The Daily Press’ April 5 edition had a major article on the enforcement efforts by the city of Santa Monica regarding signs. The headline was “Signs of the times, tear ‘em down or pay.” As a business owner and a business lawyer, that article disturbed me — a lot.
It doesn’t surprise me that the city is now deciding to enforce, after a three-year hiatus, its signage laws. This is merely one part of the concerted effort that the city will be putting forth, if it is to meet the stated goal of increasing its fines throughout the city. This is the way to cover the gaping deficit that the City Council, in its bacchanalian spree of spending, created.
About three months ago I read the proposed city budget. Yes, my life can be very dull sometimes, but the point is, buried in the budget was a tremendous increase over the previous year, in fines. It is one of those items that no one would really notice when a budget is proposed and approved. In the revenue section of a budget, people look to see the obvious categories of income: taxes, user fees and convenience charges. No one will ever really notice that the “fine income” has a budget increase because it doesn’t affect them, they think.
When reviewing a political budget one looks for the obvious pork. Where has the City Council created a new jobs program and who benefits? What new building is being built at a cost of XX million to pay off a political donor? Which homeless shelter is being funded and given a new home, to provide a payback for their fundraising and voter registration efforts on behalf of which councilmember? Which department is being cut because they didn’t play ball with the council? These are the types of items that one looks for, to see who really controls our city.
In order to provide for the funding of the various pet projects of our esteemed council members, all of whom I believe are doing their best for their particular constituencies, they had to raise funds. Can’t raise taxes — wouldn’t be prudent. Can’t raise user fees too much, that would annoy the voters and this is an election year, (watch what happens in 2005-2006. I bet fees go up.) So the city is left with only one constituency it can politically attack and not worry about the backlash: The business owner.
But how do you extract more money from them? Increase the business license fees? They are already high. (Note: business license fees are due July 1 and are for the upcoming year. If you apply prior to the month of July, your license will be for the previous fiscal year, and a renewal fee will be due July 1. The city of Santa Monica does not pro-rate their license fees, nor do they credit you for the upcoming year.) The best way City Hall could continue its attack on business was to go after their signage. In an abundance of publicity to be fair to the business community, they have posted the following on their Web site in bright red type: “Don’t forget that if you need a sign for your business, you must have it approved by the Architectural Review Board and pull a permit to install it. Much of the process can be handled at the planning counter at City Hall.”
This innocuous looking paragraph makes it seem like that all you have to do is walk in to City Hall, pay a fee, and you get a permit.
You’d be wrong. There is certainly the fee part, both the signage application and then the building permit. In the ARB process, they want to know how it will look. You’ll need drawings. They want to know how it will affect the neighbors. So you need to have pictures, or drawings, of the buildings and signs of the neighbors. This process can take over a year, and drawings take money. Just ask the gents at Tom Foolery on Main Street.
Last week I wrote about how unsafe it is to live here. This signage issue is but one example of how unsafe it is to do business here. If you were to ask Joe Piperski, a man that owns two food establishments in town, the city pretty much killed his donut shop.
They made the licensing of it — and the operation of it — so difficult, that what should have cost a small amount, became cost prohibitive. All he wanted to do was sell donuts in a space that is unusable for anything else. Now his donut shop is gone and four more jobs have left the city.
The City Council sets the tone of the government. The actual bureaucracy runs, and ruins, the business climate. The City Council needs to send a different message:. Make it safe to do business here. Make it easy for a business owner to start and operate a small business.
Councilman Ken Genser told the Daily Press, “People complain about people sleeping in their doorways, and they don’t report it. We want our laws enforced, but it takes the whole community to help with it, you can’t just be passive.”
Yes, it takes the whole community, and the City Council represents the whole community. Remember they don’t have districts, so when a community voice is active but not heard, doesn’t that mean the City Council isn’t doing its job?
The business community is screaming for help. But no one is listening in City Hall. (David Pisarra is a partner in the law firm of Pisarra & Grist, he (310) 664-9969 or by e-mail at He welcomes your comments and questions).
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 6, 2004. Read the original PDF.