June 11, 2000

Dear Editor:

I guess Ms. Sedillos has tried to master her most polite person which she has a problem finding.

Our elected officials are elected by the majority of our citizens and endowed with the responsibility of making decisions for the public's well being and the good welfare of all. To have this initiative placed in front of our public with the excuse that ALL of us need to have a voice is a joke, and to say she supports the living wage with this poor initiative is another joke.

We have seen the initiative process in California be abused by the big money interests or extremists, get on our ballots and then plowed with millions of dollars. Passed by a community that is bewildered by the onslaught of TV commercials and make BAD laws that hurt the community rather then help.

This living wage initiative does the same thing. As Seddillos says it will
not cover enough people but we could go back to the ballot so we can expand the numbers.

My question is why do this in the first place?

Particularly when our elected officials are going about it in the proper way -- survey the issue, have a the study conducted by reliable professionals and educate all of us to the complexities of the living wage issues. Rather then have another initiative that is forced down our throat, a poor unfulfilling initiative, that we will have to go to the voters to correct in the future. I believe that is a poisned pill.

The truth is that Ms. Sedillos knows that the interests behind this initiative
is big business and big money and she supports it.

I would rather have our council be responsive to ALL of us.

Bruria Finkel
Santa Monica

June 9, 2000

Dear Editor,

I couldn't believe my eyes when I read that a SMRR Council member and a Rent Control Board member opposed the new SMRPH initiative (Santa Monica Residents Protection and Home ownership Charter Amendment) which is a revision of the old TORCA law. SMRR is claiming SMRPH/ affordable housing are two different things. That it threatens affordable housing.

I don¹t think so. What it does is create and protect affordable housing. Affordable housing that doesn¹t even have to be subsidize by the tax payers. Housing that can be purchased at an affordable price by tenants that may never have the opportunity do do so otherwise. Although I may not to be ready to buy my apartment right now, I sure would like to have that option open for me in the future.

I believe affordable housing should be as available to the middle class as to anyone else. It is the middle class that supports all the social programs in this country, but they are generally too busy working to get out and lobby for their own rights. SMRPH continues to protect low-income housing while it also opens the door for the hard-working middle class and their families. Aren't we entitled to a little piece of the American pie.

Additionally, it is the only progressive future affordable housing has in this town. Nothing that is coming from renters right advocates has a provision that guarantees a 99 year lease, not only for the tenant but also protects the rights of roommates that reside in the unit for three months, even if they are not on the lease. Rent control can¹t do that, in fact, the Costa Hawkins Act has basically eliminated most protections of rent control and the courts are upholding the law in spite of challenges. SMRPH is the only protection renters have left. In addition, it makes available the possibility of ownership to renters in Santa Monica, something that would never be accessible to most of us in this life time.

Residents at the June 3 Mid-City Neighbors Annual Convention overwhelmingly voted to support this initiative; their only question was why they haven't heard of this before from SMRR. Could it be that SMRR fears losing their tenant voter base and to support any new form of ownership would undermine their efforts. If you are a renter and are concerned about your future in Santa Monica, I suggest you go directly to the source of the SMRPH initiative and find out more. Renter beware! Here are a few new options for you to carefully look into:

Non purchasing tenants in a SMRPH conversion receive an irrevocable 99-year lease that maintains existing local rent control and eviction protections, even if rent control is abolished in SM.

If you move and your roommate in not on the lease, you may name them the successor, maintaining your 99-year lease protections.

Senior Citizens may pass on an existing lease agreement with a "will" type of written designation.

No SMRPH tenant can be evicted under the Ellis Act.

No SMRPH tenant can be charged more than the maximum allowable rent, even if rent control is abolished.

No SMRPH tenant can be given a rent increase under Costa Hawkins or any other laws that seek to decontrol rent levels.

No SMRPH tenant can be evicted for "owner-occupancy."

If your unit is "bootlegged," there are specific provisions to legally convert increasing housing in SM. Currently, if those units are discovered the tenants are evicted and the unit goes off the market.

SMRPH protects existing housing, protects renters and protects our options for a piece of the American Pie.

The list goes on and on. SMRPH does more for the resident of Santa Monica than anything that has come from the Rent Control Board or SMRR in a long, long time. Don¹t be bamboozled, the only hidden agenda here is the one from the oppositions.

Donna Block
Vice Chair Mid City Neighbors
Santa Monica

June 6, 2000

Dear Editor,

Regarding comments made in the Lookout's article on the Mid-City
Neighbors Convention that there are 5 members of the City Council with
like minds... But...there are six members of the City Council with like
minds -- and more: they think like men! Heh, I'm the one representing the
way women think.

Folks, we are all individuals and each thinks for ourselves. On some
issues we are in aggreement: there are a lot of 7-0 and 6-1 votes. And
on the close votes (5-2 and 4-3) we mix it up a bit.

Remember, there are many people in the U.S. (and some in Santa Monica) who consider all of us to be like-minded liberals!