VERITAS supporters spent $45K on initiative
About 70 residents turned out for a three-hour debate on a ballot initiative that would rewrite how elections are done in Santa Monica.
The Voters Election Reform Initiative for a True Accountability System — also known as VERITAS, is a bad government initiative, according to Mayor Mike Feinstein. But according to its author Paul DeSantis, a local real estate attorney, VERITAS is a badly needed accountability reform.
The two men faced off at the Ken Edwards Center Thursday night before a crowd of supporters on both sides of the issue and a handful of undecided residents of the Wilshire/Montana Neighborhood Coalition, which sponsored the debate.
Proponents of VERITAS say the current election process makes it unattainable for the average person to run for office and is not a representational form of government.
The current system allows for slate-financed campaigns dominated by huge special interest money, they say. What’s more, they contend if people could vote for their mayor it would politically legitimatize the position.
“If you don’t have a slate endorsement, you don’t get elected,” DeSantis said. “It’s been true for the past 20 years.”
Opponents say the measure would split the city apart — not just by voting districts but also putting neighborhoods in competition with each other. They also argue by creating a mayoral position with veto powers, special interests will flood local campaigns with big money.
“Slates will still be involved if there are districts,” Feinstein said. “Money will get into the same elections and help buy the same campaign pieces. This isn’t a solution for that problem.”
If approved by voters this November, VERITAS would segregate the city into voting districts from which residents would elect representatives. There would be seven term-limited council members and one city-wide elected mayor, who would be given veto powers. Vetos could be over-ridden by the council with a two-thirds majority vote.
Council members currently serve four-year terms with no limits on how many times they run.
Under the VERTIAS proposal, council members and the mayor would be limited to two consecutive terms. After that, they would have to take four years off before running again.
Elections would be changed to a run-off style process. Residents would vote in a March primary, and the two top vote getters would move on to a general election held in June. But the winners of the election would not be sworn in until January, creating a seven-month lag between when a candidate is elected and when he or she is officially sworn into office.
Currently, the mayor is elected by the seven city council members, who run at-large throughout the eight square miles of Santa Monica’s city limits. The mayor’s position is largely as a figurehead.
Each side also discussed where VERI- TAS was receiving the vast amount of its funding. DeSantis said the group spent about $45,000 to get the initiative on the November ballot. Roughly half of the money came from individual contributors and the other half came from Santa Monicans Fighting Against Irresponsible Regulation — or FAIR, a coalition of residents, business owners and beachfront hotels who are trying to overturn the city’s living wage ordinance. The ordinance, passed by the city council last July, requires businesses that make more than $5 million in revenue pay their employees $10.50 an hour and provide health benefits.
VERITAS opponents argue FAIR is a passthrough for money from the hotels, which are believed to be supporting anything that would overturn the current city council and defeat the mandatory minimum wage increase.
FAIR and other living wage opponents have placed a measure on the November ballot that would repeal the council’s living wage ordinance, which has not taken effect.
Some VERITAS critics say it’s an attempt to get three new council members elected who would ensure the living wage ordinance be squashed permanently.
After the debate, many residents in attendance said they were still conflicted about how to vote on VERITAS.
“It’s helpful to know at least two sides of the issue — who knows, there could be others,” said Santa Monica resident David Cole. “This has both strengths and weaknesses, probably more weaknesses than strengths. I’d like to see term limits, but I’m not so sure about some of the other features.”
“It’s helpful to know at least two sides of the issue — who knows, there could be others.” — — DAVID COLE Santa Monica resident
Other residents believe VERITAS would bring more Santa Monica issues to the city council.
“I haven’t felt represented in this city and I think this might be a chance to finally be represented,” said resident Barbara Coffman. “I’m tired of renters’ rights being the only issue in town — it’s a lopsided situation I would like to see change.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on May 11, 2002. Read the original PDF.