Inaccurate Reporting, VERITAS, Playing Fields and a Worthy Landmark

December 16, 2001

Dear Editor,

So sorry, but in your reporting of the December 12, 2001, Planning Commission meeting -- "Planning Commission Giddy Over Project" (Dec 14) -- Jorge Casuso does a dis-service to your readers by being an inaccurate reporter.

In his enthusiasm for registering our positive response to the re-design of the development scheduled for the beach-adjacent block of Hollister, he declares that we are a "commission that seldom sees a development it likes."

A sober review of this Planning Commission's decisions since summer of 2000 would confirm that the Commission has actually approved far more projects than it has rejected, although often with extra conditions intended to ameliorate their impact on residential neighbors.

Such a review would also show that a majority of rejected projects have been in violation of their existing CUPs at the time of review or have been denied by City Council on appeal or have failed to demonstrate neighborhood compatibility as per the specific -- & discretionary -- provisions of the Zoning Code.

The Planning Commission has, as its mission statement, the following mandate: "To promote the health, safety and general welfare by encouraging the most appropriate use of land; provide adequate open spaces for light and air; prevent undue concentrations of population; lessen congestion on streets; facilitate adequate provisions for community utilities and facilities such as transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks and other public requirements; and, designate, regulate and restrict the location and use of buildings, structures and land for residents, commerce, trade, industry and other purposes."

In the spirit and by the letter, the Planning Commission is required to think in the long term and beyond the bottom line (including that of the City). We are to consider the common-wealth and imagine the city 20, 40, 80 years into the future. This is such a serious charge that, yes, sometimes it requires saying: No.

Yours sincerely,
Geraldine Moyle

December 16, 2001

Dear Editor,

Thanks to Frank Gruber for opening a serious discussion on VERITAS in his column ("Something Causes Grumpiness in the City of Santa Monica," Dec. 14).

Frank raised a number of thoughtful issues which will no doubt be addressed in the upcoming campaign. Since Frank so kindly acknowledges our good intentions, we would like to express the basis of those intentions. We believe in meritocracy. We believe people should be elected based on their character and ideas, and not on the amount of money spent by others who expect loyalty in return from the elected candidates.

Santa Monica politics is taking a dangerous turn. Not only are campaigns nastier and more polarized, but outsiders with their own agendas are now influencing the elite few who control the local slates. Those outside agendas, whatever their merits on the national level, may be inimical to the civic health of Santa Monica.

Irresponsible actions and policies by City Council are causing multiple costly lawsuits against the City. As misguided politicians continue their assault on Santa Monica's economy, businesses leave and investors fear to locate here. The City's pioneering progressive social programs, such as affordable housing, aid for the unfortunate, and fiscal appropriations for schools and the environment are being threatened.

There is ample leadership talent among us in Santa Monica, talent that could restore confidence, but that fresh blood cannot emerge without a loosening of slate control.

Under the present system, in order to be elected it takes several hundred thousand dollars, most of it spent on manipulative direct mail. Hence, only well financed slate organizations decide who has a chance. Thus, it is not surprising that for over 20 years, with one exception, no independent has been elected to the City Council. Furthermore, however ironic, "progressive" Santa Monica has never elected anyone from the heavily minority Pico neighborhood.

Although slates have selected some fine people, the criterion for endorsement has been loyalty, not mature, independent judgement or new ideas. The result has been many Council members with questionable seasoning who have burst upon the scene simply because slate leaders chose them.

We are not opposed to slates participating in local politics, and under VERITAS slates would still be active, although hardly with the lock Frank Gruber thinks they will have. With grass-roots democracy possible in districts as proposed by VERITAS, slates will no longer be able to suppress independents and dominate the dialogue. In fact, with real political competition, the two major slates either will become more open, constructive, and responsive, or they will vanish.

Santa Monica is blessed with an abundance of capable people who can bring more enlightened leadership to our community. VERITAS lets these people be heard in a forum where they can be judged based on their quality, and not on the number of slate mailers they can stuff into our mailboxes.

Paul DeSantis
Irene Zivi
Co-sponsors of VERITAS

December 13, 2001

Dear Editor,

There is another community mistake of tragic dimensions about to unfold. I learned at the Sports Advisory Council board meeting that the Civic Center redevelopment "working group" just essentially unilaterally proclaimed that none of about 15 acres of open space designed into the community project will be allowed for our community's organized youth sports.

Meanwhile, our youth face an already critical shortage of playing fields. My colleagues on the Sports Advisory Council report already having to turn away children players, undoudtedly from across the economic spectrum in our community. And I've seen the results of this disadvantage at area tournaments that I've coached at.

The plan presently calls for 300 low income housing units on the western portion of the project. About 10 acres of grass and tree casual use spaces are slotted to the north, and northeast. The working group also specifies 5 more acres of open space at the eastern portion of the project. This is the key area.

Enabling playing fields on those 5 eastern-most acres (nearest to Samo High's west field border), will not only help the entire community youth sports programs, which already face crucial shortages of field space, and will thus benefit the health and welfare of our entire community, but will also give the youth of the on-site housing project residents to the western area a place to play with the rest of the community youth -- while still preserving about 10 acres of undedicated open lawn and tree area green space at the civic center project, including for those residents and the community at large.

The crucially needed change, which is specifically to reverse the working group's one sentence, self proclaimed, prohibition of including the playing field needs of our youth in our community's civic center redevelopment, will still add 10 acres of undedicated acres of casual use space-- for use such as now can be enjoyed, such as that is, at Palisades Park along Ocean Ave.

There will be a few more meetings this month up to and including the City Council meeting in early January, where citizen input needs to be voiced.

Correy Avner
Santa Monica Sports Advisory Council

December 10, 2001

Dear Editor,

Thanks for getting this news out so fast. ("Samohi Wins First CIF Championship since 1981," Dec. 10) Keep up the good work... I love reading about our local sports.

Richard McGee

December 8, 2001

Dear Editor,

I am so tired of another architect who thinks he's a city planner telling everyone what's right ("Councilman Appeals Landmark Nod for Civic Auditorium," Dec. 7). The Civic Auditorium fits in because it's cool.

This city doesn't need a Gehry monstrosity. Isn't (Mayor) Feinstein satiated enough in his acceptance of the continued rape of Main Street?

Gee-let's spend more money on traffic circles which are nothing but a pain-in-the-a-- and don't remind anyone of "charming European intersections" no matter how the Feinsteins sugarcoat it.