Report from the (Ocean) Front: CHANGE IS ON THE WAY
By Della
Franco
The change is coming. That is
for sure. Is it all good? For the City, probably. For some artists on the
Front, maybe. For the activists who are trying to save the Free Speech Zone
they helped create, definitely NOT. So here is what has been going on. In a
nutshell, or should I say, a bombshell.
Two separate lawsuits were filed against
the City – each claiming that the current Venice Boardwalk ordinance (LAMC
42.15) is unconstitutional. Both lawsuits have been assigned to one federal
judge, which is not uncommon. One lawsuit is Hunt vs City of Los Angeles with
plaintiffs Michael Hunt and Matt Dowd. The other lawsuit is Venice Food Not
Bombs vs the City of Los Angeles with plaintiffs Venice Food Not Bombs (FNB),
Bill Greenslade, Lani Ware, and a few others. Even though it has been agreed
that parts of the existing ordinance is unconstitutional, rather than simply
rule on the lawsuits, the judge has been attempting to bring the suing parties
together with the City in an attempt to create a better, constitutionally sound
law.
Multiple meetings have taken place
in the Judge’s Chambers and an idea was proposed (not by any of the
plaintiffs) to divide the Boardwalk into two zones. One zone would be for
selling and another for Performances and Free Speech. The selling zone would be
called the “I” Zone and only for selling items “inextricably
intertwined” with a First amendment message/a spiritual/religious message.
The other zone would be called the “P” zone and designated for
Performers and Free Speech and the only things that could be for sale would be
buttons, bumper stickers, and performer CDs. At the June 7, 2007 meeting the
City Attorneys were instructed by the judge to write a Draft Ordinance. The
draft was sent out promptly by the deadline of the following Monday. Then
another draft was sent Thursday, the evening before the next court meeting with
revisions regarding
criminalization.
Some core issues of
the Venice FNB lawsuit plaintiffs and attorneys are to try to de-criminalize the
Free Speech Zone as well as preserve Free Speech, which has been a long-standing
tradition of the Westside of the Venice Boardwalk.
Another problem with the zone proposal
was that the City wanted the zones to be different sizes. The “I”
Zone would be from Dudley to Navy along with some spaces around Windward and
Market (not many). The rest of the boardwalk would be for the “P”
Zone. A decision was made by the Venice FNB plaintiffs and attorneys to fight
for as many changes as possible to improve the City Attorney’s draft
ordinance. They decided to fight for EVERY possible change and that is exactly
what Carol Sobel did in court on June 15.
One
of their suggestions was to make the zones equal.
The Judge actually came down on Carol
Sobel, but he later apologized. Carol Sobel did not back down. The City Attorney
accused her of grandstanding, but the judge responded to this accusation by
defending Ms Sobel’s sincerity. The Judge then asked the City if they
would continue to work with the suing parties to try to create this new
Ordinance. The City Attorneys reluctantly agreed and parties met for hours
arguing the detailed changes made by Carol Sobel and plaintiffs to the City
Attorney’s draft ordinance.
Things seemed like they were starting
to move forward and a new meeting was set for June 20, 2007 to discuss issues
the opposing sides had not resolved. But this time the City brought in a wild
card, Debby Rowland, the superintendent for Parks and Recreation. Ms Rowland had
her own idea about what should happen to the boardwalk. Her suggestion was that
the Venice Boardwalk be run like every other Los Angeles run park –
everyone obtains a Public Events Permit. She made further suggestions regarding
proof of [liability] insurance and other requirements in order to get such
permits.
Had the City completely
forgotten that the Westside of the Boardwalk is called the Free Speech Zone
– not the “vending permit lottery zone?” What the hell was
happening to negotiating a fair and just Ordinance? All discussions came to a
standstill. Another meeting was set for only the City and the plaintiff’s
lawyers. Who knows what will happen now. The entire freedom of the boardwalk
could end and Commercial vending and lottery enforcement could win. If that
happens artists will be driven out and commercial vending will destroy the soul
of Venice Beach.
So for now, until we
know what the final outcome will be, Councilman Bill Rosendahl’s word to
protect and help the craftspeople of Venice was just dust in the wind. I will
keep you updated. Pray for freedom.
Posted: Sun - July 1, 2007 at 07:16 PM