SMCLC disputes coalition’s claims
DOWNTOWN A ballot initiative that seeks to limit commercial growth in the city will face a new challenger as a coalition of community activists, educators and environmentalists has formed with the specific intent to defeat the measure this fall.
The Save Our City campaign formed in response to the Residents’ Initiative to Fight Traffic, which would limit commercial development in the city to 75,000 square feet annually if passed in November. The measure, authored by the Santa Monica Coalition for a Livable City, was placed on the ballot after receiving more than 10,000 signatures collected in the spring.
The anti-RIFT coalition prides itself on representing a broad spectrum of the community, from religious leaders to environmentalists, and from homeowners to renters rights’ advocates, the group calling itself “historic.” Santa Monicans for Renters’ Rights has yet to take a position on RIFT.
“The broad range [of RIFT], we think, is unprecedented and extraordinary,” Terry O’Day, one of the chairs of Save Our City, said.“It’s because this initiative has such hit-ting consequences for so many different sectors in our community.”
The group plans to officially announce its launch during a 9:30 a.m. press conference Wednesday at John Adams Middle School.
The coalition describes RIFT as having detrimental consequences, from depriving approximately $1 million from the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District to displacing renters. The initiative has been opposed by several organizations, including the Chamber of Commerce.
O’Day, the executive director of Environment Now, added that RIFT would have serious consequences for sustainability initiatives by impacting adaptive reuse, mixed-use projects and the ability to create transit-oriented communities.
Diana Gordon, who serves as co-chair for SMCLC, refuted a handful of claims made by Save Our City, including an argument that RIFT would not reduce traffic.
She pointed out a presentation made last month by City Hall consultants on the RIFT which concluded that there would be 40 percent less commercial development if the measure was passed.
“If you reduce commercial development by 40 percent, you are going to significantly reduce traffic impacts,” she said.
While the consultant did point out City Hall would stand to lose a total of $11 million in revenue by 2023 under RIFT, that number would be an insignificant percentage of the total budget by that time, which Gordon estimated to be well over $1 billion, taking inflation into consideration.
“That’s [about] one percent of what would be the city’s budget,” Gordon said. “That is not going to involve slashing, it’s not going to rob the schools’ money.”
The anti-RIFT coalition also claims that the city’s affordable housing stock will slowly dwindle if the initiative passes. Gordon points out that the RIFT only pertains to commercial development.
Gordon questioned whether the group was backed by developers.
“They should be calling themselves Save Our Developers,” she said.
The coalition is trying to raise funds to wage what will perhaps be a costly campaign against RIFT, getting out information about a complicated topic, O’Day said, adding the money could come from developers.
“It’s easy to sign up for a ballot initiative to say I hate traffic, but it’s a complicated message beyond that,” he said.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on July 29, 2008. Read the original PDF.