Posts Tagged ‘venice’

March 26, 2015

DENY 259 HAMPTON PROJECT – NO MORE ALCOHOL LICENSES IN VENICE – THERE IS ALREADY AN OVER-SATURATION OF ALCOHOL IN VENICE – ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

AlcoholBan

Dear friends and neighbors,

Even though the community WON the 259 Hampton Drive appeal at the WLA Planning Commission Hearing on Jan 7, 2015 — the owner requested a re-hearing, because HE LEFT THE BUILDING BEFORE THE HEARING STARTED!!! Now he’s demanding his RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS! As a result, the project will be reviewed AGAIN by the WLA Planning Commission on April 1, 2015 @ 4:30 pm.

It is time we launched into URGENT ACTION in preparation for this Appeal re-hearing of 259 Hampton Drive — NEXT WED 1st April at 4.30pm at West LA Planning Commission.

Go here to watch video of 1st Appeal Hearing that took place on January 7, 2015 – https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4bxvYWxZpRJmJt23sLSX1PCtJizDdj_G

PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU CAN BE THERE TO TESTIFY OR SILENTLY SUPPORT – and bring a friend /neighbor (or three!) We need as many bodies in the room as we can get to save our neighborhood!

**WE WON THE CASE LAST TIME AND WE CAN AGAIN IF WE ALL SHOW UP!!!**

ASAP- WE NEED TO URGENTLY SEND TWO LETTERS:
Please take just 10 mins out of your busy day to do so. One letter to Mike Bonin, and one to the Commissioners. Please send to ALL email addresses I have listed and BCC me on them, so we can keep it on our case file.

THANK YOU IN ADVANCE DEAR FRIENDS & NEIGHBORS!!! Remember, together many voices can and DO make a change!

LETTER #1 TO COUNCILMAN BONIN:

mike.bonin@lacity.org
councilmember.bonin@lacity.org

cc:
chris.robertson@lacity.org
cecilia.castillo@lacity.org
tricia.keane@lacity.org

SUBJECT LINE:
DENY 259 HAMPTON PROJECT…. UPHOLD APPEAL: ZA-2012-1770-CDP-CUB

***Please personalize it as you see fit. It will be better if not all letters read the same! Does NOT have to be LOTS of detail. This is a sample letter, with listed points you can pull from. If you live across the alley, say so. If you own across the street, say so. Make it personal as to how YOUR LIVES will be affected!

***Don’t forget to sign your name and address (if you are close by) at the bottom.
————————-

Dear Councilman Bonin,

I request that you OPPOSE the proposed bar/restaurant with full alcohol at 259 HAMPTON DRIVE due for rehearing on Aril 1st. The project is a 2 story, open rooftop bar/restaurant WITH ZERO PARKING, 15 FEET from peoples homes. It has been operating illegally as a sit down restaurant for five years already.

We thank you for coming out in opposition against 320 Sunset, which was the right decision in support of the Venice community. We remind you that this project at 259 Hampton is a mere block and a half away, hence imposes a worse cumulative negative impact on the community and surrounding neighbors.

To quote from YOUR letter of opposition against Sunset, dated 31 October 2014:-

“It is absolutely imperative that we do not sacrifice the sanctity and well being of the existing adjacent residential neighborhoods. The success of one cannot be to the detriment of the other.”

“The noise and other disruption that will result from the operation of this restaurant/bar is an due burden to place on the neighbors across the alley” [and across the road]

“I am deeply concerned that the noise and its impacts from the patio, given the proximity to residences cannot and will not be adequately mitigated.”

[Zero parking]…”does not meet the REAL demand that a project of this scale will generate.”

We find that all of your concerns as quoted for the Sunset project should be applicable to the 259 Hampton proposal. The intensification of this site sets a very worrisome precedent, and is detrimental to our neighborhood for the following reasons:-

OVER SATURATION OF ALCOHOL
* Venice is over-saturated with alcohol licenses already. Four times the allowable limit per ABC. ABC Regulation 61.4 states that there should not be alcohol licenses approved within 100 feet of residential homes, yet this project is 15 feet from residents!

SENSITIVE ISSUES – ALCOHOL
* This project is on the same block as 2 CHURCHES and A HERITAGE LISTED SYNAGOGUE – as well as CHILD CARE and PRE-SCHOOL. This is an essential factor in the dis-allowing of alcohol per ABC, and adds concern re the density and intensification of 259 Hampton site.

INCREASED CRIME
*It is well documented that there is a direct correlation between high density of alcohol outlets and the increase in serious crime. In this census tract, there is almost four times the average crime rate for LA. The LAPD has weighed in that they DO NOT WANT ANY new alcohol licenses in Venice, and THEY ARE PARTICULARLY OPPOSING THIS APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOL AT 259 HAMPTON DRIVE. Venice may be a tourist destination to some, but to thousands of us it is our home.

NOISE NUISANCE
* A bar/restaurant within 15 feet of residential homes can never be truly mitigated from noise unless it is completely sealed on all four sides and rooftop. This is not the case on this project. It is an open air roof and some open sides. There are several homes across a 15 foot alley, and also 35 feet across the street.

ZERO PARKING
* There is NO ACTUAL PARKING. Not even one disabled space. Paying for in lieu spaces does nothing to help the serious parking drought in Venice. Providing parking for patrons is the cost of doing business, and mandated by the Venice Specific Plan. An $18,000 in lieu fee to the city will not take those vehicles off our residential streets and make the streets safe for our families, nor will it serve to green our environment.

TRAFFIC DANGER
* Traffic is already congested in this area, all day every day. Extra car traffic this business will generate, crawling looking for parking on residential streets adds to the danger. Many families and children walk, cycle, and skateboard in this area. To add alcohol and inebriated drivers into this mix is very dangerous.

NIGHT-TIME DANGER
* We should not be deprived of the ability to park close to our own homes and be forced to park 3 to 4 blocks away at night – and worry if we will make it home safely at night. This strips our quality of life and put us in grave danger.

Councilman Bonin, I urge you to act in favor of our, the Venice community’s interests. Please back us up in preserving the sanctity and well being of our neighborhood. We have a right to peace and quiet enjoyment in our homes, and look to you for protecting our rights.

PLEASE DENY 259 HAMPTON.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME…
YOUR ADDRESS…
———————————————————————————————

LETTER #2 TO PLANNING COMMISSION:-
email:- APCwestLA@lacity.org

SUBJECT LINE:
DENY 259 HAMPTON DRIVE, VENICE … UPHOLD APPEALS: ZA-2012-1770-CDP-CUB-1A, and DIR-2010-2932-SPP-1A-REC

***AGAIN- Please personalize it as you see fit.

***Don’t forget to sign your name and address (if you are close by) at the bottom.
————————

LETTER STARTS HERE:-

Dear Commission Executive Assistant – WLAAPC,

Would you please print 15 copies of my letter to follow (for the file, 5 commission members, Planning Dept, ZA Dept, Commission Executive, and City Attorney) and distribute accordingly, in time for the April 1 re-hearing. Thank you in advance.
———–

Dear Commissioners,

I request that you uphold your decision, of January 7, 2015, to DENY the proposed bar/restaurant with full alcohol at 259 HAMPTON DRIVE, which is due for rehearing on April 1st. As you may recall, the project proposes a 2 story, open rooftop bar/restaurant WITH ZERO PARKING, 15 FEET from people’s homes. It has been operating illegally as a sit down restaurant for the past five years.

These are the reasons why this project should be DENIED AGAIN:

OVER SATURATION OF ALCOHOL
* Venice is over-saturated with alcohol licenses already. Four times the allowable limit per ABC. ABC Regulation 61.4 states that there should not be alcohol licenses approved within 100 feet of residential homes, yet this project is 15 feet from residents!

SENSITIVE ISSUES – ALCOHOL
* This project is on the same block as 2 CHURCHES and A HERITAGE LISTED SYNAGOGUE – as well as CHILD CARE and PRE-SCHOOL. This is an essential factor in the dis-allowing of alcohol per ABC, and adds concern re the density and intensification of 259 Hampton site.

INCREASED CRIME
*It is well documented that there is a direct correlation between high density of alcohol outlets and the increase in serious crime. In this census tract, there is almost four times the average crime rate for LA. The LAPD has weighed in that they DO NOT WANT ANY new alcohol licenses in Venice, and THEY ARE PARTICULARLY OPPOSING THIS APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOL AT 259 HAMPTON DRIVE. Venice may be a tourist destination to some, but to thousands of us it is our home.

NOISE NUISANCE
* A bar/restaurant within 15 feet of residential homes can never be truly mitigated from noise unless it is completely sealed on all four sides and rooftop. This is not the case on this project. It is an open air roof and some open sides. There are several homes across a 15 foot alley, and also 35 feet across the street.

ZERO PARKING
* There is NO ACTUAL PARKING. Not even one disabled space. Paying for in lieu spaces does nothing to help the serious parking drought in Venice. Providing parking for patrons is the cost of doing business, and mandated by the Venice Specific Plan. An $18,000 in lieu fee to the city will not take those vehicles off our residential streets and make the streets safe for our families, nor will it serve to green our environment.

TRAFFIC DANGER
* Traffic is already congested in this area, all day every day. Extra car traffic this business will generate, crawling looking for parking on residential streets adds to the danger. Many families and children walk, cycle, and skateboard in this area. To add alcohol and inebriated drivers into this mix is very dangerous.

NIGHT-TIME DANGER
* We should not be deprived of the ability to park close to our own homes and be forced to park 3 to 4 blocks away at night – and worry if we will make it home safely at night. This strips our quality of life and put us in grave danger.

I urge you to act in favor of our, the Venice community’s interests. Please back us up in preserving the sanctity and well being of our neighborhood. We have a right to peace and quiet enjoyment in our homes, and look to you for protecting our rights.

PLEASE DENY 259 HAMPTON AGAIN!!! Thank you.

Sincerely,

YOUR NAME HERE…
YOUR ADDRESS…

Advertisements

On March 11, 2015 the Institute for Public Strategies gave a 2 hour workshop at Oakwood Receation Center, in Venice.  Tricia Keane, Planning Director for CD11 and Claudia Martin, Westside Neighborhood Prosecuter spoke and answered questions.  The event was well attended by Venetians interested in, and frustrated by, the alcohol licensing process that is currently creating an over-concentration of alcohol outlets in Venice (108 to date), immediately adjacent family neighborhoods, causing a nuisance problem for the community.

Very creative video to be presented at the CA Coastal Commission TODAY – Friday June 13 – thank you to the Venice Coalition to Preserve Community Character (VCPUCC) and film maker Xaime Casillas for speaking out about Hyper-Gentrification in Venice Beach (stay tuned) –

save-venice-again
Please Attend Coastal Commission Meeting Jun 13th, 2014

Venice Needs You!

Please attend the monthly Coastal Commission Meeting at Huntington Beach City Hall on Friday June 13 at 9am to OPPOSE EIGHT DEMOLITIONS and one restaurant project.

The current Coastal Commission meeting agenda is online http://www.coastal.ca.gov/mtgcurr.html.

Go to the link , scroll down to Friday. It’s a three day agenda: Wednesday – Friday. Venice is on Friday at 9am, which is the last day of the meeting and at the bottom of the agenda.

Each Venice item has a link to the Coastal Commission staff report and each one has the Coastal Permit application number.

ALSO, please WRITE AN OPPOSITION EMAIL RIGHT NOW (sample letter below) and send it to Charles Posner at chuck.posner@coastal.ca.gov

Points to bring and make the Coastal Commission aware of:

CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act, defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable.” (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15355)

Venice is approximately 1 % of the Los Angeles population, yet has 19% of the developments.

These demolitions are cumulatively destroying the existing Venice community and the rebuilding is out of mass, out of scale, out of character, and obviously only for the wealthy to buy or live in.

It is a violation of CEQA to approve one more demolition in Venice without demanding a study consisting of: Parking, Traffic, Historic Preservation, Community Character, and the Mello Act replacement of affordable housing.

Coastal Act Sec 30624.7 The new developments have adverse effect both individually and cumulatively, because they are not consistent with the existing community character.

Coastal Act Sec 30116 (E) & (F) Venice Coastal Zone community is a sensitive coastal resource area with special communities and neighborhoods which are significant as a visitor destination and also provide existing coastal housing and recreational opportunities for low and moderate income persons.

Coastal Act Sec 30253 (E) This type of over development maximizes adverse impacts, instead of minimizing them and the city planning is doing nothing to protect the unique characteristics of the Venice Coastal Zone.

Coastal Act Sec 30212 (2) & (3) New developments are exceeding floor area, height and bulk of the former structures by more than 10% along with changing the intensity by more than 10%.

Coastal Act Section 30320: Developers are not properly posting or notifying the public or abutting neighbors of demolitions, which is a violation of due process.

Coastal Act Section 30604 (f) because there is no local coastal program the commission is mandated (shall) to encourage housing opportunities for persons of low and moderate income. Currently developers are evicting low income tenants, holding the property vacant to avoid MELLO Act

Requirements and all of the developments are for wealthy people.

There are no reports on Mello Act replacement for any of the affordable housing that has been lost or removed from Venice.

——————————–

SAMPLE LETTER:  COPY & PASTE INTO EMAIL AND SEND TO:  CHARLES POSNER – cposner@coastal.ca.gov

Dear Mr. Posner,

I oppose the five (5) demolitions proposed in the Oakwood section of Venice, to be heard at the June 13, 2014 Coastal Commission Meeting, for the reasons stated below:

Please ensure that each of the commissioners receives a copy of this letter for each of the five (5) projects, and that the letters be made a part of the permanent file for each of the five (5) cases, agenda items 10 F-J.
Thank you.

Regarding June 13, 2014 California Coastal Commission Meeting –
Agenda items 10 f through j, application numbers:

5-14-124 521 Vernon Ave Venice, CA 90291
5-14-0212 720 Indiana Ave Venice, CA 90291
5-14-0237 520 Broadway Ave Venice, CA 90291
5-14-0239 663 E. Brooks Ave Venice, CA 90291
5-14-0240 659 Broadway Street Venice, CA 90291

Dear Coastal Commissioners,

I request that the Coastal Commission deny the above five (5) application requests for a Coastal Development Permit based on the recurring pattern in each of the five (5) cases, all of which are in the Oakwood Area of Venice based on the following:

(a) none of the cases for demolition have been heard at the local level by the Venice Neighborhood Council, the public has not enjoyed the right to fully participate as required by Section 30005.5 of The California Coastal Act.

(b) provisions have not been made to replace the loss of affordable housing per Mello Act requirements on any of these demolitions. Reports or records are not available to the public on Mello Act replacements units on any of the affordable housing that has been lost and removed from the affordable housing inventory. A request has been made to Council District 11 with no response to date. The Venice Community has lost more affordable housing without replacement in the last six years than any other time in its history. I beseech your support as Coastal Commissioners to reverse this trend and bring relief to our community.

(c) each of these cases is a Venice Sign Off and does not reflect the intention of the Venice Specific Plan, the planned developments are not compatible in mass or scale to the existing community and therefore inconsistent with Coastal Act Sec 30624.7.

(d) It is a violation of CEQA to approve one more demolition in Venice without demanding a study consisting of:

Parking, Traffic, Historic Preservation, Community Character, and the Mello Act replacement of affordable housing. The barrage of development is having a negative cumulative effect per CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act, defines cumulative impacts as “two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable.”  (State CEQA Guidelines Section 15355).

Venice is approximately 1 % of the Los Angeles population, yet has 19% of the developments and the environmental impact on the ecological balance due to this onslaught of development with lack of green space and removal of trees threatens to irrevocably change this beach community of quaint cottages into a concrete jungle that will no longer be walkable and welcoming. Per section 30001 of the California Coastal Act, I urge you to prevent the destruction of the ecological balance of this world renowned treasure we call home and to retain its resource value that is being destroyed.

Coastal Act Sec 30116 (E) & (F) Venice Coastal Zone community is a sensitive coastal resource area with special communities and neighborhoods which are significant as a visitor destination and also provide existing coastal housing and recreational opportunities for low and moderate income persons.

These demolitions are purely for financial gain those developing have no interest in the long term cumulative effect that it is having on the community and its residents of today and those of tomorrow. It is our responsibility and duty to protect the beautiful California Coast and the unique communities we call home for ourselves and future generations.

In conclusion, I ask you to deny any more demolitions without a proper study of how this is affecting our community.

Respectfully,

(Name)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stay in touch with the Spirit of Venice — spiritofvenice.net

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

KEEP VENICE STREETS FREE — HEARING @ CA COASTAL COMMISSION – THURS. JUNE 13

JATAUN_NOPDJune 6, 2013 at 5.00 pm, was the last day to submit letters, emails & petitions opposing Overnight Parking Districts (OPDs) in Venice.

BUT…we can still make our voices heard by attending the CA Coastal Commission (CCC) hearing next Thurs. June 13 which begins @ 8:30 am in Long Beach, CA.

If you are available on that day PLEASE join us in telling the CCC that you want to keep coastal access to Venice beach free and open to all, as stipulated by the 1976 CA Coastal Act; and, if you live in Venice, that you don’t want to have to pay to park on your street!

NOPDs supporters are meeting @ 7:00 am on Thurs. June 13 at Beyond Baroque, 681 Venice Blvd., Venice, CA 90291 –

We will be busing and/or carpooling to Long Beach – contact David Busch for info. about bus/carpools.

PLEASE COME IF YOU CAN, ESPECIALLY IF YOU LIVE IN VENICE.

The hearing will be held at City of Long Beach, City Council CHAMBERS, 333 West Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90802 (415) 407-3211

Go here to view the CCC agenda, scroll down to Thurs. June 13: http://www.coastal.ca.gov/mtgcurr.html

Go here – CCC_NOPD-6-2013 to view the May 31, 2013 report made by CCC staff, Charles Posner, who states: 

“Staff is recommending that the Commission approve the coastal development permits for the proposed permit parking program with special conditions to ensure that the public will continue to be able to access the shoreline recreation areas in the early morning hours. The recommended special conditions begin on Page Three.”

For more info. on this topic go here: https://spiritofvenice.wordpress.com/nopd/

Hope to see you there — it will be well worth the effort 🙂

Best,
SOV

Mark Ryavec at NOPD Coastal Commission Meeting 2010

Mark Ryavec at NOPD Coastal Commission Meeting

If you live in Venice, CA and you pay attention to local politics – you will, no doubt, eventually come across the name Mark Ryavec.  To some, he is a hero who seeks to gentrify Venice and improve it’s ‘quality of life’; while to others, he is a villain and, some might say, a bigot – who seeks to rid Venice of it’s free-spirited homeless population and install permit-parking on its streets, in an attempt to protect 24 hour street parking for residents only.  How you perceive Ryavec, the man, may depend entirely on which side of the argument you come down on.

But for those who are still straddling the fence, let’s take a look at what we know about Ryavec, the man – courtesy of Google.

To begin with, Mark Ryavec is the president of Venice Stakeholders Association – whose mission is: “dedicated to civic improvement”; and, as such, in March, 2013, filed a complaint to the Department Of Neighborhood Empowerment (DONE) for an “Investigation of Ethics Violation by Linda Lucks, President of the Venice Neighborhood Council’ (a position that Ryavec has coveted for several years, having run – and lost to Linda Lucks, twice, for the position of president – in the last two local Neighborhood elections).

Ryavec is a leading proponent of Preferential Parking Districts (PPDs) in Venice and has spearheaded a movement to implement Overnight Parking Districts (OPDs) for the past several years.  Twice he, and his supporters, have lobbied the City of L.A. (COLA) and the CA Coastal Commission (CCC) for OPDs in Venice – and twice, first in 2009 and then in 2010 his efforts have been thwarted by those who prefer to keep the streets of Venice free – and open to all – in alignment with the CA Coastal Act of 1976.

In spite of his two stinging defeats at the CCC in 2009 and 2010, Ryavec has drummed up support to continue his lawsuit, started in 2010, which according to the Venice Beachhead argues that: “no Coastal Commission approval is needed in order to establish OPDs in Venice. City Attorney Carmen Trutanich, although at first against Ryavec’s lawsuit, changed his mind and joined forces with Ryavec against the Coastal Commission.”

On April 16, 2013 the proposed lawsuit settlement was brought before the VNC monthly board meeting.  Ryavec and a panel of OPD supporters (Arturo Pina, District Director of CD11;  Jane Usher, Senior Advisor to the City Attorney; and Tamara Martin of LADOT) discussed the OPD settlement being proposed to CCC –

 

On October 15, 2012, according to PRnewswire, Mr. Ryavec announced his candidacy for the CD11 seat on Los Angeles City Council vacated by Bill Rosendahl.  “Formerly a legislative analyst for the City Council and chief deputy tax assessor for Los Angeles County, [Ryavec] said he is running to return the City’s focus to traditional municipal services.”

However, claiming “lackluster community and fundraising support”, Ryavec “quietly” withdrew his candidacy on November 7, 2012 stating:

“When I decided to enter this race I thought that I would be running against Councilman Bill Rosendahl.  He appeared to be confident that he would recover from the cancer that he was battling and run for a third term.

In the end, as we have seen, he has continued to improve but also made the prudent decision to focus on his health and not run.

In very short order, Bill endorsed his deputy Mike Bonin and Bonin immediately announced his candidacy, released the names of a whole passel of campaign co-chairs and endorsements from senior Democratic party elected officials and then reported that he had raised over $50,000 in nine days.  As a former political consultant myself, I have to say, “Well played, Mike.”

Later, on February 8, 2013, Ryavec endorsed former City prosecutor of 25 years, Tina Hess, in the CD11 race, presumably in the hope that Hess would carry on the fight to rid Venice of its homeless population.  As it turned out, Rosendahl’s deputy, Mike Bonin, won the race hands down; and we have yet to see if he will follow in Rosendahl’s footsteps, policy-wise.

Previous to these recent political sorties, Ryavec was always very verbal on the issue of (not) helping the homeless.  For example, on June 17, 2012 he brought a motion before the VNC to step up police enforcement of city codes aimed at homeless people living on Venice streets.

 

Earlier, on May 17, 2012, he had posted this article on Venice Patch: “Food Giveaways on Venice Beach Enable Status Quo, Ineffective at Helping People Get into Housing” – arguing that feeding hungry people was not a constitutionally protected activity and only served to encourage homeless people to stay in Venice.  Ryavec omits to acknowledge that there is no affordable housing available for homeless people – which is why many remain on the streets.

On March 3, 2012, in an article about a proposed ferris wheel at Venice Beach (opposed by many Venetians), the LAIST reported Ryavec (who never misses an opportunity to push his agenda) as stating: “the wheel could grant Venice the chance to apply with the Coastal Commission for 24-hour preferential parking permits for beach-adjacent residents.”

Ryavec always, it would seem, a law unto himself, has spearheaded a number of attacks on what he considers to be ‘blight’ on the streets of Venice, namely homeless people sleeping on sidewalks and living in vehicles.  And, in April 2012, to get back at those sympathetic to the homeless dilemma, he published a list of names and home addresses of 11 activists, journalists and politicians “who he said shouldn’t mind having the homeless set up tents and sleeping bags outside their doors because they had expressed sympathy for them.”  In fact, he even offered $20 to any homeless person who would set up camp outside their homes.

Back in the summer of 2010, Ryavec started his own personal campaign to rid Venice streets of RVs by lobbying hard “for permit-parking zones that would have locked out many RV dwellers” and claiming “The left here in Venice doesn’t want to see any rules… ’Keep Venice free’ and all this crap. They think there’s something romantic about people living in RVs. This is a marginal existence.”  And, for those unable to afford the high rents in Venice and most of Los Angeles, the only existence they can afford.

yv

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Stay in touch with the Spirit of Venice — spiritofvenice.net

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An interview on KPFK’s “Uprising” with Sonali Kolhatkar

Residents and activists in Venice beach say police are harassing community members and the homeless as a new wave of gentrification hits the city, best known for its eclectic beach-loving population. Last Wednesday dozens of homeless people lost their personal belongings when the Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation, in cooperation with the LA Police Department, raided a homeless encampment at Third Street between Rose and Sunset Avenues in Venice Beach. Los Angeles City Councilman Bill Rosendahl said the city was conducting a “sanitation action” that was only meant to sweep up abandoned property.

The homeless disagree, and say their personal items, including prescription medications, wallets, and clothing, were indiscriminately collected and immediately dumped into garbage trucks. Adding to the outrage of the community is a feeling of betrayal, because police began directing the homeless to the Third Street encampment when the city began enforcing a no camping ordinance on the boardwalk, which displaced many homeless individuals. Venice residents from the Oakwood neighborhood and others also report an increase in community members being ticketed by police for small infractions, such as not having the fence around a home properly painted.

GUESTS: David Busch, an activist with the Spirit of Venice Coalition, Maria Fitzsimmons, and organizer with People Organized for Westside Renewal, or POWER, and Kendra Moore, a POWER leader and president of the Holiday Venice Tenant Action Committee Visit http://www.power-la.org for more information.

There will a direct action training in relation to the Venice area activism on April 14-15, 2012. For more information, visit http://www.99spring.com.