By Jorge Casuso
September 11, 2025 -- With no discussion, the City Council Tuesday night permanently replaced the six members of the Downtown Santa Monica, Inc. (DTSM) Board it removed one-and-a-half months ago.
The new members -- picked quietly with Councilmembers imputing their chosen candidates on their computer screens -- included two former mayors and the head of the Chamber of Commerce.
Former Mayors Gleam Davis and Richard Bloom, who also served two terms on the State Assembly, and Chamber CEO Judy Kruger will serve Board terms ending on June 30, 2028.
Chosen to serve terms ending on June 30, 2026 were Sean Besser, president of the Ocean Park Association Board (OPA), Hodge Patterson, CEO of the Santa Monica Family YMCA and Albin Gielicz, a member of the boards of several local civic and business organizations.
Former interim City Manager Elaine Polachek and gas company CEO Jonathan Gregory, who had served on the DTSM Board on an interim basis, were not appointed Tuesday.
The six interim members -- which also included Davis, Bloom, Besser and Patterson -- were chosen minutes after the council on July 29 voted 6 to 1 to remove all six members it appoints to the Board.
The unprecedented move came during an emergency meeting hastily called "to reform the governance of DTSM," according to the item from Councilmember Barry Snell, in coordination with Councilmembers Caroline Torosis and Dan Hall.
The item provided few specifics but stated that "given the recent announcement of the resignation of current CEO Andrew Thomas, we believe that the governance issues that currently exist at DTSM can no longer be ignored."
"By taking these actions now, prior to the selection of a new CEO, the City Council can ensure that DTSM is better positioned to serve the public interest, respond to evolving downtown challenges, and become a more effective and aligned City partner moving forward."
The moved prompted a lawsuit filed Friday by two of the Board members removed by the Council -- Leonid Pustilnikov and Jon Farzam -- that seeks to invalidate the Council's actions.
The lawsuit, which the Council took up in closed session Tuesday, claims the Council had no cause "to remove the majority of the members to cripple the Board's operations and to improperly influence the negotiations" with the City.
