Chairwoman Is Not Amused

I have read, with increasing interest and decreasing amusement, the barrage of articles devoted to Derek Shearer’s personal opinions about individual members of the City of Santa Monica’s paid professional planning staff and appointed volunteer Planning Commission.

In its continuing coverage of Commissioner Shearer’s remarks, the Los Angeles Times has on at least three separate occasions printed unsubstantiated statements in which Mr. Shearer has personally attacked individuals both by name and implication. Your reporter chose not to contact any of those people nor did he contact members of the planning staff nor any of the other six planning commissioners in order to verify the accuracy of these statements made. Instead, The Times has printed, reprinted and even allowed Mr. Shearer to expand on his remarks over the course of the last three weeks.

It should be noted that the few people questioned about Mr. Shearer’s remarks, in this election year, are all elected council members and their responses have been predictably political. While the exchange of political rhetoric may be amusing to the press and public, I can assure you that it is not amusing but, in fact, quite serious to those individuals who have been the “victims” of Mr. Shearer’s attacks. The eventual victim will be the city itself, since members of the community will be reluctant to serve on the various boards and commissions that do a large portion of our city’s work without any remuneration.

For the record, the Planning Commission has convened nearly weekly public hearings for the past six months for the purpose of creating a new zoning ordinance that will govern construction and development for many years to come. We are hopeful that the ordinance, due to be completed in December, will provide regulations that developers can easily adhere to while protecting our residential neighborhoods from continued encroachment of commercial uses and traffic. We have already completed two-thirds of this task, with the aid and participation of Mid Cities Neighbors, OPCO, CIPA, The Chamber of Commerce, Santa Monicans for Responsible Growth, etc. Various subcommittees, formed to study more complex problems in greater depth, have enjoyed the participation of local architects, landscape architects, environmental consultants, commercial property owners and just plain interested and affected neighbors, in addition to all members of our commission.

It is a surprising fact that Mr. Shearer seems to be one of the residents of our city who has actively sought to not participate in the creation of this document, despite his position of responsibility and expertise in precisely this subject. Throughout this process, we have all worked, with the exception of Commissioner Shearer, in a congenial, cooperative manner on this project. This is reflected in the fact that approximately 80% of our revisions to the zoning ordinance have been passed with a unanimous vote.

Planning staff, including the director, has been responsive to our needs and provided us with requested information in a timely, courteous manner. In addition, the understaffed Planning Department has had to keep up with the demands of the normal development review and permit process, long-range plans and special projects. Our agenda packet for September alone contains 18 items and accompanying staff reports, 11 of which are for public hearings.

The reality is that this current commission, excluding Mr. Shearer, has worked long and hard to erase the previous reputation of a politicized body and we deeply resent the recent manipulation through the press that would again embroil the commission in city politics. The credibility of the Planning Department and the reputation of the city as a good place to invest one’s professional career is clearly at risk. The desirability of serving on a Planning Commission that has become one person’s private shooting gallery is equally in question.

The press has an obligation to present facts, not private opinions that belong in the editorial pages. Up to this point it has not fulfilled that obligation. The Santa Monica City Council also has an obligation. It has a duty to protect its appointed commissions from this type of destructive behavior.

For those of us who believe in and respect our public process, action must now be taken to protect the Planning Commission and planning staff from further irresponsible attacks.

As an independent person in the community who has never aligned with either of the two major political groups in Santa Monica, (and was, in fact, voted into this position by members of both groups), I must now urge the Santa Monica City Council to fill Shearer’s seat with a person who will represent on the commission the concerns of our under-represented multifamily residential neighborhoods. These neighborhoods have a right to representation in zoning ordinance deliberations which will affect their living environments but as of this time they have not enjoyed such official representation.

I regret the need for this statement, but Mr. Shearer, in his irresponsible and self-serving attacks on Santa Monica city officials, has left me with no other options.

EILEEN HECHT

Chairwoman

Santa Monica Planning

Commission