We need your help

Dear Fellow Residents,

I want to thank you for your commitment to our community, evidenced by your willingness to answer our recent homeless survey. Homelessness has risen nearly 30% over the past few years, but with your continued partnership, we can overcome this problem. Councilmember Bobby Shriver has laid out a sensible plan to address this issue, but he needs additional support on the City Council for its success.

We firmly believe that the optimal source of this support would come from Mayor Bob Holbrook and City Planning Commissioner Terry O'Day. Mayor Holbrook and Commissioner O'Day support a blanced approach to the homelessness problem, one that recognizes that it is not a lack of compassion to keep the homeless from the very dangerous situation of sleeping in the crevices on the Santa Monica bluffs - one that recognizes that we must take proactive steps toward reducing the crime that results from having nearly 2,000 homeless individuals in Santa Monica.

We ask you to join us in restoring our city's "livability" by displaying signs supporting Mayor Holbrook and Commissioner O'Day in your yard, or by, with our help, writing letters to the Editor to the local press asking for the re-election of Mayor Holbrook and election of Commissioner O'Day.

Please contact us at 310.450.5680 or email us at sm4sppac@gmail.com for a better quality of life in Santa Monica's future.

Sincerely,
Bob Hattoy
Former Sierra Club Regional Director
Santa Monica, CA

All in on Team Holbrook/O'Day

For over thirty years I have crusaded for our environment and have been in the trenches with many of you in our fight for various progressive political issues--
Now, with the Santa Monica City Council elections before us, I have been all ears as the chatter concerning the candidates grows in volume. Before the onslaught of political mailers, dubious charges, and counter charges fill our heads with confusion, I would like to take this time to focus your attention on two extraordinary candidates that excite me and give me hope about the future of Santa Monica.

The two candidates that I think are deserving of election are Bob Holbrook and Terry O'Day.

I feel that Bob Holbrook and Terry O'Day are a dynamic duo who have stepped onto the scene of this year’s election with more promise than I've seen in years. These two guys inspire me to write this, because they give me hope that they can and will tackle the problems of our city that have been skirted for far too long by the majority of the council. Our community is headed full-speed for a crossroads at which we must either choose a future where the problems of crime, traffic, homelessness and protecting our quality of life are addressed in new, solution-oriented ways (as proposed by Holbrook and O'Day), or we can continue to stagnate under the behavior of "the way things have always been done."

For over two decades the same crowd has been in charge of choosing candidates and running Santa Monica City Hall. A lot of good things have been done, but their best behavior has gotten us to where we are today…and so much more needs to be done. It's time to say thank you to the old machine that has run Santa Monica and then. . . to move on!
So many issues have been ignored, so ISN'T IT TIME TO TRY SOMETHING NEW?
The new ideas and progressive views of Bob Holbrook and Terry O'Day will revitalize Santa Monica and put us back on track as a city that solves the problems we are faced with.

Mayor Bob Holbrook and Terry O’Day combine the best of city hall professionalism with grassroots activism, and Santa Monica absolutely needs both. I have talked to, researched, met with, and scrutinized the prospective candidates by every means available, and these two guys not only caught my eye, but have kept my attention! Mayor Holbrook brings considerable experience to the table, having led the way on the homeless issue by providing a strong voice on behalf of reasonable care and protection for the homeless while calling for enforcement of existing vagrancy laws. Terry O’Day has taken the reigns of social responsibility by running an eco-friendly business and masterly directing the venerable Santa Monica based organization Environment Now that actively advances the education of children about the importance of our coastal waters through a program called “Windows on our Waters”.

This coupling of the know-how to get things done with passionate commitment to progressive solutions will definitely rock the boat at City Hall…and simply put, that makes me excited!

With all of the contentious political campaigning aside, the principle concerns of our community remain: crime, traffic, homelessness, and protecting Santa Monica’s environment. Bob Holbrook and Terry O’Day not only have a history of dedication to resolving these issues, but bring new ideas of innovative ways to solve these lingering problems. With their vision and leadership, these guys have the capacity to rejuvenate Santa Monica’s political scene...to create change.

By reelecting Mayor Holbrook and electing Terry O’Day, we will have two strong advocates for change who can team up with Councilmember Bobby Shriver to form a strong, progressive majority on our City Council. I’m all in on Team Holbrook/O’Day, and all I have to say is: Join our team for Santa Monica's future.


Bob Hattoy
Former Sierra Club Regional Director and Clinton Environmental Advisor
Santa Monica, CA

Backed by Businesses

SUPPORT: Holbrook, O' Day secure chamber endorsements

By Kevin Herrera
Daily Press Staff Writer

SIXTH STREET-- The Chamber of Commerce, which represents more than 1,000 local business owners, endorsed the City Council campaigns of Mayor Bob Holbrook and Planning Commissioner Terry O' Day, providing each a significant boost as they head into the November election.

The chamber's board of directors chose to support the two last week after a series of hour- long interviews with six candidates, including three who have been endorsed by Santa Monicans for Renters' Rights, or SMRR, which has long been at odds with the business community over development issues.

Holbrook, who was endorsed by the chamber during his last re- election campaign, is seeking his fifth term on the council, while O' Day, a member of the Planning Commission since 2003, is making his first run for elected office.

O' Day, who is also endorsed by environmental attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr., has not yet qualified for the ballot, but is confident he has collected enough signatures from registered voters to do so. The required amount is 100.

The chamber is expected to encourage members to vote for Holbrook and O' Day as well as donate to their campaigns and volunteer to go door to door securing votes. The chamber will not raise money for an independent campaign, said Tom Larmore, chairmen elect of the board.

"We felt it was better to help the candidates raise money for their own campaigns rather than have us run one independently," Larmore said. "While we won't be running a slate (of candidates), our members will be actively campaigning on behalf of Bob and Terry, using e-mails, phone banks, whatever we can to help them get elected."

Holbrook and O' Day earned the chamber's endorsement because of their commitments to the community, the environment, education and balanced public policy that weighs the interests of the business community as well as other stakeholders, said Kathy Dodson, president of the chamber.

"I think the business community is very excited about these two candidates," Dodson said. "Terry has been phenomenal on the Planning Commission, very proactive. He's run a business and has had to make payroll... and he has very practical, creative ideas.

"As for the mayor, he's been a wonderfully consistent voter who has been around long enough to know what's good for Santa Monica, having served on the school board before being on the council. We think his experience in education as well as his ability to offer common- sense solutions make him a great candidate, as with Terry. Both are very strong."

Securing the chamber endorsement was critical for Holbrook and O' Day given the influence of local business owners, many of whom are looking to replace SMRR- backed council members who have blocked development and imposed strict affordable- housing requirements.

"The chamber endorsement was a key endorsement for me four years ago, and I am gratified to have it again," said Holbrook, a pharmacy from USC. "As you know, the chamber has members from all across the community, and they thought I had been very middle- of- the- road and supportive of sustaining our economy, which is very important for businesses bring in tax revenues and create jobs.

"There are those who are driven by interests... but I vote for what's in the interest of Santa Monicans," Holbrook added.

O' Day, who heads environmental watchdog Environmental Now, was pleased to receive the chamber's endorsement as well. There was speculation that O' Day was trying to seek both the SMRR as well as the chamber's; however, O' Day said he pulled out of the running for SMRR's independent campaign and felt he could not do that if he was supported by SMRR.

"I'm running the type of campaign that I think gives me the best opportunity to talk to as many people in the community as possible who are affected by the city's policies," O' Day said. "With SMRR, I felt that I had to commit to a particular platform and, in a way, cut myself off from other opportunities."

Those who decided to go or both endorsements including incumbents Kevin McKeown and Pam O' Connor, and education activist Gleam Davis, all three of whom are endorsed by SMRR.

McKeown's chances of winning the chamber's backing were slim given his record, in which he has supported a living wage law for hotel workers and inclusionary zoning that forces housing developers to set aside units for low- to- moderate- income residents.

"Endorsements reflect true interests, and I respect that the chamber differs with my principled positions on development and worker issues," McKeown wrote in an e-mail. "My continued efforts are with the small neighborhood- serving businesses in our city, keeping them viable and encouraging more resident- friendly amenities like outdoor dining."

Larmore said McKeown is out of step with the needs of the city, but was invited to interview with the chamber because "it was the appropriate thing to do since SMRR had not had their convention at the time of the interviews."

"We knew it would be difficult to endorse a SMRR candidate because of their platform," Larmore said. "But we felt we should open to all candidates who were serious about running. We definitely don't think the SMRR majority has been good for the city, and we'd like to see a change. I think that's reflected in the endorsements we made."

(As published in the Santa Monica Daily Press, August 17, 2006.)

SMRR Sticks with Failed Policies

At its recent party convention, Santa Monicans for Renters' Rights (SMRR) reaffirmed its support for the same failed policies that have caused so many problems in our city. Delegates approved a platform calling for supporting 20 year old homeless programs that have led to the current out- of- control homeless population and the nickname for our city "the home of the homeless."

They also want to shift multi- family housing to commercial and industrial zones. The SMRR platform also included proposals that would scare away tourist dollars by adopting an isolationist City development policy. SMRR doesn't seem to realize that we are part of a larger community and our residents want to build a more livable environment for everyone.

The convention also endorsed three candidates for City Council-- incumbents Kevin McKeown and Pam O' Conner and political novice, Gleam Davis.

Positive Steps Toward Homeless Problem

Two new programs championed by local leaders are finally moving in the right direction with the homeless issue. The "Homeless Court" is a pilot program created to handle quality- of- life crimes such as public intoxication and street- camping. The program will be overseen by Judge Bernard Kamins who supervises the Drug Court in LA.

The Chamber of Commerce, along with the local non- profit, Chrysalis helped create a program to put homeless persons to work in local businesses. The program has already seen success-- it is estimated that 20 to 30 Chrysalis- trained employees have found permanent employment in and around Santa Monica.

Pier Cameras Delayed

An emergency request was denied by the city council to speed installation of a surveillance system along the Pier after three suspicious men of Middle Eastern descent were observed videotaping the area. Councilman McKeown previously had said footage from the cameras could be used by government agencies that "aren't trustworthy." In turning down the Police Department's request for immediate action, McKeown said he didn't feel there was any imminent danger.

More Great Mentions of Santa Monicans for Sensible Priorities

Santa Monicans for Sensible Priorities is mentioned in the SMDP as "SMRR's nemesis in this year election." Kevin Herrera writes on Saturday, August 5:

"SMSP is funded primarily by the hospitality industry, which has long been at odds with SMRR. SMSP has recently attempted to build credibility by launching its own grassroots campaign, signing on what they claim to be 5,000 members. The organization is focused heavily on quality-of-life issues, most notably the increasing homeless population and government bureaucracy. SMSP has in the past few months sent out numerous mailers that have criticized SMRR elected leaders, their social agenda and their policies.For most of the past three decades, SMRR has been able to maintain a majority of seats on the City Council. There was a short period in the 1980s and in the mid-1990s that the business community was able to level the playing field. During that time, large developments like the Water Gardens commercial complex and luxury hotels were approved and built.“The big issue for SMRR this time is how do you sell to the people of Santa Monica three candidates that are for change when they have been the agents of change for 25 years and things have changed very much?” Jacobson asked. Jacobson said SMRR has had many successes over the years, improving the quality of life in Santa Monica to some degree, however, he said their record in the last decade is questionable and something SMSP is prepared to highlight in mailers. SMSP is believed to be SMRR’s strongest competition, with the ability to raise more money.“There seems to be some division in their leadership and some question as to whether or not they have a solid platform,” Jacobson said. “They’ll rally their troops like they always do and attack the business community, using them as their dark angel, but I think residents and voters believe that Santa Monica cannot really thrive without a strong, healthy business environment. Their policies haven’t worked and I think residents will ask tough questions.”

The tide must sweep in change

Editor:

I am writing in response to your columns from Jenna Linnekens regarding the problems with transients in Santa Monica. Like Jenna, I am not heartless or unsympathetic, but a citizen who is tired of dealing every single day with a city overrun by the homeless. I feel sorry for those with mental problems or veterans who have been through more than anyone should have to endure, however there are too many other categories of homeless who have it too good in this town to move on or get motivated to improve their situation. Citizens are being harassed every single day, when they walk on or near the beach or in public parks. I have been harassed so often when visiting Main Street that I do not even go there on my own in the evenings. The parking lot west of Main Street is loaded with homeless who harass women while they are attempting to get out of their cars. This is not good for business.

On a daily basis, I deal with the transient problem before I even leave home. This includes witnessing those urinating on my wall, sleeping, drinking, smoking and yelling all day long, just a few yards from my window. There was even a knife fight, which finally caused the police to respond, only after being called. My latest frustration occurred last week when I walked into my living room to find a couple acting inappropriately on the lawn just several feet from my window. The male yelled something to me and I immediately went into the other room to call the police. After describing the couple and the fact that they were smoking pot outside my window I felt confident the police would respond. In the next half hour they smoked a few joints, got rowdy and practically had sex in front of all — including many children passing by — before they moved on. All the while, no police response. If they do not respond to that activity, what makes me believe it is worth my time complaining if nothing is going to be done? Perhaps the police were dealing with a more violent situation with other transients elsewhere in town. One only has to read the SMDP's weekly crime reports to realize that the overwhelming majority of the perpetrators in Santa Monica are transients.

Unfortunately, if the majority of Santa Monica voters are more concerned about keeping Santa Monicans For Renters Rights (SMRR) candidates in office to maintain their below-market rentals, and will vote in any SMRR candidate over a candidate who will protect the safety of its community, the situation will never improve. Instead of voting for “renters rights” why not protect the rights of all citizens including Santa Monica home owners, business owners and tourists who have been bringing hundreds of millions of dollars every year to this town. What do the tourists remember about Santa Monica? The homeless problem.

I am spending hard-earned money to pay for a condo so I can enjoy a small view of the ocean. Why should I have to keep my windows and shades closed so I do not have to witness irresponsible behavior on a regular basis? Put Jenna — or someone with her common sense approach — on the ballot. I would vote for her in a heartbeat.

Susan

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.27.06)

Stewed about a lack of beats

When is it time for words to be put into actions? Why not now?

The citizens of this community, the readers of this column have said over and over again that they want — they need to see measurable change with regard to the homeless issue, public safety and education. Each term, we vote for the people who promise to make these changes, who assure us they will respect and acknowledge the wishes of the residents, and yet, as of this writing, I can see no real measurable change. The time for empty promises is over. I believe that Santa Monica as a community is at tipping point. We can’t ignore this. We must act swiftly before the scale tips back and the status quo is reinstated. Without sounding dramatic, but still relaying my deep concern, we as a community, we must seize the day. We must clean up the city now, or we may miss our opportunity. The upcoming election can not be based on political allegiances or personal agendas. It must be based on balance, common sense and unity of our community.

Unity can be formed and supported in a myriad of ways. It must start with the community as a whole, and then trickle down into our daily lives and span all groups, organizations and commissions. Unity is especially critical between the people of a community and its police and fire departments. I believe that there are deep-seeded issues between our community and the above referenced public servants. Perhaps it is because there has been a breakdown in communication, or simply none at all. I know many residents feel left behind, unprotected and alone. I believe what is missing is the simple daily interaction — not calls on official business — between residents and the police and fire departments. In New York City, police “walk a beat.” They know their niche of the community, they know the names of the residents and they make the daily effort to say a simple “hello.” In turn the community feels a closeness and loyalty to its police, thus creating a sense of unity to overcome crime and weed out the “bad seeds.” Don’t you think that sounds intriguing? It may take a bit more time during the course of a day and will certainly require more police presence on the streets — not just driving by in their cars but truly pounding the pavement and really interacting with the people.

I feel it is unacceptable to have only a handful of homeless police officers that only work Monday through Friday. I feel it is unacceptable that there are not groupings of officers visible at all times on every block of the Promenade. I feel it is unacceptable that the Pico neighborhood feels as if they have little protection, and that no one is available to act as an advocate for peace in that part of the city.

It does not have to be this way.

With a new police chief on the way, three City Council seats available this fall and a serious new city manager in place, we can revamp our police force so they become more a part of the community like other major cities do. We do not need to reinvent the wheel. Let’s simply look at what has worked elsewhere and take the best parts and apply them in Santa Monica. Wouldn’t it be nice to walk down a street in Santa Monica, any street in any neighborhood from Montana to Pico and know your neighborhood police officers?

Yes, we must hire more police officers and it will cost more money but if we have a concrete plan behind the allocations of funds, it might just be the best money we have ever spent. Can you really put a price tag on the safety of the residents of our very special community? No, of course not. The most basic of human needs is to feel safe and to feel connected. Let us not lose the human element of our community.

I thank you for embracing my words over these last six weeks. Please keep your ears and eyes open for me as I intend to now take my own advice and take action to make Santa Monica a more sensible and balanced community.

--Jenna

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.27.06)

Homeless court can make a difference

Stories like this one from San Diego are unfolding in cities across the country: Jack received three illegal lodging tickets for sleeping under a bridge. He sought services and transitional housing at St. Vincent de Paul Village. As he progressed through his case plan, it became clear that those tickets were a barrier to employment. After completing his rehabilitation program, Jack appeared before Homeless Court, where the outstanding charges were dismissed based on his rehabilitation strides. He is now night shift supervisor for a major downtown hotel, earning $18 an hour.

We will soon see more success stories like Jack’s in Santa Monica.

The county of Los Angeles, at Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky’s request and with the unanimous support of the Board of Supervisors, has made available $500,000 to establish a Homeless Community Court with enhanced services for Santa Monica. These funds will allow Santa Monica to more effectively deal with the chronic homeless already living on the streets in Santa Monica by applying a unique problem-solving approach now being utilized with great success in Midtown Manhattan. The police and prosecutors already know the chronically homeless in Santa Monica who will come before or be treated by the court. The court will use a “carrot and stick” approach.

The purpose of the Santa Monica Homeless Community Court is to link homeless offenders committing “quality of life” crimes in Santa Monica — like sleeping in parks and doorways, being intoxicated in public, among other minor offenses — to services and/or appropriate sentence by a judge. Appearance in court thus becomes an opportunity to break the cycle of homelessness rather than a perfunctory visit to the courthouse or the typical revolving door from streets, jail, to streets again, often without meaningful connection to therapeutic services.

Presently, most homeless offenders cited for quality of life crimes by the Santa Monica Police Department do not appear to answer their citations. The citations require them to appear at the criminal courts building near LAX, many miles from Santa Monica. Lacking transportation and, in many cases, organizational skills, most of these homeless offenders never make it to court to receive an appropriate sentence or referral to services which could help them change their lives.

The establishment of a community court in Santa Monica to hear these cases is an important and logical step in the process of addressing homelessness. A judge with specific knowledge about this population and with back-up support of trained personnel to recommend treatment and/or other referrals can produce life-altering interventions. The very fact that repeat offenders must appear before the same judge will make these offenders more accountable for their behavior and reduce the revolving door problem plaguing the system. Police, prosecutors, public defenders, service providers and the judge will work together to effectively assist the offender to overcome obstacles to their getting off the streets. Anyone participating in this program must complete the court-mandated rehabilitation or risk jail time.

Any receipt of services through the Homeless Community Court would be conditioned upon compliance with the court’s requirements.

I saw firsthand the effectiveness of this type of court in Midtown Manhattan earlier in the year and am convinced that it will be of enormous value in Santa Monica. I believe it will become a model to be established in other areas of the region.

Ed

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.24.06)

Police getting bad rap for crackdown in Pico

I’ve been buying seafood from Juan for years. Among the filets of fish, we often talk about life in the Pico neighborhood, where Juan and his family have lived for a long time.

A couple months ago, Juan told me about black and Hispanic adolescent males that were hanging out in the northeast corner of Virginia Park.

“They talk trash, smoke dope, drink 40s (beer), vandalize park furniture and carve placas and gang signs. My wife and I don’t walk there anymore,” he said.

A few days later, Juan told me they stopped hanging out in the park. I told him that someone probably called the police about a situation that needed looking into.

I don’t know what the police did about the law breakers Juan described, but I’m sure they made contact and the young men decided to hang out somewhere less public. I’d bet they told their friends they were “harassed” and that the “pigs keep jacking us.” And, they probably didn’t care if their loutish, criminal behavior was driving off families and other kids afraid of confrontation and violence.

The good news is that Juan and his wife are using the park again, but they’re still angry about those few who spoil it for the rest of us. The bad news is the parents of these young men probably have no idea what their kids were really up to beyond maybe being told, “the cops screw with us.”

The local press (SMDP, July 17 and July 19, page 1) ran articles about two rancorous meetings of the Pico Neighborhood Association (PNA) and the Virginia Park Advisory Board (VPAB). Some Pico neighbors wanted more police patrols, while others felt there is already too much police scrutiny and that officers have it in for neighborhood youth. It seems no matter what law enforcement does, it isn’t right.

An outspoken critic of neighborhood police presence and who insists that “all young Latinos are suspects” is a PNA board member whose 20-year-old son was arrested on July 12 for battery on a peace officer. Gina De Baca was quoted (SMDP, July 17, page 8) as saying of that charge, “My son did nothing wrong. He did not break the law.”

However, the record shows that De Baca’s son was charged with the same crime in 2004, although the charges were dropped. According to the Los Angeles County Sheriff Web site and Los Angeles Superior Court records, he was convicted the same year for possession of a controlled substance for sale. In January 2006, he was arrested and charged as an ex-felon in possession of a firearm, and two weeks ago, arrested and charged with a second battery on a peace officer.

Based on comments made at the VPAB meeting, it seems that some folks think the police have nothing to do except target law-abiding Pico neighborhood youth. I doubt that’s the case.

The problem is that the general public is getting weary of charges and demands. The complainers are losing credibility and sympathy. There seems to be a growing “they made their own bed, let them lie in it” response to anything that goes on between Pico Boulevard and the 10 Freeway — and that’s a tragedy.

Casting the police, whose mission is to stop the violence and ensure safe neighborhoods, as “villains and instigators” compounds the problem and fosters more distrust on all sides.

Nothing’s going to get any better or safer as long as people play the blame game. Parents, the schools and the churches all need to get much more involved with our children. Anything meaningful must start in the home.

Expecting government to sweep in, stop the violence and perform miracles is as likely to happen as FEMA rushing in to rescue the residents of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina.

There’s no one magic formula that’ll make everything “OK.” That only happens in bad movies and fairy tales.

Bill

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.24.06)

Put up or shut up, Bauer

Editor:

I found Bill Bauer’s July 17 column (SMDP, page 4) about the new Santa Monica Homeless Court so irritating, I had to go into the kitchen and eat half a can of Reddi-whip. I am now ready (Reddi?) to respond.

First, before Bill gets his shorts into their weekly twist, he should get his facts straight: City Hall has not dramatically increased spending on homeless programs over the last couple of months. The City Council allocated $200,000 to allow Ed Edelman to complete the 18 months — not two years — he was originally expected to serve. The city did not “cough up” another $1.2 million to house people in the new homeless court program. This funding — much of it federal grant money — has already been allocated to the city’s chronic homeless program. The rental subsidy he mentioned was $75,000 to help St. Joseph’s Center stay in Venice. The evaluation of homeless services was funded in last year’s budget. So we’re talking about an additional $275,000 out of a $445 million annual budget. Not so dramatic, really. And the homeless court itself will be funded by Los Angeles County.

Bauer complains that over the past 25 years Santa Monica has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on homeless programs, yet we have more people living on our streets. I have made that statement plenty of times myself. That’s why I and other volunteers are working with city councilmembers and staff to find new ways to move Santa Monica’s chronically homeless people into housing: The chronic homeless program, serial inebriate outreach, family reunification, supportive housing on the VA grounds for chronically homeless vets, expedited housing programs, and the homeless court.

As Bauer’s anonymous “experts” say, of course some people will abuse these programs and fall back into destructive lifestyles (I myself just went back and finished the Reddi-whip). But others will complete their rehabilitation and move on to jobs and housing.

This is not “blind optimism.” These approaches are all working in other cities. Search Google and you’ll see.

In column after column, Bauer carps that every city program will not reduce the number of people who live on our streets. I have two questions for Bill:

1. Should we go ahead and shut down all these programs, then?

2. If you and your experts know so much more than the people working to solve the problem, why haven’t you ever suggested one course of action that will be effective?

Jean

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.25.06)

Providing a Sensible alternative

CITYWIDE — Criticized by foes during the last campaign season for being a mouthpiece for the hotel and restaurant industry, members of Santa Monicans for Sensible Priorities are looking to prove themselves as a legitimate, community-based group capable of influencing local politics for the benefit of the people — not big business.

While originally backed by the hotel and restaurant industry, SMSP has received plenty of cash from residents — one personal check at a time, said Seth Jacobson, a political consultant and spokesman for SMSP.

At a recent City Council meeting, members of the group presented elected officials with 5,000 signatures from residents who said they are affiliated with SMSP and support its mission to reduce crime, traffic and the homeless population. The signatures, presented during the public comment portion of the meeting, was an attempt to show widespread support for the group’s platform and announce their arrival.

Since then, Jacobson said SMSP has increased its support network to 7,500 and wants to see that number climb to 9,000 or more this summer, allowing them to become a force in the November election, which includes races for the council (three seats); school board (four seats); Santa Monica College board of trustees (four seats) and the rent control board (three seats), in addition to the state Assembly.

“We want to be a legitimate organization,” Jacobson said. “We want to have influence and we think … we will be very powerful in terms of endorsing candidates or being involved in candidates’ activities.”

That could include raising funds or hosting political forums, Jacobson said.

At some point, the group will consider whether or not to make endorsements and campaign for a slate of candidates. However, at this point, increasing membership is SMSP’s main focus, Jacobson said.

That’s hard for some to believe, particularly SMSP’s main political rival, Santa Monicans for Renters Rights (SMRR).

Over the last few months, SMSP has distributed two mailers highlighting City Councilman Kevin McKeown’s voting record. McKeown is a member of SMRR and a 30-year renter in Santa Monica.

One mailer praised Mayor Bob Holbrook, Mayor Pro Tem Bobby Shriver and Councilman Herb Katz for their work on homelessness, but failed to mention efforts made by other council members who have been backed by SMRR, including City Councilman Richard Bloom, who has been very active in coordinating homeless efforts.

The other mailer targeted McKeown specifically, pointing out his lone vote against a downtown parking plan that includes the addition of more than 1,700 parking spaces. McKeown said he voted against the plan because it was based on increased development in downtown, something many residents oppose.

Former mayor and SMRR co-founder Denny Zane said SMSP is nothing more than “AstroTurf,” claming to be grass-roots. He said the group is the voice of two major hotels — Casa Del Mar and Shutters, and not residents.

“They’ve been created exclusively for the purpose of attacking progressive City Council members and candidates,” Zane said. “This year, they clearly have a coordinated effort to attack Kevin McKeown because Kevin is the hardest working council member, who makes defending residents and their neighborhoods … his top priority.”

Zane said McKeown backed a living-wage ordinance for hotel workers and has been a voice for residents concerned about over-development, putting him directly in the crosshairs of the hotel industry and big business.

Jacobson said the mailers were not attacks, but rather information items educating voters about SMSP and critical issues affecting residents.

“We are just pointing out that there are clearly differences on the council between the priorities of Kevin and some of his supporters and Bob Holbrook and others, even (Council member) Pam O’Connor and others,” Jacobson said. “We are pointing out that there is a real division and wouldn’t it be great if everyone could agree on a unified strategy, particularly around the homeless issue?”

Jacobson said SMSP spent roughly $20,000 last year on surveys to see what the public believes are the top priorities. That, he said, demonstrates the group’s commitment to speaking for residents. If SMSP was just a puppet for hotels, it would have spent that money on campaign literature, Jacobson said, and not on research.

Jacobson said SMRR feels threatened by SMSP, and prefers the politics of division over the politics of inclusion.

“SMRR is trying to use us as a whipping horse to get their people excited,” Jacobson said. “We’re happy to work with (SMRR) if there are issues we think we can join together on. That would be great.”

Holbrook, who looks to benefit the most from SMSP’s existence, said he doesn’t know much about the group except that members submitted 5,000 signatures of support. He said SMRR has engaged in mailers like SMSP’s in the past, including those that he said unfairly distorted his voting record.

“(Mailers) just seem to be part of the fabric of Santa Monica politics,” Holbrook said. “Many groups have come up over the years and have become involved in politics, from the (Committee for Excellent Public Schools) and the Lifelong Learning Community, to those that have been around forever like the League of Women Voters.”

Holbrook said almost anyone can form a group. He added that he is focused solely on running his campaign and can’t worry about mailers.

“If a group is offering an endorsement, then I’ll go talk with them,” Holbrook said. “But there does come a point when you have some groups who shouldn’t be giving endorsements. I guess there’s just an overwhelming urge to support a candidate and if you don’t fit in anywhere, then I guess you just start your own group.”

McKeown said SMSP is misrepresenting his voting record and that he stands by his decisions on the dais.

“My council votes reflect concern for the quality of life of residents, so it’s vexing to see my recent votes against unplanned development and the privatization of public outdoor space misrepresented as they have been,” McKeown said. “As always, the name of the game in Santa Monica stealth politics is, ‘follow the money.’ I’ve held the line on too much commercial growth, and stood for affording local workers the dignity of a living wage. Could some developers and hotel owners be holding a grudge?”

SMSP plans to hold its first town hall meeting in August where voters will be able to get a glimpse of the group’s leadership. In the meantime, those with Internet access can go to the group’s Web site at www.cityhallstories.com, Jacobson said.

“We’ve had an overwhelming response from the community,” Jacobson said. “It’s been staggering. To be honest, we never thought that we would get 5,000 people.”

With the election still several months away, it remains to be seen what impact SMSP can have, said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, who has watched Santa Monica politics evolve over the years.

“You never know … until you see the final votes, but clearly (SMSP) is a counterpoint to SMRR and its tremendous influence,” Stern said. “There were counter organizations to SMRR several years ago and they still won several seats.”

Kevin

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.21.06)

Something stinks in SM

Editor:

I commend Stephen Baker for speaking out in “Homeless are sucking the life from Santa Monica” (SMDP, July 6, page 4). Thank you for publishing his eloquent and frank description of the problems we face as residents of Santa Monica.

I was raised in Santa Monica. I love it here. My family and I enjoyed the beaches and the parks when we were growing up. We would have picnics, throw the ball, enjoy what we deserved as children in a nice neighborhood.

We were never accosted or threatened by people begging for money, food and even worse, be scared we were in danger of being hurt.

I used to enjoy the simple pleasures of walking my dog along Palisades Park. Unfortunately, this is not possible. The park is full of vagrants in sleeping bags and the disgusting piles of vomit and smell of urine have deterred our daily visits along Ocean Avenue.

It is very unpleasant to take strolls along the beach and so sad that we cannot enjoy the sunsets without being harassed or approached by a stranger.

The incredible attempts to beautify Santa Monica have created great looking benches that are being used by the homeless. Where do we sit when we want to take pleasure in a cup of coffee along our Promenade?

As a homeowner and taxpayer, I feel very fortunate to live in such a beautiful community, but what good is it if the current homeless situation keeps us on edge and prohibits us from relaxing and enjoying our city?

I agree with Mr. Baker, it appears the homeless are being excused for their atrocious behaviors and have preferential treatment because they are homeless. As a dispatcher from the police department stated, quote unquote “because the homeless, for the most part, are a little crazy.”

Is that a rational explanation?

“Help me,” too.

We want our city back.

Valerie

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.19.06)

Rio feels safer than Santa Monica

Editor:

I am sad to report that after just spending a week in Rio de Janeiro I felt much safer staying in their beach communities than I have felt living here in Santa Monica. I think we all know Rio’s reputation for crime. In Rio, my girlfriend and I were never bothered walking around day or night, and routinely walked back after going out at night. Here in Santa Monica, I live in an apartment five blocks from the Third Street Promenade and we never walk back from it at night. Although we have not been victims of a crime in Santa Monica, it feels dangerous walking the streets of this city, especially during the night. Also, it is a shame that we have one of the most beautiful parks in the world, Palisades Park, and the taxpaying citizens do not even feel comfortable enough to enjoy it any more. As others have mentioned in recent letters to the editor in the SMDP, the homeless problem is out of control. Shame on Santa Monica for failing to live up to its potential.

Josh

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.19.06)

Let the homeless fix themselves

Editor:

I read Kitty Monsalud’s letter to the editor (SMDP, July 10, page 4) and I was absolutely amazed at your true ignorance to the problem of homelessness and even more amazed at your idea on how to solve it by raising taxes and throwing more money at it.

Billions upon billions of dollars have been donated, spent, taxed, raised, etc. on homeless problems in the United States. Yet for some reason, we still have homeless folks. So it is obvious — throwing money at the problem does not solve it. The reason Santa Monica has such a huge homeless population is because Santa Monica is an enabler. Santa Monica is like that “friend” who brings a case of beer to an AA meeting and says, “why are you looking at me?”

There are legitimate homeless folks out there with real disabilities who need and deserve the help of the people of this country, and there is plenty of money already there for that. But if you ever walk down the Santa Monica green, as I do everyday for four miles, you will see that the majority of these homeless folks are more than able bodied enough to work their way out of their problems. Many of the homeless choose to stay that way because the shelters often require that they do not drink, smoke or do drugs while staying there. Many choose not to do this and thus remain outdoors.

Now Kitty, if you want to give more money and open your door to your house to take in some homeless folks, please, be my guest. But don’t try to get everybody else to do something because if “feels” like the right thing to do. We have been doing the “right thing” for this war on poverty for decades and it remains the same. The time is to now change it.

And for you to group together those truly disabled and poor with those low-life’s who choose to turn to booze and drugs as a way to escape is incentive at best. Nobody forces anyone to get addicted to drugs or anything else. You make a decision to do it. Yes, some people have more addictive genetic make-ups, but you still have the ability and free will to decide not to go that route and instead take a more positive route to getting yourself out of poverty.

And this ludicrous idea that raising taxes creates jobs. Where did you get that crazy idea?

And how dare you call our society hostile and inhumane. This country and its people give more to the needy of this planet than just about all other nations combined. We have program after program and layer after layer of entitlements for the needy in this country. We spend billions on education and most of that is wasted on the children of illegal aliens. Image what kind of education system this state could have if we removed 50 percent of the students because either they are illegal or their parents are? Imagine how much more money we would have to build better and more advanced schools and hire better teachers? You see Kitty, this is a real solution to the problem. Not just taxing more and spending more on the same damn system that is broken.

Open your mind and stop trying to open everyone else’s wallets except your own.

Billy

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.18.06)

Hating homeless is a slippery slope

Editor:

This is in response to all you who take such great pride in bashing the homeless population. I’ll tell you what — why don’t you just get out your white sheets out of the closets and burn crosses in the homeless campsites? Or let’s just take the homeless population out and line them up and shoot them.

Good old Rush Limbaugh, hypocrite that he is, gave you that idea.

Even better yet, let’s do it to all the impoverished in LA. You know, you could stop homelessness that way. Nip it in the bud before it gets started.

Then, after the homeless and impoverished are gone, who could you run out of town next? Let’s see, well the lower middle class would be the next target, yeah they will be poor soon under this great economic recovery, and then who?

I hope you who are so high and mighty get the message: You have shown your true colors very well.

Charles

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.18.06)

Park has proven to be no safe haven

Editor:

How very sad that Virginia Avenue Park is becoming a center for criminal activities. The money the taxpayers spent to create that park is all for nothing. This was to be a safe place for our children, so it was said, but this is a place where our children kill or are killed, and it seems this park is progressing to other crimes such as rape. Where are the leaders, such as Oscar de la Torre? Why is he not stopping the crimes? After all, if the Santa Monica Police is blamed for everything, why not those who profess to want the best for the Pico corridor? The only action I have seen from them is to have a march for peace.

Once upon a time, a Santa Monica councilman wanted to close some of the city streets because the traffic was much too much for him, at that time I believed this councilman was a bit crazy. I am not so sure right now. I would like to see Virginia Park become a parking lot. You see, this way when I go to the pharmacy, to the freeway and other places where I need to drive by the park, I would stand a better chance of not getting killed by our children.

Maria

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.17.06)

Homeless court will only fee problem

In case you hadn’t noticed, City Hall has dramatically increased spending on homeless programs over the last couple of months.

Recent additions to homeless spending include funding for Ed Edelman’s second year as city’s homeless czar, surveys on services, a rent subsidy to a city-contracted homeless services provider and the establishment of a homeless community court.

Nothing illustrates City Hall’s Pollyanna approach to the issue more than the disingenuous statement made by City Councilman Richard Bloom during a July 3 press conference announcing the new community homeless court. Bloom said, “No one wants to see homeless people get sent to jail for not having a place to live.”

Bloom, an attorney, knows better. Nobody here goes to jail for not having a place to live.

Legitimate law breakers are usually cited for infractions and misdemeanors such as drinking in public or trespassing on private property. Only if a person has criminal warrants or has committed serious offenses could they go to jail.

LA County has promised $500,000 to help fund the homeless court for a year. City Hall coughed up another $1.2 million for services, including permanent housing for the chronically homeless and chronically homeless inebriates.

“City officials expect to reach an estimated 150 to 200 chronically homeless individuals at the end of the one year pilot program ... County officials estimate that the city now spends about $8,000 per homeless person for police, paramedic and jail services — not counting LA County jail, court and hospital expense,” according to published reports (SMDP, July 4, 2006, page 1).

Officials say they don’t know how much the program will cost per homeless individual. But if you divide $1.7 million by 200 persons — the maximum estimated that might participate — the average cost per person for this program alone is $8,500.

Don’t think that these beneficiaries won’t still be using police, paramedic and other city services. Years of anti-social behavior and their associated costs aren’t going to stop overnight no matter how many caseworkers and other programs are deployed.

While Bloom and city officials wax enthusiastically about how a homeless court will open the door for training and jobs, the truth is that most participants aren’t going to adopt a socially acceptable lifestyle. Experts in both law enforcement and homeless services tell me that service resistant street people will milk and abuse the program as long as they can.

Santa Monicans concerned about health and safety issues are disgusted by the negative image our army of vagrants projects to the world. While many residents demand more police action, paradoxically, they also want more homeless services.

While it feels good to provide services, they’re still a magnet for vagrants and transients. The few highly-publicized success stories aren’t about Santa Monicans, they’re about people from Atlanta, Houston, New York or “name a city” because they “couldn’t get services in their hometown.”

I’m gratified that people get help, however, we all pay for it in higher taxes and an increasingly dirty and dangerous community.

City Hall has been providing an array of services for over two decades and have spent literally hundreds of millions of dollars, yet we have many more unhoused vagrants and transients than ever before.

Many city-subsidized giveaways of food and clothing enable a street lifestyle. Out-of-towners who feed here sustain and prolong the misery. Local businesses and individuals wrongly think handouts encourage them to go away. In reality, all of this is akin to feeding bears in Yosemite. Do-gooders usually find themselves in over their head, besieged and victimized. Ultimately, it leads to even bigger problems.

Public Ignorance impedes dealing with the problem intelligently. Recently, a spate of letters to this newspaper orchestrated by a hotel-backed political group contained solutions for solving homeless problems. Unfortunately, many of the “solutions” such as “feed indoors” and finding housing” are already being done.

Suggestions such as “enforcing vagrancy laws” will be difficult considering that loitering and vagrancy laws were expunged from the California Penal Code more than 25 years ago when they were deemed unconstitutional.

Dealing with our homeless problems with blind optimism, false promises and worthless suggestions is like putting a fresh coat of paint on an unsafe rust bucket. It might look good for a while, but it’ll kill you on the highway.

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.17.2006)

Take it to the streets

For thousands of residents living on the south side of the 10 Freeway, the nighttime patrols by police helicopters with their roving spotlights have been a bit unnerving this past week. But then, so were the four gang-related shootings and the reported sexual assault that have occurred just since the Fourth of July.

While the helicopters may provide some level of ease, they also serve as a constant reminder that the gang-bangers could strike at any moment. We can only hope that no one is struck with their bullets. The violence and increased police patrols might also lead people to conclude they are either caught living in a war zone or have found themselves residing in the ’hood.

Tell that to the people who have purchased homes there. The Pico neighborhood — while certainly not north of Montana, where real estate investments are much more hefty but at least come without the gang-banger threat — their homes have value all the same.

Pico residents have said they want true community centered policing, not an occupying force. Some residents feel as if police are continually stopping and harassing kids, or anyone for that matter, as they walk down the street. The results of which only instill bad attitudes and distrust.

They want the same courtesy and respect allotted other parts of town. Of course, those other areas don’t have the same number of low-income housing projects, where unfortunately, many of the shootings occur.

One shooting this past week was in the alley behind Euclid Street, near Pico Boulevard. There is a Community Corp. of Santa Monica building at the corner. According to a report by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, prepared under the Clinton Administration, residents who live in or near low-income housing projects are more than twice as likely to be victims of gun violence than the community as a whole.

That might be one reason there aren’t any low-income housing projects north of Montana or Wilshire, or in the Sunset Park neighborhood — where several City Council members live. There would seem an obvious correlation between the fact that nearly all of this community’s violence happens in the Pico neighborhood — from which there has never been a resident elected to the City Council.

Pico has been ignored for decades and has traditionally always been a more impoverished neighborhood than other areas of Santa Monica. But Pico — which is bound by Pico Boulevard on the south side, Lincoln Boulevard on the west side, Santa Monica Boulevard to 20th Street on the north side, to Colorado Avenue, and to Centinela Avenue on the eastern boundary — has seen significant gentrification, especially since it is one of the largest sections of the city. What used to be a predominately poor black community, and then turned mostly Hispanic, has seen many middle-class white families moving in after having been priced out of other areas in Santa Monica.

The block on Euclid Street where the shooting occurred in broad daylight on Sunday afternoon — reportedly by 15- and 16-year-olds — is lined with small apartment complexes and several homes worth $1 million or more. Imagine paying that kind of money and worrying whether or not your children might get killed in a drive-by shooting while playing in the yard.

About 10,000 people live in the Pico neighborhood and they are being held hostage by a handful of criminals. Tensions seem to rise when those locked up for parole and probation violations are released. That’s when the shootings happen and that’s when Pico residents’ frustrations flare.

City officials have thrown money at the problem by hosting a few gang summit meetings and job fairs. They’ve put in more street lights and what are called “safe walking paths.” Still, how will that protect residents when bullets fly?

They’ve increased police patrols and renovated a city park in the heart of the troubled area of the neighborhood. Unfortunately, the $13 million renovation of Virginia Avenue Park hasn’t kept the gang members and attackers away. There was a shooting there on July 7, where a young Hispanic male was shot in the upper torso. He survived. Four days later, a woman said she was sexually assaulted while using the pay phone around 6 a.m.

All that criminal activity and violence with a police substation permanently set up at the park. Police presence is a good thing. So why not have that station staffed 24/7, rather than just 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. each day?

Residents are going to have to take back their streets. We are not suggesting vigilantism, but we are suggesting a strong neighborhood watch program be put into place, with the police actively involved. Even if one quarter of the residents who live in Pico were to organize routine patrols, it just might deter the punks from pulling out their artillery.

Carolyn

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 7.14.2006)

Where's the compassion?

Editor:

What issues about homelessness do I think are pertinent?

That human beings are being neglected as human beings and that this neglect goes on in public so that everyone, including children, can see a society that allows people to die on the sidewalks in the city we like to think of is caring of human beings.

The suffering, the resentment, the hopelessness, the degradation of human life.

How does the situation affect me?

I try not to ignore this shameful neglect and be a part of the “good Germans” who simply complain and write nasty letters inferring that the city should somehow “deal” with these humans through punishment or criminalizing them for simply being poor in public with absolutely no basic necessities such as trying to stay clean, use a toilet, go to sleep or ask for food to eat.

It saddens me to know the lack of these basic necessities causes human beings to wash in public restrooms, defecate and urinate on the street, sleep on the street and beg for food. What else can a human being do if they are on the street?

What can be done is to put two and two together and provide those basic necessities so that humans forced onto the street can at least have their basic needs met. Wouldn’t everyone, both homeless and the housed be relieved. Providing a toilet, a shower, private safe sleep, food and storage would not be impossible and it would solve the most obvious issues that plague both housed and unhoused.

I have been volunteering my time for five years to work with homeless people through Side Be Side, a homeless discussion group that has met at the Ken Edwards Community Center twice a month. I work with H.O.P.E. (Helping Other People Eat) to provide and serve food for the homeless at least once a week and have for three years. I know many homeless people personally and have for years. The thing that separates me and you from them are these basic necessities. Without them, they devolve mentally and physically. They suffer from society’s hatred through repressive anti-homeless laws that punish them for simply having human functions that can not be magically turned off. They suffer society’s insults, dirty looks and neglect.

Instead, society continues pretending that the situation should be studied further, discussed by committees of residents and professionals year after year after year without meeting the homeless humans’ basic needs. Remember the homeless only represent 1 percent of our population. That percentage has stayed pretty constant for some time. As the population grows that 1 percent grows with it.

By the way, according to Bring Home LA’s own current census of the homeless, 17,000 Veterans are homeless in LA County. A 350-bed shelter for veterans at the West LA VA leaves 16,650 vets on the street. The “solutions” I’ve heard regarding the 100,000-plus homeless population of LA County are just basically a twisted sad joke that perpetuate society’s misery of people living and dying on the street.

Excuse me if you don’t like my tone, but face the facts. Talk, talk, talk, complain, complain, complain, ignore, ignore, ignore. Just try to put yourself in a homeless person’s shoes for two days and think about what you have today that you wouldn’t if you were homeless.

I am ready to conduct a seminar for the public with homeless people as the panel, and the housed and professional community as the audience. That might be step one towards society getting a better handle on “solutions” to this disgusting chapter in human degradation. Come to Side By Side any first or third Wednesday of each month to the Ken Edwards Center at 7 p.m. and listen, as I do, to what life is like being homeless.

Randy

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.13.2006)

No mercy

Editor:

“We must stop making it easy for the homeless to live on our streets. We must be helpful and sympathetic without forsaking our residents safety and security.”

In Jenna Linnekens’ column (SMDP, July 6, page 5) 6 July 2006, “No more easy streets,” she made the above statement. It addresses the crux of the matter — how to balance residents’ safety and security with being “helpful and sympathetic” to the homeless.

I have lived in Santa Monica since 1996 and before written letters to the editor, attended various workshops on the homeless situation in Santa Monica and called the police department more than 20 times for problems with homeless in the alley behind my residence and on adjoining streets — urinating, defecating, fighting, disturbing the peace, threatening, etc. In the last decade, I have seen a budget of $2 million per year directly allocated to the homeless. Each year, an estimated 25 percent of the budget of the police department and 10 percent of the fire department budget are directly used for dealing with homeless misbehavior and treatment. With the combined police and fire departments’ budget annually at $60 million and $20 million, respectively, that means an additional $17 million is used for the homeless each year. Thus, over the last decade as much as $200 million has been paid by the government of Santa Monica through revenues from its citizens and visitors to deal with the city’s homeless population — 2 percent and growing. And now we have a “homeless czar” paid $200,000-plus per year to coordinate the problems of the homeless on a regional basis. Please.

For me, it seems more important for the City Council and the citizens/voters of Santa Monica to decide to either encourage or discourage the homeless from locating in Santa Monica.

The consequences of that simple, not easy decision are immense. It’s time for our City Council to make up its mind, openly, clearly and officially. Decide and be willing to accept the consequences. We don’t need any new laws. There are adequate ones on the books already, if they were only enforced on a consistent and continuing basis. No more enabling. Start empowering and enforcing accountability for all involved. Enough is enough.

The official position of the city of Santa Monica to the homeless of the world is — encourage or discourage? Welcome, or stay out? What’s it to be?

John

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.13.2006)

Santa Monica is no Palm Desert

Editor:

On May 23, I left Santa Monica and moved to Palm Desert, Calif. I was paying $2,300 per month for a decrepit two-bedroom apartment built in 1968 at Second Street and Montana Avenue. I bought a two-bedroom house in a gated development with two golf courses, three club houses and four swimming pools — talk about having a beach, we have a beach everywhere via three outdoor pools and now I only pay $1,800 per month and I own the house. I have a real problem with the rent subsidies that are promulgated by rent control. I have a friend who has a two-bedroom apartment off of Ocean Park Boulevard near Main Street. After 26 years, the rent is only $880 per month. I have concluded that if all the folks in rent-controlled apartments ever have to pay market rates for housing, the homeless population in Santa Monica will increase even more. Anyone who thinks this situation can continue is in for a rude awakening.

My move was precipitated by the homeless population that continually rummages through the trash cans and defecates and urinates in the alleys, parking structures and doorways. What you don’t realize is that much of this urban runoff usually ends up in the storm drains and dumps out onto the beaches of Santa Monica and frequently results in beach closures, even though there are attempts to solve the problem of urban runoff through installation of dryflow systems which capture some of this effluent and pump it to the Hyperion treatment plant. In the meantime beach goers don’t swim. They just go through the movements. No pun intended.

Much is made of the Third Street Promenade. It is OK but how does it compare to The Grove?

Santa Monica, wake up. You are living in a dream world.

J. Roger

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.12.2006)

Parks are useless if they're not safe

Editor:

Today was a beautiful day in sunny Santa Monica. I decided to take my son to Reed Park where the YMCA summer camp was spending some time. He enjoyed the sand, the slide and watching all the big kids. He made numerous attempts to escape the confines of the playground to test and push his boundaries as all small children do. As I packed up the stroller I made a mental note to bring his ball next time and skip the playground in lieu of finding a shady spot to practice his new throwing skills. My heart sank as we left the park and every nice spot was occupied by an individual or group of transients. I realized I had the following options: 1. The shady lawn that was occupied by at least five homeless people talking loudly to one another. 2. Another shady spot where a woman sat muttering and twitching to herself. 3. The knoll where a transient couple are lying/sleeping next to their shopping carts and one another. 4. The bright sunny spot occupied by no one yet which held promises of sunburn.

Over lunch, I read Stephen Baker’s letter to the editor (SMDP, July 6, page 4) and I truly identified with his desperation. As taxpaying residents of Santa Monica, we all have an opinion of the homeless issue that plagues our city. Mr. Baker is obviously frustrated and angry. At this point, I am just sad. I am sad that my out-of-town guests cannot see Palisades Park for the beautiful place that it is because all they can see is the numerous people who call it home. I am sad that the police blotter is full of invasive crimes both of property and person committed by transients. I am sad when I walk on Fifth Street from Santa Monica Boulevard up to Wilshire and all I can smell is urine. I am sad that we have great spaces for children, yet I can not seem to find a comfortable spot to play catch.

I second Mr. Baker. Why is it acceptable for the citizens of our city to feel like second-class citizens to the transient population? We have an incredibly unique and beautiful piece of land here compared to the rest of the world. It is the city officials responsibility to ensure that our citizens — our taxpaying, rent paying, mortgage paying, bill paying citizens — be able to enjoy Santa Monica to its absolute fullest. At the very least, I challenge you to show me a safe, comfortable place to kick around a ball with my kid at a park within walking distance to my apartment.

Molly

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.11.2006)

Forget about the 'haves' already

Editor:

In response to the letter from Stephen Baker (SMDP, July 6, page 4):

Wow, what a great letter! Mr. Baker gets the high five from me. Hopefully, more and more concerned and victimized citizens will write to the SMDP, sharing their scary, bizarre and common experiences. Kudos to you, Stephen Baker. I thought I might try to answer some of Stephen’s relevant questions.

The homeless population is getting worse and worse because our City Council wants all of them here. They actually want more of them to come here. You see Stephen, all of the homeless create a voter base — along with Santa Monicans For Renters Rights and the low-income housing boom — that keeps our City Council members both in office and in their rent-controlled apartments.

Keeping the homeless here allows them to punish property and business owners (aka “the haves”) by spending the hard-earned tax dollars of the “haves” on the “have nots.”

The reason you can’t find, use or stand to use a bench on the Promenade is because the City Council won’t allow the police to enforce vagrancy laws that would allow store customers (the “haves”) to rest between spending store to store. The fact that the city is losing sales tax revenue means nothing to the City Council. All they care about is keeping their cushy chairs in the bowels of City Hall and voting in the middle of the night to put developers out of business by requiring that they give a third of their investments away to the “have nots.”

Yes, your taxes do pay for buildings and services, but that doesn’t mean a thing. The homeless come first. The City Council wants your money but they don’t care a bit about keeping you safe, your children safe or your property safe. Several of our City Council members don’t even own property here, they have no vested financial stake whatsoever in this community, yet they have the power to ruin your quality of life, ruin your property values and steal your investments and you can’t do a thing about it.

The City Council and the police don’t give a rats behind about protecting private property, be it shopping carts, vehicles, carports, garages, yards, etc. They care about the homeless stealing from each other, and taking a detailed report of the same, but they can’t be bothered with reports of vandalism, public urination, bomb threats, batteries and assaults, etc. As long as the homeless come out on top, that’s the goal. Simple as that. I don’t know what’s up with the incompetent police dispatchers Stephen, but we all still have to call the police every time we see a crime committed by a bum. Eventually, maybe someone will tally up all the police reports and publish a truthful total of what the homeless are actually costing our city.

And finally Stephen, you should be used to the smell of urine, the mumblings and threats of the crazies and being assaulted. That’s what one gets for their million-dollar plus property investment here.The city leaders want people pissing in your yard, threatening you and your family and making it impossible to picnic in a park. That's what they must want, because that's the way it is here. City leaders want everyone to be sickened when at the Promenade or anywhere public — that way, if you are a bleeding heart liberal or a Section 8 rent control recipient in this town, you will feel sorry for the homeless and re-elect the incumbent morons who sit on the City Council, promising to fix the problem while actually making it worse.

If it makes you feel any better, Stephen, you are not alone. Your frustration is my frustration, is my family’s frustration and is my neighbor’s frustration.

Lori

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.10.2006)

Solve the problem at the polls

Editor:

Regarding the letters from residents who are upset that there are homeless people in Santa Monica and who asked them to be “removed” and I couldn’t help to think:The homeless are humans, just like me and you who didn’t have the fortune to go through live without major problems like addictions, mental issues and poverty.If I don’t like their presence in Santa Monica I should try to find a solution to change this.And this means to vote for a president, a governor and mayor who raises taxes in order to get the U.S. education system up-to-date; somebody who will spend tax money for the health system and who is eager to build jobs in our cities; somebody who promotes rent control so not only the rich can afford to live somewhere.Solve the problem by the roots instead of creating a hostile and inhumane society that looks down on the less fortunate.Vote for the right people and get involved into day to day politics, then you might create a world with less poverty and substance abuse that looks pretty and picturesque.Every day I wake up in the morning I thank God not to be homeless.

Kitty

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.10.2006)

Homeless are sucking the life from Santa Monica

Editor:

I have become very frustrated over the years with the homeless problem in Santa Monica. I have lived in Santa Monica for more than eight years, and it has just gotten worse and worse. What’s wrong with our city?I no longer venture to the Third Street Promenade. I don’t even know what new stores have gone in since the last time I’ve been there. I don’t go because every bench, at any given time during the day when the shopping district is open for business, is taken up by a homeless person and his or her belongings. So while I’m shopping, and enjoying myself, I can’t even have a seat to rest and just take in the beauty of the promenade because of some bum. Why is this allowed? I understand that at some point, the ACLU argued that the promenade is public property, so anybody is allowed there without discrimination. But as far as I can see, my taxes paid for the buildings on this street, and are paying the staff that keep the street clean. Which homeless person is paying taxes? Someone, I’m sure, will argue that some of them have jobs and how dare I group all the homeless together… I’m not. I’m talking about the ones who are on the benches, all day, with stolen shopping carts and plastic bags full of who knows what.Speaking of stolen shopping carts, it says very specifically at the stores in question that the carts are not to be removed from the store’s property without written permission, and it is a crime to do so. Why isn’t SMPD collecting and jailing all the bums who are walking around with these carts? They’re not doing anything about it. Some people may say, “Well, that’s a really petty crime, they should be working on more important things.” Oh really? So at what point does stealing become “not petty?” I know if I stole an item worth $75 to $100 (www.metroactive.com), I’d be arrested and charged with a crime. So why are the homeless allowed to walk around in plain sight of the public, including the police, with these items?Enough about the shopping carts, let us move onto other crimes. I’ve personally witnessed littering and public urination. I’ve been a victim of a variety of things including threats to myself and threats of a bomb in a public place. I’ve had to call the police a number of times. In one case, I followed up on a homeless woman who was threatening to smash her half-empty bottle of Jack Daniel’s on my head. When I called the police, it took them 15 minutes to arrive. 15 minutes! The woman could’ve smashed the bottle on my head, drank the blood out of my neck, taken all my things, and been on a bus to Hollywood by then. What the hell? If an average person had made the same threat, the police would’ve been there immediately. So what’s going on?The dispatcher asked if the person threatening me was homeless. I said yes, she appears to be homeless. She asked if the person had hit me with anything yet. I said no, I had not been hit yet. Then she told me the police would be there shortly. End of conversation ... 15 minutes later, woohoo!, the police arrives. They take me aside to question me, and I describe in perfect detail what had happened. They arrest her for threatening me with a weapon. They give me a business card with the detective’s name on it that I can call to follow up on the matter. I called approximately two weeks later, and I was informed the case hadn’t come out of the front office, that the detective hadn’t received the case yet, and to call back in a week or two. I was told it takes seven to ten business days to process. I called back a month later, and I was informed she was already out of jail. I was informed that she’d been convicted of a few crimes and had a warrant or two out on her. She is a repeat offender, but she is homeless, so hey, what can they do about it? HUH? So if you’re homeless, you can threaten to smash people up with glass, and you’ll be out in a month or two, even though you have a record of multiple offenses? Sweet! I’m going to go homeless in a few days so I can start robbing liquor stores. They’ll let me go after a month or two because I’m homeless. Anyone see anything wrong with this picture?The bomb scare was absolutely brilliant. There was this old man standing just inside the patio at Trastevere Restaurant, on the corner of Third Street and Santa Monica Boulevard, and he was telling a guy he had a bomb in his backpack and was going to blow up the entire restaurant. He kept repeating things like this and laughing. Of course, I called the police because nowadays if someone threatens to have a bomb, you have to take them seriously, right?The dispatcher asked if I had seen the bomb. I replied that the guy had said it was in his backpack. Then they asked, of course, if he was homeless. I said yes, because he appeared to be homeless. They said, then, that I had to have seen the bomb before they would come do anything. To make sure I was hearing her correctly, I said, “So this guy can stand here and threaten to kill a man and his wife, and blow up a restaurant, and yet I have to see the bomb before you’ll send officers to the scene?” She replied yes, because the homeless, for the most part, are a little crazy and there was doubt to the truthfulness of his story.Are you kidding? So now a guy just has to be grubby, and he can go around making bomb threats and nobody will take it seriously? What the hell is wrong with our city?I write this in frustration because I am so sick and tired, every day, of walking down the street, and getting harassed by at least one homeless person for something on every block. A cigarette, some change, some food, whatever. Normal people don’t do this! Then, when I get to where I’m going, which is generally a restaurant, I like to sit on the patio to enjoy the breeze and weather. On the patio, again, I get harassed for food and/or money. When did this become OK? People sometimes stare at me because usually when asked for something by a homeless person, I tell them to go f*** themselves. I just can’t deal with it any more. Help me.

Stephen

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.6.2006)

Time to hang 'closed' sign on SM's door

Editor:

That Santa Monica has evolved from the “People’s Republic of Santa Monica” to the “Home of the Homeless,” saddens me. The time is long overdue for our City Council to put out the “closed” sign to the area homeless.Using the crime report in the Santa Monica Daily Press as one barometer, of the crimes listed during April and May, where the information was available, fully 19 of the 40 crimes listed made reference to the arrest of a “transient” (read homeless). This small snapshot reveals that is nearly half (47.5 percent) the crime in Santa Monica.It’s time for the City Council to invite the “transients” into their own homes so that the citizens of Santa Monica can enjoy a better quality of life.

Ron

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.5.2006)

Taking back our city from homeless

Editor:

I am writing this letter in regards to the June 20 City Council budget meeting. The article in the paper last Thursday by Kevin Herrera (SMDP, June 29, page 1), did not address the fact that there were members of Santa Monicans for Sensible Priorities (SM4SP) who came before the City Council and voiced their concern regarding the chronic homeless problem Santa Monica is facing. SM4SP discussed their personal experiences, concerns that homelessness has escalated to near uncontrollable proportions, and resolutions that SM4SP has in mind to help mend our city.

SM4SP feels the portion of the budget intended to directly affect the homeless is being spent inefficiently. SM4SP feels the budget needs to be focused more towards:

Increasing the funding to make it worth while for police and medical personnel to enforce current vagrancy laws. Currently, the city has only four specialized officers responsible for enforcing and counteracting homelessness in Santa Monica which is unacceptable considering the sheer numbers of homeless persons in Santa Monica.

Applying restrictions to the funding of social service organizations and city service organizations which run the feeding programs. This will decrease the incentive for more homeless to come to the city because there will be fewer free handouts.

Engage the business community to fund and establish housing for the homeless by providing tax breaks to the investors and allocating city funds to renovate unused housing for the homeless.

When I reviewed the article by Kevin Herrera, I did not see a specific amount of money that our City Council was planning to put aside to help resolve the homeless problem. Of the current $442.6 million budget there was no direct indication that any of the money would be spent on resolving the homeless issue. Furthermore, there was no discussion about how much money was already being spent on the homeless issue. In 2005 the city allocated only $2.2 million in funds. This money is clearly not being spent the right way considering the homeless problem is rising and only 40 percent of the total homeless population is being aided with city programs.

Santa Monica needs to allocate a set amount of the 2006-07 city budget towards developing beneficial programs that both begin to resolve homelessness and ease the minds of the city residents. The City Council needs to help take back the city from the homeless. When is the City Council going to listen to its citizens and open their eyes to what is going on in their own community?

Wade

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.5.2006)

It's time to take back this town

Editor:

To substantiate the points made in Jenna Linneken’s column (SMDP, 6/29/06, page 4), I would like to share one of my family’s many recent experiences with the ever growing vagrant population that our city leaders insist on keeping here.

On June 27, at about 5 p.m., I took my teenage daughter to Save-On (now CVS) on Lincoln and Santa Monica boulevards. I let her go into the store by herself, while I waited in the car. She walked out of the store stuffing her change in her pocket and was accosted by a ranting, cursing woman, screaming “give me that money. I am pregnant. Give it to me right now.” My daughter ran away from her, and ran back to the car, terrified.

As I drove out of the parking lot (looking for a security guard), the woman was already busy victimizing the next two customers that came out of the store. This abusive, obviously drunk (although pregnant) woman was accompanied by the gang of intoxicated thugs that live in the parking lot of that store. For more than three years, the same crew of derelicts have resided there, camping illegally, trashing the property, mugging teenagers and strong arming customers for hand-outs.

Jenna writes about saving the future of our special community and “blazing a path to reclamation.” It is, as Jenna says, a “monstrous mission.” If you live in this city, a simple trip to the pharmacy has become a terrifying, dangerous and life-threatening outing. Clearly, pleas and public outcry for basic public safety fall on deaf ears. The only way to reclaim our community is to enforce a zero-tolerance policy for the law-breaking bums that squat here.

Let’s start small at making our community safer for everyone. I challenge the owners of Save-On/CVS to clear their property of the criminals that constantly harass and assault customers. I challenge the SMPD to patrol, observe, arrest and remove those same criminals that make it impossible for me or my family to buy shampoo and survive the experience unscathed. In return for the cleaning and clearing out of the resident felons living at Save-On/CVS, I will return to the store and be a regular customer again. I might even bring a friend.

Lori

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press - Letters to the Editor 7.3.2006)

A schooling for city in terms of priorities

It seems that the city’s support of education is tentative at best. It is clear that the current City Council must continually be pushed by devoted educational activists and community members for the critical funds needed to reinforce the crumbling foundation that is known as our educational system. It is the “holder of the purse strings” that should view this educational debacle as one of its top priorities. It is imperative to look at the immediate effects of a successful educational system, as well as the long-term effects. By allocating more funds that would be supervised by a “community watch group” we would be assured that the money would go directly to specific areas that would avoid misappropriation. This would result in a significant increase in employed graduates, decreased crime and less homeless. My grandfather used to say, “without your health, you have nothing.” I agree. However, I think it is equally true that “without an education, you have nothing.” Every child deserves basic and fundamental preparation to allow him or her the opportunity to be an active and positive part of society. The City Council must empower the school board by loosening its “purse strings” and reinstating the crucial arts and athletic programs. These programs have proven to strengthen children’s self-esteem, as well as their ability to work in groups. The number of young people who would engage in gangs would be significantly reduced when they are enriched by arts programs. We also have so many children with special needs who deserve our attention. I wonder if Santa Monica restaurants, stores and the like are being supportive and willing to employ these special kids? We need to form a community wide awareness that we have high-functioning kids that have special needs that can, and want, to work. How would you feel if you could not go outside and run, take your favorite yoga class or do whatever it is you like to do? Imagine all you could do all day long was perform your daily work duties with no outlet for your creative instincts? Without these critical classes and activities the students of Santa Monica’s public school system have to go through this drudgery every day. We must also focus on increased after-school programs. These are not new ideas, but we must take them more seriously. There needs to be a demand by our community. Enough really is enough. To have a functioning and successful society we must start with a basic right to learn and to express ourselves.I will share a personal story with you. I grew up in Los Angeles. My mom moved to a particular area so that I could attend the public school in the area. Kindergarten and first grade was super. Second grade was approaching and bussing began. The district wanted to bus me to a school hours away from my home that had a very low reading percentile. My mom, who has a lifetime teaching credential, decided to change professions and found a teaching position at a school that would allow me to attend. I am very grateful to the academic community that welcomed us. Many families have to use life savings, take multiple jobs, or take out second and third mortgages to fund there children’s educations. It is not right that a wealthy city like Santa Monica cannot provide more enriched educational programs and activities for the children of its community. Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District is going through big changes. With a new superintendant on the way and three seats up for grabs in the coming election, along with three seats available on the City Council, it is our responsibility to speak up and take action in the name of change. We must insist that the school board and the City Council act as a united front that will allow great change in our special city.

--Jenna

(published in the Santa Monica Daily Press 7.20.06)

Keep bending the rules and matters get worse

In a functional family, boundaries are created so everyone understands what the rules are. If the rules are broken, then a consequence is inevitable. The Santa Monica “family” has imposed boundaries, but it has not followed through on the consequence. Since rules are clearly broken in the increasing homeless debacle we have gotten into, it is clear that we are simply maintaining the status quo in order to keep the peace. Do council members like Kevin McKeown honestly believe it is acceptable for people to sleep on the very dangerous Santa Monica bluffs, beaches and parks until we can find a home for them? The answer is “yes.” He made his beliefs very clear when he voted to let homeless people continue to sleep in the crevices of the Santa Monica bluffs. I believe that he did not have the city’s best interest at heart when he voted against installing cameras on the pier as well. The shooting of a child in the beach parking lot below the pier this month should have been recorded, but that obviously was impossible since there were no cameras. The reality is that whether it is the imploding homeless problem or the blatant disregard for public safety, there are those who are too comfortable on our City Council. It is time for visible chance on the streets of our city and in our council chambers. Words and promises no longer are acceptable. The old adage of “actions speak louder then words” seems more appropriate now than ever. The Santa Monica community as a whole must create change.We have the power to make change. We have our voices. We are a very special community of people with big hearts and sharp minds. I recently read on the City Hall blog an entry entitled “Hell of the Homeless.” The blogger said “The city must do more to provide the means for our churches and nonprofit groups to get involved more to help the homeless people and we should try to solve this problem by working with the city housing department.” I find comments like this incredibly frustrating.City Hall, along with the churches and nonprofits, continue to do so much to help the homeless. Why do you think so many are here? It is because they have heard that Santa Monica is where the programs are plenty and the living is easy. That is why we are in so much trouble. We have so many programs, yet the city is still an unsafe place. The homeless are not in “hell.” They to have the choice to accept myriad help offered and available. Additionally, they get hot meals, lay by the beach and stay in our parks without being asked to move by the police or the rangers. They have nice, clean bathrooms along Palisades Park that lock from the inside for privacy. Many are aggressive and many make enough money to meet some basic needs. I send kudos to the organizations that are able to truly help those who want help. However, there are many who do not want help because they are perfectly happy having lived on our streets for 10 or more years. Certainly wonderful programs like Step up on Second have approached and continue to try to vigorously help many who have needs such as finding housing, getting sober, obtaining educational opportunities, or reintroducing necessary medications for mental and physical stability.We must set our boundaries, offer help and follow through with consequences when rules are broken. We must take our city back and no longer accept the status quo. We must act and act quickly.Following are the critical areas that must immediately get attention:- Enforcement: City Hall must enforce existing vagrancy laws — all the time. The City Council needs to make the necessary funds available for the police or other law enforcement agencies to handle this growing problem. They must provide funds for enough police and medical personnel, since, at the present, they only have less than five dedicated officers for this program. This is unacceptable for such a critical issue.- Feeding programs: The programs must be moved to locations indoors. There are lots of locations and businesses that would be more than happy to assist in making this happen. They could even be rewarded with a tax break.- Housing alternatives: City Hall needs to recognize the success of programs in other cities where housing has been created for the chronically homeless. There is no need to reinvent the wheel.- Family reunification programs: These programs need to be encouraged by reuniting the homeless with their families.- Veterans hospital: This is an alternative because one third of our homeless are veterans. More money should be allocated to allow the VA to help the homeless. If Santa Monica shows a commitment, others will follow our lead. - “Give a Hand Up Not a Hand Out”: This will allow people who normally give money to homeless people on the streets to deposit it into a meter-type device. Then the money would be distributed to organizations that would really help these people. A citizen’s council would be created to monitor the proper allocation of money.

--Jenna

(published in the Santa Monica Daily Press 7.13.06)

Compassion doesn't equate to rolling over

City Hall Stories

I was born and raised in Los Angeles and I went to school in Santa Monica. My school was very near Third Street, before the Promenade was even a thought in the city’s mind. As a newlywed who is thinking about starting a family, I am fearful that I and many others will no longer be able to live safely in this community, if our city government does not take immediate action to remedy the chronic homeless problem. We must seriously begin to blaze a path to the reclamation of our community.

When I walk my dog in the evening, I stumble upon homeless people lying on sleeping bags on my neighbor’s lawns. This is called camping and it is illegal. We must call the police when we see it. When I pull out of my garage, people are defecating against the wall in the alley. I see my neighbors chasing vagrants out of their carports early in the morning. I see mothers pulling their children closer into them as they are accosted by beggars and transients who are yelling profanities at the top their lungs. The police stand by doing nothing. I walk in the park and I see makeshift houses under tarps and belongings affixed to parking meters and bicycle stands. This is a matter of public safety and public health.

Our parks have become virtual refugee camps that only the homeless are allowed to enjoy. Last week when I was in Reed Park I talked with a ranger who said to me, “Please stand back. That woman is a spitter.” He was referring to a homeless person who was walking by. He also said, “I am just the eyes and ears around here. I cannot tell them (the homeless) to move on.” Thus we continue to simply manage the status quo, and that in no longer acceptable.

We must reclaim our community. At this time we are not making the best use of the money specifically allotted to fight the homeless issue. We — the residents and business owners — want to be partners with the city in this monstrous mission. In order to be partners you must have similar objectives and at the moment that does not seem to be the case.

Let us send a very clear message. Santa Monica is not the place to come where the living is easy. Santa Monica has compassion — however, our safety has been compromised, and a result we are living in a community where people are scared, uncomfortable and becoming more apathetic daily. We must not forsake our residents, business owners and our very important tourist industry. We must save the future of our special community.

Is it going to take a rape, a murder or a serious assault on a person or their property to help our local government realize the enormity of this issue? If the laws that are supposed to protect us — the law abiding residents, the people that visit Santa Monica and the mainstream population — they are not working. The beauty of living in a democratic society is what we have the power to change.

As a point of reference, our state government implemented a small solution that helped a large number of people: “Give a hand up not a hand out!”

Sacramento installed a series of parking meter type devices along some popular pedestrian thoroughfares. Those meters collect donations that go directly to various homeless feeding programs and housing programs. The devices have signs that clearly read “Give a hand up … not a handout.” So, instead of residents and visitors putting money into the hands of myriad homeless people, they would put a hand up and deposit their hard-earned money into the meter. It has proven very successful in our state capitol. Why couldn’t it work here?

The time is now — action is the only option.

I leave you with this quote, think about it. “You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” — Mahatma, M.K. Gandhi.

--Jenna

(published in Santa Monica Daily Press 6.29.06)