By Karen Blechman Santa Monica
At the City Hall last night supporters of the Third Street Neighborhood Historic District stayed late to address the City Council on the subject of the 2617 Third St. project.
By midnight there were five council members remaining on the dais: Robert Holbrook was out of town and Bobby Shriver had to leave.
A quorum of four council members is needed for an appeal (such as that of Mark Woollen, owner of 2617 Third Street) to win approval. By his aggressive questioning of Third Street supporters and sweet demeanor towards the individuals there to speak on behalf of Mark Woollen, Herb Katz signaled his support of the project.
This, despite the presence of Landmarks Commissioners Margaret Bach, Roger Genser and Chairperson Nina Fresco and a letter from Landmarks Commissioner Ruthann Lehrer, sidelined by illness, that made it abundantly clear that a majority of Landmarks Commissioners are opposed to the project. On the other hand, questions asked by Ken Genser and Kevin McKeown had made clear their sympathy for the residents of the district.
Those present in the Council Chambers waited eagerly for a vote. Clearly the appeal would not win because it did not have the necessary support among council members.
However, life is not so simple. Mayor Katz, over the objections of both Ken Genser and Kevin McKeown, refused to allow the item to go to vote there and then.
He knew the appeal would not succeed because it would not get four votes in favor.
He has the power as mayor to overrule objections and so he insisted on continuing the item to another date (It will likely be heard again next Tuesday, April 29th, early on that evening’s agenda).
This postpones any defeat of the project and, by such manipulation, gives the appellant the advantage of effectively, a second hearing. It’s as though Mayor Katz was saying, I didn’t like the outcome of this hearing so we’re going to do it over.
Should the mayor be manipulating the outcome in this fashion? What is the mayor’s interest in this project? Is this a democratic way of doing things? I would suggest that it is not.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 24, 2008. Read the original PDF.