyond. If that seems unlikely, what he has done so far was beyond our worst imagined case scenario just a year ago.

Although the Venice Neighborhood Council in February passed a motion to move the Edward Biberman mural out of Silver’s office, and put it into a public space such as the Abbot Kinney Library, no further action was taken.

According to the Phase III Design Plan Review, Silver is replacing things like wainscoting, wood paneling, wood-frame bulletin boards, and other defining features of the building, with the provision that “they would be safely and securely stored so that they could be reinstated at a future date, if so desired.”

Angelica Houston, the last millionaire to move into the area, removed the historical Venice colonnades in front of her compound, and they were never to be found again.

Call the inspector or risk getting hit by a car when walking along one of Venice’s busiest streets.

Another Nail in the Coffin of Venice

By Ian Dean

There once was a little street near the ocean that was strung with little shops, and houses. It was not a fancy area, fairly modest and far from perfect, but it had a very strong sense of community, and was an affordable place to live for families and free spirits alike. This street was known as West Washington Blvd. Today it is known as Abbot Kinney.

Noted as “The Coolest Block in America” by GQ, it was not long ago this “Hip” area lacked the chic boutiques, the high end organic cafes and the chi exploring yoga center. It was a street where people actually lived both in terms of residence and commerce. It was a place to see people, not a place for people to “be seen”. And it is due to magazines like GQ that have been killing Venice bit by bit for over a decade, and the most recent victim is a small, family diner formally known as Glencrest BBQ.

By the time you read this, Glencrest will have closed. No more will it deliver its crispy fried chicken or delicious pulled pork sandwiches. The collard greens and cole slaw will no longer be served as a side and the menu on the wall, full of deliciously fattening and high carb dishes that would make any vegan run for the hills, will simply cease to be. That is a damn shame.

Glencrest, for those of you who never had the fortune of stopping by for a bite to eat, was much more than just a restaurant. It was a true local family establishment. It was was not a place people went to tap away on their Ipads or make tweets about, or brag to their friends about. It was a place you walked in to and were always were given a big hello, and had an actual conversation about your day, especially if Little Chris (who is NOT little at all) was working behind the counter. It was a place to stop and munch on some corn bread and ribs, while everyone outside bustled around with their high end shopping bags and jabbered away on their cell phones about who knows what. It was a place to read the newspaper and sip on a crisp orange Shasta. It was a place to watch the busy world everyone else was trapped in just zip by as you sat and lazily laughed at how they all should slow down, come inside, and order themselves a burger. And actually enjoy it.

In contrast to the other “hip” shops on Abbot Kinney, one might have walked right past it and not even have known it was there, but the building is far from indistinguishable. The front is emblazoned with the words “GLENCREST BAR.B.QUE” in big bold, almost western like letters. There is a painted barber pole on the side, and along the wall that stretches back to the alley of Aragon Court, there is a giant graffiti style mural with such images as a great white shark, a sexy looking Chicano woman, the word “VENICE” clearly defining the pride of the town, and a pig in a cook’s toque and shades.

This little hole in the wall has a fairly rich history as well. It was owned and operated by Christopher “Stone” Featherstone. If the name sounds familiar it ought to. Residents who use the facilities over at Oakwood Park have seen it many times on the marquee over the Baseball Field: “Glen Featherstone Field”, who is Stone’s grandfather.

The building in which Glencrest originally was located was owned by James Cooper, who also was Stone’s uncle. Originally, the space was a barber shop from  the 1960′s through the mid 80′s, serving the community, and was also a place for gossip and local interaction. But as most people do, Mr. Cooper eventually wanted to retire, and Mr.Cooper’s young nephew, Christopher Featherstone, had been dabbling in cooking for a while, and had wanted to open up a small eatery. His uncle agreed to rent the space to him, and in December of 1985, Glencrest BBQ was born, and up until recently cooked some of the best damn chicken and ribs I have ever had.

I sat down with Stone over a lunch of fried chicken, mac and cheese, and potato salad. I asked him how the closing of Glencrest came to be. Stone told me when his uncle had passed, his cousins inherited it. With the rising popularity of Venice (specifically on Abbot Kinney, which is prime real estate), his cousins wanted to capitalize on such an opportunity. I asked Stone if he was bitter towards his cousins for this. He said was not not bitter, so much as disappointed. “It’s their building, and they could do what they want with it.” That does not mean, however, that it didn’t sadden him that his family put money before the hard work and time and heart that went into making that place what it was. He also fondly recalled all the former businesses that are no longer around, that were practical rather then pricey. A pet store, a shoe repair shop, and The Brig, back when it was a REAL bar and opened at 6am every day, and the bartender knew what you drank.

The real reason Glencrest will not being staying at 1146 Abbott Kinney Blvd, is because they just can’t afford the new rental price the new owners are asking for. “They want 9 to 10 grand a month,” said Stone, in a tone of disapproval and disbelief. “Just not happening.” The decision for this sale happened very fast, which just goes to show how quickly Venice is being sliced up like a pie for financial gain. According to Stone, the new owners purchased the building just before Christmas, and wanted them out within the next month. That was just not possible, between finances, not to mention all the heavy cooking equipment. They needed more time, which was begrudgingly given. As I write this, Glencrest is on its last week of operation. That is not to say that the Glencrest Crew won’t still be around. Stone has an investment in the eatery across the street called Local 1205, which neighbors The Other Room Bar. They also plan to relocate Glencrest, but sadly it more than likely will move more inland towards Los Angeles than stay in Venice. Where it truly belongs.

I decided to ask around the area to other locals about their feelings on the matter. One particular individual, “Seven”, was very heartfelt in his opinion. “I’ve spent a lot of time at that BBQ. It’s like losing a family member,” said Seven. “No matter when or why I walked through that door, I ran into wonderful people cooking or eating wonderful food, birthday parties were thrown there, it was a place to have celebrations and in itself, was a place TO celebrate. It was the last true Venice family institution where people with younguns could go and get great food for a great price, and now it’s gone. Another place so many loved, pushed away by the ever growing, bougie clientele that has systematically driven so many others out of the area just so they can have a slice of Venice. It breaks my heart.”

Another gentleman, who also happens to be a merchant at one of the Boardwalk store fronts, Rami Khoury, had a more simple and less attached, but still valid opinion. “I honestly only just found out about this place, and I wish I found out about it sooner. I work at the store 5 days a week and have been eating at Glencrest 3 days of them for the past 2 months. It’s worth the walk and the food to stroll toward Abbot Kinney. It’s a bummer it’s shutting down.”

I am going to miss this place. It’s not fair that it had to close the way it did. As stated earlier, this is a family establishment, in more ways then one. This was the place my sister ordered when she was in a bad space as comfort food. It’s the place my former roommate, Ian Tweite, (who passed away 2 years ago) and his wife would go for dinner. They survived on Social Security, and when they were short on cash, Glencrest always took care of them. It’s where customers were more than just a profit margin, but friends who were actually cared about, and it showed in the food. It’s another example of gentrification, and it’s at the expense of wonderful people and their wonderful diner.

I joked with Stone that it would be ironic if the new owner rented it to a vegan cafe. He laughed and said from what he understood, it was to be a sandwich shop, which isn’t much better, as Abbot Kinney is covered now for both the vegan and sandwich niche. I guess there is Baby Blues BBQ over on Lincoln, but it’s so expensive in comparison to the affordable menu offered at Glencrest and with none of the love that should go into it. Which takes me to Stone’s last comment before he had to go inside to take care of some customers. “This area used to be affordable, not just for living, but for eating too. Now it costs $10 for a salad. I really wish the other owners around here would understand that if you create an environment where everyone can afford to eat, things would be a lot more pleasant for everyone.”

To bring this to a close, I would like to personally address those coming to the area to set up a new shop or those who frequent these institutions. Things change, not everything can stay the same way forever. It’s a fact. But when something works, when something is enjoyed by many, when it’s fine just the way it is … why change it?

We all have a place we call home. This is my home, as it is for many others, and it pains us to see places and people we care about pushed out simply for revenue investments. I am sure many readers here, who have come to call Venice their new home, have fond memories of where they grew up. Imagine if one day you went back and everything you remembered was gone? That grocery store your Mom used to go to is now an American Apparel. That movie theater you and your friends used to sneak into is now an upscale condominium. You are lying if you say it wouldn’t crush you, and you are lying if you think it’s “progress”.

Driving the rent through the roof, making it impossible for the original storefronts to survive – that made the area so unique in the first place – is counter-productive to the very purpose of those who migrated here to become involved in the community.

So long, Glencrest… and thanks for all the catfish.

Some Will Never Be Gentrified

By John O’Kane

Many have expected Venice to become another upscale coastal community ever since the early 60s, when the city directors began dozing the architectural gems copied from the Italian source. The gentry go after good business deals and cheap property wherever they may be. Once the poor man’s beach, Venice lagged behind other coastal areas due to a Depression made worse by the discovery of oil, and has been targeted by developers ever since.

But Venice has been more than undervalued property, and still is to some extent: a creative bohemia, relatively independent political city-state, and alternative cultural haven. The members of these communities have always been refusers who believed in living differently, and unplugging from the mainstream. They’ve fought back against efforts to make it an homogenous, upscale-consuming community, and they had the numbers to succeed for many years. These old Venice types were not merely colorful under-consuming eyesores vibrating some extinct religion, though there are a number of these around. They’ve always needed low rents to survive, and sought out cheap hoods to subsidize their art-making and lifestyles.

As the history of bohemia shows, however, they only have so much time before the entrepreneurs find them and they have to migrate. While their lease has been nearly up for years, they’ve helped keep Venice other than a top-end shopping mall.

In the early phases of gentrification aspiring members of the bohemian club, whatever the strain, dedicated themselves to poverty as a way to symbolize their refusal of the material world, but also as a way to manage their time and resources better so they could live a more spiritually-rewarding and insightful existence. They were educated folks, religiously inspired, and breathing the city’s beaten legacy nurtured over the years by diverse performers. High rents have made this dedication difficult. But the upgrade of this craft can be found in various states of withdrawal from the rat race and passionate devotion to the quality life.

High consumption has always coexisted with real and dedicated poverty here. Abbot Kinney, the city’s founder, constructed an upscale resort with cultural attractions, but was its first bohemian. He was not happy with the quick arrival of the Coney Island carnival mind, since his culture was upscale too, but he believed in culture. These attractions inspired a climate that welcomed creators of many stripes, and encouraged a marriage of culture with the circus. The resulting mass entertainments were distractions for many over the years, but they mushroomed into unique pop forms that became part of the identity of the refusers, their ways of expressing themselves: performance art, rock music, surfing sub-culture, murals, street theater…

These free forms were valid alternatives to the upscale ones, and they remain today. Somehow it seems Abbot would have at least appreciated Jim Morrison’s free verse poetry, and the “doors of perception” metaphor his band borrowed, as well as the automatic writing of the Beats who made the city’s postwar identity that persists in alternative circles.

After all, he showed sympathy for the lives of interest to the Venice Kerouacs and Ginsbergs in building Tent City while he constructed Venice. It was for those who came to buy plats but were written out of the plots. The nitty-gritty of lives down below fueled the Beats’ mojo, that of the beatens who mirrored them, as well as that of the surrealists whose names and actions found a secure existence here. They were all fascinated by the zen principle of bewitched bodies finding spiritual meaning and transcendence in the contrasts of ordinary objects, structures and events in the everyday world, and fused these elements into new meanings.

Some would say that Abbot’s sympathies toward the lowly are most evident in his bringing of pigeons here, leaving his first family on Paloma Ave to breed like some drugged-out kin network.

Ray Manzarek, a surviving Door, says that what distinguishes this bohemia is the freedom of everyone to explore states of mind, no matter what your state in life. Its source is in the variety of stimuli from nature and the playful amusement scene, an explosive cocktail that vaults you beyond yourself to yourself. No need to even worry about the mushrooming valet culture on Rose Ave or elsewhere. You make freedom in the cracks of the glistening facades, and in the contrasts between the downbeat liquor store and the upbeat boutique next door that keep citizens aware of their surroundings.

For over a century this impulse has breathed through residents like a contagion, often erupting accidentally through the most unsuspecting citizens, turning them into momentary visionaries. And it’s safe to say that Venice is haunted with the memory of these transactions. People come here and change, never leaving. They become possessed and metamorphose into a peculiar kind of Venetian that is neither wealthy nor poor, but rich in spirit.

Will gentrification ever leave Venice immune from recession and the scars of downbeat worlds; reach a point where the ghosts of the past are exorcized and alternative residents cease being formed? Not likely, since profits need low wages; wealth needs contrast. And the creative life is too entrenched, blurring the divide between new and old. The scene will always bring those who want to discover. And certain sectors as well as citizens simply can’t be gentrified.

There’s always a chance the gentry will get caught in a hotspot, donate their wealth, and slum it on the beach with the pigeons…

Edward Biberman Mural

By Delores Hanney

Since the recent slipping into private hands of the 1939 WPA-built post office in Venice, there has been much anguish and gnashing of teeth mainly due to the loss of an almost constant availability of the pleasure afforded by an offhand gaze at its iconic mural, The Story of Venice, tucked up inside the building. The 6’6” by 15’10” oil-emulsion tribute to the town’s past is the work of one Edward Biberman done in 1941.

The Work Projects Administration was a New Deal agency created during the Great Depression to provide useful employment to the otherwise jobless: constructing roads and bridges, parks and public buildings. Many of those buildings were then festooned with murals capturing a topic of local significance, painted by talented artists such as Biberman who were also working under New Deal programs, The Section of Fine Arts in Biberman’s case.

Not being painted directly onto its host wall, The Story of Venice is separated by process – if not purpose – from those pictographs of the cave painting sort harking back to times of antiquity. By contrast, the Venice post office version of visual life recordation is an oil on canvas that Biberman created in his studio on Vine Street in Hollywood. Actually, the oil was mixed with a wax preparation following a recipe he was given by Hilarie Hiler, a WPA mural-maker working out of San Francisco. It imbued the surface with a lovely eggshell quality and a gentle sheen as opposed to a shine. In completion, the painting was affixed to the wall through a technique called “marouflage,” a kinky kind of name for a procedure not that far removed from a do-it-yourselfer hanging wallpaper in the dining room.

He was way jazzed to receive the commission for this, his second mural. “It’s a painter’s dream to run into that kind of rich material, which also happens to be true,” he told an interviewer for the Archives of American Art at the Smithsonian twenty-three years later. “Everything about the place is something which one would imagine to have been created from a figment of some very rosy imagination.”

Biberman’s approach, to this pictorial – and picturesque – historytelling project of his, is delicious, as all who ever saw it can readily testify. Following the ersatz triptych model employed on his first mural painted for the Federal Post Office Building in downtown Los Angeles, Venice founder Abbot Kinney is the central image in The Story of Venice, behind him the visionary rendition of his cultural Shangri-La. To the left Biberman depicted its honky-tonk manifestation; to the right in its industrialized form. In this manner, he captured not only Kinney’s fancy but also how it evolved upon making contact with real life. “It’s a wry commentary on what can happen to a man’s dream,” the artist observed. Venetians promptly claimed it as their own.

Stylistically influenced by the work of important Mexican muralists such as Diego Rivera, David Alfaro Siqueiros and Jose Clements Orozco, all of whom he knew from his days back in New York, it’s not just a sentimental reminder of things past. The piece exudes a certain romantic muscularity that embraces both the idealistic and the pragmatic in a sideways kind of optimism for the future. It offers, however, no hint of the somber social advocacy that later would become the primary focus of his fervor.

For more than seven decades, Edward Biberman’s awesome mural was there to welcome Venice post office patrons who bustled about, task oriented, towards a swift completion of business. The government retains ownership of the treasure but the covenant signed by the building’s new owner, movie producer Joel Silver – of Die Hard, The Matrix and, Lethal Weapon fame – would have him restore it for public viewing at his new digs, by appointment on a bi-monthly basis. That eventuality would have the effect of lifting said mural-viewing from an incidental part of an ordinary day’s errands to the status of a special event. But as Greta Cobar reported in the Free Venice Beachhead, a law suit was filed in Washington D.C. for reconsideration hopefully resulting in re-emplacement in the Abbot Kinney library: the best possible outcome for Venice homies.

In his moody and mystical and impassioned poem, “Sacred Places,” Jim Smith evokes that old post office to enshrine it as a temple, the mural image of Abbot Kinney inside as its resident deity. With it, a piercing howl of pain breaks from Smith’s soul.

Primeval articulation of a community’s grief for things as they stand now.

Venice Homeless Person Not Guilty – For Erecting a Toilet

By David Busch

I love you.

After a year now of controversial Venice arrests, 12 jurors have found that a homeless person’s “porta-potty” erected here in Venice on Third Ave. near Rose – and which was torn down and destroyed by the LAPD last April – had been a lawful benefit to this community.

I’m David Busch.

And the porta-potty was mine.

The potty, covered with hippy peace signs – and bearing a smiley-faced placard, stating, “Hi, I’m your porta-potty” – had been erected by me as a way to serve all of Venice.

And, like all basic human needs must be – it was free. For I have been given so much to my spirit, I now know this.

I first came here to Venice in 1980 and rented for a couple of years on the boardwalk. I was a diesel mechanic back then – for the city; and today I’m a proud Venice Hippy.

But early this year, after pushing literally hundreds of us “homeless people” and youth travelers several blocks off the people’s Boardwalk from midnight until 5 am each night with the City of L.A.’s  illegal beach closure and with no toilets available until nearly 8 am, I was actually arrested by LAPD – and charged with “creating and maintaining a public nuisance” (P.C. 372), for erecting a much-needed homemade porta-potty behind Digital Domain.

Where up to 120 people – and still without toilets right here in Venice – have been attempting for all this time, to this day, to find themselves a safe spot for nightly shelter in Venice. As the poor, youth travelers, street kids – and we hippies in Venice – long had on the Beach and Boardwalk, before its illegal closure. And with  plenty of room for both us and the thousands of tourists we welcome here, in our own Venice way.

So starting with a tent, I had began collecting donations of soap, cleaning supplies and toiletries; and I soon found myself daily emptying and carefully re-cleaning a bucket, and a toilet seat lid for the porta-potty. Later, a beautiful lady here named Mariska donated a bigger tent. One homeless man, living in his car, donated rolls of toilet paper he bought himself – each week. I kept things washed, and had some water with chlorine for occasional spills.

This setup was in line with procedures outlined in Red Cross emergency manuals.

For months, maintaining this potty further required the hauling of some tightly-sealed 5 gallons buckets for nearly four city blocks, down to the Rose area Beach toilets once they were opened.

But I want you to know, I now know that any of us can do it – and juries will stand with us on this.  And even the hazmat officials who arrested me agreed that our porta-potty beat out the City’s Beach toilets for over-all cleanliness.

At the end of the four day trial, the verdict was handed down in Los Angeles’ LAX/Airport Superior Court on Wednesday, December 19. And in declaring me innocent, this jury had to find that the utility of my  conduct to the  community outweighed any other offense.

Additionally, I was also charged in this trial by LAPD with violating the Los Angeles municipal code LAMC 56.11: leaving or permitting to remain “any article of personal property upon any parkway or sidewalk.” For having, on Third Ave., my homeless shopping-cart wheeled box, which holds my, and other people’s on the streets, possessions.

At trial the jury deliberated for many hours over two days, and after three requests to the Judge for the

– Continued from page 1

court to clarify the law and testimony, including one  seeking a further explanation of the ordinance, which was denied, the jury, in response, returned its verdict to me on this second charge: “Guilty.” For violating LAMC 56.11.

This is despite the fact that in Los Angeles LAMC 56.11 has been significantly constrained for several years by a Federal injunction, due to a prior homeless lawsuit against this homeless-abusing city: “Lavan v Los Angeles.”  This injunction had specifically been brought to prevent the seizure and destruction of homeless people’s property that is merely left on the sidewalk, and not abandoned, just as I had  maintained in this instance.

But for several years, this injunction has also brought the ire of some vocal, and winey,  LAPD officers here in Los Angeles, who claim that they cannot tell what an imminent threat to public health and safety is. And a bizarre crusade to overturn this law by our current Los Angeles City Attorney, Carmen Trutanich.  And now in Venice, LAPD is using this ordinance to harass the youth hitchhikers here – and lump them all in with us homeless, in violation of their rights to continued coastal access.

And so, strangely, and despite this injunction’s being upheld in a recent 9th Circuit appeal – at my  trial, the judge would not allow jurors to hear about this injunction. And not even a simple proposed, jury instruction that merely would have stated that the charge must be balanced – by all people’s 4th Amendment right to property.

My attorney here in Venice, John Raphling, who has represented me on this, further argued that this  Los Angeles city law is so vague that merely locking one’s bicycle to a pole, or parking one’s car in Venice, on the face of it, violates this crazy ordinance.

Yet housed people aren’t driven from Venice over it.

To me it is so sad to see that our Venice, a community of 42,000, has absolutely no shelter beds now whatsoever; and this, additionally, while our Councilman Bill Rosendahl was recently bombarded by another homeless-hate campaign for his support that we homeless people merely have access to some kind of day-storage facility here.

I ask you, “What good is an equal  ‘Right to Property’ anyway – if we haven’t even a legal place to keep it? Do they make housed people here now carry their houses around on their backs, everywhere they go?”

What will you do when you loose your own house?

So, for standing up for this storage, the City Attorney’s Office demanded at my sentencing – for parking a box on the sidewalk in Venice – that I be entirely banished from Venice for three years.

The honorable Nancy Newman was this trial’s presiding Judge.

Newman, instead, sentenced me to no probation, one day in jail – and time-served for this arrest.

To me, the bottom line of this absurdly wasteful trial was that after three days, and hours and hours of truly bizarre testimony officially presented by LAPD officers, the jury, in cleaning up all this mess – just spoke for all the loving Venetians here.

The LAPD testified that they never saw urination or defecation in any of Venice’s streets, gutters, or alleys – contradicted by testimony and photos, from their own hazardous waste officials, that more than 60 pounds of feces, and urine-deposited matter was collected by them from the streets, sidewalks and alleys around Third Ave.. And these Venice officers insisted that feces contained in a bucket and later dumped down the toilet was supposedly a greater threat to the public than the pounds of feces and urination that they, in fact, had found themselves smeared across Venice’s sidewalks, parking lots, alleys, and streets – and all of which, supposedly, was meant to pick apart my own effort to keep Venice safe.

Venice’s LAPD officers have now been given some new, common-sense orders by their own, highest authority – we the people. Twelve jurors have now instructed LAPD in Venice to open up their eyes, and recognize that even a homemade porta-potty by a homeless person here is far better than urination and defecation anywhere in Venice’s beautiful streets. I hope those that cry for “law and order in Venice” aren’t just hypocrites and will recognize that this is now the law.

Homeless porta-potties, simply and properly maintained, are not a public nuisance – and without something better to meet human need and sanitation – they are a benefit to all in the community.

Finally, I just especially want to thank my Defense Attorney John Raphling, who provided his own services to all of us here in Venice in this matter pro-bono, and is a member of the National Lawyers’ Guild.

Because with this victory, you can bet we all who’ve loved Venice have even more plans. And adequate toilets for Venice are just a start.

To sign a petition demanding more available public toilets, go to change.org and search “Access to toilets is a human right.”

I love you.

——————————————————

David Busch has recently taken a vow to begin and end all his conversations with I love you.

Mural Illustrating Abbot Kinney Should Be Moved to Abbot Kinney Library

By Greta Cobar

We as Venetians are upholding our reputation of not giving up. So here’s the latest on our up-and-going, not-nearly-over fight with the United States Postal Service (USPS) and the new owner of our former, historic post office, Joel Silver.

The Story of Venice mural by renowned artist Edward Biberman, formerly housed in our historic post office, remains the property of the USPS even though the building has been sold into private ownership. Ever since the sale of the building, which closed on August 2, we have tirelessly tried to obtain a copy of the covenant concerning the mural between Silver and the USPS. Both Bill Rosendahl’s and Janice Hahn’s offices made vain promises of obtaining the document and making it public. It took a Freedom of Information Act request filed by a Mark Ryavek to finally view the document four months after the sale of the building.

The document, dated August 2, starts out by optimistically stating that “USPS agrees to loan the Mural to the Borrower, and the Borrower agrees to borrow the Mural from the USPS, for the purpose of exhibiting the Mural for a term of fifty (50) years.” However, through undisclosed maneuvering with the USPS, Silver managed to add a “First Amendment to Loan Agreement” on August 21, which states that “Borrower agrees to provide public access to the Mural six days per calendar year during the hours of 10 am and 6pm Pacific Time by appointment.”

There goes the request by the Coalition to Save the Post Office, representing virtually all Venice organizations and a wide spectrum of citizens, to maintain access to the mural during the same hours as the USPS had back when it owned the building.

In addition, although the initial loan agreement states that “prior to any such restoration (of the Mural), the Borrower shall send notice to the USPS of the proposed restoration for USPS review and approval,” the August 21 amendment negates any such responsibility by stating that “Borrower shall not be obligated, prior to any Mural restoration, to obtain the approval by the USPS of the proposed restoration provided.”

No wonder Silver was able to remove the mural from the wall in spite of expert and community opposition.

I personally filed an official request with the Venice Neighborhood Council (VNC) to introduce a motion to move the mural depicting Abbot Kinney from Silver’s property, which does not allow public viewing, to a public space, such as the Abbot Kinney Library. Let’s hope that the VNC will represent the wishes of the community on this issue, and let’s hope that their recommendation will actually have the power to make a difference.

The battle against the USPS is still being fought on more than one front. A new brief was filed on December 19 in Washington DC in our lawsuit against the USPS. The Circuit Court has combined our case with two others, involving Pimmit Branch Post Office in Northern Virginia and the Spring Dale, West Virginia Post Office, all represented by Elaine Mittleman.

The current brief submitted by Mittleman quotes the USPS as stating, in its own document, that “to maintain the spirit of the section in placing artwork in Post Offices, postal policy provides for the relocation of these works into the new facility when a Post Office moves so the art can continue to enrich people during the normal course of their lives” (http://1.usa.gov/12RK0kW).

Although our new mini, hole-in-the-wall post office at the mail sorting annex does not currently have enough space to exhibit the Biberman artwork, the original building has a very high ceiling. With minor modifications the current ceiling could be raised to accommodate the mural. However, after our one-way communications with the USPS over the past two years, we might choose to avoid dealing with them and move the mural to the Library instead.

“The Postal Service will include measures to ensure the mural will remain available for public viewing in any plan for reuse or disposal of the Post Office property” is a commitment that the Final Decision about the Venice Post Office included, according to the latest brief filed by Mittleman in Washington DC.

The Postal Regulatory Commission (PRC), whose mission is to represent the public in dealing with the USPS, “failed to consider the commitment by the Postal Service that the mural will remain available for public viewing. In addition, the PRC did not address the historic preservation issues concerning the Venice Post Office and the mural,” according to the brief submitted by Mittleman.

Yes, we are taking on a big, federal institution whose mission seems to be self-destruction in favor of private shipping companies behind the excuse of a manufactured crisis. And yes, we are taking on Silver, the multi-millionaire Hollywood producer who was recently kicked out of Burbank and decided that Venice is hipper. It doesn’t make sense for Silver to keep the mural after removing it from the wall, without provisions for public access. Could we get the building back? If through our current lawsuit we can prove that the USPS or the PRC failed to follow procedures when disposing of our historic post office, the USPS would have to buy the building back from Silver and re-instate postal services.

Please contact the VNC at secretary@venicenc.org and urge that the motion to move the Biberman mural to the Library be placed on the January VNC Agenda. Then get involved by attending the VNC meeting on January 15 at 7pm at Westminster Elementary School, 1010 Abbot Kinney Blvd.

Silicon Tsunami Wipes Out Free Venice

By Jamie Virostko

About a year ago, I was walking a dog, crossing Abbot Kinney up San Juan, when a tattooed guy in worn jeans, stopped me on Electric Ave. His long hair in a salt and pepper braid, he was returning from buying breakfast. As the big Samoyed sniffed longingly at a steaming paper bag, my mid-fortiesh friend lamented all the changes in Venice, “Man, used to be, we’d make fun of the yuppies with their long boards who think they’re f—ing cool…Now we just take it.”

He had my sympathy, until he suggested I come to his place for a massage. When he opened his arms in anticipation of a “brotherly” neighborhood hug, I moved on. I had learned, the hard way, that those “free love” embraces with senior skater and surfer dudes, often lasted too long and sometimes involved an ass grab. Around here, you’re better off hugging the homeless. Too bad there’s not many left…

The Techies have a vision, and they are actualizing it. Major increases in property values since Google’s arrival! And, they are recruiting from outside Venice Beach! Now Microsoft has office space, along with a crapload of hungry startups. Wealth is sweeping through like a tsunami, washing everything affluent and white and clean.

The “Coolest Street in America” title, bestowed on Abbot Kinney, freaked me out. Great, now we’ll get Hipsters from all over the world, journeying like pilgrims to the Apex of Hip. If that wasn’t bad enough, Rose is blossoming into Abbot’s well dressed and über trendy kid sister. And, if you haven’t noticed, they’ve been awfully zealous of late, enforcing that two hour parking for all vehicles along Rose Avenue curbs.

Whenever I see a quaint, beach cottage sold on the off-Lincoln Walk Streets, it is almost always bought for the land. One story, character-rich dwellings razed and replaced with modern mini-castles, as soon as someone can obtain the permit! That means fewer starter homes and less Middle and Working Class Families. Young White Professionals bleed into the Oakwood area, displacing the already diminished diversity. Then come new developments – like those big lofts near 4^th and Rose.

Being a dog walker, I stroll Venice – up and down, front and back – everyday. Before Rose grew hip, I have watched what’s left of our Black and Hispanic Communities, aging and priced out, as buildings are sold and renovated or rebuilt. Many of the Mamas and Papas of the local Counter Culture have crossed into their twilight years, with free expression settling behind seven foot tall privacy fences. Our Young Artists struggle to afford housing in this once Bohemian enclave, as wild gardens and homemade art in front yards are replaced by standardized landscaping.

Those beautiful and tragic camps along the Boardwalk – groups of kids and their dogs, soft guitar, pot, old bums, addicts and ex-cons settling into slumber, blankets and broken beach umbrellas – banished at night. The people do not cease to exist. But, where do they go, now that they cannot gather – either on Ocean Front, Rose or any other place where they were previously tolerated? How do we get them into homes when nothing is reasonably priced?

The City would like to relegate Free Venice to the murals and the Boardwalk vendors, with a few notable characters thrown in for spice. It’s allowed where tourists roam and money can be made. Is that really satisfactory? They give you a fancy, A-list celebrity, sign lighting and save the Biberman work…But what about an entire way of life tossed aside?

Diversity and Homeless are the battles that, if lost, will wipe real Free Venice off the map. Unfortunately, those are huge, hard challenges. But, sanitized homogeny will be the death of creativity, not to mention the negative blow to our Community Soul. Where are Occupy and that famous Free Venice Activism? This is relevant, tangible and happening now!

Did the Tech Panel not tell us, at the Silicon Beach Town Hall last spring, that a primary reason they came to Venice was the available talent already here? Is anyone going to hold them accountable to generate jobs for the existing community? For keeping our community in tact, through involvement with this new wealth, instead of swept aside by it? Google’s rep at that Town Hall said they wanted to be careful not to alter the things that make Venice special. Are they keeping their word?

In everyone’s lifetime, one must process change. Free Venice has often found strength in hunkering down and digging in against it, even revering its own uniqueness. But, celebration of the individual can make it difficult to really come together. Hundreds of solitary voices, when gathered, can end up a cacophony of splinter agendas, personal history, and the desperate desire for each one to be heard.

How can uninhibited free expression forge an unwavering wall of camaraderie that, wholeheartedly, puts community first? And yes, Silicon Beach now has to be included in that community, along with major bucks to the Venice Family Clinic and St. Joseph’s; and, increased tax revenues to California and the City of LA.

How do we get creativity back into the streets, so we can be inspired by one another?

With respect for life, there are no boundaries. We are free to go and be who we are, wherever we want to go and be. But, if we don’t come together soon, it could be game over a lot faster than you think.