By Jan Tousignant Santa Monica
Maybe it’s sitting up here in the quiet fresh air of the Northern California coast that is causing an anarchy of thoughts to be sifting through my mind. These thoughts are about the life and times of current day Santa Monica — a place I was born, raised, educated and am now living with my own family. When I am “up north” something exists here that is sadly absent in my hometown of Santa Monica — fair representation and the freedom to excel in anything outside of politically correct venues.
Santa Monica is what I would call “a socially engineered community.” It all started with the emotionally charged debut of SMRR, in the late ’70s — a group who put forth a bully pulpit espousing a “We are right, you are wrong” platform that has only grown in its heady power trip over everyone’s way of life. Housing issues were SMRR’s forceful “foot in the door,” followed by putting SMRR endorsed representatives into every nook and cranny of government policy making. Consequently, we have evolved into a town ruled by despotic consumers, where providers have little say, squeaky wheels rule, distorted facts and figures go unchecked, and politically correct activism is our city motto.
We are now coming upon another ho hum election season. SMRR, as usual, has announced its slate of candidates. How many people actually anointed the party slate? A hand full, perhaps? As usual there will be an election hook — some sensational issue that will pit one philosophy against another. Will it be the “living wage” battle, trying to force hotels to unionize? It's all about emotional takes on things and catchy sound bites. Everyone knows that. But, we tend to be engulfed in perceived injustices and vote with knee jerk spasms, not questioning credentials or facts, just voting straight from those convenient little postcards that are shoved under wind shield wipers or door mats just before local elections.
And, what do we get from this kind of prepackaged electioneering? What type of government is created from the long tenure of an unstoppable machine like SMRR?
First, I think there is a certain smugness, an alternative fat cat syndrome, that comes with absolute power. Fairness is defined by those in power. Those out of power are ignored. The city, as a landlord, therefore allows itself to make rather unsympathetic economic decisions when cutting loose long term businesses, such as the Boathouse. They also think nothing about raising “unconscionable rents” on businesses they manage, like Hot-dog on a Stick, using generic excuses like, “this is good business for the city.” Why then are they so opposed to “good business” decisions made in the private sector?
SMRR’s position on Trader Joes and Target is another irony of preaching one set of political ideals while acting on another set. SMRR identified itself as a political vehicle for low rents, small business, and taking on big, corporate development. But, when it came to backing the Target project, it was Ken Genser, a long time SMRR councilman, who vigorously promoted this super corporate store, saying it would have little impact on the crowded downtown area. Only, after a very public battle, was it narrowly defeated.
Trader Joes, however, a smaller, customer-friendly market, was quickly silenced and vanquished after it applied for a store location at 12th and Wilshire, where there is far less congestion and a greater need for this type of service. How many people would have welcomed another site, for this popular store, on the other side of town? We will never really know, because with no SMRR crony pitching its merits, and SMRR planning commissioner, Kelly Olsen, vehemently opposing it, Trader Joes did-n't have a chance.
How about all those BIG apartment complexes, in the central business district, on Sixth and Seventh streets? What ever happened to SMRR being against rampant development? Maybe only tree houses qualify as “over development” in the SMRR rhetoric? Remember Ken Genser’s robust objection to a child's treehouse being built? Whew, got to watch out for built-out back yards, especially when they are in trees!
And, the new transit mall... does that really ease traffic and make our city more resident-friendly?
Do we really need a bigger downtown library, after spending how many million to rid the main branch of asbestos? Whose idea is that? Yours, or our SMRR run city? I hear that 60 percent of those polled don’t like the idea. Oh well...
Historical districts is another hot button. Now SMRR wants to get into your homes and decide whether you reside in a historical gem or not. If they deem that you do, then another city-created bureaucracy, the Landmarks Commission, becomes judge and jury on what you can do with your property. A similar city entity, the Rent Control Board, has been making arbitrary economical decisions for residential income property owners for decades now. Residential owners, welcome to the club of the controlled.
Homelessness. Everyone is talking about this issue. Some call it compassion run amok. Others say it is everyone’s entitlement to have a meal, roam around, and act as they want. Our city heads seem vague. They want to be viewed as caring, but at what cost? After all, 5,000 workers have lost their jobs recently. Tourists are uncomfortable with the high visibility of the homeless. For that matter, residents don’t seem to like it much either.
Governing bodies, without the baggage of political agendas and endorsements, might advocate food, shelter and work program combinations, aimed at people wanting out of their dire circumstances. Vagrants and free loaders, who only want free handouts, free space and no strings would be discouraged. But, in order to implement such programs, the city would have to mediate the concerns and ideas of business, residents and charitable organizations, partnering solutions rather than posturing ones.
Over the years, the reign of Tenant’s Rights has grown into a tyranny, creating a “crisis” or sponsoring divisive issues as a means to stay in power. This is simply not healthy leadership or governance. Our city’s reputation should not be that one person’s rights automatically invalidates another’s, just because their “guy” is in office. No, a well-run city, a fair community takes everyone’s needs into consideration. In order to do this, city councils, school boards, college boards, rent control boards, etc., all positions of power, should be occupied by people with diverse ideas, experience and not beholding to any political group, as SMRR demands of the people it endorses. Such human diversity is a good checks and balance so that a city doesn’t grow crooked or slanted with only one point of view at its helm.
Just think for a moment... wouldn’t it be magical if the majority of voters just threw away their post card and voted in people instead of old musty, crusty politics!!! What a breath of fresh air and revitalization of good will that would be!
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on September 10, 2002. Read the original PDF.