Special Interests and Unspoken Agendas

April 30, 2008

Dear Editor,

On Tuesday evening the City Council sent the 2617 Third Street project back to the drawing board with instructions to make the proposal compatible with the surrounding buildings in the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District. By doing so, it was acknowledging that the present design is not compatible and does not comply with the District Guidelines.

Rather than denying the applicant's appeal outright, certain council members sought to appease both the applicant and his architect on the one hand and the residents and their supporters on the other and avoided the responsibility of making a definitive decision on the project.

The architect will have to redraw his plans and the project will essentially return to square one, the Landmarks Commission, where it was first heard last June. This remanding of the project to the Landmarks Commission was the result of a suggestion made to Mayor Katz by the project architect, Michael Folonis, who is doubtless doing his best to prevent the denial of the project. (Editor's note: Folonis is the chair of the Architectural Review Board)

One has to ask whether it is fair of the council to ask residents to attend even one more Landmarks hearing on a project that has already been through so many hearings. The citizens of Santa Monica have a right to expect the City Council to uphold the City's own ordinances and guidelines rather than obliging residents to assume that burden. Since the mayor and his fellow council member Pam O'Connor are so clearly intent on supporting the project and/or villifying the citizens who oppose it, one also has to question their motivation.

It would be good to see a Santa Monica free of special interests and unspoken agendas. In November four of the current councilmembers (Mayor Katz, Richard Bloom, Bobby Shriver and Ken Genser) will be facing the end of their current terms in office. With the RIFT initiative also likely to be on the ballot, local politics is going to be lively this fall.

Residents across the city want to see their elected officials acting in the best interests of citizens. There is considerable unhappiness, manifested in the collection of around 10,000 signatures by RIFT campaign organisers, among the City Council's constituents. Is the Historic District currently a victim of special interests in the city? To the beleaguered residents it certainly feels that way.

Karen Blechman