(Published in Santa Monica Daily Press)

Dear Editor,

The REAL reason voters have two confusing Santa Monica Airport initiatives to decipher and contemplate is because of a bull-headed blunder on the part of four City Council members.

When Council members O’Connor, O’Day, Davis and Holbrook initially approved the Hines Project, they did so despite an avalanche of resident input urging them NOT to. These four Council members disregarded the hundreds of emails and the thoughtful testimony of countless residents at Council and Planning Commission meetings. They also approved Hines knowing full well that residents had formed Residocracy and had vowed to gather enough signatures to rescind the project if Council approved it. These four Council members essentially dared residents and Residocracy to defy them.

We all know what happened next… Residocracy gathered the signatures and the Council was FORCED to rescind Hines, which never should have been approved in the first place.

The big pro-airport money ($545,000 and growing) behind Measure D saw this as an opportunity and thought… “We’ve got a ton of money. We can do the same thing.”  They paid people to gather signatures, got Measure D on the ballot, and the Council was forced to do SOMETHING and came up with Measure LC as an alternative.

Now we voters are left with two confusing airport choices because four City Council members went against the wishes of residents and tried to force Hines down our throats.

Oops.

Mayor O’Connor led the support for Hines. She also led the push to approve it, encouraged others to do likewise and went against the wishes of most residents in doing so.  She bears most of the responsibility for this blunder.

Please remember it when you vote November 4th. Please also vote NO on D and Yes on LC. 

Just because four Council members screwed up doesn’t mean you have to.

Thank you,

John C. Smith

Member, SM Democratic Club, Sierra Club, SMRR, and the Wilmont Executive Board

(Published in Santa Monica Daily Press)

Dear Editor,

Thank you for covering the lawsuit filed by Elizabeth Riel, who was hired, then fired by the City of Santa Monica. I hope your coverage strives to include the following elements as the story develops...

For starters, the city stands to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars because of this lawsuit, due to the actions of a few of its leaders, beyond City Manager Rod Gould.

Let's be clear. Gould was hired by the City Council to manage the city's affairs. Whatever they decide, it is his job to do. He has probably overseen the hiring of hundreds of employees without interference from Council
members. But not this time. He hired Ms. Riel after an exhaustive interview process. He knew of Ms. Riel's political activities eight years ago and didn't think they were a problem. So what happened? The only logical conclusion to be drawn is that someone on the Council thought the hiring WAS a big problem and told him to undo it, or he would have never rescinded the offer.

Mayor O'Connor will only say publicly that she 'may have mentioned Riel's hiring' to Gould.

Right.

Of course, now no one, including O'Connor, Gould or City Attorney Moultrie can discuss the case because it is 'pending litigation', which is often the case in such matters, and we residents are left wondering what really happened. Meantime, the City stands to lose a lot of money because of a mismanaged hire/fire episode that clearly appears to be politically motivated.

The fact the City is using outside legal help to handle the case, at great expense, when Ms.Moultrie has any number of six-figure salaried legal eagles in her flock who could handle it, only compounds this costly debacle.

So what will happen? This case will never go to trial. It will be settled out of court, as quietly as possible, at great cost. After the election, of course. The settlement will include a provision that all parties agree not to discuss the settlement. Rod Gould will leave, which will deflect attention away from the Mayor, and we will never really know who had Riel un-hired.

But we do know. And our collective voices will reflect what we've learned when we vote November 4th, despite the blizzard of glossy mailers paid for by developer money that will urge us to vote otherwise.

Sincerely,

John C. Smith