By Kevin Herrera
Daily Press Staff Writer

September 26, 2006

CITY HALL — How ironic that on the evening when elected officials issued a proclamation declaring October “Disabilities Awareness Month,” an ornery, disabled senior citizen was booted out of the City Council Chambers — walker and all.

It’s not that our elected officials are cruel. They weren’t even the ones to order the emergency evacuation during Tuesday’s City Council meeting. It was City Clerk Maria Stewart, who seemed to have had her fill of the scruffy, white-haired man’s abusive outbursts.

Throughout the first hour of discussion, which included an update on the City Hall’s living wage ordinance and efforts to end homelessness, the senior was continuously leaning over Stewart’s shoulder, pestering and prodding. It seems he was growing a little impatient with the council’s long-winded discussion and didn’t want to wait like everyone else for his turn to speak publicly.

Just which issue he wanted to address may never be known because as soon as he grabbed his walker and slammed it on the ground in disgust, a well-dressed police officer was standing by his side ready to usher him out of the chambers.

The tall blond officer, bedecked in a shiny black suit, used the utmost care as he gently lead the disgruntled audience member to the back of the room, populated by attorneys, planning commissioners and gadflies.

It was at this time that the old man hollered out, “This is a disgrace. You’re all a bunch of crooks!”

As he leaned over his walker, his left foot bandaged, the old man slowly limped out of the chambers, all the while berating the council.

It was a shame to lose the old guy, for he provided that last bit of entertainment and excitement during what was more than five hours of sleep-inducing debate around complex land use issues that had much of the waking audience scratching their heads in confusion, this reporter in particular.

Essentially, the council approved a set of incentives and fee waivers for preferred development projects that include such things as affordable housing units and child care facilities. Those that practice historic preservation or are funded by charities would also receive priority. Those projects that are not preferred would be reduced in terms of their density and scope.

The moves were made by the council in anticipation that Proposition 90 will be approved by voters on election day — Nov. 7.

If you haven’t heard about it already, Prop. 90 is the enemy of all municipalities, at least that’s how it’s been characterized by council members and slow-growth advocates.

Entitled the “Government acquisition, regulation of private property initiative,” Prop. 90 bars state and local governments from condemning or damaging private property to promote other private projects or uses.

More importantly, if approved by voters Nov. 7, Prop. 90 would limit government’s authority to adopt certain land use, housing, consumer, environmental and workplace laws and regulations, except when necessary to preserve public safety or health. If a new zoning law is enacted and it limits the amount of development a property owner can engage in, Prop. 90 would require local governments to pay big for the developer’s profit loss.

Supporters of the measure are presenting it as an anti Wal-Mart initiative that would protect the little guy — working families, seniors and small business owners — from eminent domain abuse. Prop. 90 would “restore homeowners’ rights that were gutted last year by the Supreme Court’s outrageous Kelo decision … allowing imminent domain to be used to take homes and businesses and turn them over to private developers … Save homes and businesses.”

Sounds great, right?

Those opposed say don’t be fooled. Prop. 90 is poorly written and will cost taxpayers billions each year, opponents said.

The League of California Homeowners, California Fire Chiefs Association and the League of California Cities are warning voters to say no to “the taxpayer trap (that) would … erode basic laws that protect our communities, our neighborhoods and the value of our homes.”

Being the proactive body that it is, the council decided to address as many land use issues as possible in advance of the election so that, just in case Prop. 90 does pass, Santa Monica will be able to retain the current character of its neighborhoods.

Council member Pam O’Connor summarized it best.

“Prop. 90 would take away the tool of zoning,” she said. “If approved, we would be frozen into the zoning we currently have. We would not have the ability to control development in the way that residents believe is the best for our city. While we can’t change current zoning because it’s a long process, we can create incentives for the types of projects we want and give those projects priority.”