On the Point and Tenants & Prop A

March 11, 2003

Dear Editor:

I would like to thank real estate attorney Tom Larmore for his insightful opinion on the significance of the United States Supreme Court and its lack of relevance to our quality of life in Santa Monica. ("LETTERS: Bashing McKeown and Beside the Point," March 11)

As Larmore knows very well, the 1978 Penn Central Transportation vs. New York City ruling that he dismisses as irrelevant to the debate over Prop A, because it dealt with a commercial property, has been almost universally accepted as upholding the right of communities to adapt historic preservation ordinances identical to the Santa Monica ordinance that Prop A will gut.

It has been interpreted as the very foundation for our right to protect our heritage and that of our children and grandchildren, something we should hold very dear.

Given his position on the Supreme Court's ruling on Penn Central Transportation vs. New York City, I would be very interested to know if Mr. Larmore, who wrote Proposition A, has similar opinions (or plans for the future) on how to reinterpret court rulings on environmental law, rent control, free speech or a woman's right to choose, protections the courts have ruled we are entitled to under the United States Constitution?

I believe they have also upheld a citizen's right to vote in an election, a fact that Larmore's colleague Greg Poirier also seems to dispute.

Ken Breisch

March 11, 2003

Dear Editor:

Prop A's supporters and campaign literature have recently cranked up the volume on their claim that Prop A does not affect tenants (although, ironically, Prop A's author, real estate attorney Tom Larmore, has advised landlords that Prop A is important for them by protecting their use of the Ellis Act).

The implication of these claims by Prop A supporters is that tenants don't need to vote. In fact, in a recent letter to a local news source someone even had the audacity to say that tenants should not be allowed to vote on Prop A since it supposedly only affects homeowners.

Outrageous! Opposition to Prop A is about protecting the character and history of the community we all love and choose to make our home. Prop A does affect tenants. Tenants care about the character of Santa Monica. Tenants have civic pride. Many will become Santa Monica homeowners. Many have.

As for denying the vote to tenants, we decided as a people long ago that lack of property, that race, and that gender were not acceptable reasons to deny any citizen a vote. Santa Monica does not need to revisit those decisions at a local level.

Prop A affects tenants. Tenants should vote on Prop A. Tenants should vote NO on Prop A in order to protect our neighborhoods, our community, our history, and our future.

Bea Nemlaha,
Spokesperson for Save Our Neighborhoods
Resident, Third Street Historic District