VENICE VOTES by CLAY CLAIBORNE
DISSATISFIED WITH THE WAY THE FEB. 21, 2009 OVERNIGHT PERMIT PARKING ELECTION WAS RUN? SEND COMPLAINTS TO THE DEPT. OF NEIGHBORHOOD EMPOWERMENT (DONE) and VENICE NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL (VNC) :
D.O.N.E ~ Deanna Stevenson (email@example.com)
D.O.N.E. ~ Leyla Campos (Leyla.Campos@lacity.org)
V.N.C. ~ firstname.lastname@example.org
Here is the D.O.N.E. website for those wishing to check out more info ~ http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/page2.cfm?doc=home
Here is the D.O.N.E. Election Procedures webpage ~ http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/electionProcs.htm
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
Below is a copy of the mail Mark Lipman sent to the VNC board and president:
I’m sure you are aware of the final results of the election by now and of the series of complaints that are going to be filed from different sources over the election itself. What happens from that happens.
So you know, there are three complaints that I will support:
1: That after the second initiative was filed that the ballot was not simplified for a straight YES or NO vote on permit parking. This objection was made several times during the process of setting up the rules for the election and was ignored by both the Rules and Elections Committee and Adcom.
2: That by having both initiatives on the same ballot, it sufficiently confused the issue for voters that it had the effect of denying me my rights as a stakeholder in Venice to have a fair election on the initiative I presented under article 5 section A on the VNC ByLaws.
3: That initiative B, was not valid to begin with as it was submitted by a sitting board member. As board members you give up certain rights as stakeholders – as clearly explained when running for a seat on the board. Ivan Spiegel, chair of the elections committee also agrees with me on this point and has said so to me verbally.
In fairness, I would call for a new election with a straight forward YES or NO vote on parking permits for Venice in a more neutral location, at a time that would be open to a greater diversity of our community.
By looking at the demographics of the vote, Saturday afternoons at the library (which is located closely to the more affluent section of Venice), highly favors the pro-permit parking side and therefore is too biased to be considered valid.
Alternatively, if we considered holding a supplementary election at say the Oakwood Recreation Center, for the rest of the Venice population that did not get to vote yesterday, solely on initiative A, I would consider valid the results of the two vote totals combined.
This would in effect be an expansion of the democratic process by including more of the population while at the same time counting the votes of those who already cast a ballot on this issue.
Either solution is acceptable to me.
– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
D.O.N.E. website: http://www.lacityneighborhoods.com/page2.cfm?doc=home