"A Countervailing Power" and "Self-serving Hypocrites"

July 8, 2003

In the weeks leading up to the City Council's recent deliberations and decision regarding appointments to the Santa Monica Planning Commission, I have read or heard numerous times the characterization of Kelly Olsen, among others, as being "staunchly pro-resident." ("Olsen’s Reappointment Stirs up Political Storm," July 3)

The interesting thing is that this characterization is viewed as being a negative factor for Mr. Olsen, as somehow indicating an unwillingness to compromise, or an extreme point of view, and certainly making him more controversial.

But if we turn to the theory of political economics, specifically John Kenneth Galbraith's theory of countervailing power, we see that this is not a negative factor at all. Instead, in systems where power is concentrated in one sector -- as it is in the business sector in Santa Monica -- the system works BEST (i.e., has the most efficient results) when there exists a countervailing power, a concentrated force that works for its own interests, just as the business community does.

No one expects the business community to be anything but staunchly pro-business. But if we want the system to work well, we must have another concentration of power to act as a counterbalance.

People and organizations who take strongly pro-resident positions are vital to making Santa Monica run well.

Jennifer Polhemus
Economist
Santa Monica Planning Commissioner 1990-1993

July 8, 2003

Dear Editor,

Regarding your July 3 article "Low-Income Housing Project Appealed" concerning the proposed CCSM Pacific & Main project, I have the following comments.

The article incorrectly states the project to be 27,046 square feet. The site area is 27,046 s.f. The four-story apartment building contains 43,291 square feet, the retail space is 1,780 s.f., and the walkways, patios and courtyard are 7,503 s.f., for a total above grade square footage of 52,574.

However, the 82-car parking garage contains approximately 24,600 square feet, so the entire project encompasses a total of approximately 77,174 square feet. Try asking Joan Ling to confirm this figure publicly.

I also take exception to Joan's comments regarding the proposed project's "popular" support from OPCO. Due to the lawsuit against the head of OPCO over the organization's financial irregularities, the four OPCO Board Members opposed to the CCSM Pacific & Main project resigned. In their place, 4 women, all either CCSM Board Members or affordable-housing advocates, and the Reverend from the Church of Ocean Park (James Conn's alma mater) appointed themselves to the OPCO Board, so that they could "unanimously" approve the project.

Prior to this charade, OPCO had created a Pacific & Main Committee to prepare a Report on the proposed project. When the Committee surveyed area residents and found 49 of 50 persons interviewed opposed to the project, OPCO quickly buried the Report.

In response to the negative impact of the unreleased Report by the Pacific & Main Committee, OPCO directed its Housing Committee, lead by an employee of the City of Santa Monica Housing Department, to generate their report espousing the need in Santa Monica for more affordable housing. The OPCO organization is a collection of self-serving hypocrites, whose sole purpose is to maintain the status quo at City Hall and their own self-interest.

Ms. Ling's final remark in the article suggests that "one person can stand in the way of a publicly supported project." Evidently, I am that "one person" to whom she is referring. But anyone who has attended the three ARB meetings regarding this project knows that the proposed project does not enjoy popular or community support.

The project is supported by a small and vocal group of CCSM supporters and residents, as well as affordable housing advocates, all of whom are connected in some way to OPCO and City Hall. In fact, as mentioned in your article, it is the strong political connection between City Hall and CCSM that makes our efforts to reduce the density of the project an uphill struggle.

The continued opposition to this project is not due to "a fear of change" or "misconception," as claimed by Ms. Ling. The powerful opposition is due to the fact that the City "administratively approved" the project, exempting it from a previously required CUP and any meaningful development review process.

The proposed project remains, after two years of CCSM lobbying and arrogance, incompatible with the existing neighborhood due to its height, density, lack of parking and ground floor retail use on Main Street.

Ling is right about one thing however. America is great because throughout its history, men and women have been willing to fight, against all odds, the adherents of the status quo, those unwilling to part with their special privileges gained at the expense of others.

CCSM received over $4 million in public funding and it's high time CCSM showed some respect toward the public that supports its mission to create low-income housing, but not at the expense of existing neighborhoods.