Sunday, December 15, 2013

ACTION ALERT! Massive Abbot Kinney Hotel Complex Coming Up For A Vote THIS Wednesday!

Architect's rendering of the Abbot Kinney Hotel Complex, corner of Broadway and Abbot Kinney Blvd.

Just in time for the holidays, Dan Abrams and his development partners have delivered a nice, shiny lump of coal to Venice in the form of revamped plans for a block-long hotel/mall complex on Abbot Kinney Blvd. Now that their new plans have finally been made public, we've learned the developers are still asking for precedent-setting variances for height, the project still has significant issues with mass and scale and will still cause traffic gridlock and huge parking headaches for the surrounding neighborhoods.

They are rushing the project through the Venice Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) this Wednesday, December 18 - only a week before Christmas, the timing of which will conveniently suppress community participation. Worse, the developers have known for over a week this would come up for a vote and have been rallying their supporters with "suggested facts" (no, I'm not making this up), to share with their neighbors while the rest of the community was kept in the dark.

LUPC has been inundated with emails in support of the project while they have yet to hear from opponents.

We need you to act NOW.

WRITE AN EMAIL VOICING YOUR OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT AS PLANNED:

Even if you've written letters in opposition to the hotel before, we need to you to write again. Please send your email to the following addresses:  Board@VeniceNC.org, lupc@VeniceNC.org, mike.bonin@lacity.org, tricia.keane@lacity.org, veniceforchange@gmail.com

The project's address is 1033 S Abbott Kinney Blvd, Venice, CA 90291: It must be included at the top of any correspondence.


ATTEND THE HEARING
WHEN: WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18  - 7:30PM
WHERE: Oakwood Rec Center - 767 7th Avenue (corner of 7th and Oakwood)

Numbers matter. We believe LUPC members will vote in favor of the project as proposed unless we convince them otherwise.  So we need as many people to attend as possible.  The project is second on the agenda and is supposed to be heard at 8pm. We believe they will try to keep the meeting on time. Get there early and fill out a speaker card.

Here are the real - not suggested - facts about the Abbot Kinney Hotel Complex. Include them in the emails you write and the talking points you use during the meeting.

IT'S TOO HIGH: In his letter to supporters,  project architect David Hertz wrote "the project fully compliant with the Venice Specific Plan and Local Coastal Plan and we are not asking for any exceptions to these plans whatsoever."  Hertz wasn't telling the truth. The developer may have knocked off the 4th floor in October, but he's come back with a design that's still asking for a precedent-setting height exemption to the Venice Specific Plan.

IT'S TOO BIG:  The hotel complex as currently proposed includes an 87-room hotel (down only 5 rooms from the October proposal, with two of those now apartments for some reason), a 3,500 sq ft restaurant/bar, a separate coffee bar on Electric, a 1,500 sq ft spa on Electric and Westminster, a 2,500 sq ft retail space on Westminster and Abbot Kinney, and a 2,444 sq ft poolside bar area.

It still takes up the entire block between Broadway and Westminster, with a partial carve-out for two parcels the developers don't own. There's nothing else on Abbot Kinney that even comes close to it in terms of mass and scale.

To get an idea of what that really looks like, take a gander at these two drawings below. These are the most recent plans submitted by the architect. I've highlighted the existing structures - Joe's, Venice Place, and the Baptist Church - in orange. The hotel complex, highlighted in purple, dwarfs those structures by comparison. Click on either image to see them full size.

Hotel complex on the Abbot Kinney side. Existing buildings are in orange. The proposed hotel complex is in purple. 
Click on the image to see full size.


Hotel complex viewed from Broadway. Existing buildings are in orange. The proposed hotel complex is in purple.  
Click on the image to see full size.

THERE'S NOT ENOUGH PARKING: In fact, in this revamped version, the developer is offering only 160 parking spaces, 12 less than the 172 he was offering back in October.  That's supposed to suffice for all 87 hotel rooms, plus three restaurants, a coffee bar, a spa and 2,500 sq ft of retail/cafe space. By the developers own estimates, the hotel and three restaurants alone will have 160 employees (a low figure, since they aren't figuring in the 2,500 sq ft retail/cafe space proposed for the corner of Westminster and Abbot Kinney).  

In his letter to supporters,  project architect David Hertz wrote "the project allows employees to park for free." The numbers I just listed above show how ridiculous this statement is. Unless, of course, he means allows employees to park for free on our streets.

TRAFFIC WILL STILL BE A NIGHTMARE: A new traffic report released by the City of LA states the hotel complex will add close to 700 net new car trips a day. Bizarrely, DOT seems to think this won't be of "significant" impact to our neighborhood. But tell that to anyone trying to navigate the gridlock on Abbot Kinney, Broadway, Westminster and Electric as cars, taxis, trash trucks and delivery vehicles cue up to service the hotel and deposit its guests.

Folks, it didn't have to be this way. This could have been a win-win for the community and for Dan Abrams. But almost from the beginning,  Abrams and his development partners have not been an honest partner in this process. They're certainly not being honest now as they try to railroad this project through while people are distracted by the holidays.

Don't let them. Please take the time to write email, come to the meeting, and inform your neighbors.

For reference, here are links to the developers plans:

http://cityhood.org/Attachments/_3Y60KHPGK.pdf
http://cityhood.org/Attachments/_3Y60KWXL7.pdf
http://cityhood.org/Attachments/_3Y60KZ4SR.pdf



Thursday, December 12, 2013

UPDATE: News About The Abbot Kinney Hotel, None Of It Good

Latest hotel renderings as they appear on the developer's website
Folks, I hate to bother you so close to the holidays, but I've been hearing some disturbing news about the massive block-long hotel complex being proposed for Abbot Kinney Blvd. and none of it is good.

To review, after being turned away by the community in October and forced to remove the fourth floor, developer Dan Abrams' project was literally sent back to the drawing board. He would have to create new plans and submit them to the community to review before he could proceed further.

We've waited two months for those new plans. But instead of coming to the community and presenting them in a transparent and open manner where they can be reviewed and discussed by everyone at the same time in a public forum, it seems Abrams and his development team is withholding information and engaging in a PR campaign of private meetings and carefully parsed talking points.

Yesterday morning I learned the developer had submitted a draft of the revised project to Venice Land Use and Planning Committee member John Reed a week ago, yet those plans have yet to appear on LUPC's website or on the developer's own website http://www.abbotkinneyhotel.com/.

Then later in the day I started receiving emails from Abrams' supporters, who had evidently been provided a list of talking points to share during a private presentation given to them earlier in the week (more on those talking points in a minute). According to the email, supporters were told at that meeting the project would be fast-tracked through LUPC next Wednesday, December 18th - only a week before Christmas. Yet no agenda
null
Proposed site of the Abrams hotel
has been set so far for next week's LUPC meeting.

What do the developers know that the community doesn't?

My concern is that the only thing that Abrams and his development team learned from encountering the community's opposition in October was how to avoid as much of the community as possible in the future. I can find no other explanation for this kind of behavior.

If Dan Abrams and his investors have truly created a project "conceived, grown, and curated by people living in, connected to, and caring for the unique community of Venice" as their website claims then there's no need for the secrecy and obfuscation. It's that simple.

But instead, we're left with new plans only some supporters have seen, a crucial planning meeting that may or may not happen next week and a set of highly misleading talking points.

Here is what we do know:
  • As far as we can tell based on the limited information we have (and the artist renderings on the developer's own website), the only thing that's substantially changed with the hotel is that they've lopped off the 4th floor. But we knew that two months ago.  
  • The hotel complex still takes up the entire block between Broadway and Westminster, with a partial carve-out for two parcels the developers don't own. There's nothing else on Abbot Kinney that even comes close to it in terms of mass and scale. 
  • The hotel complex will still have close to the 92 rooms originally proposed. Abrams has tried to obfuscate this point by claiming "Phase 1" would only be 70 rooms and "Phase 2" would be 18 rooms, but in fact this was always the plan, regardless of the height of the development. When I met with Abrams earlier this year, he told me he could not make the hotel pencil out at anything less than 80 rooms. And when I talked with him before the October LUPC meeting he told me he would try to restore as many of the hotel rooms from the lost 4th floor as possible.
  • The hotel complex would still cause major parking and traffic headaches for the surrounding neighborhoods. The developers are claiming traffic for the hotel would be much less at "peak hours" than an alternative office/retail project, yet a 2007 DOT report estimated a 57-room hotel proposed for Abbot Kinney would generate 757 net new car trips a day.  Abrams' hotel as proposed would be nearly twice the size and would, presumably, generate nearly twice the traffic.  Expect permanent gridlock on Abbot Kinney, Broadway, Westminster and Electric as cars, taxis, trash trucks and delivery vehicles cue up to service the hotel and deposit its guests.
  • The developers also claim their parking "allows employees to park for free." Well, they could also "allow Martians to land and claim our women" but that doesn't mean it's going to actually happen. It's an empty promise, with the burden of enforcement on us (if it can be enforced), not the developer. Good luck with that as you circle the block endlessly looking for any street parking not already taken up by hotel patrons and employees looking for the free parking that already exists in front of your home. 

So now what?  

The Venice Land Use and Planning Committee is not legally required to post an agenda for the December 18th meeting until Sunday, December 15th. So all I can tell you for now is to please keep next Wednesday night open in case we need you to show up.  

As soon as we know more I promise to send you information on the hotel's new plans, who you need to write emails to if needed, and if we need you to come out next week.

So please stay tuned for further news! 

Friday, October 4, 2013

UPDATE: Abbot Kinney Hotel Developer Backs Down On Height But Mass/Scale/Traffic/Parking Still A Nightmare

Developer's rendering - Abrams' hotel as seen from the corner of Broadway and Electric


First, the good news

As I alluded to in my brief post Wednesday night, developer Dan Abrams backed off his demand to build up a precedent-breaking 4 stories only hours before his project was to come before the Venice Neighborhood Council's Land Use And Planning Committee (LUPC) for a vote.

This is a significant victory for the community, and only happened because of the intense pressure you put on City officials and the developers in the last couple of weeks. Over a hundred of you packed the meeting Wednesday night, and of the 30+ speakers who gave public comment, only 4 or 5 came out in favor of the project as planned - even knowing that the 4th floor would be lopped off. Hundreds more who couldn't make it to the meeting wrote letters in opposition.

 
100+ Venetians gather in opposition to the hotel

Venetians voiced a variety of concerns, top of the list being parking and traffic, followed closely by the project's remaining mass and scale, the fact that it's across from an elementary school, and the lack of outreach on the part of developers and LUPC.  Indeed, despite multiple LUPC meetings. and carefully orchestrated developer-led meet-and-greets, many in the room felt blind-sided, having no idea this project existed until they received a Venice For Change email or saw a blog post here, on Yo! Venice, or on Facebook in the last couple of weeks.

One neighbor question why we even needed another hotel in Venice, when there are literally dozens of existing hotels within a 5 mile radius. A search on the travel site, Kayak.com reveals there are already 19 hotels within a 2-mile radius of the project.

Another neighbor concurred, saying "We need another hotel in Venice like we need another food truck."


So what happens next?

Having conceded the precedent-breaking 4th floor, Dan Abrams and his developing partners withdrew their project from LUPC's consideration. Abrams told me the project would need to be redesigned in order to add back at least some of the hotel rooms lost in the process. So at some point the redesigned hotel will be back up for a vote at LUPC, and if approved, the Venice Neighborhood Council. Once it passes those hurdles (and even if it doesn't ) the project will eventually have to go to the West LA Planning Commission for a vote.

So yes, Wednesday night was a significant, and positive, milestone for our community, but it's only one sign post on a very long road. We have miles to go before we're done. Here are the significant problems remaining:


Mass and Scale: 
This project still takes up most of a city block. It will take up the entire back of the block between Westminster and Broadway (where the open parking lot is now) and all but two parcels in the front.

developer's renderings - notice the two stories above Joe's. 


The developers like to present the project as modular, saying they will "preserve" Joe's restaurant and the Venice Place Building, but the developer's own plans and renderings tell a different story. The hotel will build two floors above Joe's and will build up on either side of Venice Place. So "encased" might be a better word than "preserved".




Traffic
Abrams made it clear to me that even without the 4th floor, he intends to stick as close to his original proposal of 92 rooms as possible. That means we're still dealing with the same potential traffic gridlock as before.  In  2007, DOT estimated  that the proposed 57-room Ray Hotel would generate 757 net new car trips a day on Abbot Kinney.  The Abrams hotel as proposed would be nearly twice the size and would presumably generate nearly twice the traffic. That traffic from Abrams' hotel will back up on Abbot Kinney, Broadway and Electric as cars, taxis, trash trucks and delivery vehicles cue up to service the hotel and deposit its guests. (I asked Abrams to produce the traffic study he paid for and been citing for months now, but he demurred, saying they were working on a new study and would release it when updated)

Parking
Hotel will sit where the French School is now.
When asked if he's providing enough parking for the project, Abrams will very carefully say they're providing what they're legally required to. What they won't tell you is if they're providing enough

Abrams is proposing 172 parking spots, which sounds like a lot......until you factor in how much you'd need to service 92 hotel rooms, a 100 seat restaurant, a bar, a spa and at least 80 employees.

The reality is that hotel/restaurant/bar patrons and employees, given a choice between paying for parking at the hotel or parking for free on our streets will park for free on our streets. We already see that every day with restaurants like Gjelina who provide virtually no parking thanks to convoluted planning laws.  And since we live in the Coastal Zone, the California Coastal Commission will not allow us to have residents-only permit parking to mitigate the hotel's overflow.
 

Keep the pressure on

Abrams likes to say he's a nice guy, and he certainly talks a good game about being a "local", listening to "concerns", and "dialoguing" with the community.  But as nice as all that sounds, the only thing that matters are actions.

When push comes to shove, he's demonstrated an unwillingness to make anything but cosmetic changes to his project unless pressured to do so. That 4th floor didn't come down until the very last moment, and only after intense pressure and scrutiny from the community. At Wednesday's meeting, he was only too happy to drag out that old developer's canard that if we don't let him develop his project, some bigger, badder developer would come along and build something worse.

"The property will be developed", said Abrams.

So we need to keep the pressure on. Sign up at veniceforchange@gmail.com to get on our mailing list. Bookmark this blog for further updates.

Stay tuned!



Wednesday, October 2, 2013

"We Need Another Hotel In Venice Like We Need Another Food Truck"




100+ Venetians pack the Oakwood Rec Center to oppose Abrams' hotel project.


I'll have to make this short, folks, it's been a long day and there's lots to process. 

As a neighbor I am beyond grateful for the 100+ community members who came out tonight to the Venice Land Use and Planning Committee meeting to voice your opposition to Abrams' 92-room hotel.  Your comments were amazing, insightful, creative, cogent and concise. 

One Venice resident voiced her concerns better than I ever could, "We need another hotel in Venice like we need another food truck."

Thanks to all the pressure you put on the developer, he's finally agreed to the easiest concession - reducing the hotel's height from 4 stories to 3.  But we have miles to go before we're done. 

Though the height reductions will reduce the overall number of hotel rooms, it won't be by much, and after talking with Abrams, it was clear he would try to replace some if not most of the 12 rooms that would have been on that 4th floor. And Abrams and his partners still have not made any adjustments to scale and mass, nor have they dealt with the inadequate parking or the traffic issues this project would generate for the surrounding neighborhood. 



So this is far from settled. The hotel must now go back to the drawing board and come back to LUPC for a vote. Stay tuned and stay engaged folks, it's going to be a long and bumpy ride. 

More details soon.

Monday, September 30, 2013

Crucial Vote On Massive New Abbot Kinney Hotel Project Scheduled For Wednesday

 
Abrams' developing partners Greg Reitz and Steve Edwards press the flesh for their "independent boutique hotel"
at the Abbot Kinney Street Festival



A crucial vote is going to be held by the Venice Neighborhood Council's Land Use and Planning Committee on the 92-room Abrams' hotel project Wednesday evening. Now is the time to make your voice heard.


WRITE TO CITY OFFICIALS

If you haven't already done so, please write an email to the following people. Tell them you're opposed to the project as planned, and that at a minimum it must conform to the Venice Specific Plan and provide adequate parking for the site's use.

VNC Land Use and Planning Committee:  lupc@venicenc.org 
LA City Councilman Mike Bonin: mike.bonin@lacity.org 
CD11 Planner Tricia Keane: tricia.keane@lacity.org 
Venice For Change: veniceforchange@gmail.com 

The project's address is 1033 S Abbott Kinney Blvd, Venice, CA 90291: It must be included at the top of any correspondence.


ATTEND THE HEARING
WHEN: October 2 at 6:45 pm  
WHERE: Oakwood Rec Center - 767 7th Avenue (corner of 7th and Oakwood)

Numbers matter. We believe LUPC members will vote in favor of the project as proposed unless we convince them otherwise. At the last meeting, Abrams offered to carve 4 units of affordable housing out of space reserved for two of the hotel rooms. But we've since learned the only reason this was offered was to invoke SB1818, a state law that allows developers to bypass community approval to build bigger and higher by offering affordable housing units. And we know this because a LUPC member has conveyed this sentiment as he lobbying on the hotel's behalf with city officials!

So we need as many people to attend as possible.  Get there early and fill out a speaker card.

Some bullet points to consider:
view from Abbot Kinney/Westminster
Developer Dan Abrams and a group of yet-to-be-named investors are proposing a 92-room mega-development that includes a 100-seat restaurant/bar and luxury day spa and which will stretch an entire city block between Broadway and Westminster.
  • Abrams and his group are asking for precedent-setting exemptions to the Venice Specific Plan for mass, scale, and height. Among other things, the developers are asking to build up to 43 feet (the VSP calls for 35 feet) and add a precedent-breaking 4th story. If allowed to go through as proposed, other developers will be quick to pounce. A Beverly Hills developer recently purchased the property on Abbott Kinney that includes Hal's and Just Tantau for $20 million and Arnold Schwarzenegger is in the early planning stages to develop his corner property at Main and Abbot Kinney. Already he's asking for height exemptions to the VSP and to grandfather in 40 non-existent parking spaces.  
  • The project as proposed will create permanent gridlock. In 2007, DOT estimated another, smaller proposed hotel project for Abbot Kinney would generate 757 net new car trips a day. The Abrams hotel as proposed would be nearly twice the size and would presumably generate nearly twice the traffic. Traffic from Abrams' hotel would back up traffic on Abbot Kinney, Broadway and Electric as cars, taxis, trash trucks and delivery vehicles cue up to service the hotel and deposit its guests.
view from Electric/Broadway
  • Hotel patrons and employees will park for free on our streets. If you live anywhere near the hotel you can forget about parking in front of your home as inadequate parking forces hotel patrons and employees to hunt for street parking in our neighborhoods. Worse, since we live in the Coastal Zone, the California Coastal Commission will not allow us to have residents-only permit parking to mitigate the hotel's overflow.   




So folks, if you don't want this to happen, now is the time to step up and make your voice heard. Tell all your friends. Write to city officials and show up on Wednesday!



Sunday, September 22, 2013

ACTION ALERT: Massive New Hotel Project Proposed For Abbot Kinney Blvd!


Here we go again folks.

Six years after the community and the LA City Planning Commission turned back the developers of the Ray Hotel project, a 57-room luxury hotel proposed for the corner of Abbot Kinney and Brooks Ave., movie producer Dan Abrams and a consortium of yet-to-be-named investors are proposing an even bigger hotel project for Abbot Kinney - this one a 92-room mega-development that includes a 100-seat restaurant and luxury day spa and would stretch an entire city block between Broadway and Westminster.

Like the Ray Hotel's developers before them, Abrams and his group are asking for precedent-setting exemptions to the Venice Specific Plan for mass, scale, and height. Claiming the site presents a "hardship" (to their profits?), among other things, the developers are asking to build up to 43 feet (the VSP calls for 35 feet) and add a precedent-breaking 4th story.

Worse is the parking and traffic situation. We've yet to see any published traffic studies for the Abrams hotel, but in 2007 DOT estimated the Ray Hotel would generate 757 net new car trips a day.

The Abrams hotel as proposed is nearly twice the size as the Ray Hotel. You do the math.

And like the Ray Hotel before them, these developers aren't providing adequate parking to accommodate their hotel, restaurant, spa guests and employees, claiming they don't need to because the hotel will be bike friendly and will encourage guests to use public transportation (they do know the closest rail stop is in Culver City, right?).

In short, this hotel will be a disaster for our community. Here's why:

Proposed site of the Abrams hotel
First of all, it doesn't exist in a vacuum. If allowed to go through as proposed, the project will break precedent that other developers will be quick to exploit. A Beverly Hills developer recently purchased the property on Abbott Kinney that includes Hal's and Just Tantau for $20 million and Arnold Schwarzenegger is in the early planning stages to develop his corner property at Main and Abbot Kinney. Already we've heard reports he is asking to grandfather in 40 non-existent parking spaces.

Secondly, the traffic generated by Abrams' hotel will create permanent gridlock on Abbot Kinney, Broadway and Electric as cars, taxis, trash trucks and delivery vehicles cue up to service the hotel and deposit its guests. If you live anywhere near the hotel you can forget about parking in front of your home as inadequate parking forces hotel patrons and employees to hunt for street parking in our neighborhoods.

So folks, if you don't want this to happen, now is the time to step up and make your voice heard. 


WRITE TO THE VNC LAND USE AND PLANNING COMMITTEE AND OUR COUNCIL OFFICE
Send an email to the following people. Tell them you're opposed to the project as planned, and that at a minimum it must conform to the Venice Specific Plan and provide adequate parking for the site's use.

The project's address is 1033 S Abbott Kinney Blvd, Venice, CA 90291: It must be included at the top of any correspondence.

Venice Neighborhood Council Land Use and Planning Committee: lupc@venicenc.org
LA City Councilman Mike Bonin - mike.bonin@lacity.org
CD11 Planning Director Tricia Keane -  tricia.keane@lacity.org
Venice For Change Organizer Marta Evry - veniceforchange@gmail.com


ATTEND THE NEXT VNC LAND USE AND PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

WHEN: October 2   6:45 pm-9:00 pm
WHERE: Oakwood Rec Center - 767 7th Avenue (corner of 7th and Oakwood)


The hotel is scheduled to come up for a vote at this meeting. Please attend and make your voice heard!

Friday, May 17, 2013

Venice For Change Endorsements For The May 21st Election




First things first, if you have an absentee ballot, today is absolutely last day you should fill it out and mail it in. If you can't mail it in today, just fill it out and drop it off at ANY polling place in Los Angeles on Tuesday. 


If you plan on voting in person and if you don't know where your polling place is, go to http://www.lavote.net/LOCATOR/ and type in your address to find out. Polls are open Tuesday, May 21st from 7am-8pm.



Now that we've gotten that out of the way, here are the Venice For Change endorsements for the May 21st Los Angeles Municipal elections!



MAYOR


CITY ATTORNEY
Mike Feuer


CITY CONTROLLER
Ron Galperin


MEASURE C - YES
Measure C is an advisory vote urging Congress to pass a constitutional amendment to overturn the 2010 Citizens United ruling, which says that restriction of political spending by corporations or labor unions violates free speech. The campaign for the proposition is being led by political watchdog Common Cause, in partnership with the California Public Interest Research Group and the Money Out/Voters In Coalition.
Common Cause began a campaign in November to get cities and states to pass ballot measures instructing Congress to support a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United. So far, Montana, Colorado and more than 175 cities, including Chicago, San Francisco, and more than half the cities in Massachusetts, have passed such measures by a popular vote.

MEASURES D, E, and F
Measures D,E, and F are all measures designed to control and regulate medical marijuana dispensaries within LA City limits

MEASURE D - YES
Measure D would allow the 135 dispensaries approved under the interim control ordinance of September 2007 to stay open, if they follow the city's rules on proximity to schools, churches and neighborhoods, and would place a new tax of $60 per $1,000 of marijuana sold.


MEASURE E - NO
Measure E would ban all medical marijuana dispensaries except the shops that were registered before 2007. This would permanently cap the number of medical marijuana dispensaries in the city at 135. It does not include a revenue component.


MEASURE F - NO
Measure F would allow the unlimited licensing of medical marijuana dispensaries that opened after 2007 as long as they meet certain specified standard, and would impose a 20% sales tax on the medical marijuana sold in the proposed licensed dispensaries.

Saturday, May 11, 2013

After Months Of Going Negative, Wendy Greuel Calls For A Mortatorium On Negative Ads Her Campaign Can No Longer Pay For

California NOW slammed Greuel
for attacking rival Jan Perry over a personal bankruptcy
After pummeling campaign rivals for months with negative mailers and TV ads, Wendy Greuel called on opponent Eric Garcetti to agree to a moratorium on negative campaign ads in a debate aired live tonight on KABC-TV.

Amid audible groans from the studio audience, Greuel played the victim saying. "OK, my campaign consultants are probably not going to like this, but I say no more negative ads," Greuel told an incredulous Garcetti.

Greuel's calls for a moratorium come as finance reports reveal Greuel's campaign went broke this week funding millions of dollars worth of TV attack ads and mailers against Garcetti.

Greuel was essentially calling for a moratorium on ads her campaign no longer had the cash to pay for.

Garcetti's campaign on the other hand, had over $2 million in cash on hand, having husbanded their resources for the final push to election day.  SuperPACs supporting Greuel have already spent over $6 million on Greuel's behalf, and that has no signs of letting up before election day.

This mailer was targeted to Black and Latino voters.
Over the last eight weeks, Greuel's campaign has relentlessly attacked Garcetti - dressing him up in effeminate costumes and accusing him of everything from poisoning children for fun and profit, to being an Obama-hating racist, to influence peddling.

Think I'm exaggerating? Click on just a few of the links below and find out for yourself.

Wendy Greuel TV Ad Attacks Eric Garcetti's Support For Digital Billboards, Which She Also Voted For

Wendy Greuel's Ties To Felon Examined After She Goes After Eric Garcetti For Same Thing

Kevin James releases Wendy Greuel's texts after she attacks him 

California NOW denounces Wendy Greuel's Attack Ads Against Jan Perry 

Wendy Greuel website attacking Eric Garcetti goes dark

Wendy Greuel's Oil Attack Comes From Strategist John Shallman's Playbook 

New Greuel TV Ad Lies About Garcetti Taking "Illegal Vote" On Billboards
Greuel attack mailer
 
Wendy Greuel TV Ad Slams Eric Garcetti's Polo Fundraiser With Felon Developer

Greuel Uses Footage From Christmas Party To Attack Eric Garcetti

Wendy Greuel Attacks Eric Garcetti In New Radio Ad; TV Ads Picking Up In Campaign's Final Week 

Wendy Greuel outlines fresh attack on rival Eric Garcetti 

Wendy Greuel attacks Eric Garcetti's job-growth claims 

In new attack, Wendy Greuel includes Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa in L.A.'s 'failed' leadership






Friday, May 10, 2013

Wendy Greuel's Campaign Deploys Homophobic Pastor In Attacks Against Gay Republican Kevin James (UPDATE)


******UPDATE: 5/12
On Twitter, I asked Greuel's campaign policy director, Jim Dantonia, if Greuel knew of Bishop Jones' role in perpetuating discrimination and violence against gays in Jamaica. He sidestepped the question, saying only that "the attack on Kevin James is for his racist rants not for being gay."**********


Hoping to soften support with African American voters, surrogates for Wendy Greuel's campaign continued to hammer Eric Garcetti over controversial anti-Obama statements made by Garcetti surrogate Kevin James. But in doing so, Greuel managed to step on the third rail of religion and politics in the African American community - homophobia.

Venice For Change has learned today that a surrogate Greuel's campaign deployed against James, Bishop Noel Jones, a Gardena, CA pastor, traveled to Jamaica in 2004 to urge that country's political leaders to "stand their ground" against efforts by LGBT activists to repeal some of the most restrictive anti-gay laws on the planet.

Leading the charge against Kevin James is LA County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, who has endorsed Greuel. In a press-release he sent out this week, Ridley-Thomas quotes Bishop Jones by name. “How many more divisive, debilitating, and shamefully offensive comments should we have to bear from Kevin James? (His) endorsement and apparent relationship with Eric Garcetti eliminates any doubt that the people’s choice for Mayor should be Wendy Greuel," said Jones.

Besides being the lone Republican in the mayoral primary, Kevin James, who for 6 years served as Co-Chair of AIDS Project Los Angeles, was also the lone LGBT candidate.

In 2004, it was reported Jones, a native of Jamaica, believed his homeland should resist the pressures being placed on it by gay rights advocates to reform their draconian anti-sodomy laws. He said the nation should "stand its ground by simply allowing your laws to stay the way they are."

He was responding to reports published earlier this week in which local and international human rights groups called for a relaxation of laws that curbs homosexual conduct.

Bishop Jones, who is the pastor of the City of Refuge church in Gardena, California, and an internationally renowned television preacher, said: "If you have laws and legislation that ban certain things based on the principles of the Scriptures and based on your Christian background, then let it stand there. Who is having big debates with the Islamic people about it (gay rights)? Who is telling them to bend their laws? If your laws are based on your Christian points of view, then you must stand your ground?"

The pressure being placed on Jamaica by United States homosexual interests, Bishop Jones hinted, is inconsistent with the best traditions of the United States. "The thing that bothers me about America is if they are so democratic, why don't they allow the rest of the world to be what they are? Their
democracy says a person has the freedom to do many things, so why won't they leave Jamaica alone?" Bishop Jones said.

Mob attack on a Jamaican transsexual.
Homosexuality in Jamaica is punishable by up to 10 years' imprisonment - with or without hard labor - for anyone convicted of the "abominable crime of buggery committed either with mankind or any animal".  Mob violence against gays prompted Time Magazine to call Jamaica the "Most Homphobic Place On Earth". According to Amnesty International, at least 35 gay men have been murdered on the island since 1997. Thirty-two incidents of mob violence directed against LGBT people were recorded in one recent eighteen-month period alone. In many cases, the murders were followed by crowd celebrations around mutilated bodies.

If Wendy Greuel was aware of Jones' role in perpetuating violence against gays in Jamaica,  she did not let on when she warmly welcomed the endorsement of Bishop Jones in March.

“Bishops Blake and Jones are true servants of their communities. They have shown us the central role our faith community plays in improving and empowering neighborhoods across Los Angeles,” said Greuel. “As mayor, I will continue to partner with faith leaders around the city to deliver critical resources into all our communities, and make Los Angeles the shining example to the world that I know it has been and will continue to be.”


Garcetti's campaign has also touted the endorsement of  African-American religious leaders, some of whom stand on either side of LGBT rights issues. In an April press release Garcetti's campaign listed the support of both Rev. Eric P. Lee and Rev. Xavier Thompson - Lee is an outspoken proponent of LGBT rights and same-sex marriage, while Thompson spearheaded opposition against SB48, a law requiring public school textbooks to include historical contributions of gay people.

Parenthetically, Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas apparently tried to shield himself from possible blow-back over his role promoting Jones' attacks against Kevin James by tweeting this photo of himself with LGBT Councilman Bill Rosendahl from a press conference on the steps of City Hall yesterday. Yet when I asked Rosendahl if he was there to criticize James, the councilman told me he only spoke briefly about an alleged anti-Greuel push-poll and did not reference James.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

Endorsement: Eric Garcetti For Mayor Of Los Angeles


  
For those of you who follow this blog, you know back in February I endorsed both Eric Garcetti and Wendy Greuel as the two candidates I wanted most to see as our next mayor of Los Angeles.

Today, seven weeks later,  I'm thrilled to endorse Eric Garcetti alone as the progressive choice, the environmental choice, the fiscally sound choice, the feminist choice, the best choice to lead Los Angeles for the next 4 years.

So what happened in the last seven weeks to make me want to plant my flag so firmly in Garcetti's camp?

There were several factors - partly it was due to the negativity and divisiveness of Greuel's campaign, partly it was due to ethical lapses Greuel herself had made, but mostly it was from observing Garcetti at work, on the streets and in Council Chambers, and realizing this was a person who cared deeply about everyone in our City, who worked tirelessly to be a consensus builder, who every day lived the "Respect, Empower, and Include" mantra of the Obama campaign and who was willing to stick his neck out to make the right choice.......even if that choice cost him politically.

So here are just some of the reasons why I'm endorsing Eric Garcetti for Mayor of Los Angeles.....

Councilmembers Wesson, Parks and Perry endorsed Garcetti
LEADERSHIP
 Garcetti has shown time and again he's willing to make the right decisions - whether it was taking ownership of LA's budget mess and working with unions to help our city avoid bankruptcy, or standing up to deep-pocket business interests that want to to shove endless LAX-caused Carmageddon down our throats -  even if those decisions weren't politically expedient.

When it came to dealing with the city's budget mess, Council President Herb Wesson praised Garcetti for the courage he showed by pursuing pension reform for city workers despite the wedge it drove between him and union leaders. At the time, Wesson told Garcetti that he could keep out of the spotlight on the issue and let Wesson take the brunt of the criticism, but Garcetti insisted on coming out publicly in support of the reforms. “You saw all the heat he’s taken from unions,” Wesson said in an interview. “I gave him an out, but he didn’t want it. That’s courage.”

I witnessed Garcetti's courage up close and personal as I organized against LAX runway expansion through the "Stop Endless LAX Carmageddon" campaign. Despite enormous pressure from business interests and trade unions - many of whom had donated generously to his campaign - Garcetti came to the conclusion that moving LAX's runways made little sense from either an economic or safety standpoint. He was one of only three council members to vote against the proposal, and he immediately caught heat for it.

"Eric didn't get to that decision because it was good politics," said Councilman-elect Mike Bonin, whose district includes LAX.  "Eric got to that position because he listened to the actual, factual arguments. Eric got to that position because he's a serious grownup, because he cares about about Los Angeles, and because he cares about doing what's right."


CONSENSUS BUILDER
Garcetti won not only the endorsement of nearly all the sitting council members - including the council's only woman and every African American, but the endorsement of all three of his former opponents from the March run-off as well. While individual endorsements are nice, it's how these disparate personalities have lined up to support Garcetti - from liberal councilman Herb Wesson to conservative mayoral candidate Kevin James - that should be most indicative to voters. Why? Because Garcetti was able to work past their differences, and past the campaign rhetoric, to find consensus on issues they did agree on.  James in particular noted he didn't agree with Garcetti on everything, but appreciated his independence when it came to special interests. "That willingness to stand toe to toe with the very powerful interests in the city — that's something that's attractive to me," James said.


Garcetti marching with SEIU union janitors
THE BEST CHOICE FOR LABOR
It says something about the upside-down nature of this race that Greuel has tried to paint Garcetti as anti-union because he opposes the millions of dollars in taxpayer funds DWP's union leadership has funneled into Greuel's election.

What gets lost in that rhetoric is this - it's not about the DWP, or about unions in general, it's about Citizens United. It's about uncontrolled, unaccountable spending from interest groups overwhelming and distorting the democratic process - and it's just as bad coming from interest groups we like (unions) as coming from interest groups we don't like (the Koch Brothers).

So despite how the opposition might try to paint him, from Garcetti's key role in passing a living wage ordinance for Century Corridor hotels to marching with janitors as they sought to negotiate for decent working conditions, Garcetti has proven himself to be an ally to labor.

In a 2007 letter to the LA Times praising Garcetti's support of workers at the LAX Hilton, Maria Elena Durazo, President of the LA Federation of Labor, wrote "These are men and women who, despite earning poverty wages and despite the lack of affordable health insurance, continue to work hard to make (their employers) profitable. We should thank Garcetti and others who have the courage to stand with people who work hard for poverty wages."

And the DWP's deep pockets aren't shared by most other unions in Los Angeles. While workers in private sector unions struggle with poverty wages, and other public sector workers like LAUSD teachers haven't seen a raise (not even for cost of living) in eight years, salaries for DWP's upper management jumped a whopping 15% since 2008, with the average DWP pay rising from $88,299 to $101,237 in 2012.

No other city employee has seen raises like that, not even police officers, who's salaries rose only 2%.

In all that time, Wendy Greuel never found a single dollar in "waste, fraud and abuse" at the DWP.
So it makes perfect sense for them to believe they could get a better deal from Greuel than they could from Garcetti. 


According to Richard Riordan, this will be city workers' 
new retirement plan if Wendy Greuel becomes mayor
WITH GARCETTI YOU KNOW WHERE YOU STAND
One day after receiving the endorsement of another powerful public sector union, the LA County Labor Federation, Greuel enthusiastically embraced the endorsement of Richard Riordan, even going so far as to say he'd be her "first hire".

Only five months earlier the Labor Fed, along with a number of other public employee unions, barely defeated Riordan's attempts to put a pension-reform measure on the ballot so onerous, one union president called it a “Wisconsin-style rush to the bottom on pay and benefits for all middle class people.”

The back-to-back endorsements by Riordan and the LA Labor Fed was a circle that would not square.

Greuel tried to soft-peddle Riordan's endorsement to labor by claiming she'd renegotiate pension give-backs the union had already made, but then walked that back within hours after she was hauled in front of the Chamber of Commerce to explain herself. 

So while much has been written about the DWP's independent expenditures on Greuel's behalf,  it's these schizophrenic signals coming from Greuel we should all be paying attention to. Because when a candidate does a 180 like this depending on her audience, it means the voter can't ever really know where the candidate stands.

Garcetti has the support of nearly every private sector union in Los Angeles - janitors, grocery workers, sanitation workers, truck drivers, port workers, construction workers, teachers, laundry workers, security officers, stadium, sports and entertainment workers, LAX workers, and City administrative and technical workers. He has it not by making promises he can't keep, but by being who he's always been - a fair partner with a deep commitment to social justice, dignity, and the principle of a fair day's pay for a fair day's work.

Garcetti at the Venice CicLAvia hub - he wants these once a month!

HE'LL BE A STRONG ADVOCATE FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Garcetti, who's received the endorsement of the Sierra Club and the Los Angeles chapter of the California League of Conservation Voters, has long been a champion of policies to expand public transportation and improve our environment.  In 2004, Garcetti authored Proposition O, a county storm water bond which sought to clean the city's waterways. Voters approved the bond with just over 76% of the vote making it the largest clean water bond in the country.

In 2005, Garcetti helped found the Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust. He also authored two of the nation's largest municipal green building ordinances requiring all city buildings, and all commercial buildings over 50,000 sq ft, to be built to LEED-certified standards.  A longtime electric car driver, he even appeared as a proponent of electric cars in the 2006 documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car?"

Garcetti loves talking about public transportation in a way only a wonk can, supporting a comprehensive transit network that integrates light rail, subways, busways and even dedicated bike lanes. 

"I will continue to accelerate badly-needed rail lines (and where appropriate, busways), since these projects have the best shot at reducing traffic throughout our city. We need to finish the Expo Line to Santa Monica, link LAX to the Green Line, build the Crenshaw Line in South Los Angeles, get a North­‐South line in the San Fernando Valley that traverses the Sepulveda Pass, and it is critical to get the Wilshire subway to the Westside," Garcetti told LAStreetsblog.com. 

"I would also make sure that the system is on time, predictable, and easy to navigate. The city has an incredible amount of transportation data and we can use this to make our city’s transportation system more flexible and change to the city’s demands."

Incidentally, I knew I couldn't support Greuel for mayor when she used a $1.25 a year mineral rights lease to eviscerate Garcetti's environmental record, implying in attack ads he was secretly trying to make a profit off of poisoning voter's children (no, I'm not exaggerating - watch the ad yourself)

For those of us who supported Debra Bowen in her congressional bid against Janice Hahn in 2011, we've seen this movie before. With only a week to go in that race, John Shallman, campaign consultant to both Hahn and Greuel, put out ugly, misleading mailers attacking Bowen, claiming the staunch environmentalist was in bed with big oil.  Shallman's "proof"? Twenty year-old campaign contributions from energy companies and an unsourced blog post from a supporter of primary opponent Marcy Winograd.

But hey, it worked once, so I guess that's all that matters.


HE'S THE FEMINIST CHOICE
Greuel is an accomplished female leader and should she win it would be an historic first for Los Angeles.  But does that mean she's the best or only choice for women? Hardly.

In endorsing Garcetti over Greuel, California NOW president Patty Bellasalma cited CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women - an international treaty that commits governments to removing barriers to women’s equality. Also known as the Treaty for the Rights of Women, it addresses legal rights, education, employment,
 health care, violence against women, politics and finance.

“CEDAW implementation is essential because it establishes a requirement that when policy is being considered one of the factors that must be known is the gender effect of the policy," said Bellasalma. 

Originally introduced by former Councilwoman Jackie Goldberg, Garcetti fully backed it's implementation. But it stalled after opposition from the Mayor and City Attorney. According to Bellasalma, Greuel was missing in action.

“I’ve known Wendy for 30 years. She could have endorsed CEDAW. She could implement CEDAW but when asked why she hasn’t committed to its implementation her answer has been, 'We’ll have to do a study to determine it efficacy'. Studies have already been done,” Bellasalma said. “It’s bad when your first answer to a problem is to hire a focus group."

More recently, California NOW reiterated their support of Garcetti as the feminist choice for mayor after Greuel refused to directly answer if she thought it was appropriate for the Obama administration to restrict over-the-counter access to Plan B emergency contraception for girls under the age of 15.

Instead of addressing the issue in terms of federal policy,  Greuel bizarrely stated access was somehow the responsibility between a doctor and their patient, missing the point entirely of having over-the-counter access to emergency contraception.

When the moderator pressed her, pointing out that many members of women’s health organizations believe there should be NO age restriction on access to emergency contraception, Greuel replied, "Well again, I think that's a conversation between the young woman and, uh, the pharmacist and others about the ability to have access to that (access to Plan B). I think we need to teach our young women responsibility…..”

When the moderator asked Eric Garcetti the same question, Garcetti replied, "No I don't believe there should be….(age restrictions on access to emergency contraception).....we have to remember these girls, these young women, are often coming from sometimes abusive situations, may have been the survivors of sexual abuse in other situations. They might have that in the home, and I think if you make this be something that somebody has to describe to their parent, you remove those protections from some who have been the most abused and the most vulnerable, and that's the reason I oppose(restrictions on access to Plan B)."


ERIC GARCETTI WILL BE THE MAYOR WHO LISTENS
Garcetti was one of President Obama's earliest supporters.
One of the great mantras of the Obama campaign was "Respect, Empower and Include" and it's a mantra Garcetti - who happens to be one of Obama's earliest supporters - takes to heart as a public servant.

Garcetti was the first Council Member to institute weekly "office hours" where constituents could meet with him face-to-face without having to go downtown.  Garcetti estimates he's met with 5000 constituents over the years this way.

"You might be talking to a head of state back-to-back with a homeless person who has recently lost their job and their apartment and desperate. You're the last stop they have to try to get their life back on track," Garcetti told KPCC.org.

"You have to learn to be a great listener, it's the most important thing in politics, and both the classroom as a teacher taught me that...same thing in politics, if you think you're just supposed to give good speeches at press conferences, you'll never solve people's problems...Office hours has been my way to stay grounded, to make sure people never have too many layers between them and me and that I'll always be held accountable."


There's lots more I could go into, but I think you get the picture.

Vote for Eric Garcetti to be our next Mayor -  the progressive choice, the environmental choice, the fiscally sound choice, the feminist choice, the best choice to lead Los Angeles for the next 4 years.