Venice Neighborhood Council “DONE-in”
By C.V.
Beck
I am a Venice resident. I am very
concerned about what appears to be a rightward bias in the matter of
DONE’s position regarding the June, 2004 elections in which 500-plus
persons from Venice came out in good faith to vote for their candidates of their
choice.
It is clear that we have a situation
developing in which elections are beginning to be treated as the “best
2-out-of-3” or more than that, in order to give the “Losing
Party”time to “fluff up” their numbers...and to save
face.
I would like to remind people
(just in case you don’t know, or have forgotten), that it was because of
the pre-planned “hammy,” orchestrated resignations of the
developer/real estate interests faction of the LUPC (Land Use and Planning
Committee) Board and the same faction of the GRVNC (Grass Roots Venice
Neighborhood Council), that had made these elections necessary on account of
their dysfunctional desire” to create a mythical and non-existing
“dysfunction” of the Board, in which they then pointed their fingers
at those who were abandoned, in an undemocratic
charade.
This was because they knew
they were going to lose and couldn’t stand it, could not stand to
“lose” fairly and squarely. So, they created this alleged
“dysfunction” to save their
“face”.
It is apparent that
we now have a “stand-off” here resulting in distinct lack of due
process for the average person in Venice. This is being aided and abetted by
various departments of the City of Los Angeles. Talk about bias!
How can you otherwise explain the
lengthy, lackadaisical delay (over the summer break) in the non-resolution of
the definitively asked for “mediation” which did not take place; the
lack of leadership and conscientious decision-making until after the March 8,
2005 city elections, thus giving these departments time to see which way the
“winds are blowing” in Los Angeles. (Also, giving the losing side
much more time to plot their next undemocratic
moves...).
1) My feeling, generally, is
that if Ms. M. Evry, a self-appointed, “Watchpuppy of Venice” (who
did commit the ONLY smarmy, orchestrated and well-assisted “fraud” (
in which she submitted her dog’s ballot to vote in the prior round of
GRVNC elections) got a “Pass” for her disgusting machinations, (also
aided and abetted by the same factions of real estate interests and
developer’s dummies), that it certainly should be possible for the June,
2004, accidental technical “glitches” (which I believe were of a
very minor nature), to likewise to “passed” in the interest of
appropriately recognizing the large, virile turnout of 500-plus persons for the
elections, despite harassment, threats and “monkey business” at the
polls by this same exclusionarily-minded, undiverse group of well-heeled and
undemocratic band of unethical
“thugs.”
2) Equally
important is the very questionable omission of Option 2 (ratify the four GRVNC
appointments to the Board) of DONE (which was inexplicably ignored by
themselves) after their own list of acceptable resolutions was submitted to
GRVNC. To me, this is additional evidence of a bias which I no longer believe is
not conscious on their part. These actions also exhibit unprofessionalism; an
unseemly political bias, as well as a gullibility, evidenced by both an
over-reactiveness and a too-willing, bending-over-backwards, to be receptive to
majority-slanted input from the same group of unethical thugs (who are, of
course, well-heeled).
In conclusion, my
“due process” and that of many other diverse people in Venice, has
been repeatedly ignored. I am not happy with the role the City of Los Angeles is
playing in this. Now that they know which way the winds are going to blow in
Venice, what are they going to do to repair this repairable problem?
I am asking for the restoration of the
quorum in GRVNC, so it can act in the way the majority of voters want, and end
this stalling and foot-dragging until the cows come home? Or are the
“watchpuppies of Venice” pulling the strings behind the
scenes?
Posted: Fri - April 1, 2005 at 02:40 PM