By Larry Mollin Santa Monica
I found it interesting that Joanne Leavitt, of the League of Women Voters, Santa Monica, would describe the VERITAS initiative as bogus. She goes on to basically criticize one provision within VERITAS — term limits — and states that the National League of Women Voters historically has said term limits are bad. OK. “Bad” I understand, but bogus? That’s an overly charged word connoting something fraudulent, illegal, a sham, which it’s not. Term limits have been a traditional piece of reformist legislation since George Washington first brought it up. Bogus, indeed.
Welcome to the beginning of the VERITAS-bashing rhetoric that will be coming down the pike from the powers that be. You see, the VERITAS proposition is the only issue or person on the November ballot that’s a threat to the incumbents and the SMRR policy we’ve lived under for over 20 years. Maybe VERITAS isn’t perfect, but at least it’s a way to start to revitalize our stagnating city government dominated by a one-party political machine.
Let’s face it. What makes democracy work is representational government and checks and balances among its three levels; legislative, executive, judicial. This city has none of that. We elect our city council people at large. That means our diverse neighborhoods are not guaranteed to have an individual voice. VERITAS provides for district-wide elected representation. That means council people would have to live within one of the seven districts of Santa Monica. Would it be bad for north of Montana to have a city council person and neighbor whom they could turn to in their fight to stop historic designations?
Would it be bad for south of Pico to have a city council person/ally with to discuss racial profiling in the schools? Would it be bad for the downtown business interests to have a dedicated voice to air their frustration about urban blight? Would it be a bogus thing for us to have an executive branch of government, namely the chance to elect a real mayor rather than have the city council appoint one of their own?
Hey, even Berkeley has district-wide representation and elects its own mayor. They still have rent control. They haven’t sold out.
Mark my words, in the coming weeks you will see more letters like Ms. Leavitt’s. They will say VERITAS is bogus. District representation balkanizes the city. They will claim electing a mayor will be obstructionary to getting council business done. They will brand every VERITAS supporter as an elitist, a developer, a conservative, an evildoer. But they’re not. They’re just Santa Monicans who want a change in city government. And those already in power will use any words they can to stop this machine-busting proposition.
And if term limits are wrong as Ms. Leavitt claims, with checks and balance in effect we can reform that element of VERITAS in another proposition down the road. That’s what America does best — change. I urge you all to vote YES on VERITAS. Even those in the League of Women Voters. Or is that venerable, reformist organization also AGAINST representational government?
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on October 11, 2002. Read the original PDF.