> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.smdp.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # I hear the sizzle, but where’s the steak? - URL: https://www.smdp.com/i-hear-the-sizzle-but-wheres-the-steak/ - Published: 2007-10-02T15:00:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-25T01:04:18.000Z - Author: Guest Author - Tags: Opinion, Santa Monica, #archive-import, Homeless I, ALONG WITH MOST OF THE REST OF the city, I presume, have just received the latest correspondence from the city of Santa Monica. This one deals with the impending addition of fluoride to our drinking water. This is a controversial topic. Some people think that fluoride causes cancer, AIDS and Leukemia. Others think that it prevents cavities and is a good addition to our diet. The science on this topic is wide ranging, and as with any large-scale adulteration of a community asset, there are people on both sides of the spectrum screaming that the other side is wrong, insane and uneducated. Since I’m not a doctor, and my understanding of chemistry and biology is pretty much limited to knowing that 1 cup of alcohol and 1 cup of water do not equal 2 cups of liquid by volume; and that the inside of a dead frog is gross, I’m not particularly well equipped to deal with the appropriateness or not, of adding fluoride to my water. I do know that it is a naturally occurring substance, and that it can be found in natural water supplies. I also know that there are multiple studies proving it has lowered the overall rate of caries (that means ‘cavities’) in the population, and that I have spent most of life having it in the water, my toothpaste and directly applied to my teeth by my dentists. On balance, I think it is probably an acceptable thing to have fluoride in our water — odds are that it isn’t going to be present at levels that are high enough to cause death or even illness. Certainly, it can be abused, as most things in this world can be, and if done to excess can cause death. Even the basics of life — oxygen and water — can be overdone and kill a person. I’m not so concerned with the fact that the city is beginning to put something in the water, as I am that the city, by way of the City Council, seems to me to be encroaching more and more each year into my personal life and being less and less concerned with the real work they were elected for — to run the city in a fiscally responsible manner and with an eye for the future. I see a lot of activity around issues that I think we should be dealing with personally, not as a society. What I mean is that issues such as the No Smoking in the Parks and Public areas ordinances; this latest fluoride debate, are all well and good, but honestly, I’d like to see the council focus on issues that are more substantive. When I worked in the restaurant world, we used to see salesmen come in and they gave a great pitch, and afterwards, we’d always say that we liked the sizzle, but where’s the steak? To me, issues like the fluoride in the water, No Smoking ordinances, homeless being banned from sleeping in the parks, the city suing itself over interpretations, all seem to be political grandstanding. It’s a lot of sizzle, and not much steak. I say this because of events like getting a very nicely done, glossy brochure in the mail from the city explaining to me that the water is going to have fluoride in it. I want to know what that marketing piece cost to produce and distribute because, frankly, it strikes me that it really is nothing more than a puff piece of non-campaign literature from the council “proving” they actually did something of value. I don’t get brochures on most of the other things that City Council decides to implement. We don’t get an annual round-up of the new laws that Council has enacted. When I asked where I could get a copy of the municipal code, I was told that the city does-n’t make those available, but if I wanted to order a special copy they’d be happy to provide it, for a reasonable “convenience fee” of $325 dollars. Thanks, but no thanks. We did receive a nice glossy announcement about the No Butt’s About It campaign, but I have yet to receive any kind of notice about the latest developments in the Second and Fourth streets deforestation act, with only Kevin McKeown as the lone voice trying to save at least the healthy trees. So much for the rest of the council and their “green” credentials. Talk about posers! It doesn’t take much to find a high-profile example, read this from the www.bob-byshriver.com Web site (as of 10/1/07): “We all have our Santa Monica stories. I still find mine hard to believe: Last year, the Tuesday before Thanksgiving, I and many others received criminal infraction notices that our hedges were too high. The City had decided to enforce a 1948 ordinance and gave many residents throughout Santa Monica until the following Monday to cut their hedges. I was able to get the City to withdraw those charges, but in April we all received civil compliance orders, giving us a month to cut our hedges or pay a $25,000 per day fine. Since then, I’ve been looking closely at other city issues. I’ve realized that the hedge “crackdown” is merely a symptom of a pervasive problem: a city government that has lost sight of the reason it exists — to serve its people. That’s why I decided to run for Santa Monica City Council. It’s not about my hedges.” I guess it’s not about the trees either. DAVID PISARRA is a family law lawyer in the Santa Monica firm of Pisarra & Grist. He or (310) 664- 9969. *Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on October 2, 2007.* [Read the original PDF.](https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/smdp%5Fbackissues/100207.pdf?ref=smdp.com)