The following commentary is by Zina Josephs, President of Friends of Sunset Park.
I strongly urge the Santa Monica City Council to vote "no" on the Village Trailer Park development agreement ordinance.
The election campaign website of one of the City Council members who was re-elected on Nov. 6 states he "protected renters rights and affordable housing by voting to prevent evictions of Village Trailer Park residents." Yet on Nov. 14, eight days after the election, he voted in favor of the Village Trailer Park development agreement, which would force the eviction of the remaining Village Trailer Park residents.
Lots of verbal promises were made by the developer Marc Luzzatto during public hearings concerning the Village Trailer Park development agreement. However, the only promises concerning current park residents that are actually in the Development Agreement ordinance the Council will be voting up or down on Nov. 27 are:
The Project provides for the donation of land and the development of parking spaces for future affordable housing and the provision of 16 affordable housing units within the proposed project, of which 7 will be affordable to extremely low income households and 9 for very low income households
I.e., the developer will be eliminating 109 rent-controlled spaces in the return for building 16 affordable apartments and donating an unspecified amount of land (supposedly for the 10 existing trailers of his choice).
Nothing in the development agreement ordinance language specifies how much land is being donated, how many trailers will be allowed to remain, how those residents will be selected, or how long they will be allowed to live there.
The city of Santa Monica does not have a great record when it comes to enforcing Development Agreements. Examples:
- St. John's Health Center promised in its 1998 Development Agreement to build a 422-space subterranean parking garage. It never built the parking structure, much to the dismay of nearby residents and, in 2011, the City Council amended the agreement, relieving St. John's of the parking requirement.
- "In Santa Monica, affordable-housing rental agreements are often not enforced" (Los Angeles Times, April 5, 2010): "For decades, Santa Monica has allowed developers to add floors to their buildings or exceed other zoning restrictions in exchange for providing affordable housing to poor and moderate-income tenants. Such was the case with Dorchester House, a luxury condominium low-rise just blocks from the Pacific Ocean. Almost three decades ago, the city approved a development plan in which 15 first-floor units were earmarked as affordable housing." But the city did not enforce the Dorchester House development agreement. In 2010, a prospective condo dweller found condo owners living in the income-restricted units instead of renting them to low- and moderate-income tenants. One rental was advertised at $2,000 per month, although the rent-control price would have been about $1,200. The city only moved to crack down on violators after threats of litigation, but nothing has been resolved—all 15 units are apparently still out of compliance.
Patch accepts and publishes letters to the editor and commentary regarding any relevant local issue. The views expressed in the above commentary do not reflect the opinion of the publication, its editor and/or its writers. Emails may be edited for length and clarity. Have an opinion? Write to the editor of your Patch site. To find his or her email address, look in the top left corner of the home page.
Want to submit your own letter to the editor or opinion piece? Email it to Santa Monica Patch editor email@example.com.