July 29, 2024

Dear Editor,

Dan Hall’s rebuttal to my letter, “Council Candidates Stubbornly Support Gascon,” naming City Council candidates who support failed DA George Gascon, scolded me to “stick to the facts.”

But he diligently avoided the central fact that Gascon vowed his policies would “enhance safety” but he delivered precisely the opposite. And Hall’s slate of candidates unanimously supports re-electing Gascon anyway.

First in Hall’s storybook of claims (“Fact #1”), he denies supporting “defunding” the police. Maybe so, but I stand by the one “defunding” fact I presented: Hall’s slate (Dan Hall, Ellis Raskin, Barry Snell, and Natalya Zernitskaya) all are endorsed by an organization, the Santa Monica Democratic Club, whose president absolutely called for defunding SMPD.

Then (“Fact #3”), the United Gascon Supporters Slate signals a diversionary “public safety” definition by mentioning “other policies” that increase safety. Hall later enumerates a dozen, including “after school programs,” “libraries,” and “climate resiliency.” Elsewhere, slate member Natalya Zernitskaya emphasizes that “public safety” includes building maintenance and (congestion-inducing) mobility programs.

Get it? By arguing “public safety” covers everything from library programs to electric scooter adoption, slippery candidates can say they support public safety while favoring crime-friendly policies.

Nonetheless, Hall claims (“Fact #4”) it’s “fair to say the Santa Monica Democratic Club’s current membership and leaders” (which include Hall and Zernitskaya; the other two slate members merely pledge fealty) are not “crime-friendly.”

Hardly fair or a fact, since the club’s president today is exactly the same individual who called for defunding SMPD. And at that same City Council meeting, the club’s now “VP, Legislative” piled on by proclaiming SMPD’s “budget is the highest in the region and its officers are the highest paid by far.”

If the United Crime Cheerleaders Slate is not “crime-friendly,” let them renounce these defunders’ endorsement and demand exclusion from the organization’s election material.

Anyone seeking further evidence of the slate’s crime position can look to slate member Ellis Raskin, who did not classify “reducing crime” as even a top-three priority during his losing 2022 council run, and repeated the omission in his statement seeking the 2024 endorsement of the Santa Monica Democratic Police Defunders Club.

Or consider that slate member Zernitskaya opposed gang-related sentencing enhancements, same as Gascon, and termed allocating funds for four additional SMPD officers “ridiculous.”

Also in “Fact” #4, Hall touts supposed crime-fighter bona fides by declaring he supported Santa Monica’s state representative Rick Chavez-Zbur’s Assembly Bill 2943, which purportedly targeted smash and grabs, but was widely viewed as part of a series of legislative stunts intended to thwart California voters from toughening penalties for retail theft and drug crimes.

Another recent Chavez-Zbur headline-grabber was his attempt to block a law increasing penalties for child sex trafficking. No word on whether the United Crime Lovers Slate (Hall, Raskin, Snell, Zernitskaya) supported that, but all four either endorsed Chavez-Zbur or received a political appointment from him.

Much later (“Fact #7”), Hall finally defends the slate’s unanimous support of Gascon by reasoning that Gascon’s sole remaining election opponent was once a Republican. No doubt an important consideration for machine politicians, but I’ve never heard of a mugger, robber, or rapist ending an attack due to a victim’s lifelong membership in any particular political party.

In closing Hall proposes that “if” Santa Monicans “think” safety has worsened (it has, check the facts) they should elect new leadership—though NOT in the DA’s office. Instead, Hall essentially suggests anyone concerned about Gascon’s failure to “enhance safety” should vote for a slate of politicians that supports the failure.

Paradoxically, these candidates’ version of sticking to the facts is nonsense.

Sincerely,

Peter DiChellis
Santa Monica