Division in Slow-Growth Forces Could Test Galanter

An escalating rift among slow-growth advocates on the Venice Town Council may rekindle a communitywide debate on whether development is being properly controlled, as well as test City Councilwoman Ruth Galanter’s strength among those who elected her.

The grass-roots community group is divided over tactics, with one faction sufficiently alarmed to push for a one-year moratorium on commercial development in Venice. A second faction favors working with developers who have already had their projects approved, thereby extracting amenities for the community, such as parking and affordable housing units.

A member of the second group, Town Council President Dell Chumley, resigned last week, amid accusations that she lost sight of the group’s mission, choosing instead to become closely allied with Galanter.

‘Debating Society’

“She is parroting Galanter’s approach,” former Town Council board member Steve Schlein charged. “That approach, in my opinion, misses the point: How much development can this community take?”

Chumley, in turn, branded her opposition as a small band of ‘60s-style refugees who preferred having a “debating society” to accomplishing anything. “Today’s a different world,” she said. “A lot of people don’t want to give that up. . . . My idea of what community groups should do is take on winnable projects.”

By her resignation, Chumley avoids being the eye of what promises to be a stormy debate scheduled for the Aug. 10 Town Council meeting to reassess the group’s goals and explore ways to keep the group’s leaders working toward those goals.

It is not yet clear which--if either--group is the voice of Venice.

Jim Bickhart, Galanter’s legislative deputy, said the moratorium backers have yet to show they have support beyond about 30 activists laboring under a “combination of wishful thinking and a thinly veiled philosophy which tries to make Venice into something it isn’t--Woodland Hills.”

The chairman of the Venice Town Council moratorium committee, John Haag, said he aims to find out what the populace thinks with a petition drive set to begin in mid-August. Haag said a trial run of the petition, which would urge Galanter to pursue a moratorium in the Los Angeles City Council, will be circulated this weekend.

Moratorium backer Sherman Rattner said the Town Council dispute is of “profound importance” to Venice and carries the potential to hurt Galanter politically.

“It’s the first volley out there at the grass-roots level of dissatisfaction with the way Ruth Galanter has been conducting business here,” he said.

‘Pretty Stiff’ Plan

Galanter, who won office two years ago as a slow-growth candidate, opposes a moratorium as illegal and unnecessary in light of a “pretty stiff” interim development plan she introduced to control growth until a long-awaited master plan for Venice is in place.

“You can’t stop all development, but you severely limit development,” Galanter said. “My critics have a very firm all-or-nothing position. . . . They’re apparently not willing to acknowledge the progress that’s been made.”

Galanter said she is delivering on her campaign promise to manage development, while negotiating with developers to pay for community amenities. “I’m very comfortable with my record and proud of it,” she said.

The no-growth faction is particularly irked by the “hardship” exemption provision in the interim ordinance, under which developers seek exceptions in the rules and in exchange agree to subsidize affordable housing units, provide extra parking or other concessions. “It’s bureaucratic extortion,” said Rattner, a financial analyst.

Persisting Fears

He and other moratorium backers expressed fear that--with such a piecemeal, project-by-project approach--the area would be overdeveloped by the time the permanent plan is in place. “There was a feeling we had to put the brakes on things,” Rattner said.

Jack Hoffman, president of the more moderate community group, the Venice Action Committee, said the moratorium backers are out of touch with the real world and yearning for Utopia. “We are not in a freeze frame and can’t stop (the world),” Hoffman said.

Galanter and her staff describe the exemptions granted as minor, when compared to the amenities extracted from developers. “We’re not giving them out like M & Ms,” said Bickhart, Galanter’s deputy.

Bickhart cites one of the biggest and most controversial projects, two 16-story buildings that will be built near the Marina del Rey boundary, a development approved before Galanter ousted Pat Russell as councilwoman for the district.

Significant Amenities

What was planned as a “very intense shopping project” is now slated to be 80% residential, with the community gaining significant amenities in the bargain, Bickhart said. Among them are money for traffic improvement, about 100 affordable housing units in the project and money for more housing elsewhere. There will be a child-care center with a regulated rate, beach parking and money for a beach shuttle system.

“Sixteen stories of something was going to be there,” Bickhart said. “It’s a big project. It was going to be a bigger project.”

To the group alarmed by what its members are seeing in Venice, that approach appears to offer small consolation. “It’s time to read the community’s lips . . . about what’s going on down here,” Rattner said.