By Michael Feinstein. Inside/Outside. October 2024
My dear former colleague on the City Council Bob Holbrook always used to say that “once election season comes, it seems rules no longer apply and anything goes.” This year is no different.
Lightning strikes false
As I predicted in my September 6 column, the yes/no 'lightning round' questions at the controversial September 8 city council candidate forum (hosted by most but not all of Santa Monica’s neighborhood organizations) would be overly simplistic and potentially misleading — and could “open the door for political manipulation, by creating images that can be used in attack pieces that do not accurately represent the candidates.”
Surprise, surprise. Misleading graphics doing just that are now circulating on Santa Monica social media, particularly around L.A. County’s Substance Abuse Prevention and Harm Reduction Program, as well as other issues.
Imagine if U.S. presidential debate co-hosts decided upon their questions in advance, with an eye towards providing content to a political action committee opposing one of the candidates. That’s what seems to have happened here: “decide how to ask questions and artificially constrain the responses by requiring yes/no answers, when accurate and informative replies merit depth and nuance, so you can use the constrained responses for partisan purpose.”
For many years the City of Santa Monica sponsored non-partisan programming in concert with the League of Women Voters, broadcast on CityTV and YouTube. Tragically that is gone, no longer funded, leaving uncontested space for misleading messaging — and the influence of big money.
Safety in tenancy is safety for renters
In May 2023, the Douglas Emmett corporation filed a historic mass eviction under California’s Ellis Act, ordering 577 tenants in West Los Angeles to vacate their buildings. Fortunately, a judge found the evictions illegal.
This year Douglas Emmett, which owns The Shores Apartments in Ocean Park, is trying to influence Santa Monica City Council elections. They’ve already put $100,000 into a political action committee backing incumbents Phil Brock and Oscar de la Torre, against candidates backed by Santa Monicans for Renters Rights, the local tenants rights organization: Dan Hall, Ellis Raskin, Barry Snell and Natalya Zernitskaya.
Highly problematic past rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court have enabled large corporations to spend unlimited money on elections. If I’m a renter, I would be concerned what Douglas Emmett expects for their money.
Campaign lawn signs
In the internet age, campaign signs still have value. They build name recognition — and seen in front of homes of people you know, publicize how they are voting, which is helpful for those relying upon friends for voting advice.
But in a city where 71% of housing units are renter-occupied, most renters don’t have the opportunity to post campaign signs, because they either don’t have their own lawn space, and/or are not allowed to do so according to their lease. The result is that many campaign signs in front of many rental buildings are actually from landlords, not tenants.
On public property, placing campaign signs is illegal, considered a public nuisance, and occupies public space for private political gain. Candidates and committees that do so should be seen as such. Per Code Enforcement, citations for this can be issued, with fines varying upon the severity of the violation — and candidates and committees are responsible. City staff does their best to remove these signs ASAP. Community members can contact 311 on the City website or its 311 App, or the City Clerk’s Office at (310) 458-8211, to have them removed.
Also nefarious is when people take down campaign signs of candidates they oppose. Doing so without authorization is against the law and a misdemeanor. It may also be considered trespassing, subject to enforcement by the Santa Monica Police Department. That’s why the cowards who take down signs, usually do so late at night.
Playing politics with public safety
On October 5th, a Santa Monica Police Officer suffered an unprovoked attack in front of our Police Station by an assailant with a knife. Fortunately the officer survived and has recovered.
On October 6th — identifying himself as our Mayor but not as a 2024 city council candidate — Brock posted a video on his Facebook page, saying this attack demonstrates “we can not continue to tolerate lack of lawlessness caused by mental illness, drug abuse and lack of penalties in our county.”
In Santa Monica, one of the Mayor’s traditional roles is to speak on behalf of the City. According to the Santa Monica Police Department, investigation into the assailant’s motive — and whether he suffered from mental illness and/or drug abuse — is still ongoing. That means Brock offered premature conclusions about the incident that were not based upon known facts.
As for Brock’s contention that the incident revealed a lack of penalties for crime, attempting to kill a police officer in California is considered first-degree attempted murder. Any defendant found guilty of first-degree murder “shall be punished by death, imprisonment in the state prison for life without possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to life.”
As a candidate, Brock has every right to promote his own narrative about crime and safety. But as our Mayor, he has no right to privatize that role and misrepresent facts for partisan political purpose.
Violating the public trust
The new City Council establishment majority of Brock, de la Torre, et al. has set a low bar in terms of competency and violation of the public trust. Coming to meetings unprepared and without reading the staff reports is beyond disrespectful to the community. Leaking confidential information from closed sessions is a possible criminal action under state law — but the new majority blocked investigation into publicly-reported leaks. Their posturing against state law led to a non-compliant local Housing Element, freeing developers to build out-of-scale projects far exceeding our local height limits.
But their coup de grâce was when the new majority directed the City Manager to violate state law and shut down the County’s Substance Abuse Prevention and Harm Reduction Program in Reed Park — even though the State Constitution gives the State Legislature the ability to delegate authority to counties to locate such programs and preempt cities’ local control.
When newly elected Santa Monica City Council members take their oath of office, they must state “I do solemnly swear… that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California…” Of their vote for illegal action in violation of the State Constitution, de la Torre said “it’s for public consumption”, while Brock said he supported it “for kicks.”
Grandstanding in public office is no replacement for governing. It’s your choice this November.
———————-
Michael Feinstein is a former Santa Monica Mayor (2000-2002) and City Councilmember (1996-2004). He can be reached via X/Twitter @mikefeinstein. ‘Inside/Outside‘ is a periodic column about civic affairs Feinstein writes for the Daily Press that takes advantage of his experience inside and outside of government.
