By Marc Schrobilgen Santa Monica board members calling themselves a neighborhood group are making endorsements and voicing the opinion of a large geographical district of the city without even getting any feedback or input from the actual neighbors who live there.
I recently attended the Wilshire/Montana Neighborhood Coalition meeting to hear discussions on Prop. A. The meeting was held in a small apartment building recreation room and was supposed to be the first meeting where both sides of the issue were going to be presented and debated. In attendance were five board members, two people from the press, three people debating the Prop. A issue and only three members of the public. After about 30 minutes of debate and some informative Q & A, I was shocked to see the leaders of the “coalition” unanimously choose right at that moment to endorse a “No” vote on Prop. A.
This was done without any communication or outreach to any of the other members of the group. I am not sure how many members make up the Wilshire/Montana Neighborhood Group, but I am pretty sure it is more than three. Even out of the three members in attendance, they were not asked for their input in the decision-making process or even where they stood on the measure. I found out later one person was for Prop. A and the other two needed more information. Unfortunately, I guess their minds were already made up for them — compliments of their local neighborhood group.
This was also obviously the case with the NOMA endorsement. It is very clear that they also have had no dialogue with the homeowners considering the huge amount of support for Prop. A.
I mean, has anybody on the board of directors actually driven through their own neighborhood? There are only about a thousand YES on Prop A lawn signs.
Oh, but wait, two landmark commissioners sit on that board, so I guess there’s no real surprise there.
As if the Landmarks Commission hasn’t already angered homeowners enough with their arrogance.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on February 14, 2003. Read the original PDF.