port,” Foisie said. “I think everyone kind of expected them to support our request this time, but we respect their decision to want to know what is fully going on and we are prepared to provide them with any information they need.
“The city of Santa Monica has been wonderful to us.” Councilman Kevin McKeown, who sponsored the motion, had some harsh words for his colleagues who did not support the Veterans’ request. He made the argument that the promotion of peace is very important to the citizens of Santa Monica and the Council, which is trying to teach non-violence to young people, some of whom have seen their friends killed by gang violence.
“Santa Monicans, like people everywhere, support peace,” McKeown said.“If I had thought this was in the least controversial, I would have asked the veterans themselves to come down and explain their non-partisan educational efforts to honor their fallen colleagues, comfort grieving friends and relatives, and provide a space for us all to reflect. I fear this vote sadly misrepresents our city.”
Rubin said he was “saddened” by the vote as he thought it was going it be unanimous. He remembers a Council that would often go out of its way to voice its support for legislation in Sacramento and Washington, D.C., as well as issue statements against injustices around the world, a great tradition that is in danger of being lost.
“I think this is putting bureaucracy over peace and I think that is really the wrong direction for Santa Monica,” Rubin said.
Making endorsements is not new nor out of the ordinary. Local municipalities have been showing support for or opposition against issues for decades, said Bob Stern, executive director of the Center for Governmental Studies.
“It is tradition that city government like to tell the federal government what they should be doing and for the federal government to completely ignore them,” Stern said. “During the Vietnam War, cities would adopt resolutions as a way to argue for or against the war. I think it’s harmless. It’s an outlet for citizens who are frustrated. It’s a way for Council members to sort of spread their wings.
“Hopefully it doesn’t take up too much time. Council meetings are long enough.”
Stern said that taking certain positions can have an impact on lobbying legislators, especially when it comes to controversial issues.
For O’Connor, who voted against the resolution opposing the war in Iraq, it was more about uncertainty than anything else. She felt she did not have enough information about the peace tour to give an endorsement.
“Who knows what the endorsement really means,” she said. “Does that mean they can start using the city graphic?”
While the Council has been opposed to the Patriot Act or the purchase of commodities from Burma (now known as Myanmar) because of human rights violations there, those actions were taken because the issues had a direct effect on residents of Santa Monica, O’Connor and Bloom said.
In the case of the Patriot Act, city officials were concerned about the invasion of privacy and the requirement that all library records be handed over to federal officials.
Councilman Ken Genser said every Council member has to decide for themselves whether or not to vote in favor of or against something and there are many factors to consider. For him, supporting the peace tour was easy because Veterans for Peace is based in the city and they were not asking for any funding.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 28, 2007. Read the original PDF.