The Santa Monica Mirror opposes Prop T, the ballot measure that would limit new commercial development to 75,000 square feet annually.
“Unlike the LUCE effort, T has not had broad community participation; it has not been fully vetted by the public. We prefer our existing processes, city council, planning, and all the ways in which Santa Monica organizes itself….Vote NO.”
In other words, the Mirror has swallowed the SMRR/CityHall/Chamber of Commerce line that the big decisions should be made in City Hall, not the voting booth, by “experts,” not the people, and via the bureaucratic process not the democratic process.
Residents crafted Prop T. Over 10,000 residents signed the petitions that qualified it for inclusion on the ballot. Next Tuesday, residents will
pass it or reject it. That’s democracy at its purest.
The revision of the land use and circulation elements of the General Plan (LUCE) was mandated by the state. The City began the revision in 2004, the year it was supposed to completed. As a result, we have been in planning limbo for four years
Planning Director Eileen Fogerty now predicts that the revision will be completed sometime next year, though it is deeply flawed, the Council was divided on some basic questions at its most recent review, and the latest iteration ignores residents’ clear preference for a low rise, small scale beach town. That’s the bureaucratic process at its purest.
So, according to the Mirror, if you want more bureaucracy, vote against T, if you want less traffic and commercial development, vote for T.
Marion Blount has lived in Santa Monica for 16 years. Her name appears on the Save Our City list of people who oppose Prop T. Not only does she not oppose it, she has already voted for it.
Last Friday, L.A. City Councilman Bill Rosendahl, who represents Mar Vista, Brentwood, Santa Monica Canyon, Pacific Palisades and Venice, joined Santa Monica Councilmen Kevin McKeown and Bobby Shriver and about 30 other people in a demonstration for Prop T at the Cloverfield on-ramp to the 10 Freeway.
Mayor Herb Katz and Mayor Pro Tem Richard Bloom, both of whom
are running for re-election, have been endorsed by Rosendahl, and have more gall than good manners or sense immediately scolded him.
According to the Santa Monica Daily Press, Katz said, “He and his city are probably more of a traffic generator in Santa Monica than anyone else. If you took L.A. out of the equation, we wouldn’t have traffic or most of it.”
Wrong and wrong. Of course metropolitan L.A. is a “traffic c generator.” It has 10 million residents. But on Katz’s watch, as he often boasts, the Third Street Promenade was created, the Santa Monica Pier was amped up, Santa Monica became a “regional commercial hub,” the promotion budget climbed to $2.4 million, and our daily transient population shot up to 300.000.
How does Katz think they get here — by parachute? In fact, Santa Monica has become a major traffic magnet, thanks to Katz and his City Hall pals, including Bloom, and now the once-serene communities to our north, south and east suffer the multiple consequences of our alleged success, and enjoy it about as much as most of us do.
Bloom was quoted by the Daily Press as saying that he called Rosendahl and said ‘Bill, why don’t you just pull back, take some time to consider it and then make a decision,’ and he declined…He represents a city that is repeatedly referenced as one of the top 10 worst traffic generating cities in the nation and so he needs to focus on the problem he has in his
That’s exactly what the Councilman from L.A. was doing last week, trying to alleviate a problem that dogs his constituents. That’s what our Councilmen Mckeown anf Shriver were doing, too, And what Bloom and Katz, and Genser, Bob Holbrook and Pam O’Connor should be doing, but their primary interest is in preserving their power, not reducing traffic.