Sour grapes or political differences causing rift?
A possible civil war may be brewing inside a powerful renters group that has dominated Santa Monica politics for decades.
Leaders of Santa Monicans for Renters Rights remain divided after last weekend’s convention when the group elected to endorse local activist Abby Arnold in her bid for a city council seat currently held by Bob Holbrook.
Three city council members who side with the renters group signed a letter distributed at the convention calling on delegates to vote for anyone but Arnold.
They wrote in their letter that Arnold was not a true champion of renters’ causes and she is being propped up by the local Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees union and Santa Monicans Allied for Responsible Tourism, a local activist group fighting a proposed repeal of the city’s living wage ordinance.
Arnold’s critics say she has made derogatory comments on issues affecting renters in the past and she worked against some reforms they were trying to make. They also say the union has rammed Arnold’s nomination through and as a result, it has left little room for other nominees to have a chance.
Instead of reconciling after the convention, the two sides remain distant and at least two councilmen said their relationships with the union’s leaders are now damaged.
“Certainly my perception is that there is a re-examination among many council members about their relationship with the union,” said Councilman Ken Genser. “I don’t think policy decisions will be affected but the relationship has been effected.”
Mayor Mike Feinstein said while he will work hard to advance causes important to workers, he is unsure how he will support the union’s leaders.
“I’m here to serve the entire community on labor issues and I am here to ensure laborers have a fair stake as a part of our local economy — nothing about that will change,” he said. “But I hope this is bringing about a sober re-evaluation of tactics and strategies within the union as well.”
The union first became active in local politics in the 1996 election when it began endorsing city council candidates, many of whom were supported by SMRR. The overlap drew the two groups closer and the relationship was further strengthened in the 1998 campaign when the two organizations ran parallel campaigns.
In 2000, the two groups formally joined campaigns to fight against a ballot initiative they believed would have undermined efforts to enact a living wage ordinance. Since then the two have tied the themes of workers and renters’ rights together in local politics.
“I think that SMRR and SMART and the union is an extraordinary coalition unique in the United States,” said Kurt Petersen, organizing director of the hotel worker’s union. “While we have some differences, our common goals are what keep us together — protecting renters and protecting workers will keep us together.”
However, the leadership of SMART and SMRR, disagree on endorsing Councilwoman Pam O’Connor’s bid for re-election. SMART leaders feel O’Connor had undermined their cause by voting for a lower mandatory living wage, which is why they did-n’t endorse her.
SMART chose not to endorse a final candidate for the third open seat knowing SMRR would endorse O’Connor, because they feared it would damage the coalition of the three groups.
While O’Connor won an easy endorsement from SMRR, the contentious endorsement of Arnold has caused a rift in the political party.
“I think it’s fair to say that this is more than difference of opinion,” Feinstein said. “This not only involves significant policy differences in that those of us who have not supported Abby have concerns about her true dedication to affordable housing and tenant protection.”
Petersen disagrees that any rift has formed between his union and SMRR. He said the large turnout at SMRR’s convention was evidence the rank-and-file of both groups still support each others’ causes.
“Keeping the coalition together is very important so we are going to work as hard as we can to elect coalition candidates,” he said. “People are excited and passionate. I respect that but I know we are all aiming for the same goals.”
According to Feinstein, the relationship between the union and some SMRR supporters is not the only relationship Arnold’s endorsement has damaged.
“I think we are at a time where people are willing to question a lot of the (SMRR) premises and the (SMRR) leaders that have brought us to this point,” Feinstein said. “If we were a national government with a parliamentary system, one might hear calls for a vote of no confidence in the SMRR and SMART leaders.”
SMRR co-chair and founder Denny Zane said the tensions are part of the post-convention process and the group will be united once again.
“I get the impression that Mike in particular is sort of trying to fan the flames of a possible rift and I am concerned about why,” he said. “This is partly sour grapes because the candidate he supported didn’t win.”
Feinstein endorsed Pico activist Josefina Aranda, but she failed to win endorsements from SMART, SMRR and the union.
Longtime SMRR activist and former councilwoman Judy Abdo agrees a split within the group is not likely.
“I think (the convention) was a sort of small ‘d’ democracy in action,” she said. “People organized, they got their people out and the votes were clear on who they supported.
“Some people are unhappy with the unions but others are pretty committed to working within the coalition,” she said.
Arnold said she has heard only congratulations since the convention.
“I am surprised, I’m very surprised they see this as a permanent rift because I certainly don’t,” she said. “In terms of direct communication with me, I have had many SMRR members and activists contact me and tell me they plan to volunteer on my campaign.”
However, she hopes all traces of bitterness will recede once the campaign is in full swing.
“I don’t want to risk the future of rent control or other progressive issues in Santa Monica over a primary battle,” she said.
Zane believes once it becomes obvious who SMRR’s opponents will be in this year’s election everyone will fall into line.
“One of the problems happens when your adversaries appear weak and don’t appear to have strong candidates, it invites minor divisions to look bigger than they actually are,” he said.
In every campaign since at least in 1996, there has been a slate of candidates on the opposing side of SMRR, usually consisting of people who side with developers and big business, like luxury hotels. But so far this year, no such slate has appeared.
It would seem ironic, at best, that in the one year SMRR faces little organized opposition to its council candidates, it would tear itself apart from within.
But Zane says that flat out will not happen. “It’s always the sort of thing that happens when your advocates look weak,” he said. “In the short run there will be some snarling and carrying on, but in the long run it will be a small bump in the road.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on August 12, 2002. Read the original PDF.